The Fayûm and Lake MœrisBrown, R. H. (Robert Hanbury)
History
The Fayûm and Lake Mœris
Brown, R. H. (Robert Hanbury)
Fayyum (Egypt) -- Description and travel; Moeris, Lake (Egypt)
On the shores of the Lake Mœris would stand the Labyrinth with
its pyramid (Hawârah), and within the lake area Crocodilopolis or
Arsinoë (Medinet-el-Fayûm). The lake would serve as a moderator for
the Nile in flood, and would supplement the short supply of the river
in summer. It would have had a perimeter of 220 kilometres against
Herodotus’ perimeter of 360 kilometres, assuming that Jomard and
others were right in supposing that Herodotus made use of the little
stadius. The greatest depth of the lake, when filled to R.L. 22·50,
would have been at least 70 metres against Herodotus’ depth of
92 metres.
The lake itself was not artificially made, as supposed by Herodotus,
but was brought under control by the works of man.
The water in the lake came from the Nile and not from local sources.
The lake lay between the Arsinoïte and Memphite Nomes.
Herodotus and others after him state that there existed two pyramids,
crowned by colossal statues, centrally situated in the lake, and
Herodotus thus describes them:—“The lake lies oblong north and
south, being, in its deepest part, 50 fathoms deep. It tells its
own story that it is artificially made, for about the middle of the
lake stand two pyramids, each rising above the surface of the water
50 fathoms, and that part of them which is built under water being
as much more. On the top of each (or _against_ each, according to
Cope Whitehouse’s translating) is a colossal figure seated on a
throne. So these pyramids are 100 fathoms high.”
It is supposed by some that the ruins at Biahmu (Plate XXII.) are
the remains of what Herodotus described as pyramids. Possibly they
are, but it seems a somewhat feebly supported supposition. Though a
colossus on the top of a pyramid is not what one would expect to find
there, and the dimensions of the pyramids given by Herodotus are, of
course, obtained second-hand and may be worthy of little reliance,
still the evidence, that the Biahmu ruins are the remains of what
he referred to, does not seem to me convincing.
[Illustration: PLATE XXIII.
RESTORATION OF A COLOSSUS, BIAHMU, FAYÛM.
Reproduced from Petrie’s ‘Hawara, Biahmu, and Arsinoë.’]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account