expedition of nebtawyre in wadi hammamat

Iain Eaton (1091223) ANCHIST724B-2012

A Quarrying Expedition:

Inscriptions left by an expedition of

Nebtawyre Mentohotep

in the Wadi Hammamat

123123123123123

Iain Eaton (1091223)

ANCHIST 724B – 2012

In excess of six hundred inscriptions have been discovered in Wadi Hammamat,

spanning four millennia of Egyptian history – from the pre-dynastic period through to

the Roman occupation.1 This work will examine four of these inscriptions, which were

left by an expedition sent by, and bearing the name of, Nebtawyre Mentohotep

(Mentohotep IV). I will present my own translations of each of these inscriptions and

will place them within both a general and an immediate context. The general context

will consider the role of the Wadi Hammamat and examine the purpose and types of

expeditions sent there. The immediate context will consider how this particular

expedition fits within the overall pattern of use for the Wadi, as well as discussing some

of the more unusual events that occurred on it. I will show that the four inscriptions fall

into two distinct pairs. The first two, M192 and M113, are the official and unofficial

reports of the expedition. The remaining two, M110 and M191, are of a very different

nature – these are the so-called wonders experienced by the leader of the expedition, the

Vizier Amenemhet, while on the expedition. It is probable that this person is also in fact

the future king Amenemhet I. I will discuss how the second pair of inscriptions can be

interpreted in this context as a form of posturing, where Amenemhet is openly

displaying his power and suggesting he enjoys divine favour.

In antiquity, as remains the case today, the overwhelming majority of Egypt’s

population lived within the Nile Valley. Beginning with their creation myth, Egyptians

were taught that the land that first rose out of the water was Egypt. That the center of

the world was Egypt was an inviolate fact that Egypt’s geography further enforced; the

cataracts of the Upper Nile secured the southern frontier nearly as well as the Sahara

1 T. Hikade, Expeditions to the Wadi Hammamat during the New Kingdom. JEA 92, 2006, pages 153-168. page 154.

of 24

Figure 1


and Sinai Deserts isolated the west and east.2 Egypt was defined to a significant extent

by this geography, being referred to as either kmt (the black land, in reference to the

fertile soil washed down during the inundation), setting it apart from dSrt (the red land,

a reference to the sand of the desert); or tA, the flat land (which could also be translated

to mean the entire world), setting it apart from xAswt, the hill lands. Unfortunately,

the inhabited

areas of Egypt

have few if any

natural deposits

of precious

metals and apart

from Aswan’s

famous pink

granite quarry

and the Tura

limestone, have

little material

suitable for use

in building

works.3

Consequently,

mining expeditions were sent into adjacent areas, often via wadi, by

many king’s. These expeditions ranged from small groups of fewer

than a hundred men to places such as Gebel el-Silsileh and even Aswan to enormous

expeditions of many thousands of men to more remote areas.4The expedition being

investigated in this work involved, according to Inscription M192A – translated later in

this document – thirteen thousand men. Wadi Hammamat is one of the many wadi that

run through the mountainous region of Egypt’s Eastern Desert. The wadi is ideally

located to serve as a route to the Red Sea, consisting of a natural path connecting the

2 For Egypt being the centre of the world to ancient Egyptians see J.P. Allen. ‘The Egyptian concept of the world’. In D. O’Connor and S. Quirke (eds.) Mysterious Lands. London: UCL Press, 2003, pages 23-30. page 29.3 There is plenty of stone in the Nile valley but the vast majority is brittle with intense schistosity. See D. D. Klemm, and R. Klemm, ‘The building stones of ancient Egypt – a gift of its geology’. Journal of African Earth Sciences 33, 2001, pages 631-642. Page 633.4 Hikade, pages 162-3.

of 24

Figure 2: Serekh of Narmer


Nile to the Red sea from modern day Qift (see Figure 1), which is the point on the river

that is closed to the coast.5 The wadi then continues through the Eastern Desert,

travelling around 180km before reaching the modern day port of Qusieir. The wadi

remains an essential route today – as a modern two lane highway – just as it was in

antiquity.6

We have evidence to suggest that Wadi Hammamat was used from the earliest

times of Egyptian history, stone from the region having been identified as the source

material for pots from as early as the 4th millennium BCE.7 Private entrepreneurs and

royal expeditions are attested from the pre dynastic period and continue through to the

Byzantine era with only a brief hiatus at

the end of the Old Kingdom and through

the First Intermediate Period.8 A graffito,

inscribed into a rock in Wadi el-Qash –

an offshoot from Wadi Hammamat, may

represent the earliest piece of evidence

for the exploitation of this region. The

graffito in question (see Figure 2) contains the serekh of

King Narmer, and although a sweeping conclusion should

be avoided given that this is a single inscription, its location does suggest that there was

contemporaneous state-initiated activity.9 Predating both Narmer and this graffito are a

number of rough petroglyphs. Some of these petroglyphs are predynastic but are not

evidence that the region was exploited for mining or quarrying before the Narmer

expedition. Instead they depict scenes of a more pastoral nature – including elephants,

ostriches, huntsmen and reed boats, reminding us that the Wadi would not always have

been an inhospitable desert.

5 See page 1 of G. Goyon, ‘Nouvelles inscriptions rupestres du Wadi Hammamat’. Paris, Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1957.6 See H. Goedicke, ‘Some remarks on stone quarrying in the Egyptian Middle Kingdom’, JARCE 3, 1964, pages 43-50. page 43. 7 Hikade, page 154.8 Hikade, page 154.9 See page 1 of A.J. Peden, The graffiti of Pharaonic Egypt: scope and roles of informal writing c.3100-332BC. Leiden, Brill, 2001. “The purpose of any such state expedition would presumably have been either the extraction of bekhen stone or simply to exploit the wadi as a direct route to the coast”.

of 24

Figure 3: The Turin mining papyrus


Expeditions to the Wadi Hammamat were conducted for a number of reasons,10

the most common of these being quarrying stone, particularly blocks large enough for

use in statuary.11The stone available in the wadi includes a variety of sandstone,

greywacke and schist – collectively referred to as Bekhen stone. The colour of this stone

varied widely from a dark almost black basalt like colour through reds, pinks and

greens. While the stone in the wadi was generally too flawed to be used in building

projects, the variety of colours available made it highly prized for use in statuary and

sarcophagi (see Figure 4). The Wadi remained valuable as a source of stone throughout

Pharonic history

and is recorded in

what is, according

to some scholars,

the oldest known

geological map,

the Turin Papyrus

mining map.12

This map, which

was discovered in

1820 and dates to

the reign of Ramesses IV, is believed to

accurately record the topography and geology of

the Wadi. The map is badly fragmented (see Figure 3) but a colour coded schema can be

reconstructed showing how the cartographer distinguished between different types of

rock. Hills are shown as pink, pink and brown or black, representing igneous,

metamorphic and sedimentary rocks, respectively. Bekhen-stone quarries and gold

mines are also marked, along with 28 hieratic remarks describing in many cases the

particular type or quality of rock and how it might best be used.13 The map is not drawn

10 See K.-J. Seyfried ‘Beiträge zu den Expeditionen des Mittleren Reiches in die Ost-Wüste’. Hildescheim, Gerstenberg, 1981, pages 241-285 for a general description of work in the Wadi Hammamat.11 Goedicke, 1964, page 43.12 See J. Harrell, M.Brown, ‘The World’s Oldest Surviving Geological Map: The 1150 BC Turin Papyrus from Egypt’. Journal of Geology 100, Jan 1992, pages 3-18. Page 3. However see also Klemm and Klemm, pages 633-634 where they state “it also shows the location of the Bekhen-stone quarry site, coloured in dark blackish green. […] differently coloured parts of this papyrus obviously represent different rock types of the portrayed region” Klemm and Klemm conclude by saying that “that the map, while topographical, cannot realistically be claimed as geological.”13 Harrell and Brown pages 7 and 15.

of 24

Figure 4: Broken sarcophagus from Wadi Hammamat


to scale but does include distances between many of its points recorded as text.

Interestingly, the wadi itself is referred to on this map as ‘the road to the sea’, further

highlighting its use as a route not only for quarrying and mining but also to access the

coast and Punt beyond.

Several inscriptions in the Wadi date to the reign of Pepi I and show that the

wadi was used as a route to the Red Sea and therefore as a base for trade expeditions to

the as yet unidentified land of Punt, well before the Turin mining papyrus.14 Other Old

Kingdom kings attested to (with varying

degrees of certainty) in the Wadi include

Khufu, Khafre, Djedefre, Menkaure,

Sahure and Unas.15 A military exercise is

also attested to, led by a ‘king’s

son’named Djaty. After Pepi, throughout

the First Intermediate Period there is very

little that can be dated with any degree of

certainty. There are two small inscriptions attributed to Merykare and Ity of the

Herakleoploitan Dynasty X. Two further inscriptions are attributed to the otherwise

unknown kings Ity and Imhotep.16 It seems that regular expeditions to the wadi ceased

until relative stability returned to Egypt. In fact, it was Nebhepetre Mentohotep who

appears to have reopened the wadi, probably sending quarrying missions. His son

Sankhkare Mentohotep send three thousand men on a mission to Punt in his 8 th regnal

year. This trade expedition is attested to by an inscription left by his chief steward

Henenu.17 Finally, immediately before the Middle Kingdom’s inception, Nebtawyre

Mentohotep sent an even larger expedition, which is the focus of the four inscriptions I

will be concentrating on.

Before presenting the translations, it is important to differentiate between the

classifications of texts left in the wadi. Broadly speaking, these fall into the following

14 In fact Peden claims on pages 7-8 that Old Kingdom activity prior to Pepi was irregular. His rationale is that prior to this many graffiti are not able to be securely dated. While this is undoubtedly the case it is not in my view evidence of absence.15 See note 14, although some of these are doubtful. See also J. Couyat and P. Montet, ‘ Les inscriptions hiéroglyphiques et hiératiques de Ouâdi Hammâmât’. Cairo, l’Institute Francais d’Archeologie Orientale, 1912, Inscription 60 as an example of these Old Kingdom records in the Wadi Hammamat. 16 If these were real kings then presumably they belong to Dynasty VII or VIII.17 Peden, page 21.

of 24


categories: expedition reports, expedition inscriptions, stelae, graffiti and petroglyphs.

Gundlach explains that an expedition report comes in one of two forms.18 It can be a

report located at or at the least originating from the source of the expedition, the place

from which it set out.19 Alternatively, it can be an inscription left at the target site of the

expedition confirming that the expedition was ‘on target’ and meeting its goals. An

expedition inscription, on the other hand, does not relate to the aims of the expedition,

but rather records something unrelated.20 In both cases the expedition was recorded by

one or more of its participants most frequently as a carving into the rock face.21

The four inscriptions I will translate are in two pairs; the first two are expedition

reports – one official (M192) and one unofficial (M113), whereas the second pair

(which will be discussed later) are two expedition inscriptions left by the Vizier

Amenemhet. Another 19 short graffiti probably date to this expedition as well and

record the name of both king Nebtawyre Mentohotep and various officials and workers

from the expedition.22 Inscription M192 is the official report of the expedition and

records the construction of a stela on the orders of the king. This inscription reveals the

expedition’s mission – to find a slab of stone suitable for use as a sarcophagus’ lid. The

second inscription, M113, was written by Amenemhet himself as the commander of the

expedition and not on the orders of the king. This report has a different tone to the

official one and provides a detailed description of the position of Amenemhet, as well as

his (self-proclaimed) close relationship to the king.

18 See R. Gundlach, ‘Mentuhotep IV und Min analyse der Inschriften M110, M191 und M192a aus dem Wadi Hammamat’. SÄK 8, 1980, pages 89-114. 19 Gundlach, page 90. 20 Gundlach, page 90.21 R. Ennmarch, ‘Of Spice and Mine: The tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor and Midle Kingdom Expedition Inscriptions’. in F.Hagen et. al. (eds.) Narratives of Egypt and the Ancient Near East. Leuven, Uitgeverij Peeters, 2011, pages 97-122, page 91. 22 Examples of these can be found in Couyat and Montet Inscription numbers 1,40,55, 105, 205, 241 see also Goyon Inscription numbers 52-60 and Seyfried page 245.

of 24


Translations of the first two inscriptions – the expedition reports,

based on the hieroglyphs published by

De Buck.23

M192: The Official Record – (1) Regnal year two, second

month of Inundation, day fifteen. (2) Horus “Lord of the two lands”,

Two Ladies “Lord of the two lands”, Gods of Gold the King of Upper

and Lower Egypt Nebtawyre, Son of Re Mentohotep living forever.

(3) His majesty commanded the erection of this stela for his father

Min, lord of the hill lands, on this splendid mountain (4) primeval god

preeminent in the land of the horizon dwellers, divine temple offered

life, divine nest of Horus (5) within which this god is content. His

pure place of enjoyment above (6) the hill countries of god’s land in

order to satisfy his soul (and to) honour the god in accordance with

his desires as a King (7) who is upon the great throne does. Foremost

enduring of monuments excellent god, lord of joy (8) much feared,

greatly loved, heir of Horus in his two lands nursed (9) by divine Isis

mother of Min great of magic for the kingship (10) of the two banks

of Horus. The king of Upper and Lower Egypt Nebtawyre, may he

live like Re eternally, (11) says “(My) majesty caused that the

Hereditary Prince, Overseer of the City, Vizier, Overseer (12) of

Works, Royal Confident Amenemhet, come together with an

expedition of ten thousand men (13) from the southern provinces of

Upper Egypt and from the south of wAbwt (14) in order to bring me

a splendid slab of the pure stone of this mountain whose (15)

excellence was made by Min for a sarcophagus an eternal memorial

and for monuments (16) in the temples of Upper Egypt as a mission

of the king, who is upon the Two Lands (17) to bring to him his

heart’s desire from the hill lands of his father Min. He created it as

his monument (18) for his father Min of Koptos lord of the hill lands

chief of the tribesmen so that he be given a very great quantity of life

living like Re forever. (19) Day 27, the lid of this sarcophagus

23 A. De Buck. ‘Egyptian Reading Book’. Chicago: Ares, 1948.

of 24


descended as a block 4 cubits by 8 cubits by 2 cubits. (20) As it came

forth from the works cattle were slaughtered, goats were

slaughtered, incense was put (21) on the fire. An expedition of three

thousand sailors from the regions of Lower Egypt followed it in

safety to Egypt.

of 24

Figure 5: Inscription M113in situ


M113: The Commander’s record – (1) Nebtawyre (2) living

forever! (3) Regnal year 2, month 2 of Inundation day 15. A royal

commission executed by the (4) Hereditary Prince, Count, Overseer

of the City, grand Vizier, Royal Confident, Overseer of the Works,

important in his office, great in his dignity foremost in (5) the house

of his lord inspector of the court of magistrates chief of the six great

ones, judging the patricians and the subjects and hearing legal pleas

to whom the

great ones

come while

bowing (6) and

the entire land

upon the belly.

He whose

office his lord

advanced. His

intimate

friend, Overseer of the Door of

Upper Egypt. He governed millions

of subjects to do for him the desire of his heart and build (7) his

monuments which endure upon earth. A great one of the King of

Upper Egypt, an important one of the King of Lower Egypt,

controller of the temples of the Red Crown, servant of Min in the

stretching of the cord ceremony who judges without partiality,

Overseer of the Entire of Upper Egypt (8) to whom is reported that

which is and that which is not. Governor of the administration of the

Lord of the Two Lands who devotes himself upon the Royal

commission Inspector of the inspectors, leader of Overseers, Vizier of

Horus in his appearances Amenemhet (9) says “ (My) lord l.p.h.! The

King of Upper and Lower Egypt Nebtawyre, living forever, sent me

as one in whom are divine limbs sends to establish his monument in

(10) this land. He chose me before his city after I had been preferred

before his court. His Majesty commanded that an expedition went

of 24


forth together (with me) to this noble land (11) men from the

choicest of the entire land. Stonemasons, craftsmen, officials,

sculptors, painters, metalworkers, goldsmiths (12) treasurers of the

great house. Every treasure of the treasury and every office of the

kings house united behind (me). (I) made land as river and upper

valleys (13) as waterways. (I) brought to him a sarcophagus, a

monument of eternity that endures forever. Its likeness never

descended from this land since the time of the god. (14) The

expedition descended without loss, not a man perished, not a

battalion turned back not a donkey died, not a craftsman was

deprived. It happened to the majesty of (my) lord (15) as the power

which Min created for him because he loved him so much so that his

soul might endure on the great throne in the kingdom of the two

banks of Horus. He made it as that which is greater than it. I am his

favourite servant who does all that he praises every day.

The official report begins by telling us that the expedition was active during the

inundation season. Mining was a seasonal activity and the Inundation season – roughly

September to January – was both substantially cooler than summer and a period of the

year when farming activity was minimal. Very few mining expeditions took place

outside of this time of the year, one such exception being the summer expedition led by

Harurre.24 The already harsh conditions in the desert would have been compounded by

the heat of summer, making the likelihood of fatalities far greater. Indeed, mining

expeditions were perilous enough even in the cooler months. With little water available

in the wadi – which were after all dry river beds – water for the miners had to be

brought in and rationed. This lack of water also limited the amount of livestock that

could be taken as food. What rations there were made a tempting target for the bandits

who lived on the fringes of Egyptian society, including in and around the wadi, making

security another major consideration. Of course the troops required to deal with this

24 Harrure records that “This treasurer of the god said to the officials who will come to this Mine-land at this season: "Let not our faces flinch on that account; Hathor will turn it to profit. I looked to myself, and I dealt with myself; when I came from Egypt, my face flinched, and it was hard for me [........]. The highlands are hot in summer, and the mountains brand the skin [...]. When morning dawns, a man is [... ...]. I addressed the workmen concerning it: 'How favoured is he who is in this Mine-land!' They said: 'There is malachite in this eternal mountain; it is [...] to seek (it) at this season. It is [...] to [...] for it in this evil summer-season.”. Translation from Breastead Ancient Records part 1 § 736

of 24


threat would add to the food and water needs of the expedition. Finally, the desert was

known to be inhabited by many dangerous wild animals such as snakes and scorpions,

and as Seth’s domain and the gateway to the Underworld there was a supernatural risk

too.

The official report continues by confirming that the purpose of the expedition

was to secure a slab of stone suitable for the king’s sarcophagus – as previously noted

the stone available within Wadi Hammamat was ideally suited for this. The method of

extraction is unknown to us, but we can see that it took 12 days of extraction before any

work could begin. The text does not specify the measurement system used to describe

the slab, as the word mH is lacking a determinative to indicate if it is a standard or a

royal cubit. Assuming these are royal cubits, which seems most probable in light of

their ultimate purpose, then an approximate size would be 210cm x 420cm x 105cm or

8m3 (around 20-23 tonnes) and it is unsurprising that a team of ten thousand was

required to extract the slab.

Finally, the official report also tells us that three thousand sailors were required

to transport the slab from the wadi to its destination once the slab was ready. Land

transport of a slab of this size could be achieved by pushing it across a series of logs, or

(once closer to the Nile and with water more readily available) by moistening the

ground to make it slippery enough for the workers to pull it along.25 Both of these

methods would be very time consuming and exhausting, even for a crew of thousands,

so once the Nile was reached a boat would have been far easier.26 The inclusion of three

thousand sailors confirms that a significant portion of the journey in this case was by

river.27

Perhaps the most significant detail to be gleaned from the unofficial record is the

implication that by the time of this expedition, the two lands of Egypt had been reunited

under a single King’s rule post the fragmentation of the First Intermediate Period. This

is evident from two ideas within the text. Firstly, the king is being attributed with titles

such as Lord of the Two Lands and the nsw-bity title. This could of course be an

25 Klemm and Klemm, page 632.26 Klemm and Klemm, page 632. 27 The tomb and sarcophagus of Mentohotep IV have not been located, so we cannot say where the sailors were taking the slab; Thebes seems a likely destination but this is speculation.

of 24


aspirational claim ascribed to the King and his followers rather than actual fact. When

coupled with the statement that the expedition included ‘men from the choicest of the

entire land’ however, the implication becomes more solid. The unofficial record also

explains in more detail the types of jobs that the ten thousand men would have been

doing and it seems clear that much of the work would have been done in situ;

stonemasons, craftsmen and sculptors were all present. This is again unsurprising – the

chance of finding a flaw in the slab would have been too great to risk transporting an

unfinished piece especially considering the costs of the expedition in the first place. The

term stretching the cord refers to an important foundation ritual in the construction of a

religious building. The cord is the mason’s line, which was used to align the building in

the appropriate direction relative to the stars, as well as to measure the building’s

dimensions accurately. The reference to stretching the cord in the context of this

expedition serves to underscore the importance of the king’s sarcophagus in a religious

sense and therefore to emphasise the importance of this expedition.

The theme of triumph over adversity is a common one within the corpus of

expedition reports and it is no surprise that both of the texts above proudly proclaim that

there were no losses in the expedition and that it was a success. Many of the official

reports left behind by expedition leaders dwell at some length on the difficulties they

faced at first before overcoming them.28 This undoubtedly draws on the tradition in

autobiographical texts of promoting individual achievements, but also probably reflects

the reality that many mining expeditions would have failed and that returning home

with no fatalities would have been unusual.29 Expedition inscriptions frequently

illustrate a more direct relationship between the mortal and divine realms than is found

in the habited areas of Egypt. Assman suggests that this is because contact between non-

royal mortals and the gods was more immediate outside the borders of Egypt away from

the rule of mAat imposed by the king.30 A formulaic sequence of events can be shown.

After an initial failure – the inability to find the expedition’s required stone – the power

of the local deity is invoked. In this instance the local deity, Min, whose cult centre was

28 R.J. Lephrohon, ‘Remarks on private epithets found in Middle Kingdom Wadi Hammamat Graffiti’. JSSEA 28, pages 124-146. 7.29 Ennmarch takes this argument further on pages 103-4 where he comments on lines 14-19 of the Shipwrecked Sailor. This is the section where the count is fearful of the reception he will eventually receive at court, due a lack of success on his mission, and Ennmarch shows that this echoes mining inscriptions and extrapolates to show that success was most probably unusual in such ventures. 30 See J. Assman, ‘Herrschäft und Heil: PolitischeTheologie in Altägypten, Israel und Europa’. München, Carl Hanser Verlag, 2000, pages 57-64.

Page 12 of 24

Figure 6: Inscription M110 in situ


at Qift at the entrance to the Wadi Hammamat, was honoured via the inscriptions.

Following this, wonders occurred as the god assisted the expedition. Thanks in the form

of sacrifices are offered back to the god and the expedition is able to return home in

safety. This sequence of events – failure, honouring the god, divine assistance,

resolution – in many ways parallels the königsnovella, which follows a similar formula:

impossible situation, king is honoured, king provides a solution, resolution. This

formulaic literary device may therefore serve to link divine favour with royal power in

expedition reports.31

Translations of the second two inscriptions – the ‘wonders’,

based on the hieroglyphs published by

De Buck.

Inscription M110: The first wonder – (1) The King of Upper

and Lower Egypt, Nebtawyre living forever (2) The wonder which

happened to His Majesty: Creations came down from the hills to him

(3) A pregnant gazelle came, going forth with her face to the people

before her (4) while her eyes looked back but she did not turn back

before she arrived at this

noble mountain (5) at this

block it in its place for this

lid of this sarcophagus. Then

she gave birth upon it while

this (6) expedition of the

king was watching. Then her

neck was cut and she was

sacrificed upon it (the sarcophagus) as a

burnt offering (7) It descended safely. Now it was the majesty of this

noble god (8) Lord of the hill lands who made the sacrifice to his son

31 Ennmarch suggests something similar is happening in the Shipwrecked Sailor, which he contends is influenced by Mining Expedition reports. See Ennmarch page 108. More research in the intersection between literary works and expedition reports may prove fruitful.

of 24


Nebtawyre, living forever, so that his heart was joyful and so that he

might be (9) alive upon his throne (*) forever and eternally and that

he celebrate millions of Heb Sed festivals (10) Hereditary Prince,

Count, Overseer of the City, Vizier, Official (leader) of all Judges,

Overseer of that which heaven gives (11) earth creates and the Nile

brings. Overseer of everything in the entire land, Vizier Amenemhet

Inscription M191: The Second wonder32 – (1) The king of

Upper and Lower Egypt Nebtawyre living forever. Born of the King’s

mother Imi. Second month of Inundation, day 23: Starting of work

(2) at this mountain on the single slab sarcophagus. Repeating of the

wonder: A command was issued* and the forms of the god were seen.

(3) Placing of his power to the people. The hill land was made as a

pool Revealing of water from the dry stone a well was found in the

midst of the valley. (4) ten cubits by ten cubits on its every side, filled

with water to its edge made pure and kept clean from gazelles (5)

hidden from the tribesmen and foreigners. Soldiers of old and kings

who came to pass before ascended and descended by its side (6) No

eye had seen it, the face of man had not fallen upon it but to his

majesty himself it was revealed. He had concealed it (7) he knew the

exact moment of this day. He planned the time of this event in order

that his power be seen and that one know (8) the excellence of his

Majesty. He did new in his hill lands for his son Nebtawyre living

forever. Those who were in Egypt heard it, (9) the people who were

in Egypt, Upper Egypt together with Lower Egypt they set down

their heads to the ground (10) and praised the goodness of His

Majesty for ever and eternity.

These texts are unique and stand apart from the entire corpus of expedition

inscriptions in the Wadi Hammamat. They focus on an event that happened during the

32 However A. B. Lloyd, ‘Once [sic] more Hammamat Inscription’ JEA 61, pages 54-66, page 56 claims that to an Ancient Egyptian this text actually reveals two wonders, not one. His rationale is that the rainstorm and the revealing of a well would have been unrelated to the original audience, who would instead have ascribed the well to Nun and not the rain.

of 24


expedition, as opposed to the expedition itself or the expedition’s objectives.33

However, both texts are still framed within an expeditionary context and, according to

Ennmarch, are therefore “an elaboration of the general acknowledgement of divine

intervention that occurs in other inscriptions”.34 Each text describes a ‘wonder’ of divine

origin. We are told that Min so loved his son the king that the god performed these

wonders in Mentohotep IV’s honour (Inscription M110 line 8 and Inscription 191 line

8).35 A modern perspective can discern a natural force behind each ‘wonder’; the gazelle

may not have led them to the slab as such, but quite possibly the gazelle giving birth

caused the expedition to examine the area more closely than they might have otherwise.

Similarly, desert storms, while rare, do occur; flash flooding often occurs in their

aftermath. This modern perspective must be set aside when considering why the

wonders were recorded in the first place. Amenemhet, as leader of the expedition, was

the only person with the power to make the decision to have them inscribed. This in turn

begs the question of why he wanted them recorded.

Inscription M110 describes an event that led the expedition to discover an

appropriate piece of rock. The pregnant gazelle giving birth in such an unusual way – in

front of the expedition after making a beeline for the ‘august mountain’ – suggested a

divine force at work and led to further examination of the site. Of course the veracity of

this event is debatable because, while it seems unlikely that the ‘wonder’ is entirely

fabricated, it does seem convenient. Once the slab was identified the gazelle was then

sacrificed in honour of the gods who favoured the expedition, just like the cattle and

goats were sacrificed in the official record (Inscription M192a line 20).

Hans Goedicke offers a different translation of this passage, preferring instead to

translate “her neck was cut” as “its neck was cut” – referring back to the stone slab.36 He

then describes how cutting the neck is supposed to refer to “separating the block from

the living rock” and is actually the process of cutting of a trench between the selected

block and the rest of the stone as is seen in the Aswan granite quarry. In Goedicke’s

translation, the reference to fire can then be seen not as part of a sacrificial event but

33 Ennmarch page 10934 Ennmarch page 11035 See D. B. Redford, ‘Egypt Canaan and Israel in ancient times’. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1993, pages 71-2. See also Lloyd page 59 where he says that “the bi(y)t demonstrate spectacularly the favour in which Nebtawyre stands with the gods”. 36 Goedicke page 48

of 24


further description of the extraction process. Goedicke also claims that a gazelle was not

suitable as a sacrifice because in order for a sacrifice to have value, the gods required

meat that a mortal would also value – and that Egytpians at that time, did not consider

gazelle edible. Strandberg has refuted this point, showing that gazelles frequently

appear in offering scenes and are quite acceptable as a sacrifice.37

37 See Å. Strandberg. ‘The gazelle in Ancient Egyptian Art’. Uppsala, Uppsala Universitet, 2009 pages 101-129 for a full review of these scenes.

of 24

Figure 7: Slate bowl from Lisht


Inscription M113 features Amenemhet very prominently; his titles and self

proclamation take up a large portion of the text – even more than is assigned to the king

in fact.38 Another consideration is the sheer size of the expedition, which seems to have

consisted of 13,000 men, making it the second largest expedition ever undertaken –

second only to the 18,000 men sent by Sesostris III(?).39 Such a large mobilisation of

manpower seems unnecessary, especially in light of the fairly modest objectives of the

expedition. This, coupled with the focus on Amenemhet in Inscription M113 leads to

the tempting idea that Amenemhet was openly posturing, displaying his power and

preparing to replace Mentohotep IV as the king.40 Further ammunition for the idea that

Amenemhet was

posturing to usurp

Mentohotep IV can

be taken from

Inscription M191,

which tells us (line

1) that Mentohotep

IV’s mother was ‘Imi, the Royal Mother’. Based

on this title it seems probable that she was not a king’s wife or a king’s daughter – she

was at best a secondary wife, leaving open the possibility that others had a better claim

to the throne than Mentohotep IV.41 There is no evidence that Mentohotep IV was a

commoner or a usurper himself, but interestingly he is omitted from the Turin Canon,

which instead records a seven year gap between Mentohotep III and Amenemhet I. This

gap supports the idea that Mentohotep IV was considered illegitimate or that there were

others who were in competition for the throne, such as the ephemeral king’s Inyotef IV

and/or Iyibre-Khent, for example. There is however no evidence of foul play and indeed

a slate bowl (figure 7) found at Lisht undermines this idea as it has both names on it –

Mentohotep IV and Amenemhet I.42 The naming of both kings on a single piece implies

that either the vizier may have assumed the role of co-regent during the last years of

38 C. Vandersleyen, ‘L’Egypte et la vallée du Nil, Tome II’. Paris, Presses universitaires de France, 1995 uses the term ‘very powerful’ on page 37. 39 Peden, page 36. See also Coyet and Montet Inscription 87 and Goyon Inscription 61.40 This whole topic is covered by Redford pages 71-5 but especially page 75. For a slightly different interpretation see Vandersleyen pages 37-39.41 Vandersleyen page 3742 D. Arnold. ‘Amenemhet I and the early twelfth Dynasty at Thebes’. Metropolitan Museum Journal 26, 1991, pages 5048, page 12 and figures 15,16 (reproduced here as figure 7)

of 24


Mentohotep IV's reign or that the pharaoh – presumably childless – was specifying his

successor in his vizier, Amenemhet.

The Wadi Hammamat was an essential source of stone throughout Egypt’s

history, as can be seen through the quantity of inscriptions left behind by different

expeditions. In this essay I have translated four of these inscriptions and shown how

they can be used to discern information about the nature of quarrying expeditions, the

dangers that were faced and some of the processes involved in the extraction of stone.

The inscriptions presented here contain even more information than this, allowing us to

theorise about the transition between the 11th and 12th Dynasties. Of course with the

evidence as it stands there can be no certainty as to whether the two Amenenhet’s were

the same person – although this seems likely. Even if we accept that they were the same

person, we still cannot infer any foul play. The tone of the inscriptions is however

suggestive and one has to ask why Amenemhet felt the need to present a second

expedition report (M113) and why in this report the majority of the text is taken up with

statements describing his own importance. Similarly, the second pair of texts raise

questions in that they stand apart from the entire corpus of inscriptions and that the

events they describe show divine favour. Whether this is favour for the king’s

expedition or, more subtly, favour for the leader of the king’s expedition and for his

success is harder to establish.

List of figures

Figure 1: Map showing location of Wadi Hammamat. Reproduced from Hikade, T., page 155.

Figure 2: Serekh of King Narmer from Wadi Hammamat. Image retrieved on 19 th

August 2012 from http://www.eastern-desert.com/wadi_qash.html

Figure 3: Picture showing reconstructed Turin Mining Papyrus, image retrieved on 19th

August 2012 from http://www.rabodeaji.com/No-5/mapa/default.html

Figure 4: Picture of a broken sarcophagus in the Wadi Hammamat. Image retrieved on 24th August 2012 from http://www.eastern-desert.com/wadi_hammamat.html

of 24

http://www.eastern-desert.com/wadi_hammamat.html

http://www.rabodeaji.com/No-5/mapa/default.html

http://www.eastern-desert.com/wadi_qash.html


Figure 5: Picture of Inscription M113 in situ. Image retrieved on 19th August 2012 from http://egyptsites.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/wadi-hammamat

Figure 6: Picture of Inscription M110 in situ. Image retrieved on 19th August 2012 from http://egyptsites.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/wadi-hammamat

Figure 7: Composite image of slate bowl dual inscribed with the names Nebtawyre and Amenemhet. Constructed from figures 15 and 16 in Arnold, D., page 12.

of 24

http://egyptsites.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/wadi-hammamat

http://egyptsites.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/wadi-hammamat


Appendix A.1 –Transliterations of records

M192A – The official record: (1) rnpt-sp 2 Abd 2 Axt sw 15 (2) Hr nb-

tAwy nbty nb-tAwy nTrw-nbw nsw-bit nb-tAwy-ra sA-ra mnTw-Htp anx

Dt (3) wD Hm.f saHa wD pn n it.f Mnw nb xAswt m Dw pn (4) Sps

pAwty xnty st m tA Axtyw aH-nTr Hnk m anx Hr sS (5) nTry wAxxw

nTr pn im.f st.f wabt nt sxmx-ib Hrt-tp (6) xswt tA-nTr n mrwt Htp kA.f

wAS nTr m st-ib.f m irr (7) nsw nt Hr st-wrt Xnty swt wAH mnw nTr

mnx nb Awt-ib (8) wr snD aA mrwt iwaw n Hr m tAwy.f rn (9) n Ast nTrt

mwt mnw wrt-HkAwr nswyt (10) idbwy Hr nsw-bity nb-tAwy-ra anx mi

ra Dt (11) Dd iw rdi.n Hm pr rpa imy-r niwt TAty imy-r (12) kAt mH-ib n

nsw Imn-m-HAt Hna mSa n s Dba (13) m spAwt Smawt SmAw xntyw

wAbwt (14) r int n inr Sps aAt wabt imit Dw pn irt (15) Mnw mnx.s r nb-

anx sxA nHH r mnw (16) m Hwwt-nTr nt SmAw m hAb nsw Hry-tp tAwy

(17) r int n.f xrt ib.f m xAswt nt it.f Mnw ir.n.f m mnw.f (18) n it.f Mnw

Gbtyw nb xAswt Hry-tp iwntyw ir.f Di anx aSA wrt anx mi ra Dt (19) sw

27 hAt aA n nb-anx pn m inr mH 4 r mH 8 r mH 2 (20) m pr m kAt rxs

bHsw sft anxwt Di snTr (21) Hr sDt ist mSa n 3000 m Xnw spAwt tA-

mHw Hr Sms.f m Htp r tA-mri

M113 – The commander’s record: (1) nb-tAwy-ra (2) anx Dt (3) rnpt-sp 2

Abd 2 n axt sw 15 wpwt nsw irt.n (4) iry-pat HAty-a imy-rA niwt tAyty

TATy sAb mH-ib nsw imy-rA kAt wr m iAt.f aA m saH.f xnty st m (5) pr

nb.f sHd qnbt HAt wr 6 wDa pat rxyt sDm mdw iw n.f wrw m ksw (6)

tA r-dr.f m dy Hr Xt sxnt nb.f iAwt.f aq-ib.f imy-rA aA SmAw xrp.n.f

HHw m rxyt r ir n.f xrt-ib.f ir (7) mnw.f wAH tp tA wr n nsw aA n bit xrp

Hwwt nt Hm mnw m pD-sS wDa nn rdit Hr gs imy-rA Smaw mi-qd.f

smiw (8) n.f ntt iwtt xrp Ssm n nb tAwy sAq43 ib Hr wpwt nsw sHd sHDw

xrp imyw-rA TAty n Hr m xaw.f Imn-m-HAt (9) Dd iw hAb.n wi nb

a.w.s. nsw-bit nb-tAwy-ra anx Dt m hAb at nTr im.f r smnt mnw.f m

(10) tA pn stp.n.f wi xnt niwt.f ssbq.kwi xnt Snwt.f iw grt wD.n Hm.f prr

43 I have read the t as a q in this word.

of 24


r xAst tn Sps (11) mSa Hna s m stpw n tA r-Dr.f Xrtyw-nTr Hmwtyw srw

qstyw sSw-qdwt qHqHw mdww nbw (12) sDAwtyw pr-aA sDAwt nb nt

pr-HD iAt nbt nt pr-nsw dmD m-sA ir.n xAst m itrw inwt Hrwt (13) m

wAt mw iw in.n.f nb-anx sxA nHH wAH ib n Dt n sp hA mit.f Hr xAst tn

Dr rk nTr (14) hA.n mSa nn nhw.f n Aq s n xtxt Tst n mwt aA nn gb

Hmww xpr.n n Hm n nb(.i) (15) m bAw ir n.f Mnw n-aAt.n mrr.f sw wAH

kA.f Hr st-wrt m nsyt idbwy Hr ir.n.f m aA r.s ink bAk.f n st-ib.f ir Hst.f

nb m Hrt-hrw nt ra nb

of 24


Appendix A.2 Tranlsliterations of ‘wonders’

M110 – The first wonder: (1) nsw bity nb-tAwy-ra anx Dt (2) biAt tn

xprt n Hm.f hAt n.f in qmAwt (3) xAswt iwt in gHst bkAt Hr Smt Hr.s r

rmT xft-Hr.s (4) iw irty.s Hr-sA sA nn an.s HA.s r spr.s r Dw pn Sps (5) r

inr pn iw.f m st.f n aA pn n nb-anx pn mst pw ir.n.s Hr.f iw mSa pn n (6)

nsw Hr mAA aHa.n Saw nHbt.s wdn.t(i) Hr.f m sb-n-sDt (7) hAt pw ir.n.f

m Htp isT grt in Hm n nTr pn Sps (8) nb xAswt rdi mAa n sA.f nb-tAwy-

ra anx Dt n-mrwt Aw ib.f wnn.f (9) anx Hr nswt.f nHH Hna Dt ir.f HHw

m Hbw-sd (10) iry-pat HAty-a imy-rA niwt TAty imy-rA srw nb n wDa-

mdwt imy-rA DD pt (11) qmAt tA innt Hap imy-rA n ixt nb m tA pn r-Dr.f

TAty Imn-m-hAt

M191 – The second wonder: (1) nsw bity nb-tAwy-ra anx Dt ms.n

mwt-nsw Imi Abd 2 Axt sw 23 wdt a m kAt (2) m Dw pn m inr wAH nb-

anx wHm biAt irt Hw mAA xprw nw nTr pn (3) dit bAw.f n rxyt irt xAst

m nwy bst mw Hr nHA n inr gmt Xnmt m Hry-ib int (4) mH 10 r mH 10 Hr

r.s nb mH.t(i) m mw r nprt.s swab.t(i) stwr.ti r gHsw sS (5) tA.ti r

iwntyw xAstyw pr.t(i) hAA.t(i) Hr gs.sy in mSa n tp-awy nsww xprw (6)

Xr-HAt n mA.n s(y)? irt nb n xr Hr n rmT Hr.s wbA sy n Hm.f Ds.f isT

grt sdx.n.f s(y?) (7) rx.n.f mtt hrw pn xmt.n.f Hnty sp pn n-mrwt mAA

bAw.f rx.t(w) (8) mnx Hm.f ir.f mAwt Hr xAswt.f n sA.f nb-tAwy-ra anx

Dt sDm st ntyw m tA-mry (9) rxyt ntt Hr Kmt Smaw Hna tA-mHw

wAH.sn tpw.sn m tA dwA.sn (10) nfrw Hm.t nHH Hna Dt

of 24


Bibliography

Allen. J.P., ‘The Egyptian concept of the world’. In D. O’Connor and S. Quirke (eds.) Mysterious Lands. London: UCL Press, 2003.

Arnold, D., ‘Amenemhet I and the early twelfth Dynasty at Thebes’. Metropolitan Museum Journal 26, 1991, pages 5-48.

Assman, J., ‘Herrschaft und Heil: Politische Theologie in Altägypten, Israel und Europa’. Munchen: Carl Hanser Verlag, 2000.

Couyat, J. and Montet, P., ‘Les inscriptions hiéroglyphiques et hiératiques de Ouâdi Hammâmât’. Cairo, L'Institute Francais d'Archeologie Orientale, 1912.

De Buck, A., ‘Egyptian Reading Book’. Chicago: Ares, 1948.

Enmarch, R., ‘Of Spice and Mine: The tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor and Middle Kingdom Expedition Inscriptions’, in F.Hagen et al (eds.) Narratives of Egypt and the Ancient Near East. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2011, pages 97-122.

Goedicke, H., ‘Some remarks on stone quarrying in the Egyptian Middle Kingdom’, JARCE 3, 1964, pages 43-50.

Goyon, G., ‘Nouvelles inscriptions rupestres du Wadi Hammamat’. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1957.

Gundlach, R., ‘Mentohotep IV und Min analyse der Inschriften M110, M191 und M192a aus dem Wadi Hammamat’. SÄK 8, 1980, pages 89-114.

Harrell, J., Brown, M., ‘The World’s Oldest Surviving Geological Map: The 1150 BC Turin Papyrus from Egypt’. Journal of Geology 100, Jan 1992, pages 3-18.

Hikade, T., ‘Expeditions to the Wadi Hammamat during the New Kingdom’. JEA 92, 2006, pages 153-168.

Klemm, D. D. and Klemm, R., ‘The building stones of ancient Egypt – a gift of its geology’. Journal of African Earth Sciences 33, 2001, pages 631-642.

Lephrohon, R. J., ‘Remarks on private epithets found in Middle Kingdom Wadi Hammamat Graffiti’. JSSEA 28, pages 124-146.

Lloyd, A. B., ‘One more Hammamat inscription 191’. JEA 61, pages 54-66.

Peden, A. J., ‘The graffiti of Pharonic Egypt: scope and roles of informal writing c.3100-332BC’. Leiden: Brill, 2001.

Redford, D. B., ‘Egypt Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times’. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.

of 24


Seyfried, K.-J., ‘Beiträge zu den Expeditionen des Mittleren Reiches in die Ost-Wüste’ . Hildescheim : Gerstenberg, 1981.

Strandberg, Å., ‘The gazelle in Ancient Egyptian Art’. Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet, 2009 .

Vandersleyen, C., ‘L’Egypte et la vallée du Nil, Tome II’. Paris : Presses universitaires de France, 1995.

Winlock, H.E., ‘Neb-Hepet-Rē Mentu-Hotpe of the Eleventh Dynasty’, JEA 26, 1941, pages 116-119.

of 24

expedition of nebtawyre in wadi hammamat

Documents