The Fayûm and Lake Mœris

by R. H. Brown

LINANT THEORY.

The most important of these theories is that of Linant de Bellefonds Pasha, once Minister of Public Works in Egypt.

His views will be found in Chapter II. of his ‘Mémoires sur les Principaux Travaux d’utilité publique exécutés en Egypte depuis la plus haute antiquité jusqu’à nos jours, 1872-1873.’

His theory, which defines the form and limits of Lake Mœris, appears to have been generally accepted after being propounded, and still to be the accepted theory with many, who have not, by a personal acquaintance with the Fayûm and its actual conformation and levels, corrected the ideas which they had accepted on the authority of Linant Pasha.

(For the names of places quoted from M. Linant’s writings I have adopted the more modern way of spelling, as otherwise the places might not be recognised. For instance, had it not been for the context, I should not have been able to recognise the village known as Abûksah in “Bogça.”)

Linant’s Theory stated.—M. Linant maintains that Lake Mœris occupied the gap in the hills by which the Bahr Yûsuf enters the Fayûm, and covered the so-called “plateau” on the south-east of Medineh, the encircling bank commencing at its north-east end at Edwah, and being continued through el-Alam, Biahmu, Zowyet-el-Karatsah, to Medineh. See [Plate VII.]

The remains of this bank he traced throughout this length, and saw evidences of it again to the S.S.E. of Medineh.

Thence he supposed that it must have passed on to Abgig (“je suppose qu’elle a dû passer à Ebgig”), el Sawafnah, Atamnah, and Gaafrah. Then he found it again constructed in masonry over a great length not far from the village of Miniet-el-Hêt. It continues afterwards (according to Linant Pasha) up to Shêkh Abu Nûr, and then takes the direction of “el Gharak in the plain,” where it is no longer well defined (“où elle n’est plus bien marquée”). He notes that at Bahr Nezlah its height (that is, the wall’s,) is 12 metres.[2] He then makes the bank pass on from the south-east of Sélé (?) to between Shêkh Danial and Tutûn, in an easterly direction, and turn to the north by Kalamshah, El Nedlé (?), to the Bahr Yûsuf, then following the Bahr Yûsuf up to Dimishkîn, turning along the banks at Lahûn (Bahlawân and Gedallah), it again returns to the west near Hawârat-el-Maqta, and, following the old canal Wardan, passes the Hawârah pyramid at the village of Dimu and joins the commencement of the bank at the south-east of Sêlah (Sélé).

Plate VII.

MAP SHOWING LINANT’S SUPPOSED LAKE MŒRIS.

From Rawlinson’s ‘Egypt,’ 1881.

All the land enclosed by this bank represents the site of Lake Mœris according to the theory of Linant de Bellefonds Pasha.

I give here a map, [Plate VII.,] copied from one of Mr. Cope Whitehouse’s papers on the Wadi Raiân, being a reproduction from the ‘Egypt’ of Canon Rawlinson, as it is a convenient one for demonstrating what this theory is. Linant’s Lake Mœris is shown on this map as a dark patch occupying what M. Linant calls the high plateau. The part where “LAKE” is printed is actually the highest part of the Fayûm, at R.L. 22 to 25, if we except the narrow pass by which the Bahr Yûsuf flows in. This latter has its land surface at from R.L. 24 to 26. But the word “MŒRIS” on the shaded area lies over a depression whose bed is at R.L. 12·00, that is, 11 to 12 metres lower than the land surface covered by the word “LAKE” on the same shaded area.

The north boundary of this area through el Edwah and el Alam runs generally along contour R.L. 17·50, 5 to 7 metres below the high plateau. It is therefore incorrect to speak of the ground represented by the shaded area as a plateau.

M. Linant’s depth of water in his supposed lake was fixed at 9·60 metres. Its bed must have been at R.L. 21·00, the level of the rock-bed at Hawârah, and its maximum water surface at R.L. 30·60. The height of the surrounding bank would have had to be, on the Edwah-el-Alam line, 15 metres, and at the Wadi Nezlah (at the initial letter of “MŒRIS” on the map) 20 metres.

Now the country lying between the Linant Lake Mœris and the Birket-el-Qurûn was said to be irrigated from this lake. Imagine the state of insecurity for this tract of sloping land, with a huge reservoir of water standing 13 metres above that part which lies along the north face of the lake, and more than this above the part along the west face. When one considers, too, that there must have been passages for irrigation through this bank, and how dangerous such an arrangement would be, it is scarcely credible that the collection of thriving towns included in the Arsinoïte nome would have grown in such a perilous situation. Imagine, also, the infiltration that would result on the lands along the faces of this lake. According to the theory, the Lake Linant, not being of sufficient dimensions itself to regulate the Nile, was to pass on the surplus into Birket-el-Qurûn by escapes on the two main drainage lines. Thus the poor fools, who had settled themselves on the strip between the two lakes, would be in danger of inundation, both from above and below, and would be in as bad a plight as Pharaoh’s horsemen in the Red Sea.

A diagrammatic section of the Fayûm ([Plate VIII.]), as it would have been when in this unhappy state (fortunately imaginary), will make the situation perhaps plainer. The diagram, by exaggerating the vertical dimensions with reference to the horizontals, emphasises the danger of the situation and shows how improbable it is that such a theory could be true.

Plate VIII.

SKETCH OF THE FAYÛM

From Lahûn through Biahmu to Lake Qurûn through the highest plateau, showing Linant’s supposed Lake.

It should be noted that the Linant Lake itself covers the richest land of the Fayûm, namely, that which, being near the first point of expansion of the inflow into the depression, had received the richest deposit during the time that the Fayûm was forming previous to the creation of Lake Mœris; and, further, it should be remarked that the remainder of the best land round the margins and for a considerable distance from the Linant lake banks would have been probably ruined by infiltration. Where, then, should we find the rich lands of the Arsinoïte Nome, so famous for their produce?

M. Linant objects (and there is, doubtless, weight in this objection) to the theory of the submergence of the Fayûm by a sufficient elevation of the waters of the Birket-el-Qurûn, that there would be no place for the Arsinoïte Nome; and he thinks that by his theory he has found a place for it between the two rival lakes. The ancient Egyptians, who lived before our era, must have had prodigious faith in their protecting deities, or in their department of public works, if they took up their abode behind Linant’s bank.

Such a peculiar arrangement of land and water as that supposed, would scarcely have been passed without notice by those who visited and described Lake Mœris. The Arsinoïte Nome would have been in some way described as being between two lakes, with a mass of water impending over it. The danger of such an arrangement in case of a breach would have been surely noted. Imagine also the condition of Arsinoë from its sanitary aspect in the hot months of summer, when by reason of all the water in the Linant lake being utilised, the bed of the lake would be laid bare at a time when no crops could be sown on it. But this objection may be met by supposing the lake to have been excavated to a sufficient depth for water to remain in it at lowest Nile. But if originally so excavated, a lake such as this was supposed to be, would rapidly silt up, and M. Linant supposes it silted up 8 metres, as is shown by his section and description. Could such a lake have continued in working order for over 2000 years, as it was supposed to have done? It would only have done so by means of periodical silt clearances of such magnitude, that the population of Egypt alone would not have been equal to the task. Suppose only a metre to be cleared over the whole area (assuming it a plateau according to M. Linant’s view of it), the quantity to be cleared would have been 250 million cubic metres, which would have to have been removed to a mean distance of at least 2000 metres! What would have happened to Linant’s supposed Arsinoïte Nome, and the west bank of the Nile irrigated by his Lake Mœris, while these clearances were going on?

The perimeter of Linant’s supposed lake is 96 kilometres (60 miles) measured on the map published in the atlas accompanying the book containing M. Linant’s theory. Its correct area is 257,800,000 square metres. But M. Linant himself gives the area as 405,479,000 square metres, which is 57 per cent. in excess of the true area as taken from his own map (see diagram, [Plate IX]). The paragraph in which this figure is given concludes: “Mais nous avons vu quelle foi on devait avoir dans les dimensions données par les auteurs anciens.” Need he have added “anciens”? M. Linant himself is the greatest argument for placing no faith in reported dimensions of lake areas, since, with his own map before him, and the limits of his lake definitely determined, he was unable to avoid so large an error.

The author of this theory states that it satisfies all the conditions required for its recognition as Lake Mœris. I think it will be found to satisfy very few, and obviously not the two following, regarding its size and depth.

It is generally stated that Herodotus gave the circuit of Lake Mœris as 450 miles, or 720 kilometres. The perimeter of M. Linant’s lake is about 110 kilometres, but he makes the difference less by adopting M. Jomard’s opinion, that Herodotus’ “stade” was “le petit stade,” whereby the circuit of the lake, according to Herodotus, would be 360 kilometres. Even thus we can scarcely admit this condition to be satisfied. But M. Linant, as we have seen, has no faith in the dimensions given by “les auteurs anciens,” but though his want of faith may be justified, his statement that this condition is satisfied is not.

Plate IX.

OUTLINE OF THE LINANT “LAKE MŒRIS.”

Taken from Linant’s own Map.

Another condition which M. Linant’s lake is far from satisfying, is the depth, which Herodotus gives as 92 metres. Linant makes his lake depth 9·60 metres, assuming that his lake area occupies a plateau, which it does not. The greatest depth of his lake, according to the actual levels of the ground included in it, would be 18·60 metres, against the 92 metres of Herodotus. This condition therefore is not satisfied.

Faulty Foundations on which the Linant Theory was built.—Had Linant Pasha had before him a contoured map of the Fayûm, I believe he would never have enunciated his theory. The Minia wall made an undue impression on him and has been his stumbling-block. He clearly traced the remains of a large bank from Edwah to Biahmu, and less plainly to Medineh, but after Medineh he found no traces of a bank, but being desirous of connecting up with the big wall, supposed that it must have passed through certain villages leading to it. This wall, closing a valley encircled by contour R.L. 15·00, was probably constructed at a much later date, or at any rate independently of the bank of which the remains are found on the other side of Medineh, and for a different purpose. If this wall had been originally higher there would be remains of the high parts at each end, where breaches had not carried away the original wall. This we do not find, but on the contrary, the crest of the wall is at one uniform level from end to end, and appears to have been added to, instead of taken from. From an examination of the abutments of the bridge, built in the line of the wall, the original wall appears to have been constructed of stone, and to have been widened subsequently by an addition of coarse brick masonry of rough bricks, in mortar made of lime and clay, probably with the view of obtaining width enough to carry an aqueduct along the top of the wall. None of the masonry is sufficiently good for this purpose, and so, no doubt, the water, leaking from the aqueduct channel, gave rise to breaches in the wall, of which the signs are evident in the blocks of masonry lying scattered about on its down-stream side.

The cross-section of the wall, [Plate X.,] gives its dimensions at a point near the bridge, where its height is greatest. Below this cross-section another of the Edwah-Biahmu bank is given for a comparison of the levels of wall and bank.[3]

Erroneous Data employed by Linant.—In Linant Pasha’s Atlas, published with his Mémoires, is to be found an extraordinary section of the Fayûm from Lahûn to Birket-el-Qurûn, in which the land from Lahûn to Medineh is shown as being higher than the land of Beni Suef on the Nile Valley side of Lahûn.

I reproduce his section on [Plate XI.,] and below it I give a section showing the actual levels. As Linant appears to refer all his levels to the rock bed at Hawârat-el-Maqta, which he makes 32·80 metres above sea, whereas it is really 21·00, it is necessary before comparison to apply a correction of - 11·80 to all his levels.

Plate X.

CROSS SECTION OF THE MINIA WALL.

CROSS SECTION OF THE EDWAH-BIAHMU BANK AT A POINT WEST OF EDWAH.

Comparing the figures after correction with those of the “actual section,” it will be found that Linant puts the level of the Beni Suef lands 5½ to 7 metres too low, and that of his first plateau 6 to 8 metres too high, with reference to the rock bed at Hawârat-el-Maqta. According to the corrected figures his Lake Mœris level would be + 32·00, but how he gets it to that level it is difficult to understand, inasmuch as he says that his lake is filled by the Bahr Yûsuf, whose high-water level is shown 4½ metres lower. (The Birket-el-Qurûn level, after applying the correction, becomes 40·80, which must have been about its correct level in Linant’s time.)

Plate XI.

SECTION OF THE FAYÛM THROUGH LAHÛN-MEDINEH-SANHUR. By M. LINANT.

ACTUAL SECTION ON THE SAME LINE.

Note.—The water-level of the Bahr Yûsuf from Lahûn to Medineh is a little below country level throughout.

I give another instance of error with reference to Linant’s conception of the first plateau. Writing of the bank from Edwah to el Alam, he states that the land to the south of this bank was about 2 metres below its crest, and to the north of it from 8 to 9 metres, which difference, he says, is explained by the deposition of silt in the interior of the basin formed by the bank, as is always seen elsewhere at all the banks of the inundation basins of Egypt. This great difference of level of the country surface on either side of the bank would have been very suggestive in a sense favourable to M. Linant’s theory had the difference of level been a fact instead of a fiction. The cross-section of the bank given on [Plate X.] shows its actual state with reference to the land on each side of it.

It seems scarcely necessary to discuss further a theory that was based on such erroneous data, but as the data were not known to be erroneous, and Linant propounded his theory with an air of authority, it has had considerable success in getting itself accepted. Guide-books, and even books used as school text-books on Egyptian history, show that his theory has been hitherto judged the correct one.

It is, however, satisfactory to find that in the fifth edition (1890) of ‘Ancient Egypt’ by George Rawlinson (The Story of the Nations Series) the exact size and position of “Amenemhat’s reservoir” is admitted to be sub judice, and it would appear that this desirable attitude is the result of a challenge of Linant’s theory by Mr. Cope Whitehouse, who is reported as believing that the water was freely admitted into the whole of the depression (i.e. the Fayûm), which it filled, with the exception of certain parts, which stood up out of the water as islands from 150 to 200 feet high. Nevertheless, in spite of this new attitude towards the Linant theory, the map representing Linant’s Lake Mœris is to be found at the end of the book, without any remark to prevent readers from being misled by it, the map being described as “Map of the Fayoum, showing the Birket-el-Keroun and the artificial Lake Mœris.” ([Plate VII.] is from an earlier edition.)

The Linant theory, examined in the light of the more accurate knowledge gained of the physical features of the Fayûm, and tested by the application of figures to determine its possible performances, can no longer stand, but falls to pieces; and the wonder is that, based as it was upon erroneous data and propped up by no solid support of facts, it stood so long. It may be said of it, to the credit of its author, that it was ingenious, but not that it was true.

Since writing the foregoing concerning the Linant theory, Mr. Cope Whitehouse has kindly lent me his first papers on the subject, the earliest paper, that I had previously seen of his writings, being that which was read by him at the Manchester meeting of the British Association, September 2nd, 1887. I now find that he has been before me in stating many of the arguments I have used against the Linant lake theory, but it is satisfactory to find that we have independently arrived at the same conclusions, though by no means surprising, as I believe that any one, with the same amount of personal acquaintance with the Fayûm, would be naturally led to hold the same views of this fantastic theory. As early as 1882, Mr. Cope Whitehouse pointed out that the Linant lake satisfied none of the conditions which a lake professing to be Lake Mœris must satisfy, and he concluded one of his papers with a remark expressing his conviction that, when Lake Mœris shall be recognised by the light of discoveries yet to be made through further research, the site of the ancient lake will in no case be found to be that of the reservoir of M. Linant de Bellefonds Pasha.

Mr. Whitehouse, at the same time as he lent me his papers of 1882, also lent me a copy of Dr. G. Schweinfurth’s letter to Paul Ascherson on a journey undertaken in the depression of the Fayûm in January 1886, in which letter I find I am anticipated again in a footnote on this theory, which gives an argument not given by Mr. Cope Whitehouse, and runs as follows:—

“Here it must be mentioned that one of the most important points on which Linant grounds his Mœris theory is the Dams[4] which has proved quite fallacious. The dam at Adwa (Edwah) geology shows to be layers of gravel; the stone dam at Minia is, on the other hand, a weir for the Bahr-el-Wady, and is evidently throughout its whole length of later date. Besides, it fills up only the deep curves of the ground, and has no continuation on the rising grounds.”

Dr. Schweinfurth, as well as Mr. Whitehouse, had thus pointed out the weakness of the Linant theory, but still we find it living and taught as a true theory so late as 1890; and this is my excuse for repeating the arguments which have not yet succeeded in overwhelming it, notwithstanding its feebleness, so much support does it derive from its parent being a reputed authority.

But we have public acceptance of the Linant theory so late as 1892, and by so eminent an Egyptologist as Brugsch Pasha, who communicated his views to the Société Khédiviale de Géographie in a paper read in Cairo, on the 8th April, 1892, the title of the paper being “Le Lac Mœris d’après les monuments.” A quotation from this will show that he accepts the Linant theory.

“De nos jours, les traces visibles de cet immense bassin d’eau (le lac Mœris) ont disparu et les savants les plus distingués se sont en vain efforcés pendant longtemps de retrouver ses anciennes limites sur le sol moderne de la province du Fayoum.

“L’opinion la plus généralement acceptée au sujet de sa position a Linant pacha pour auteur. C’est lui qui, le premier, a rejeté l’idée de reconnaître le bassin du lac Mœris dans le Birket-el-Kouroun de nos jours, c’est-à-dire ‘le lac des Cornes,’ situé comme on sait, à l’ouest du Fayoum. Suivant les recherches très minutieuses de l’illustre savant, il faudrait, au contraire, se diriger vers le côté oriental de la province susnommée, et, notamment, vers les plateaux bien connus de Hawara et de El Lahoun, où deux pyramides construites à l’époque de la XII^me dynastie (vers 2500 a. J.C.) excitent encore la curiosité des voyageurs.

“H. Lepsius, mon savant compatriote qui, il y a presque cinquante ans, a eu l’occasion d’examiner sur les lieux les résultats obtenus par Linant pacha, n’a pas hésité à déclarer dans un Mémoire spécial que le savant français avait fait la découverte la plus brillante et la plus indubitable quant à la véritable position topographique du fameux lac Mœris. Les doutes qu’il exprima à la même occasion ne s’appliquaient qu’à l’extension du lac vers le nord.

“Depuis Linant et Lepsius, aucun savant sérieux, du nombre des géographes et des Égyptologues, ne s’est opposé à l’opinion émise par ces deux illustres auteurs.”

Apparently Brugsch Pasha does not class Dr. G. Schweinfurth, Mr. Flinders Petrie, and Mr. Cope Whitehouse as “savants sérieux,” for they have expressed themselves as opposed to the Linant theory. Lieut.-Colonel J. C. Ross, C.M.G., late Inspector-General of Irrigation, Egypt, justly renowned for his power of comprehension of the levels of any part of the country, which he studied professionally, at one time gave much of his attention to the Fayûm, and especially to that part which was known as Hod-el-Tuyûr, and which is the depression embraced in the area which Linant calls a plateau and in which he localised his supposed Lake Mœris. I think I may say, without fear of contradiction, that Colonel Ross’s examination of the ground in question was much more thorough and more prolonged than that of M. Lepsius; but whereas the latter did not hesitate to accept Linant’s theory and to style it the most brilliant and certain discovery as regards the position of Lake Mœris, Colonel Ross on the contrary rejects Linant’s theory and thinks that the lake was north of the Edwah bank and not south of it.

Mr. Petrie has also clearly expressed the same views as Colonel Ross on this point.

I too have had advantages of studying the ground itself and the way the water runs, such as few have had, and have come in for the legacy of Colonel Ross’s levellings and maps.

The names of Linant and Lepsius do not therefore carry with them sufficient authority to override the facts, which are ascertained to be such by a more thorough examination of the country and a better knowledge of the physical features of the province.

Irrigation officers may, perhaps, not be classed as “savants,” but they have at least as much right to be heard as any other body of experts on such a subject as Lake Mœris, which is more than anything else an irrigation question, and one that has especial interest of a more or less practical nature at this time, when the question of the construction of Nile reservoirs for the storage of the surplus waters of the Nile is under consideration.