The Archaic number of burials to which this exact method could be applied, and the great mass of the
Periods. Archaic specimens have been dated by another system which must next be explained.
The enormous amount of material which was collected between the years 1895 and
1899 enabled Professor Petrie to carry out an invaluable work of minute analysis which
has put it within the power of the archaeologist to assign any Archaic tomb to its relative
chronological position. The methods and results of this analysis are fully described in
Diospolis Parva, to which those who desire more detailed information must refer. Here
it may be said briefly that, as it was impossible to establish a reckoning in years for the
several stages of a civilization which is earlier than the first recorded date, an arbitrary
scale was adopted. The whole period supposed to be Predynastic was distributed over
a scale to which the arithmetical numbers 30 to 80 were attached. How many years
or generations or centuries are represented by these fifty units still remains unknown;
it is relative, not absolute, antiquity which is established. The numbers up to 30 were
deliberately left unfilled in order to accommodate any discoveries of still earlier character.
The earliest graves yet known were assigned to the figure 30, while 80 represented
the close of the Predynastic epoch so far as its close had then been ascertained; and
within these limits the graves were arranged according to the nature of their contents
in an ordered sequence obtained from the digest of hundreds of combinations.
The Protodynastic period was still very imperfectly known when this scheme was
drafted, and the event has proved that the limiting figure 80 corresponds in reality
not to the close of the Predynastic time, but to an advanced point in the First Dynasty.
This, of course, does not in any way invalidate the system, but merely requires us to
regard the last units in the ‘ Sequence-dating ’ as belonging to the time of Mena and
his successors. Since the accession of Mena is placed at about 47 8° b.c., while according
to the ‘ Sequence-dates ’ his reign falls at some point between the numbers 7° and 80,
it may be said that the Predynastic periods extend back from an unknown length of
time before 4800 b . c ., while the Protodynastic begin at about that point1.
Our Archaic specimens other than those which have been already referred to were
obtained from three different sites, viz. Hou2, Abydos, and El-Amrah. The cemeteries of
Hou and El-Amrah ranged over the whole Predynastic and part of the Protodynastic
1 T h e dates given in these historical summaries are throughout (in round numbers) those adopted b y
Prof. W . M. Flinders Petrie in his H istory o f E g y p t. I t must be premised, however, that no approach to accurate
chronology can be made until the Eighteenth Dynasty. F o r the Middle Empire, the Old Kingdom, and the
Archa ic periods there is a progressive increase in uncertainty; so that although we have given some figures
which may be carried in the memory, it must be stated that there is a possible error o f ± 1000 years fo r the
date o f Mena. T h e chronology o f the Eighteenth and subsequent Dynasties is unanimously considered to be
well established, but for all before that time there is a possibility o f wide variation. T h e minimum antiquity is
that assigned b y some very distinguished German archaeologists, whose views are not by any means generally
accepted, but may be quoted for purposes o f comparison. Acco rding to their system o f dating the first three
dynasties are placed ‘ before 2500 b.c.’
T h e Fourth to Sixth Dynasties inclusive (‘ Old Em pire ’) . . . . circa 2500-2200 b.c.
Interval embracing Seventh to Eleventh Dynasties inclusive . . . . „ 2200-2000 „
Twelfth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Dynasties (‘ Middle Em pire ’ ) . . . „ 2 0 0 0 - 1 7 0 0 ,,
Domination o f the Hyksos (Fifteenth and Sixteenth Dynasties) . . . „ 17 0 0 - 15 7 5 „
Eighteenth D y n a s t y .............................................................................. ........... • • » I 545 »,
T h is is the dating adopted, for instance, in such a popular work as Dr. G . SteindorfPs D ie B lü tezeit des
P ha raon enreichs in Prof. E . He yck ’s series o f M onographien zu r W eltgeschichte.
* More exactly Shekh A li and Semaineh, which are some miles south o f H o u ; but the series has been referred
to in work already published as coming from ‘ H ou ,’ which is a convenient and sufficiently accurate description.
period. The two cemeteries of Abydos, on the other hand, were closely delimited; one
contained only graves of sequence-dates from 30 to 50, while the other was confined to
sequence-dates 60 to 80, nearly all the graves in the latter being actually between 70
and 80. As the entire middle part of the sequence-dates was absent at Abydos these two
cemeteries were taken as representative of the extremes, and the specimens from them were
published as characteristically early and late, even before the exact point had been ascertained
at which the First Dynasty makes its appearance. Further research has shown this
arrangement to be substantially accurate. The accession of Mena, as has been stated,
falls between 70 and 80 in the sequence-dating. It has been suggested on the evidence
obtained from the Royal T ombs that there were two or three kings who reigned before
Mena, and whether this is or is not the case, it is certain that the characteristics of the
tombs of sequence-date 70 ally them more closely to the First Dynasty than to the
Predynastic. Accordingly sequence-date 70 has been taken as the earliest limit of the
Protodynastic for the present purpose ; and only such of the Hou and El-Amrah graves
as are subsequent to 70 have been classed as belonging to the First Dynasty. For the
Abydos specimens it was considered better to adhere to the original division and to treat
the later cemetery as a single whole, and consequently as belonging to the First Dynasty.
The one or two specimens from it (detailed in the Appendix), which precede 70 by two or
three units, will not in any case appreciably affect the series, and it seemed unjustifiable
to separate them from the others. Having ascertained the limits of the First Dynasty,
it was desirable to subdivide the Predynastic so as to obtain the most complete contrast
possible, and the Abydos cemeteries offered a ready-made division. Accordingly sequence-
date 50 has been taken as the latest limit of the Earlier Predynastic, and from 50 to 70
is termed Late Predynastic. In the series of Late Predynastic, however, there have
further been included such examples as did not admit of minutely accurate sequence-dating,
if they were clearly /V^dynastic and if there was not sufficient reason for supposing them
to belong to the earlier division. (Cf. Appendix, p. 114.)
The characteristics of the several Archaic Periods may now be described in outline.
E a r l y P r e d y n a s t i c P e r i o d (sequence-dates 30 to 50).
The people of the Early Predynastic period, the first inhabitants of Egypt of whom
we have any certain knowledge, had already attained to a comparatively advanced stage
of culture at the moment when they come under our observation. Compared with the
highly sophisticated and refined Egyptians of the Middle and New Empire they are, of
course, barbarians. They were ignorant, if not of writing, at any rate of that hieroglyphic
script which in the hands of their historical successors became such a powerful instrument
of science. They were ignorant, too, of many of the arts which graced the life of later
times; drawing was for them still in its infancy, and sculpture properly so called had not
come into existence. But if they were barbarians they were far removed from savagery.
Living a more or less settled life they employed themselves in agriculture and hunting,
practised various industries, and even maintained a trading intercourse with far distant
regions. Their houses, to judge from a model found at El-Amrah, were built of wattle
and mud with wooden doors and windows. The people themselves would seem to have
gone scantily clad; but this was from choice, not from necessity, for they wove excellent
cloth in abundance, and the skins of their sheep and goats would have provided warmer
The Archaic
Periods.
Early Predynastic
Period
(sequence-
dates 30 to
50).