H. Frankfort, The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient ( Pelican History of Art, Harmonds- worth, 1954), plates 42 and 43.
Frankfort, op. cit., plate 69A.
|3.||Sir Arthur Evans, The Palace of Minos, I ( London, 1921), 529, figure 385.|
|4.||Frankfort, op. cit., plate 74.|
The Greek form Tuthmosis has been used here instead of the Egyptian Djehuty-mes ( Thoth is born), although a private name which also includes that of the god whom the Greeks called Thoth will be found as Djehuty-hetep ( Thoth is gracious). On the other hand, the same initial sound of the word is represented by another letter in the names of the kings Zer and Zoser. The writer is only too conscious of these inconsistencies, but has tried to present frequently used forms of names which can be easily recognized. Again the classical royal names Menes, Cheops, Chephren, and Mycerinus have been employed. The absence of vowels and the lack of general agreement as to usage in a language where the vocalization is uncertain have made uniformity impossible. The reader is referred to the admirable discussion of the transcription of Egyptian proper names in Sir Alan Gardiner's Egyptian Grammar ( London, 1950), 434.
See H. Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods ( Chicago, 1948); Ancient Egyptian Religion ( New York, 1948); J. Vandier, La Religion égyptienne, 2nd ed. ( Paris, 1949).
Helene J. Kantor, "The Final Phase of Predynastic Culture: Gerzean or Semainian (?)", J.N.E.S., 3 ( 1944), 110. The problem was avoided by the terms Nagadah I and II, derived from the site where the succession of the material was first recognized and applied to Amratian and Gerzean.
W. C. Hayes, The Scepter of Egypt, 1 ( New York, 1953), 27.
|3.||B. V. Bothmer, Bull. M.F.A., 46 ( 1948), 64.|
|4.||G. A. Reisner, The Development of the Egyptian Tomb ( Cambridge, 1936), 378, figure 188.|
W. S. Smith, A History of Egyptian Sculpture and Painting in the Old Kingdom, 2nd ed. ( Boston, 1949), 7.
George Steindorff, Catalogue of the Egyptian Sculpture in the Walters Art Gallery ( Baltimore, 1946), 19, plate i.
|7.||For example, the small seated figure of a dwarf or a child, Zaki Saad, Royal Excavations at Helwan, Supplement14, Annales ( 1951), plate xlii. For this early material in general, see J. Vandier, Manuel d'archéologie égyptienne, I ( Paris, 1952), 527, 533, 957; Smith, op. cit., 1, 110; Jean Capart, Primitive Art in Egypt ( London, 1905).|
|8.||Kantor, op. cit, 111; Brunton in Studies Presented to F. Ll. Griffith ( London, 1932), 272.|
W. M. F. Petrie, Abydos, I ( London, 1903), plate l, 23.
|10.||J. E. Quibell and F. W. Green, Hierakonpolis, II ( London, 1902), plates lxxv-lxxix, 21.|
|11.||Capart, op. cit., figures 171 and 172; cf. figures 169-85 for the group of palettes and 186-9 for the two Hierakonpolis mace-heads; also Quibell, Hierakonpolis, I ( London, 1900), plate xxvia for a third mace-head.|
Smith, Sculpture and Painting, plate 29.
|13.||Capart, op. cit., figure 176 and figure 182, which is the other face of our Plate 6.|
|14.||E. Ayrton, C. Currelly, A. Weigall, Abydos, III ( London, 1904), plates vi, vii.|
|15.||G. A. Reisner, Tomb Development, 271, figure 166.|
|16.||See particularly H. Frankfort, American Journal of Semitic Languages, 58 ( 1941), 329, where Mesopotamian influence upon Egyptian brick architecture is strongly argued.|
|17.||Although no very satisfactory explanation has yet been given why mats lashed to wooden frames should be associated with the recessed elements of an Egyptian brick wall, the painted imitation of such matwork on the narrow surfaces of the brick niches is apparently as early as the first use of the brick construction. Frankfort doubted this before the discovery at Saqqara of painted designs of Dynasty I which are like those of the better preserved example in the Dynasty III tomb of Hesy-ra;|