12.

Evidence for the Custom of Killing the King in Ancient Egypt

Author(s): M. A. Murray
Source: Man, Vol. 14 (1914), pp. 17-23
Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2788958 .
Accessed: 14/03/2014 14:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Man.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 190.216.37.2 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:16:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1914.J MAN. [Nos. 11-12.
ORIGINAL ARTICLES.
Bactria: Bronze Age. With Plate B. Read.
A Bactrian Bronze Ceremonial Axe. By Sir C. Hercules Read. 44
An example of a ceremonial (or perhaps votive) axe obtained in the II
N.W. Provinces of India, and recently added to the collections of the British Museum,
is so remarkable from several points of view that it may serve a good purpose to
bring it before the readers of MAN.
The design of the axe is singular, and a mere description could bardly convey
a clear impression to the reader; the illustration will, however, supplement the
inadequacy of the words. From the Plate it will be seen that the axe is entirely
composed of the figures of three ani-mals, a boar, a tiger, and an ibex. The cutting
edge is formed of the back of the first, which is attacking the tiger, who is turning
a remonstrant head while he grips with his fore paws the flanks of a crouching
ibex, who is also "regardant." Below the bodies of the two last are the flanges that
form the opening for the handle of the weapon, which did not pass through the
axe, but was held in position
by
two rivets, the holes for which are clearly seen in'
the illustration. That it was never intended for active use is clear from the entire
inadequacy of the edge. It is evident that the back of the boar could cut nothing,
and that the maker had no intention that it should cut, for to grind or hammer the
edge to a practicable state would entirely destroy the admirable modelling of the
body of the boar. Hence the reasonable deduction that the object had a votive
or ceremonial purpose. Our present very exiguous knowledge of the archaeology of
Afghanistan in the centuries preceding the Sassanian dynasty does not admit of any
definite statement of the uses to which an object of this kind might be put, nor
are we able to interpret the symbolism of the conjunction of these three animals.
The artist bas sbown no small amount of ingenuity in making the contours of
the beasts serve his purpose while preseiving the characters of their anatomy. The
two faces are equally finished and complete, and are fully as satisfactory from the
artistic standpoint as if the artist had had no end in view but to portray them as
they stood. It would appear, however, from a comparison with other existinlg axes
from the same region that the contour scene in the present specimen is a charac-
teristic one. Some of these are figured in Arch/eologia (Soc. Antiq., Lond.),
Vol. LVIII., page 1, where some unusual
tyvpes
of weapons are dealt with. Among
these is one which illustrates the present example, and in some ways amplifies it.
This is an axe from Kerman, in
Persia, presented to the British Museum by Major
P. M. Sykes. In this the animal forms are degraded and almost lost, but a second
axe of the same find has the beasts standing free and well defined, though by no
means of the artistic excellence of those on our present example.
After comparison with the Oxus treasure in the Museum, it seems to me highly
probable that this is a specimen of the art of Bactria of about the time of Alexander.
Further discoveries may render this attribution capable of greater precision, and such
precision can be best attained
by publication. C. H. READ.
Egypt. Murray.
Evidence for the Custom of Killing the King in Ancient Egypt 1
By Af. A. Murray.
In Egypt there is no absolutely direct evidence, no definite statement in so many
words, that the king was sacrificed, no actual representation in sculpture or painting
of such a sacrifice. Yet there are many allusions, more or less clear, from literary
sources-some early, some late-which, as I hope to prove, show the ceremonial
survival of that ancient and barbarous usage.
[
17
]
This content downloaded from 190.216.37.2 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:16:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
No. 12.] MAN. [1914.
Dr. Frazer deduced the practice of killing the king from literary sources, from
legend, and from ceremonial survivals ; a theory not at first received by all, but
triumphantly confirmed in the end by Dr. Seligmann's discoveries among the Shilluks
of the Nile Valley. In the same way we may follow the "converging lines of
evidence " in ancient Egypt, and possess our souls in patience till the final confirmatory
proof is found.
I have divided my subject into five parts: (1) the parallels in neighbouring
countries; (2) the meaning of the name Osiris (the identification of the king with
Osiris being already established) ; (3) the literary evidence from the Pyramid Texts, the
Book of the Dead, and legends both Egyptian and Arab; (4) the representations in
Art, i.e., the Sed-festival and the Drowned Men of Dendur; and (5) the modern
survivals.
(1) For the parallels in neighbouring countries, Dr. Frazer's books are the great
storehouse. He has shown that the custom of killing the king can be inferred in
Greece (Athamas) and in Crete, and was known in Babylon, Syria, and Ethiopia.
These countries either bordered on Egypt or were in close connection with her, so
close that the Greeks themselves considered their own religion to be derived from
the Egyptian. Under these circumstances it is not likely that Egypt alone would be
exempt from a custom common among all her neighbours.
The case for human sacrifice in Egypt has been abundantly proved, in spite of
Herodotus's indignant denial that so humane a people could be guilty of such blood-
thirsty deeds.
The instance which bears most upon our subject is the sacrifice of harvest
victims at Eileithiya (El Kab), the primitive kingdom of Upper Egypt. For the
fundamental idea underlying the sacrifice of the king is the belief that in him the god
of fertility is incarnate, and that on his health and strength the prosperity and welfare
of his country are dependent. On the approach of old age,
or at the end of a term
of years, the king had to be put to
death,
in order that the deity might pass into a
younger stronger body, and thuis never suffer decay or degeneration. The actual
method of sacrifice varies in different countries; but in, many cases it is followed by
dismemberment; the tearing of the body limb from limb in a savage and barbarous
maniner, the pieces being buried in the fields when the victim was
human, beilng
devoured by the worshippers when the victim was animal.
(2) The Name of Osiris.-In spite of Plutarch's sarcastic remarks on the
dull souls and vulgar minds who identify Osiris with vegetation, it is only by
applying this very theory to the cult of Osiris that we are able to understand the
many aspects of this god. I have shown in my study of Osiris in The Osireion at
Abydos that the king is the incarnate god, that Osiris is the
king
and the king is
Osiris: in other words, that the spirit of fertility
is incarnate in the
king. This
view is absolutely confirmed by Professor Erman's researches on the meaniiig
of the
name Osiris.* The hieroglyphs which form the name are a throne and a human
eye
; the same throne which appears in the name of Isis. The actual reading of
this sign is S with a preceding and succeeding vowel; the following vowel is
certainly e, the preceding vowel appears to vary, probably according
to rules of
pronunbciation. Thus in the name,
"
Isis," it would be Is'; in Osiris Use. The
eye reads Yr in this connection Yri; the throne and the eye together reading
Usiri. The meaning of Yr is "To do, to make, to occupy";
in the participle,
"the doer, the maker, the occupier." Thus we get the meaning of the names, Isis
or Is6, " She of the throne," "' the throne-woman
;
Osiris, or Usiri, " the occupier of
the throne," in other words the king.
*
Zeitschrrft fur Aegyptisehe Sprache, 1909, p. 92.
[ 18
]
This content downloaded from 190.216.37.2 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:16:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1914.) MAN. [No. 12,
Having reached this point of the identification of the king with the great god
of Egypt, we turn to the legends of the death of Osiris. The coasecutive accounts
are those of Diodorus and Plutarch (De Iside et Osiride). In Plutarch's dramatic
story Osiris was treacherously murdered by being shut up in a wooden chest, which
was then throwni into the Nile; Diodorus does not mention the manner of death.
Plutarch drags in, after the murder, an episode which has nothing to do with the
story of Osiris, but expresses the fact that ani interval elapsed between the death
and the next event, which was the tearing of the body in pieces and the scattering
of them broadcast over Egypt, i.e.,
over the cultivated land. Isis searched for
the fragments, collecting alnd joining them together, and thus caused Osiris to rise
again.
There are two special points to notice: first, that Osiris practically met his
death in the water; second, the dismemberment of the body.
(3) The Literary Evidence.-What little literary evidence remains in Egyptian
records concerning the death of Osiris, points to its having been effected by water.
It is unfortunately of late date.
In a stela of the Persian period, about the 6th or 5th century n..c. (now in
the British Museum), the cemetery of Memphis is said to have been called AnkAh-
Taui, " Life of the Two Lands
"
(the niame is significant) " because of the fact that
" Osiris was drowned in its waters."* In another late text, the so-called Lamenta-
tions of Isis, the goddess describes her journey in search of Osiris, " I have traversed
" the seas to the confines of the eaith, seeking the place where my lord is . . .
I have sought him who is in the water; I have found the Drowned One."
In the legend, Menes, the first historic king of Egypt, was killed by a hippo-
potamus according to Manetho, carried into safety by a crocodile according to
Diodorus. Here we appear to have a faint echo of the sacrifice of the primitive
kings by water; the water itself being symbolised by one of the destructive
water-beasts.
For dismemberment there is much evidence from literary sources; a few quota-
tions will suffice. In the earliest hieroglyphic texts, those inscribed inside the
pyramids of the 6th dynasty kings, dismemberment is continually mentioned. In the
inscription of Unas, the earliest, there is an invocation to various goddesses,
"0 Neith, 0 Ani, 0 Urt-hekau, 0 Urt, 0 Nesert, cause that Unas be cut in
pieces as thou (fem.) art cut in pieces." In the inscriptions of Teta and Pepy,
"0 Teta, thou hast received thy head, thou hast collected thy bones, thou hast
" united thy limbs." And of a goddess it is said "She gives to thee thy head,
" slhe unites for thee thy bones, she joinis for thee thy limbs, she brings to thee
"
thy heart in thy body."
"0
O Pepy Neferkara, leader of the gods, equipped as a
'; god, he has gathered his bones like Osiris."
Again in the Book of the Dead the religious texts in use from the 18th to
the 26th dynasties there occur the words, "On the night of the Great Mystery,
" the thigh, and the head, and the backbone. and the leg of Unnefer are on the
" coffin."
~ )
"I am a prince, son of a prince, fire, son of fire; to whom was given his
" head after it had been cut off" (ch. 43); the rest of this chapter is occupied
with the identificationi of the deceased with Osiris, for at -this time all the dead
were identified with the god of the dead. Therefore the dismemberment, of which the
*
Zeitschriftfi4r Aegyptische Spracete, 1901, p. 41.
[
19
]
This content downloaded from 190.216.37.2 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:16:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
No. 12.] MAN. [1914.
Book of the Dead constantly speaks, is probably an echo of that early time when
Osiris in the person of the king was torni in pieces, and the fragments scattered
broadcast.
The Arab legends of the ancient kings of Egypt mention the disappearance of
two kings, Kalkoum ben Khariba, and Misram ben Naqraush, the latter being the
seventh in a direct line from Adam. Tthese legends would appear to preserve the
ancient tradition of the divine spirit leaving the world.
(4) We now come to the representations in Art. It must be remembered that
in many countries the actual killing of the king was, as civilisation advanced, often
not enforced. If a human victim were required, the king's place might be taken
by a volunteer, or a criminal might be pressed into the service. Sometimes a
religious ceremonial took the place of the actual sacrifice; and sometimes the reli-
gious ceremonial and the sacrifice of the substitute might be contemporary.
Dr. Frazer has collected so many instances all over the world that I need not do
more than mention this and pass on to the examples in ancient Egypt.
First, then, for the human substitute. Here we get no help from art till
Roman times. The temple of Dendur in Nubia, built under Augustus, is dedicated
to two deified men, named
respectively
Petese and Pi-bor, who met their death
by drowning. There are two significant facts which are brought out clearly in
the sculpturedl reliefs. In the scenes of the worship the deified men are represented,
sometimes with the insignia of rovalty, sometimes with the insignia of Osiris. Where
they are shown as kings the inscription speaks of them as " The Drowned"; where
tljey are represented as Osiris they are called P-shai, or Agathodaimon. We can, I
think, only conclude that these men were sacrificed as kings, as the incarnations of
Osiris, the spirit of fertility.
The ceremonial is, perhaps, less easy of proof. The great royal ceremony, the
one celebrated with most pomp anid circumstance was not tlhe coronation as one
might
expect,
but the Sed-festival. The meaning of the Sed-festival has been
greatly obscured by the earlier Egyptologists, who looked upon it as purely calen-
drical, occulrring every thirty years when the shifting calendar had lost a week. This
theory being proved untenable, another theory was advanced that it was the thirtieth
anniversary of the king's accession; and this theory in a modified form is still held
by many Egyptologists, the Sed-festival being considered by them as the thirtieth
anniversary of the king's appointment as crown prince. It is, however, worth
noting that almost every king who erected temples or decorated them on any large
scale, represented himself in the Sed-festival (and in cases where lhe cannot have
had thirty years for heir and king), or that Rameses If. had six Sed-festivals.
The points to be observed in scenes of the Sed-festival are these : (1) the king
is the principal figure, always represented as Osiris; (2) before him is carried the
figure of Up-uaut, the Opener of the Ways, the Jackal-god of Siut who appears to
have been a god of death; (3) the royal daughter, seated in a litter, is the most
important figure after the king; (4) and in most instances there are one or more
running or dancing men.
This presence of the royal daughter and the running men is due to the scene
being one of marriage. We must bear in mind that the throne of Egypt went in
the female line. This is very clear wherever we have sufficient data to enable us
to trace genealogies with any accuracy. The king was not necessarily royal, but he
became the legal ruler by marriage with the heiress. To put it shortly, the queen
was queen by right of birth, the king was king by right of marriage.
We can
see, then, that the marriage of the queen's daughter, the princess
who was the
heiress, was an event of the utmost importance. The dancing
men were
probably
the suitors for her hand; but whether the dance was a contest before
marriage or
t 20 ]
This content downloaded from 190.216.37.2 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:16:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1914.]
MAN. [No. 12.
a fertility dance after marriage is uncertain. From the fact that in the representa-
tion of the Setl-festival of the XIJth dynasty (found by Professor Petrie at Memphis),
the king dances alone before Min, the god of
generation,
it would seem to be a
fertility dance to promote the increase and welfare of the crops, animals, and people
of his kingdom.
The figure on the throne is evidently that of the
king,
the reigning king. On
the mace-lhead of Narmer, the earliest representation of the Sed-festival, the king is
on a throne under a canopy, he holds the insignia of Osiris, and he is clothed in
the long tight-fitting robe which is characteristic of the mummiform Osiris. He is
essentially Osiris, the Occupier of the Throne. We can hardly suppose that he is
represented here merely as blessing the union of the princess-who is perhaps not
his own daughter-with his successor. On the
contrary,
the grim idea is forced
upon us that the appointment of the new king was coincident with the death of the
old, and that in the Sed-festival we have the two events combined in one great
ceremony.
Taking this view of the Sed-festival we obtain an explanation of some of the
obscure points concerning it. The key to some of these puzzles is to my nmind
the descent in the female line. If the king ruled only by right of marriage with
the heiress,
what took place if she died first.? was he put to death ? did he abdicate ?
And as the mortality of women in childbirth has always been great,
we can imagine
that this difficulty must have constantly presented itself. One solution was the
marriage of the king with the next heiress; andl this is apparently what happened
to Rameses II. His six Sed-festivals probably represent six marriages; we know
for certain that he was married four times; first to a
ladv, probably his sister, and
then to three of his daughters in succession. Another solution of the difficulty
appears to have been arrived at in the Xllth dynasty in the numerous co-regencies
which occur at that period.
But the Sed-festival is only concerned secondarily with the princess; its primary
reason, its principal figure, is the Osirified king, before whom is borne in procession
the Jackal-god of death. This combination points to the original meaning of the
ceremony, the sacrifice of the king as the incarnate deity of fertility.
This aspect of the Sed-festival is borne out
by,
the inscription on the obelisk
of Senusert I at Heliopolis, which was erected to commemorate his Sed-festival.
The phrasing is very significant. After the titles and names of the king come
the words ?
l
[
Sp tpi sd-kb (and this is the important piece)
zD ti i yr-f dy ankh zt. Taking this last phrase as a temporal
clause, which from its position it might well be, and translating yr as the unin-
flected passive, the whole sentence would read, "The first time of the Sed-festival,
" when he is made (to be) gifted with life for ever." The inscriptions also on the
scenes of Osorkon's Sed-festival at Bubastis carry on the same idea (I quote from
Breasted's translation), "1 the appearance of the king in the temple of Amon and the
"assumption of the protection ( ^-P) of the Two Lands by the king,
the protectioni of the sacred women of the houLse of Amon, and the protection
" of all the women of his city." The inscription seems to me to show clearly
that the object of the festival was the promotion of fertility. If, as I suppose, the
ceremony was al so a substitute for the actual sacrifice, a renewinig of the divine
spirit within the kinig, we should expect its periodical occurrence; and this may
account for the fact that in quite late times it certainly does seem to occur at
definite intervals.
E 21 ]
This content downloaded from 190.216.37.2 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:16:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
No.
12.]
MAN. [1914.
The Arab legend given by Maqrizi is perhaps an echo from ancient times,
containing the tradition not only of the Sed-festival but also of the still earlier and
more savage ceremony of the actual sacrifice of the king. "Misram, son of Naqraush,
disappeared from the eyes of men for thirty years. He then appeared upon a
" throne enriched with all manner of ornaments, and in an alarming array, which
" filled all hearts with terror; his subjects prostrated themselves before him and
adored him. Misram caused a feast to be prepared for them, and they ate and
drank; after which he ordered them to return to their homes and was lnever seen
again."
In connection with some of the ceremonies of the Sed-festival, I must mention
in passing the curious object to which Professor Petrie has called attention in the
representation of the Sed-festival of the XlIth dynasty found at Memphis. In the
scenes of a later period this object is represented as a scorpion (or at any rate it
is often so drawn by the modern copyist). But in the XIIth dynasty it is
undoubtedly the upper part of a headless human body. Professor Petrie sees in it
the remains, the actual dried body, of a primitive king, probably one who was sacri-
ficed; and it is certainly significant that in later representationis the arms are decorated
with the "'Ankh" the sign of life, that it is supported on the emblem of long
duration of life, and that it occurs in connection with the emblem of Osiris. The
work I have already done with Dr. Seligmann on this strange figure leads me to
suppose that Professor Petrie is right, but as yet I have no actual proofs to offer;
for the subject still requires a great amounit of careful study.
(5) We now come to the survivals in modern times. I need hardly enlarge on
the sacrifice of the Shilluk kings. In some ways the Shilluk religion appears to
retain traces of the ancient Egyptian religion ; whether derived fromi Egypt through
the priests of Ethiopia, or whether it is part of the same primitive religion still
preserved dowln to our own times it is not yet possible to say. But the sacrifice of the
Shilluk king is proof positive that the natives of the Nile Valley believed the king
to be the incarnate deity, the author of all life and fertility.
The extraordinary reverence in which the modern Egyptian, democratic as all
Mahommedans are, holds the Khedive, is perhaps the remains of the old belief in the
divinity of the Pharaoh.
But the most striking survival is one witnessed by Klunzinger in 1867 or there-
abouts. On the Coptic New Year's Day, the day of High Nile, every town and
village chose for itself a Lord of Misrule, whom they called Abu Nerfus, Father
of the New Year. For three days he was vested with supreme power, and for those
three days he was dressed in a tall cap, a long beard made of flax, and a peculiarly
shaped garment, and he carried a sceptre in his hand. This description irresistibly
reminds one of the figures of Osiris. At the end of three days he was condemned
to die, and was actually set on fire, but was always allowed to escape, though his
clothes, the insiginia of his royal office, were consumed by the flames. In this
ceremony we have the last survival of the custom of killing the king in Egypt.
I will now run over very shortly the gradual growth of our knowledge of this
subject. The beginning of this knowledge dates back to the translation of the Greek
inscription on the Rosetta Stone, where the cycle of thirty years is mentioned
(Kvptov rptaKovraer7pt8&ov). Later it was suggested-and the suggestion was accepted
for many years-that the festival was the thirtieth anniversary of the king's acces-
sion; in 1898 this theory, being found inadequate, Sethe brought forward a good
deal of evidence to prove it the thirtieth anniversary of the.king's appointment as
crown prince.t This, however, does not cover the fact that Thothmes I. had a
*
MaSrizi, pt. II., ch. 2, Bouriant, Mission Archiologique
Frangaise,
XVII.
t Zeitcklrift fur Aegyptisehe Spracke, 1898, 64,
note 3.
[ 22 ]
This content downloaded from 190.216.37.2 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:16:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
1914.]
MAN. [Nos. 12-13.
Sed-festival, though he was never crown-prince and did not reign thirty years; nor
that Tut-ankh-amon had a
Sed-festival,
though the sum of his predecessor's
reign
added to his own does not amount to thirty years.
The basis for the present interpretation of this festival was laid in Frazer's
first edition of The Golden Bough. The connection of the royal daughter with the
Sed-festival, of the Jackal-standard with the ostrich-feather of the apotheosis of the
king, and the appearance of the king as Osiris in the ceremony, was shown by
Moller in 1901. In 1904 I published a list of festivals dated in different reigns and
identified the scene on the mace-head of Narmer with the Sed-festival ; in 1905
Frazer's lectures on the Kingship laid the foundation of a comparative view
by
showing what customs of king killing existed in various countties round Egypt. In
1905 Petrie brought forward the connection of the Sed-festival of 30 years and
the Henti-festival of 120 years with the well-known shift of the calendar in a week
or a month; he also connected the marriage of the royal daughter witlh the festival,
pointed out that the deification of the king as Osiris was the substitute for an earlier
sacrifice of the king;
anid
called attention to the survival of king-killing in the
Coptic Abu Nerus. In 1911 Dr. Seligmann discovered the practice of
king-killing
still in use among the Shilluks of Fashoda. At the beginning of this year Moret
published his Mysteres Egyptiens, in which he says that the Sed-festival renewed
for the king bis dlignity royal and divine, and that several rites of re-birth can be
recognised in it (p. 73). He also collects together various instances of the Egyptian
belief in the Pharaoh's powers over fertility and famine. In the present paper con-
nections are shown between the drowning of Osiris and. the death of the early kings
and their later substitutes; it is also
pointed
out that the several Sed-festivals of
one king belong to several marriages; and that traditions of the ceremony still
remaini in mediaeval Arab legends.
The main questions still to be aniswered are four: (1) the meaning of the
gods
giving to the king "'millions of Sed-festivals," whether implying length of
reign,
frequent royal marriages, or re-incarnationl; (2) whether the thirty-year period was a
uniform
calendar-cycle
down to the XIXth dynasty; (3) whether the twelve-year
Sed-festival named in the XXIInd dyDasty* has the same astronomical basis as the
twelve-year king-killing festival in India; (4) what stages the ceremony of the
prince's marriage and successionl went through in different periods.
M. A. MURRAY.
Africa,
West.
Tremearne.
Marital Relations of the Hausas as shown in their Folk-lore. By
Major A. J. N. Tremearne, M.A., Dip. Anth.
EU
The marital relations lhave been explailned fully in Hausa Superstitions and
Customs, but these stories (which could lnot be included in that book) throw more
light upon the estimation in which wifely fidelity is held. A Hausa woman is
supposed to be incapable of upright coilduct, and story 1 explains why this is so.
Any man who imagines that he will be able to keep hlis wife from adultery is
considered to be an idiot, and even a chief will
encouragge his subjects to hold sIch
a man up to ridicule. A wife makes no secret of her infidelity, and is quite ready
to prove it to her husband should he believe her true, even should the proof
require thLe act to be committed in the husband's presence. Sometimes the lovers of
the wives have narrow escapes, and they may have to pay pretty leavily if the
husbaud is "senisible," and agrees to trade upon his wife's unlawful amours. Tphe
*
Base of a basalt statue with cartouches of Osorkon IL, mA
n
-
o
now in the Petrie
Collection
at
University College.
<
j 1
[ 23
]
This content downloaded from 190.216.37.2 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:16:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions