The Fayûm and Lake Mœris

by R. H. Brown

COPE WHITEHOUSE THEORY.

Mr. Cope Whitehouse, who has a personal acquaintance with the Fayûm, and has studied the question of Lake Mœris, though with a prejudice in favour of giving the Wadi Raiân a leading part, would possibly have been inclined to hold the same views as I do, had it not been for his anxiety to recommend the Wadi Raiân for future use by magnifying its imaginary past performances. But as his views about the Wadi Raiân are the essential and distinctive part of his theory, we do not agree.

For ten years Mr. Whitehouse has been brooding, as the faithfullest of mothers, over his theory, looking for a practical project to be hatched therefrom, but, as time passes, he begins to show signs of impatience, and fears lest his egg be addled. The possibilities as to what the chick may be when it appears, are set forth in Chapter V. of this paper, for I cannot but think that the egg is a good one.

Mr. Whitehouse believes that in prehistoric times, before artificial works of control were made, the Nile flowed into and submerged the whole Fayûm, which was filled at high Nile, and that when the flood subsided, the return flow, that took place from the Fayûm to the Nile, prolonged the period of inundation by at least two months. He also believes that the river flowed in a single channel along the eastern desert.

So far most of us who have our theories about the Fayûm travel together, with but small differences on the way. But after this our roads diverge, and each thinks the road he has selected leads to Lake Mœris. But they cannot all go there.

Leaving prehistoric times, and coming to the period of ancient history, Mr. Whitehouse holds that there were two lakes. At first the northern lake, the Fayûm, was a lake and marsh serving as a backwater to the Nile, while the southern, the Wadi Raiân, was dry. So far I agree with him, but now we part company. Subsequently, he imagines, engineers of an alien race diverted the flood waters into the dry Wadi Raiân to the south-west and evaporation dried up the Fayûm, which was then irrigated by a system of canals. The Wadi Raiân basin becoming, full served as a reservoir, and was, according to Mr. Whitehouse, the “Mœridis Lacus” of Ptolemy.

Later on, in 1890, Mr. Whitehouse explains his views in terms which are not quite in agreement with the foregoing, for he then supposes that the natural backwater of the Nile included the Fayûm and Wadi Raiân (with its minor basins Wadis “Safir” and “Lulu”) at one and the same time, and that these combined basins were filled to the level of high Nile, which he puts at R.L. 30·00.

I think, however, his present views are, that at first the Wadi Raiân formed part of the Lake Mœris of Herodotus, of which the Fayûm was the main part; and that afterwards the Wadi Raiân alone formed the “Mœridis Lacus” of the Ptolemaic maps, the Fayûm having been brought under cultivation, after its waters had been dried up by evaporation.

As the Wadi Raiân is the prominent feature of this theory, I will give here in full Colonel Western’s official description of it:—

Description of the Wadi Raiân.—“This valley or depression in the Libyan Desert, discovered by Mr. Cope Whitehouse in 1886 (really three or four years earlier), lies immediately to the south-west of the Fayoum Province, but separated from it by a range of low hills, 2 kilometres in width and with heights of about 40 metres above sea-level. Two passes, however, leading from the Gharak basin, with level of + 26 metres, have been found in this dividing range and, except for these two passes or entrances, the Wadi is everywhere bounded by hills of at least + 36 metres.

“The soil of the Wadi is for the most part composed of desert sand and pebbles overlying in places a yellow clay, but this desert sand is for about one-sixth of the area hidden by drifting sand-hills or ridges rising some 5 to 10 metres above the general plain.

“Towards the south of the Wadi there are two fresh-water springs; and near these a few date-trees and some brushwood grow.

“The deepest level of the Wadi Raian reaches 40 metres below sea-level.

“To the east of the Wadi, and connected at a level of + 55, is the Wadi Muellah, a valley about 1½ kilometres wide and 7 long. Its lowest depression is at + 25.

“In the Wadi Muellah there are ruins of ancient buildings, and a fair amount of coarse vegetation near them.

“Another small depression, also connected with the Wadi Raian, has been found lying to the south of the Gharak basin of the Fayoum, and only separated by a ridge at level + 35, and 1 kilometre in width. This depression is some 10 kilometres in length by 4 mean width, and has a bottom at about + 15 metres.”

Now, there is no evidence whatever that the Wadi Raiân had ever any possible communication with the Nile except by way of the Fayûm depression through the two gaps in the encircling walls of the Wadi, the sills of which are stated by Colonel Western to be at R.L. 26·00, but which later surveys, not yet published, show to be one at R.L. 26·00, and the other at R.L. 27·00. The Wadi Muellah, on first inspection of the map, appears to offer the most likely line of communication with the Nile Valley, but an examination of this Wadi at its upper end towards the Nile Valley gives no evidence of any such communication having ever existed.

What seems a conclusive proof that the Wadi Raiân was never in direct communication with the Nile Valley, is the total absence of all trace of Nile deposit within the limits of the depression.

If the muddy waters of the Nile in flood entered a lake 60 to 70 metres deep, the silt would be deposited and remain, for the return flow from the uppermost stratum back into the Nile would disturb none of the Nile mud brought in. After a long succession of such annual deposits, the depth of deposit would be considerable. In the Fayûm entrance we find such a deposit up to R.L. 25·00, and it is to be noted that the Wadi Raiân was supposed by Mr. Cope Whitehouse to have been in working order, as Lake Mœris, after the Fayûm ceased to be so, and therefore there would have been less time for the disappearance of the Nile deposit of the Wadi Raiân than of that of the Fayûm.

In the Wadi Raiân, Nile deposit has not been found, though eagerly looked for. I think this fact is fatal to Mr. Cope Whitehouse’s theory of a direct communication between the Wadi Raiân and the Nile or Bahr Yûsuf.

Dr. Schweinfurth thus expresses his views as regards fresh-water deposit in the Wadi Raiân:—“The basin (Wadi Raiân) exists, but it comes from geological time, does not belong to the Nile, and offers nowhere in its tracts at some distance from the Fayûm any trace of a fresh-water formation. . . .

“The traces of a settlement of water and layers of Nile earth which are said to exist in some parts of the depression are certainly absent. The grey clay-layers of the old sea with shells of fresh water, innumerable fish vertebras, bones of tortoises, &c., are not to be overlooked where they exist. I could prove such fresh-water formations on the road from Talît over Raiân and Medinet-el-Bahrl (27 kilometres to the west of the actual lake) only at a distance of 8 kilometres from the lake (Birket-el-Qurûn). The yellow Eocene marls with stripes of erosion, results of the wind, moving sand, and of periodical rains, are not to be confounded with these lake formations. A man who does that will find traces of old water and Nile earth everywhere in the deserts of Egypt.”

Later on in the same letter he says that the question, whether fresh-water formations exist in the basin of Raiân or not, is to be answered in the negative.

But supposing an indirect communication with the Nile by way of the Fayûm Lake, it is easy to understand that no Nile deposit would be found in the Wadi Raiân, even if it had been thus repeatedly filled, because the top water only would begin to spill over into it after the Fayûm Lake level had risen above R.L. 26·00, and after the water had travelled at an extremely low velocity to a long distance from the point, at which it first spread itself out in the Fayûm Basin.

But I regret, for the sake of Mr. Cope Whitehouse’s feelings, that even this cannot be admitted to have taken place, for in every situation where Nile water has been, fresh-water shells of distinct species are always found, and their total absence in the Wadi Raiân is sufficient proof to geologists that Nile water has never been there.

To the conclusion that the Wadi Raiân was never in direct communication with the Nile must therefore be added this further conclusion, that the Nile water never entered the Wadi Raiân at all, even by the only possible entrances over the sills on the side of the Fayûm Lake.

Mr. Cope Whitehouse has not distinctly stated how he supposes the Wadi Raiân was put into direct communication with the Nile, but I believe there are only three possible theories, each one without a particle of evidence to support it. One theory supposes a connection along the bed of the Wadi Muellah, another a tunnel through the hills dividing the depression from the Nile Valley, and the third a hill-side canal fed from the Nile waters entering at Lahûn and carried along the south slopes of the Fayûm.

In the absence of any evidence witnessing to the previous existence of such connections, and in the face of the fact that the Wadi Raiân contains no Nile deposit, I do not think that Cope Whitehouse’s Raiân-Mœris or Ptolemaic-Mœridis-Lacus theory can stand.

Failing better support to his theory, Mr. Whitehouse has called the Ptolemaic maps to his aid, and in his pamphlet on the subject he has reproduced the map of Egypt from the Atlas of Cl. Ptolemy, of which I here repeat the copy, with an outline map of the Fayûm, Wadi Raiân, and part of the Nile Valley, taken from ‘Egyptian Irrigation,’ by Willcocks, and which was compiled from the latest surveys in 1888 ([Plates XII.] and [XIII.])

Mr. Whitehouse considers that the Ptolemaic map has been most accurate in giving the exact shape of a lake in the desert, whereas the representation of the features of the much better known Nile and Nile Valley is evidently most incorrect, and much distorted in longitudinal and transverse dimensions.

If, however, any argument can be based on the shape of the “Mœridis Lacus” of Ptolemy, as compared with existing depressions, it seems to me that its shape resembles much more closely the outline of the Fayûm Province, with the Bahr Yûsuf indicated, than it does that of the much indented Wadi Raiân.

Plate XII.

EGYPT FROM THE ATLAS OF Cl. Ptolemy.

Mr. Petrie has furnished me with the following observations on the Ptolemaic maps.

Plate XIII.

Stanford’s Geog^l. Estab^t. London

PROPOSED WADI RAIÂN RESERVOIR.

From Willcocks’ ‘Egyptian Irrigation,’ 1889.

The Ptolemaic maps are built up from itineraries and ship routes, checked by a few latitudes. Now we know this much from Ptolemy, that Skiathis, Bakkhis, Dionysias, the Small Oasis and the Great Oasis were on one route, and that on this route Lake Mœris was passed. This was the desert itinerary from Alexandria to the Great Oasis.

Using another distinct itinerary from the Nile Valley, the route passes to Arsinoë (the modern Medinet-el-Fayûm) and Ptolemais (the modern Talît), and then on to Behnesa, without any connection being made with the Bakkhis-Dionysias route. Hence it is presumed that these two routes did not cross each other. It is therefore concluded that Dionysias can be identified neither with the ruins on the Wadi Muellah (as Cope Whitehouse identifies it), nor with Lahûn, and that it was probably on the west of Lake Mœris. Mr. Petrie (to whom I am indebted for the whole of this reasoning) supposes Bakkhis to have been at Dimeh (Dimay), and Dionysias somewhere at the extreme south-west of the Raiân valley.

If this conclusion is right, and if the Fayûm, or the Wadi Raiân, was the Lake Mœris of Ptolemy, the Lake has been placed too much to the west on the map, and should have been shown on the east of the line joining Bakkhis and Dionysias. In any case the Ptolemaic evidence, when sifted, does not support Cope Whitehouse’s theory, that the Wadi Raiân was the “Mœridis Lacus” of Ptolemy.

To show what little faith can be put in the identification of some of the ancient towns with modern remains, I may mention that Dr. Schweinfurth says of the monastery in the Wadi Raiân, that it is “evidently the Bakkhis of Ptolemy.” Thus we have this monastery identified as Dionysias by Cope Whitehouse, as Bakkhis by Dr. Schweinfurth, whereas Flinders Petrie places both Dionysias and Bakkhis on the far side of the Fayûm depression. Who shall decide when savants disagree?

In his papers on Lake Mœris, Mr. Whitehouse makes reference to two lakes, and I believe his theory of two lakes is based on some ancient maps.[5] I have not seen the map or maps, but I should expect the lakes represented to be intended for Lake Qurûn in the Fayûm, and a corresponding lake in the Gharaq basin. The Gharaq basin is the Fayûm depression repeated on a small scale, and at some period of its development towards total reclamation from the waters that covered it, it must have had a lake at its south and lowest end, corresponding to the Birket-el-Qurûn, but of smaller dimensions.

The Gharaq basin is connected with the Fayûm depression by a gap in its surrounding higher lands with sill at R.L. 16·00. Consequently the basin would not have begun to dry up from evaporation till the Fayûm Lake had fallen below R.L. 16·00, and probably the fall was not continuous, but, through some accident at Hawârah or elsewhere, the Fayûm Lake, after falling below R.L. 16·00, may have risen again and re-drowned the reclaimed land in the Gharaq. This may have occurred more than once, and have given rise to the name “Gharaq,” or the “Flooded.”

Mr. Whitehouse, in his latest expression of views, supposes the Fayûm and the Wadi Raiân were filled to R.L. 30·00. I have given reasons for concluding there was never any Nile water in the Wadi Raiân. The evidence furnished also by Nile deposit and fresh-water shells on the Fayûm side of the entrance at Lahûn shows that the level of 30 was never reached.

The highest Nile deposit near and on the Fayûm side of Lahûn is at about R.L. 26·00. The highest in the Fayûm near the Hawârah pyramid, which is on the edge of the Fayûm basin, is at R.L. 24·50 or thereabouts. The highest level of the lake was probably never more than one metre above this level, and it is therefore almost certain that the water-level was never sufficiently high to flow into the Wadi Raiân; and if it ever did, it must have been but rarely, when extraordinarily high and prolonged Niles occurred; so that it must be concluded, if my views are correct, that the normal condition of the Wadi Raiân was then, as now, that of a dry waterless depression in the desert, and it cannot therefore be considered as having been Lake Mœris, or a part of it even, at any time.