Now, as the artificial bank was formed along contour R.L. 17·50 (under the conditions assumed), and the water of the lake, as will be shown afterwards, never fell below R.L. 19·50, there would at lowest water be 2 metres depth of water up against the bank, and the most convenient point of embarkation and disembarkation for the inhabitants of Crocodilopolis on their way to Memphis would be at Biahmu, which they would reach by the road running along the top of the artificial bank formed between Crocodilopolis and Biahmu. They would take ship at Biahmu for the north-east corner of the lake, whence the desert route runs direct to Memphis. This is the direct road used to-day by the natives, who journey between Medineh (Crocodilopolis) and Bedreshên (Memphis), the road passing through Tamîyah, the site of which was, at the time that we are considering, 30 metres below water. (See Map at end.) It was therefore strictly correct to say that Lake Mœris lay between the Memphite and Arsinoïte Nomes. The ruins at Biahmu, of which Plate XXII. shows the present condition, are not in the line of the main bank from Edwah to Kalabiîn, but about 300 metres to the north of it. It is probable, therefore, that they were placed at the end of a projecting bank, in connection with the main bank, alongside which boats could lie. The two colossal figures (Plate XXIV.) mounted on their pedestals would have formed splendid landmarks for ships crossing from the north shore of the lake. [Illustration: PLATE XXII. BIAHMU RUINS.] Thus we have a vast lake of about 1600 million square metres of water surface, and an area of 27,000 feddans (acres) reclaimed from it, with Crocodilopolis in the reclaimed area, and the Hawârah pyramid and the Labyrinth on the shores of the lake at the point where the waters entering the lake were controlled. (Plates XX. and XXI.) This, I believe, was the Lake Mœris of Herodotus and of those who confirmed his testimony, and Mr. Petrie, as I have shown before, holds the same general views. But his theory, that the two pyramids, which Herodotus stated stood about the middle of the lake, were identical with the two colossi of Biahmu, of which the present ruins are all that is left, does not appear to me a satisfactory explanation of the account of them given by Herodotus, though to what Herodotus said he was _told_ I think no importance need be attached, as statements in a foreign language are apt to be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Arab traditions also may be curious and interesting, but they are of little value as a record of the past. It will be worth while to calculate the inflow and outflow of the lake in the condition, in which I have supposed it to be, as Lake Mœris, and to see if the existing features of the Nile Valley throw any light on the statements of the first historical witnesses to its existence.