Last updated 27/06/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
The scarabs found with the wreck at Cape Gelidonya are important for the dating of the ship. The group has been discussed in detail by Schulman in a chapter of the publication of the wreck. A new look at the scarab group after so many years may be worthwhile.
We have the following comments on Schulman's dating of these scarabs:
Scarab 1: “Late 18. or 19. Dynasty.”
In the discussion of this object “Gaza” is mentioned as the site of origin of one of the parallel pieces. However “Ancient Gaza” is the name of the 5 volumes by Petrie dealing with the excavations at Tell el-Ajjul, seven kilometres south of modern Gaza. The closest parallel to Scarab 1 is, however, at Tell el-Far'a. It has two horizontal lines under the nb sign, showing that “Lord of the Two Countries” (= Egypt) is intended in all these cases.
Scarab 2: “New Kingdom” “Early New Kingdom, more specifically … 18. Dynasty.”
It should be noted that the “short apparently meaningless vertical lines” are a duplication of the sign which usually follows an ideogram Z.1 in Gardiner's sign list. It is often duplicated thus, or appears as sign V.20 or Q.3.
1 Bass, G. F., Cape Gelidonya, Philadelphia, 1967Google Scholar; du Plat Taylor, Joan, AS XI (1961), 26–7Google Scholar; see also: Bass, G. F., “Cape Gelidonya and Bronze Age Maritime Trade,” in: Hoffner, H. A. (ed.), Orient and Occident (FS Gordon), Alter Orient und Altes Testament 22, Kevelaer 1973, 29–38Google Scholar. The wreck has been discussed in Anatolian Studies several times, for instance: Mellaart, J., “Anatolian Trade with Europe and Anatolian Geography and Culture-Provinces in the Late Bronze Age”, AS XVIII (1968), 191Google Scholar note 5 a; Mee, Christopher, “Aegean Trade and Settlement in Anatolia,” AS XXVIII (1978), 128Google Scholar; Jakar, Jak, “Hittite Involvement in Wetern Anatolia,” AS XXVI (1976), 126Google Scholar, note 53.
2 Schulman, Alan R., Chapter XI “The Scarabs” 143–7Google Scholar in the book by Bass (see note 1, above). See also: Schulman, A. R., “Three Shipwrecked Scarabs”, Expedition 3, 1961, 24–5Google Scholar.
3 Macdonald, E., Starkey, J. L., Harding, L., Beth-Pelet II, London 1932 Pl. L, 61Google Scholar (abbreviated here as B.-P. II).
4 The similarity with the Byblos-scarab quoted by Schulman is indeed striking. However there is no Hyksos-stratum and no Hyksos-context in Byblos.
5 Schulman, op. cit. (above, note 2), 146.
6 Rowe, Alan, A Catalogue of Egyptian Scarabs, Scaraboids, Seals and Amulets in the Palestine Archaeological Museum, Cairo 1936, 8Google Scholar; Pl. I, 25.
7 Newberry, P. E., Scarab-shaped Seals, London 1907Google Scholar (Catalogue Général des Antiquités Egyptiennes du Musée du Caire), Pl. XV, 36889, 37063.
8 B.-P. II Pl. LVII, 383.
9 Hornung, Erik and Staehelin, Elisabeth (eds.), Skarabäen und andere Siegelamulette aus Basler Sammlungen. Mainz 1976, 326Google Scholar. This is a close parallel, discussed with ample literature.
10 B.-P. II, Pls. LII, LIII, LVII.
11 In Tomb 934 there is a scarab with the inscription ḥq3 m3‘t mry ’Imn-R‘, alternative reading ḥq3 m3‘t R‘mry ’Imn, which is reminiscent of the prenomen of Ramses IV: ḥq3 m3‘t R‘. Gardiner has related the expression ḥq3 m3‘t in Papyrus Turin 1882 to Ramses IV (in JEA 41, 1955, 30Google Scholar, Pl. XI and JEA 42, 1956, 8Google Scholar: I thank Dr. Raphael Ventura for this reference). In two inscriptions of Ramses IV at Medinet Habu we have the nomen of the king R‘ms -sw with the epithet ḥq3 m3‘t mry ’Imn (von Beckerath, Juergen, Handbuch der aegyptischen Koenigsnamen, Muenchen 1984, 94Google Scholar. Similarly at Edfu: see Christophe, C. A., “Le Pylone ‘Ramesside’ d'Edfou,” ASAE 55, 1958, 8Google Scholar (reference due to Dr. R. Ventura). Whether we regard this scarab in Tell el Far'a as naming Ramses IV or not, it seems definitely related to this reign.
12 The group can certainly not be dated to the Hyksos period. Helck, W., Die Beziehungen Aegyptens und Vorderasiens zur Aegaeis bis ins 7. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Darmstadt 1979, 95: 285Google Scholar.
