The Problem of the Obelisks

The Problem of the Obelisks:
From a Study of the Unfinished
Obelisk at Aswan

The Problem of the Obelisks by R. Engelbach, published by T. Fisher Unwin Ltd. in 1923, was reprinted by Nabu Press in 2010 and by Forgotten Books in 2012. This old book is still interesting and valuable.

Reginald (or Rex) Engelbach (1888-1946) was a British Egyptologist. On the title page of this book he is described as Chief Inspector of Antiquities in Upper (i.e. southern) Egypt. Following a brief preface, the main text is divided into nine chapters:

I – Obelisks and Quarries

II – Description of the Aswan Obelisk
III - Setting out an Obelisk

IV – Extraction of an Obelisk

V – Transport of an Obelisk
VI – Erection of an Obelisk

VII – Some ancient Records

VIII - A History of certain Obelisks and their Architects
IX – Removals of Obelisks in modern Times

At the end of the book we find Appendix I (Dates of Egyptian kings) and Appendix II (Spelling of Egyptian names) and a general index. The text is illustrated by 44 photos and drawings in black-and-white.

As you can see from the table of contents, this is not a traditional book about ancient Egyptian obelisks. The focus is on the mechanical and technical problems related to obelisks, and the starting point is the broken or unfinished obelisk, which is still lying in the ancient quarry at Aswan in the south of Egypt.

The subtitle – From a Study of the unfinished Obelisk at Aswan – is important, because it shows the angle which the author wants to pursue.

In his preface Engelbach explains that this volume (published in 1923) is a popular version of a scholarly report The Aswan Obelisk (published in 1922). The popular version is an easy read. The technical stuff is not difficult to understand. The text and the illustrations complement each other well. The illustrations help the reader understand the point he is trying to make in the text.

Unfortunately, illustrations are not always placed next to the relevant passages in the text. You have to flip back and forth between text and illustration. This is a bit annoying, but it is only a minor problem.

The Aswan obelisk is 137 feet long. If it had been completed, the weight would have been ca. 1,168 tons. It would have been the tallest and the heaviest obelisk in the world.

The workers had to give up, because they found several fissures in the granite. They tried to evade this problem and create a smaller obelisk instead, but even this plan had to be abandoned, because the fissures were too widespread.

We do not know when this took place; perhaps around 1500 BC, but the ancient obelisk is still lying in the ancient quarry, and when we study this unfinished project, it is possible to find the answer to some of the questions that we have about the ancient obelisks (chapters I and II).

In chapters III-VI the author follows an obelisk step by step from the moment when it is excavated in the quarry until it is standing in front of an ancient temple. The author presents and evaluates several interpretations of the material evidence. In some cases he has even conducted a practical experiment on a small scale. As far as I can see, his account is reliable, and his conclusions are sound.

In chapter VII he reviews the ancient literary evidence about obelisks, which is quite limited. The Egyptians set up many obelisks, but they never bothered to give us a detailed account about how it was done. That is why the methods employed are still the subject of intense discussion today.

In chapter VIII the author presents some of the royal architects, who worked for the pharaohs. We know some names and sometimes a bit more about them, because they were buried in individual tombs in Thebes. Here are a few examples:

** Ineni, who worked for Thutmosis I, was buried in a tomb known as TT 81.

** Sennemut, who worked for Hatshepsut, was buried in a tomb known as TT 71.

** Other architects are Dhutiy (TT 11); Puimre (TT 39); Menkheperra-sonb (TT 86); and Beknek-honsu (TT 35).

Ancient Egyptian names are tricky, because they were written without the vowels. Modern scholars do not always use the same forms as Engelbach did in the beginning of the 20th century. For instance he says Hatshepsowet, while modern scholars say Hatshepsut.

 

When discussing how a heavy monument was moved on land, Engelbach refers to a wall painting found in the tomb of Dhuthopte in el-Bersheh. Modern scholars call this person Djehutihotep and the location Deir el-Bersha.

In chapter IX the author completes his account by telling us the story of four famous obelisks, which were erected in foreign lands in modern times:

The first obelisk had been transported from Egypt to Rome in antiquity. In 1586 it was erected in front of St. Peter’s Church in Rome. [See Obelisk: A History (2009), chapter 5]

The second obelisk was transported from Luxor in Egypt to France in 1833. In 1836 it was erected in the Place de la Concorde in Paris. [See Obelisk: A History (2009), chapter 10]

The third obelisk was transported from Alexandria in Egypt to England in 1877-1878. In 1878 it was erected on the Embankment of the River Thames. [See Cleopatra’s Needle, 1893]

The fourth obelisk was transported from Alexandria in Egypt to the US in 1880. In 1881 it was erected in Central Park in New York. [See The New York Obelisk, 1993]

Engelbach wrote his book almost one hundred years ago, but in my opinion it is still relevant. If you are interested in ancient Egypt, in particular the obelisk, I think you will enjoy this account about the practical problems related to a remarkable type of monument, which is an important symbol of this ancient civilization.

* * * 

 

Reginald Engelbach,

The Problem of the Obelisks:

From a Study of the Unfinished Obelisk at Aswan,

T. Fisher Unwin Ltd., 1923, Nabu Press, 2010, Forgotten Books, 2012, 134 pages

 

* * *

 

The ancient quarry at Aswan.

 

A pounder (made of diorite or dolerite) was used to work
on the granite in the ancient quarry.

A general view of the ancient quarry.

 

The broken or unfinished obelisk seen from the top.

The ancient stone block is 137 feet long and weighs ca. 1,168 tons.

The unfinished obelisk.

The broken obelisk.

In this picture you can see one of several fissures in the granite.

The broken obelisk seen from the bottom.
Notice the group of visitors standing near the top of the monument.
This can give you an idea of the scale.

The broken obelisk seen from the bottom.
Notice the group of visitors standing near the top of the monument.
This can give you an idea of the scale.

Figure 21 in Engelbach's book:

"Transport of the statue of Dhuthopte, from his tomb at el-Bersheh."

Today this person is known as Djehutihotep and the location as Deir el-Bersha.

Figure 24 in Engelbach's book:

"Boat of Queen Hatshepsôwet from the Punt reliefs at Dêr el-Bahari."

Today the queen is known as Hatshepsut and the location as Deir el-Bahari.

* * *


 

Cleopatra's Needle: The London Obelisk

Cleopatra’s Needle by Reverend James King was published towards the end of the 19th century and reprinted by Forgotten Books in 2012. It is A History of the London Obelisk – also known as Cleopatra’s Needle – With an Exposition of the Hieroglyphics.

The modern reprint from 2012 is in a good condition - except for two illustrations, which are just a blur: Ramesses II, at Memphis (page 29) and Cleopatra’s Needle, at Alexandria (page 38). Otherwise, text and illustrations are as they should be.

James King (1839-1913) was a priest whose book about the London obelisk was published by the Religious Tract Society. Sometimes his Christian background creeps into the text: he likes to mention Moses, the Bible, and the Christian faith, although these elements are not relevant for his topic (pp. 6, 7, 15, 33, 37, 45-46, 50-51, 71, 100, 109, 120, 127). Fortunately, they do not disturb the main story. The best way to deal with them is to ignore them.

In a recent study about obelisks, the authors note that “King’s interest in the monument went beyond mere evocation of Bible stories. A trip to the Holy Land had spurred his interest in ancient Egypt… Clip out the few scriptural citations near the beginning and end of the book and there is almost no evidence of the author’s Christian motivation.”

[B. Curran, A. Grafton, P. Long & B. Weiss, Obelisk: A History (2009) chapter 11, page 265.]

Here is the table of contents (with a few additional comments):

* Chapter I - Ancient Egypt

* Chapters II and III - The Egyptian obelisk

* Chapter IV - The London Obelisk

The following chapters are devoted to the hieroglyphic inscriptions on the obelisk, which were made ca. 1450 BC on the order of Thuthmes (or Thutmose) III and ca. 1250 BC on the order of Rameses (or Ramesses) II. King provides a complete English translation of the hieroglyphs. This is why his book is still interesting and valuable more than a hundred years after its first publication:

* Chapter V - How the hieroglyphic language was recovered

* Chapter VI – How to read the hieroglyphic language

* Chapter VII – Thotmes III

* Chapters VIII-XI - The inscriptions made by Thothmes

* Chapter XII – Rameses II

* Chapter XIII - The inscriptions made by Rameses II

* Chapter XIV – The discovery of the royal mummies at Deir el-Bahari in 1881

The information provided in chapter XIV is interesting, but not directly relevant for our understanding of the inscriptions on the obelisk.

There is no bibliography and no index.

Some names and technical terms used in the book are now considered obsolete. Here are three examples:

(1) A town in the south of Egypt is called “Syene” (page 17). Today this place is known as Aswan. On page 36 Kings says “Syene or Assouan.” The latter looks like a French version of Aswan.

(2) An Egyptian queen is called “Hatasu” (pp. 22, 64, 78). Today this woman is known as Hatshepsut, the queen who ruled as a pharaoh.

(3) The ceremony celebrating a pharaoh, who has ruled for 30 years, is called the “Triakonteris festival” (pp. 78-79). Today it is known as the Sed (or Set) festival.

The text seems to be reliable, but there are a few exceptions:

(A) On pp. 43-45 King explains how the ancient obelisk was transported from Egypt to England (1877-1878). The obelisk was placed inside a long metal cylinder named the Cleopatra while a steam tug named the Olga was employed to tow it. On 14 October 1877 a storm arose in the Bay of Biscay, and the Cleopatra keeled over. The captain of the Olga felt he had to cut the line to save his own ship; the cylinder disappeared, and it was presumed to be lost forever. King continues:

“To the great delight of the nation, it was discovered that the pontoon, instead of sinking, had floated about for sixty hours on the surface of the waters, and having been picked up by the steamer Fitzmaurice, had been towed to Vigo, on the coast of Spain. After a few weeks’ delay it was brought to England, and set up in its present position on the Thames Embankment.”

This account is inaccurate and misleading. The Cleopatra was towed to Ferrol in Spain, not to Vigo; and the delay was counted not in weeks, but in months. The cylinder did not reach England until January 1878. Following a long debate about where to place the ancient monument, it was finally erected on the Thames Embankment in September 1878, almost one year after the departure from Alexandria.

(B) On page 95 King mentions the military campaigns of Ramesses II:

“… then he led an expedition against the Khitae, or Hittites, whom he completely routed at Kadesh …, a town on the River Orontes…”

This is what Ramesses wanted the world to believe, but it is not true. Today we know that the battle was a draw; if anybody lost, Ramesses did. Ca. fifteen years later, in 1258 BC, the Egyptians and the Hittites concluded a peace treaty, in which the two powers agreed not to go to war against each other again.

For more information about the Battle of Kadesh (1274 BC) please turn to chapter three of T. G. H. James, Ramesses II (2002).

(C) On pp. 99-100 there is a long quotation about Ramesses II, taken from a book by Canon Rawlinson, which says, in part:

“He was also, as already observed, the first to introduce into Egypt the degrading custom of polygamy and the corrupting influence of the harem.”

This moralising statement is not true. Every pharaoh of ancient Egypt had a harem, and this practice was widespread among ancient rulers, especially in the Middle East. There is no reason to single Ramesses out and blame him for this.

It is easy to judge ancient rulers by modern standards, but it does not make much sense. Whether we like Ramesses or not, there is no doubt that he is an interesting and important person of the ancient world.

In spite of the minor flaws mentioned above, King’s book about the London Obelisk is still quite interesting and valuable. It is fortunate that Forgotten Books decided to include this old volume in its Classic Reprint Series.

PS. King’s book is mentioned in Cleopatra’s Needles and Other Egyptian Obelisks (published by the Religious Tract Society in 1926 and reprinted by Dover in 1990). The author, E. A. Wallis Budge, explains is his preface that his book is “intended to take the place of ‘Cleopatra’s Needle’ by the late Rev J. King.”

* * *

James King,

Cleopatra's Needle:

A History of the London Obelisk;

With an Exposition of the Hieroglyphics,

The Religious Tract Society, 1883, 1886, 1893,

Forgotten books, 2012, 128 pages

* * * 

  

The ancient Egyptian obelisk , known as Cleopatra's Needle,
was erected in Heliopolis by Thotmes (or Thutmose) III ca. 1450 BC.

The obelisk is flanked by two sphinxes, modern copies of an Egyptian original.
In this picture you can see sphinx # 1.

In this picture you can see sphinx # 2.

This plaque explains that the obelisk was presented to England in 1819.
The text does not say that the British government did not accept the gift
(because it was considered too expensive).

This plaque explains the ancient history of the obelisk.

This plaque explains how the obelisk was transported from Alexandria to London.

This plaque mentions the names of six sailors, who lost their lives trying to rescue the
obelisk during a storm in the Bay of Biscay in October 1877.

This plaque explains the hieroglyphic inscriptions on the obelisk.

The obelisk is 21 m (68 feet) tall and weighs ca. 180 tons.

After a long and difficult voyage from Alexandria to London, the obelisk was
erected in its present position in September 1878.

This plaque gives information about a German air raid on London,
which took place during World War One (on 4 September 1917).

In this picture you can see the damage
that was done to the sphinx by the German bomb.

Cleopatra's Needle on the Embankment of the River Thames in London.

Cleopatra's Needle on the Embankment of the River Thames in London.

Cleopatra's Needle on the Embankment of the River Thames in London.

* * *

Cleopatra's Needles and other Egyptian Obelisks

Cleopatra’s Needle and Other Egyptian Obelisks by E. A. Wallis Budge was published by the Religious Tract Society in 1926 and reprinted by Dover in 1990 and by Kessinger in 2003 and 2010. This old book is still interesting and valuable.

Ernest Alfred Wallis Budge (1857-1934) was a well-known British orientalist: Keeper of the Assyrian and Egyptian Department of the British Museum 1894-1924 and the author of several books about ancient history.

In his preface he explains: “This volume … is intended to replace the little book ‘Cleopatra’s Needle’ written by the late Rev. James King” and published towards the end of the 19 century.

The main text is divided into two parts:

The first part covers the same ground as King’s book. The author gives a general presentation of the ancient Egyptian obelisk and explains how the obelisk known as Cleopatra’s Needle was moved to London and erected on the Embankment of the River Thames.

The second part gives a lot more than we find in King’s book. The author presents all the important Egyptian obelisks. Some of them are still in Egypt, while others were exported to foreign lands. There are more than ten in Rome, while there is one in Paris, one in Constantinople (today Istanbul) and one in New York. The presentation includes the inscriptions found on the obelisks, generally arranged in such a way that the Egyptian hieroglyphs and the English translations are printed on the same page.

A brief bibliography and an index are placed at the end of the book. The text is illustrated with 22 drawings and 17 black-and-white photos.

In King’s book the hieroglyphs are printed in a vertical line, exactly as they appear on the ancient monument, going from top to bottom. Moreover, the hieroglyphs are explained one by one, so the reader can see how the English translation is created (step by step). This system is very helpful, very pedagogical.

Unfortunately, Wallis Budge often has another approach: in his book the hieroglyphs are usually printed in horizontal lines, going from left to right. Moreover, the hieroglyphs are not explained one by one; instead there is a large block of hieroglyphs (five, six or seven lines) followed by an English translation of this block. This means that the reader cannot see how the translation is created.

Some sections are more successful than others. One of the most successful is the section about the obelisk of Hatshepsut (pp. 98-124), which includes four full-page drawings of the vignettes on the upper part of the obelisk. The long inscription on the base of the obelisk is quoted in full. The lines of hieroglyphs are numbered (from 1 to 32), and these numbers are repeated in the English translation, so the reader can compare one with the other.

Perhaps the least successful is the section about the speech of Amen-Ra (pp. 130-142). The lines of hieroglyphs are numbered (from 1 to 25), but these numbers are not repeated in the English translation, so it is almost impossible for the reader to compare one with the other.

This text is also found in First Steps in Egyptian: A Book for Beginners written by Wallis Budge and published in 1895 (pp. 156-167). And what a surprise it is to go back in time: in this book the hieroglyphs are explained one by one, exactly as they should be.

Wallis Budge is an expert who knows his topic very well, but sometimes he is a bit careless with the details. Here are some examples:

(1) In his preface (page viii) he claims King visited Egypt and Palestine in 1878. But according to King, his journey took place in 1877.

(2) The caption to Plate II facing page 42 says: “Scaffold built by Fontana for the removal of the obelisk from the Circus Maximus to the Piazza of St. Peter, Rome.” In fact, this obelisk was moved from the Circus of Caligula, as explained in the text (pp. 41-42).

(3) On page 48 we are told: “… in 1836 [the French engineer] Le Bas was deputed to go out and dismount the obelisk chosen by Champollion and … re-erect it in Paris.” In fact, this obelisk was transported to Paris in 1833. It was erected in the Place de la Concorde in 1836. [The correct dates appear on pp. 195-196.]

(4) On page 167 we are told an Egyptian obelisk was “transported … to New York and set up in 1880 in the Central Park by Lieut.-Commander H. H. Gorringe.” In fact, this obelisk was taken down in 1879, transported to the US in 1880, and erected in Central Park in 1881. [The correct dates appear in a footnote on page 55.]

(5) On page 182 we are told Augustus conquered Egypt in “AUC 731 = 23 BC.” In fact, the conquest of Egypt took place in AUC 724 = 30 BC.

(6) Egyptian Obelisks by Lieutenant-Commander Henry H. Gorringe is mentioned several times; each time we are told this book was published in 1885. But the correct date is 1882.

Sometimes Wallis Budge does not give us the whole story: the obelisk standing next to San Giovanni in Laterano (St. John Lateran) in Rome is presented on pp. 143-159. All four sides of the base are decorated with a Latin inscription. The author quotes only two of them (north and west). The other two (south and east) are not quoted, and the two which are quoted are not translated into English (pp. 151-152).

All four inscriptions are given - in Latin and in English - in Tyler Lansford, The Latin Inscriptions of Rome (2009) (pp. 226-231).

In spite of the flaws mentioned above, this old book by Wallis Budge is still interesting and valuable, because it provides an almost complete record of the inscriptions on the ancient Egyptian obelisks.

* * *

E. A. Wallis Budge,

Cleopatra's Needles and Other Egyptian Obelisks,

The Religious Tract Society, 1926, Dover, 1990,

Kessinger, 2003 and 2010, 308 pages

* * *

  

The facade of San Giovanni in Laterano (known in English as St. John Lateran),
the first Christian church in Rome, built 314-318,
during the reign of Constantine (306-337).

Detail of the facade.

The ancient monolith, known as the Lateran obelisk, is standing on a modern pedestal.
Today it is 32 m tall. In antiquity it was a bit taller. A Christian cross is placed
on top of it to show that the Christian religion (with one god) is stronger
than the pagan religion of ancient Egypt (with many gods).

Detail of the ancient Egyptian obelisk.

The modern pedestal is decorated with a Latin inscription on all four sides.
This picture shows the inscription on the east side (15 lines).

The Latin text:
FL CONSTANTIUS AUG / CONSTANTINI AUG F / OBELISCUM A PATRE / LOCO SUO MOTUM / DIVQ ALEXANDRIAE / IACENTEM / TRECENTORUM REMIGUM / IMPOSITUM NAVI / MIRANDAE VASTITATIS / PER MARE TIBERIMQ / MAGNIS MOLIBUS / ROMAM CONVECTUM / IN CIRCO MAX / PONENDUM / SPQR D D.

In English:
"Flavius Constantius Augustus, son of Flavius Constantine, gave to the Senate and People of Rome as a gift to be placed in the Circus Maximus the obelisk moved from its site by his father and long neglected at Alexandria, set aboard a 300-oared ship of astonishing size, by mighty labours
conveyed across the sea and up the Tiber to Rome."

In 1607 a fountain was placed at the foot of the ancient obelisk. It was built by Paul V,
who was pope 1605-1621. The fountain is decorated with an eagle
flanked by two dragons. This motive is borrowed
from the pope's coat of arms.

The ancient monolith weighs more than 450 tons. Today its height is 32 m.
If we add the modern pedestal below and the Christian cross on top,
the total height of the monument is 46 m.

The obelisk was commissioned by Thutmose III ca. 1450 BC. It was completed and erected
in the Karnak temple complex by his grandson Thutmose IV ca. 1400 BC.

Around AD 330 the obelisk was moved from Karnak to Alexandria where it was left for
several years. In AD 357 it was transported to Rome where it was
placed on the spina of the Circus Maximus. It was
erected in its present position in 1588.

Detail of the obelisk.

The modern pedestal is decorated with a Latin inscription on all four sides.
This picture shows the inscription on the south side (seven lines).

The Latin text:
CONSTANTINUS / PER CRUCEM / VICTOR / A S SILVESTER HIC /
BAPTIZATUS / CRUCIS GLORIAM / PROPAGAVIT.

In English:
"Constantine, through the cross victorious, baptized in this place by
Saint Silvester, furthered the glory of the cross."

The information given in this inscription is not true:
Constantine was not baptized by Saint Silvester at Rome.
Pope Sylvester died on 31 December 335. Constantine was baptized at
Nicomedia (today Izmit) by Eusebius on 22 May 337, just before his death.

* * *

The Obelisk-Crab in the Metropolitan Museum

The Greek and Roman Inscriptions
on the Obelisk-Crab in the
Metropolitan Museum,
New York

This slim volume about the Greek and Roman inscriptions on the claw of the obelisk-crab in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (written by A. C. Merriam) was published in 1883 and reprinted in the beginning of the 21st century. It is a fascinating case story about how to handle ancient evidence.

Augustus Chapman Merriam (1843-1895) was a classical scholar from the US. On the title page of this essay he is described as Adjunct Professor of Greek in Columbia College.

An obituary, by Clarence H. Young, appears in the American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 10, # 2, April-June 1895, pp. 227-229.

What is an obelisk-crab and how did a Roman crab from Egypt end up in a museum in New York? Here are the answers:

Two ancient Egyptian obelisks are known as Cleopatra’s Needles, even though the famous queen did not have anything to do with them. They were commissioned and erected in Heliopolis by Thutmose III ca. 1450 BC. Following the Roman conquest of Egypt in 30 BC they were moved to Alexandria and placed in front of a temple known as the Caesareum. When the Romans re-erected the obelisks, they decided to support them with sea crabs cast in bronze (one crab with two claws for each corner).

Around AD 1500 one of the two obelisks fell down, while the other remained standing. In 1877 the prostrate obelisk was dug up and transported to England. It was erected on the embankment of the River Thames in the following year.

When the first obelisk was removed from Alexandria, the foundation of the other was cleared, and this is when the crabs were discovered. Only two crabs and one claw remained, the rest had disappeared. There was no trace of the four crabs which had supported the London Obelisk. Two inscriptions were carved on the claw: in Greek on the outside, in Latin on the inside. At the time of discovery the crab was almost two thousand years old, and the letters were not easy to read. The first reading of the Latin text gave the following result:

ANNO VIII CAESARIS

BARBARUS PRAEF
AEGYPTI POSUIT
ARCHITECTANTE PONTIO

In English:

 

“In year 8 of Caesar the governor Barbarus erected [this obelisk] in Egypt. The architect was Pontius.”

The Greek text seemed to give the same information (see more below).

Octavian (later known as Augustus) conquered Egypt in August 30 BC and his rule of this province was counted from that time. Therefore year 8 is the end of 23 or the beginning of 22 BC. The governor (praefectus) was identified as Publius Rubrius Barbarus.

The other Alexandrian obelisk was taken down in 1879, transported to the US in 1880 and erected in New York Central Park in 1881. The project was supervised by Henry H. Gorringe, a former Lieutenant-Commander of the US Navy, who handed the two crabs and the claw over to the Metropolitan Museum of Art (colloquially known the the Met). For the New York Obelisk four new crabs with eight claws were cast at the Brooklyn Navy Yard in order to re-create the ancient Roman setting.

The crabs are huge: one modern replica weighs ca. 900 pounds. You can find some great pictures of them on the internet. The website Scouting New York has a detailed report about The Oldest Outdoor Man-Made Object in New York.

The first reading of the inscriptions was used by James King in Cleopatra’s Needle (1883, 1886, 1893) and by Henry H. Gorringe in Egyptian obelisks (1882).

Several scholars defended the first reading, including the famous German scholar Theodor Mommsen (1817-1903). In order to do this, Mommsen had to “bend” the evidence: he had to follow the Greek author Dio, who wrote two hundred years after these events, and he had to reject the Greek author Strabo, who was a contemporary witness. Not exactly Mommsen’s finest hour.

In 1883, when Merriam came to the Met to study the original evidence, he quickly realised that the first reading was wrong, because the date (year 8) and the name of the governor (Barbarus) did not match each other:

** The first governor Cornelius Gallus served 30-26 BC

** The second governor Petronius probably served 26-20 BC

** The third governor Aelius Gallus probably served 20-18 BC

The date 23-22 BC does not fit any of them (page 17).

But a governor called Publius Rubrius Barbarus is known from a Greek inscription in the temple for Augustus on the island of Philae, which is dated to year 18, i.e. 13 or 12 BC (quoted on page 19).

Merriam went back to the Met and asked the staff to clean up the claw, and step by step everything fell into place:

During the second reading of the Latin version the date became clear: ANNO XVIII. Not 8, but 18: the same year as the inscription from Philae!

The first reading of the Greek version began with the letters L H, where the Roman letter L stands for “year” and the Greek letter H for the number 8. During the second reading of the Greek version the date became clear: L IH, where the letters IH stand for the number 18. The same year as in the Latin version!

Amazingly, the first reading of both versions gave year 8 or 23-22 BC, which does not fit the evidence at all, while the second reading of both gave year 18, or 13-12 BC, which fits the evidence perfectly.

The correct versions appear in C. E. Moldenke, The New York Obelisk: Cleopatra's Needle (1891) and in E. A. Wallis Budge, Cleopatra’s Needles and Other Egyptian Obelisks (1926).

Merriam’s diligence and patience had paid off. The mystery was solved. And now, he says, we can understand the emperor’s line of thought: moving two (relatively small) obelisks from Heliopolis to Alexandria in 13 or 12 BC was just a trial run. The real deal was implemented ca. two years later (in 10 BC) when two (large) obelisks were moved from Egypt to Rome (page 48).

Several scholars studied the ancient inscriptions on the Roman claw; and several scholars got it wrong. Merriam got it right. That is why his essay about the obelisk-crab in the Met is still important and valuable.

* * *

 

Augustus Chapman Meriam,

The Greek and Latin Inscriptions on the Obelisk-Crab

in the Metropolitan Museum, New York,

Harper and Brothers, New York, 1883,

Kessinger Legacy Reprints, 2010, 49 pages

 

* * *

 

 

The claw of the obelisk-crab which Henry H. Gorringe presented to the Met in 1881.
The Greek inscription is carved on the outside of the claw (seen in this picture).
The Latin inscription is on the other side of the claw.  

The Greek inscription carved on the outside of the claw covers
an area of ca. 8 x 4 inches (four lines).

The Greek inscription written with regular Greek letters (four lines).

The Latin inscription carved on the inside of the claw covers
an area of ca. 6 x 3 inches (four lines).



The Latin inscription as it appears in Merriam's essay.
(above) The first reading (four lines)
(below) The second reading (two lines)

The Greek inscription as it appears in Merriam's essay.
(above) The first reading (four lines)
(below) The second reading (only one line)

* * *