The text is dated in the seventh year of King Kamosi, who is described as beloved of Amen-Ra, the god of Karnak. His Majesty was speaking in his palace unto the court and nobles who attended him, ‘Consider for what is my might! One prince is in Avaris, another in Ethiopia!’ He continues to discourse of the division of the land and mentions Memphis and Cusae in an obscure context. ‘And the nobles of his court said, “Behold, the Asiatics have approached (?) unto Cusae, they have drawn (?) their tongues in one manner, [saying?] We are happy with our Black Land as far as Cusae, ... our barley is in the papyrus-marshes ... our barley is not taken.”’ The meaning of this is very uncertain. Then after a gap, ‘they are painful to His Majesty,’ perhaps referring to the replies of the countries.
After a long gap, ‘[The king, mighty in] Thebes, Kamosi, protector of Egypt [said?], “I have gone north victorious to drive back the Asiatics by the command of Ammon: the plans of my army have succeeded: every mighty man was before me like a flame of fire, the mercenaries of the Mezaiu (Nubians) were like the threshing instrument (?) to seek out the Satin and to destroy their places: the East and the West were successful (?), the army rejoicing at each thing in its order. I led the victorious mercenaries of the Mezaiu ... Teta the son of Pepa in Nefrus, I allowed him not to escape (?). I stopped the Asiatics, I freed (?) Egypt ... I was in my ship, my heart rejoicing! When day dawned, I was on him like a hawk: at a moment of ... I drove him out, I hacked down his wall, I slew his people, I caused my soldiers to embark like wolves with their prey, with slaves, cattle ... honey, dividing their property; their hearts ...”’ Another very obscure line follows. As Ahmosi, the successor of Kamosi, completed the overthrow of the Hyksos by the capture of Avaris early in his reign, one may conjecture that this text gives us the stage in the expulsion of the Hyksos when they were driven from Middle Egypt and confined to Lower Egypt by the Theban power. The latter had also to contend with a rival in Nubia, who was likewise crushed by Ahmosi.
It is remarkable that the titles of Kamosi as given here do not agree with those upon the Treasure of Ahhotp; the handwriting proves that Lord Carnarvon’s tablet (Carnarvon Tablet I) had been written within a few years of the events recorded in it. The publication of the facsimile is certain to rouse the interest of every student of one of the most fascinating problems in oriental history.
The fragments of the second tablet (Carnarvon Tablet II), facsimiled in [Plate XXIX], have not yet been translated.
CHAPTER VII
THE ‘VALLEY’-TEMPLE OF QUEEN HATSHEPSÛT
By Howard Carter
ADJOINING the site of Tomb 9 is the ‘Valley’-Temple to the Dromos of Hatshepsût’s Mortuary Chapel at Dêr el Bahari (Site 14, [Pl. XXX]).
It was first discovered by the excavation of the tomb No. 9, which exposed some of its stone-work, and it was a surprise to find here, in such a well-known place, a finely built limestone construction of considerable proportions quite near to the surface.
At the beginning this building was a puzzle to us, the part revealed in season 1909 being only a long piece of the outside wall which gave but few data, and thus became a source of much speculation as to its meaning. This wall ran east and west, having a base measurement of 2·60 metres broad with its outer faces sloping—their ‘batter’ being 4 cms. in every rise of 25 cms. Its construction consists of two outer skins of small well-made limestone blocks built upon sandstone foundation slabs, with, in the middle, a core of stone and mortar rubble mixed with sand. In it was a doorway, about half-way along the length cleared, which opened out to the north—its door-jambs being on that side. The eastern extremity of the excavation then made, showed that in that direction it descended. Under the doorway a search was made for a deposit but with no result, though at the west end, the part of the wall first discovered, there was a pocket of sand which seemed to have belonged to something of that nature.
The extensive exploration of this site in 1910 clearly determined that it was an unfinished portion of a building of Terrace-Temple form; and that the wall, which had given rise to many theories, was only its northern boundary wall ([Pl. XXXI]. 1 and 2).
The intended scheme of this unfinished building seems to have been an Upper and a Lower Court, divided by a single Colonnaded Terrace (see plan and section, [Pl. XXX]), similar somewhat to Hatshepsût’s Mortuary Chapel at Dêr el Bahari. It is, however, all in the very early stages of construction, the wall itself being the only part that shows any signs of completion. Very possibly, in earlier times, a great deal more of the structure existed, for it had been used as a quarry for limestone at some late period.