The XIth dynasty temple at Deir el-Bahari .. - NYU | Digital Library ...

12 THE XlTii DYNASTY TEMPLE AT DEIR EL-BAHAUL.
find any part uf tlie actual temple, nor did
he knoAV precisely where it was. He speaks
of it as " small," which it would not be considered
to be anywhere but at Thebes, and describes
its columns erroneouslv as "hexagonal" (they
are octagonal). It is possible that the fragments
lie had noted were the actual scraps (including
a single base), whicli until tlie present excava-
tions were lying on the rubbish near the mouth
of a tomb (No. 15 ;
see p. 52), in the south-west
angle of the cliffs,' which is said to have been
excavated by the late Lord Dufterin many years
airo. These fragments were no doubt found some
years before Mariette wrote the passage referring
to the " hexagonal " columns." To judge from his
words (quoted below in the footnote), Mariette
evidently supposed that it had not been long
since the actual temple had been visible to
travellers. No doubt he thought it had been
covered up in modern times. It is, however,
certain that the precise site, size, and nature of
the temple Avere entirely unknown until the
discovery of 1903, as the whole of its floor Avas
found to be covered by ancient debris, and in no
place liy modern tip-rubbish only. And the
ancient ilehiis has certainly not been disturbed
for a very long time, probably not since the
Ramesside period. In some places the ancient
rubbish lay fifteen to twenty feet deep above
sexagonales ? " {llevua Politique ct Litti'rairc, 1879,
p. 560.) We are indebted for this reference to M. Capart.
' Arch, licporl, 1903-4, p. 7. Mariette says he found
the " stones " of the " editice " of " Ea-neb-ldier," " tout
au fond du cirque et vers Tangle sud-ouest " (Deir cl-
Baharl, loc. cit.). This is the position of the fragments
mentioned. It is evident tliat he had no inkling that the
temple really filled up the whole of the remaining space
in the " cirque," and judged too hastily that it was
" aujourd'hui ruine de fond en comhle."
Other sporadic fragments from the temple seem to
have been found occasionally of late years. Last year I
noted a piece of coloured relief in the Vienna Museum
which certainly belongs to it ; but whether this is the
product of some chance pitting by a native on the spot,
or was found in some other place to which it had been
removed in ancient times, is uncertain.
tlie pavement level, and in no case did tlie
highest pillai's I'emainin;?, which are six to
eight feet high, jiroject above it. In this
rubbish were found, besides "jjockets" of
scarabs and fragments of blue jjottery of the
XVIIIth Dynasty, baskets, tools, and pottery
which cannot Ije of later date than the Rames-
side period. It is therefore evident that the
pavement level cannot have been seen since the
Ramesside period, at least, and that no part of
the temple Avas discovered before the present
excavations. Lord Dufterin came very near
findino; it Avlien he du"; for tomljs in the south-
west corner of the cliff-face ; and it is probable,
as has already been said, that fragments of its
columns Avere found by him loose in the rubbish,
but it does not appear that he actually un-
covered any ])avt of the building that is in ^ifn.
The temple is therefore an entirely new discovery.
We must not omit to note that in 1881
M. Maspero found in the Dra' Abu '1-Negga, not
far off", an architrave bearing Meutuhetep's name,
Avitli remains Avhicli he took to be those of this
king's pyramid, Akh-di^ut, or, as he preferred to
vocalize the name, " Khou-isiou." ^ Tlie pyramid
is, hoAvever, in the Abbott Papyrus distinctly
stated to have been situated in Zesret or
Zesret is certainly Deir el-Bahari, not the Dra'
Abu 'l-Neiro-a. Also Ave shall see that the most
remarkable feature of the newly discovered
temple is a square erection Avhich is very pro-
bably the base of a pyramid, presumably the
royal pyramid mentioned in the Abbott Papyrus,
It therefore seems most probable that the architrave
found by M. Maspero in the Di-a' Abu
'l-Negga had been brought at some later time
from the king's temple at Deir el-Bahari, and
that the Iniilding near by was not Akli-dsnt.
3 Hist. Anc. (las Pcuples da I' Orient Classiqiia, i. {Las
Oriijincs), p. 462, n. *. " J'cn ai retrouvc les restes a
" Drah abou '1-Neggah en 1881, ainsi qu'une architrave
"aux cartouches de Monthotpou et provenant de la
" chapelle funuraire."