« AnteriorContinuar »
“ teemed broad, till you get as high as Heliopolis ; “ being all the way open and champain, marshy “ and without water-As you pass upwards from “ Heliopolis, it grows narrow on account of the “ mountain of Arabia, that here runs parallel with “ the country, tending from north to south, and " continually verging towards the Red Sea. In “this mountain are the * quarries, from whence “ the stones were taken for the construction of the “ pyramids, that are near Memphis. Here [at
these quarries] is the hither end of the mountain, “ from whence it extends itself in the direction I
have mentioned.” 23 Ενθευτεν μεν και μεχρι Ηλιοπολιος" ες την μεσογαιαν εςι ευρεα Αιγυπτος, εουσα πασα υστιη τε και ανυδρος, και ιλυς. κ. τ. λ. Απο δε Ηλιοπολιος ανω ιοντι, Σεινη εσιν Αιγυπτος" τη μεν γαρ της Αραβιης ορος παρατεταται, φερον απ' αρκτ8 προς μεσαμβριης τε και νοτε, αιει ανω τεινον ες την Ερυθρην καλεομενην θαλασσαν εν τω αι λιθοτομιαι ενεισι, αι ες τας Πυραμιδας κατατμηθεισαι τας εν Μεμφι. Ταυτη μεν ληγον, ανακαμπτει ες τα ειρηται opos. It is manifest from hence that the nome of Heliopolis was a mediterranean district : and consequently the tiro provinces Phacusa and Bubastus, that are always mentioned with it, were so likewise. This is evident from Ptolemy; who, in giving an
22 There was a town there that they gave name to, called Latopolis.
23 Lib. 2. cap. 8.
account of all the nomes in lower Egypt from the bottom upwards, ends with these three ; νομος, και μητροπολις Φακεσα· Βεβας της νομος, και μητροπολις Βεβασος: Ηλιοπολιτης νομος, και μητροπολις Ηλιαtodos. The first of these Phacusa, called by Strabo Phaccusa, but mentioned only as a village, was the province at whose summit the Nile was first divided, where stood the city Cercasora. Many writers, misled by its being called the Arabian nome, have supposed it to be situated in thạt country: but I have shewn that it could not be so. Besides, what may seem a paradox, this very circumstance of its being called the Arabian nome proves it. The au. thor of the Itinerary mentions many places of upper Egypt, that were in Arabia : and Ptolemy speaks of several nomes above Delta, to the number of nineteen or twenty, one half of which (at least a great number) were to the east of the Nile, and in Arabia. Among others Aphroditopolis, Antinoopolis, Panopolis, were certainly there. If Phacusa had been in that part of the world, they could never have called it the Arabian province by way of distinction; when there were so many others that were in the same situation. The title conferred upon it would not have been adequate to the end proposed : and what would have been given by way of eminence to particularize, must have proved
24 Geogr. lib. 4.
vanvera to an
matter of doubt and confusion. The title therefore was conferred for another reason; as I shall hereafter shew. Ptolemy has taken care to guard us against this mistake; by distinguishing between the province termed Arabian, and the places that were really in that country : Aραβιας νομος, και μητροπολις Φακεσα.
Dax80%. The nome called Arabian was Phacusa ; but the places really situated upon the borders of that part of the world were Babylon, Heliopolis, Heroum : εν μεθορια Αραβιας και Αφροδιτοσολεως, Βαβυλων, Ηλιοπολις, Ηρωων πολις. From hence we gain this additional evidence, that there were two cities of Egypt called Heliopolis , which is a circumstance that has never been attended to been the cause of very great confusion. The first of these was a city of lower Egypt, that gave name tioned by Herodotus. The other was a city to the east of the Nile in Arabia; whose situation is thus described in the Itinerary, agreeable to what is above said by os Ptolemy;
M. P. xx.
M. P. XII.
25 Hence Cellarius is certainly to blame for placing these three provinces in the deserts of Arabia ; and for founding his opinion
Neither the last city nor Babylon are mentioned by Herodotus; for they did not exist in his time : but the other Heliopolis, the more antient and famous, he gives an ample description of, as we have seen above.
It is mentioned too by Diodorus Siculus and Josephus ; but by neither of them accurately: for they make one account of two places, and confound them together. Though some of these writers had been in Egypt, yet it is certain that they did not know that there were two cities of the same name ; for not one of them, except Ptolemy, makes any distinction. They are always confused when they speak of this part of the world
upon the evidence of Ptolemy, which he did not sufficiently attend to. Extra Delta, Arabiam versus, Ptolem dus tres nomos posyit. Primum dicit Arabiæ nomon, cujus metropolim Pkagusam facit, Bubastico flumini adpositum : secundum Bubasticum nomon, cujus urbs est Bubastus seu Bubastis ad idem flumen sita, cui nomen. dat: tertium Heliopolitanum nomon. There is a mistake in the first position; for Ptolemy does not place these nomes, nor any nomes in Arabia. He besides mentions but one Arabian nome; though I think Heliopolis may likewise be esteemed such : not on account of its situation, but for another reason that I shall here. after mention. All that Ptolemy says is this; Agabras rojos, xa μητροπολις Φακεσα· Βεβανιτης νομος, και μητροπολις Βεβαστος. Ηλιοπολιτης νομος, και μητροπολις Ηλιοπολις. Εν μεθορια Αραβιας και Αφροδιτοπολεως, Βαβυλων, Ηλιοπολις, Ηρωων πολις. Ρhacusa is by many writers included in Heliopolis, so that one province is constituted out of two.
and the circumstances of both places are referred to one only. Strabo is in some degree plain and intelligible : for, having mentioned the town of Phacusa, and the great canal that began immediately from it, he says, “ These places are towards “ the top of Delta : there is likewise Bubastus " and its nome, and likewise Heliopolis above, &c.” * “Ουτοι δ' οι τοποι πλησιαζεσαι τη κορυφη τα Δελτα αυτα δε και η Βαβαρος πολις, και ο Βεβαςιτης νομος, και υπερ αυτων ο Ηλιοπολιτης νομος. Ενταύθα δ' εςιν και το Ηλια πολις. His Epitomiser says the same---σερι την αρχήν το Δέλτα εςιν η τε Βεζαςος σολις, και Μεμφις, και Ηλιοπολις. In respect to this antient city, Herodotus always speaks of it as lying in a line, as you pass from the sea upwards to Thebes and superior Egypt. He makes use of it as a landmark to be directed by in going up the Nile; as an intermediate point to measure from, in stating the length of the country.
Ενθευτεν μεν [απο θαλασσης] και μεχρι Ηλιοπολις L. 2. 7. εςι δε δδος ες την Ηλιοαολιν-ανω ιοντι
L. 2. 7. και δε ες Ηλιοπολιν απο θαλασσης
L. 2. 7. ασο δε Ηλιοπολεος ανω ιοντι
L. 2. 8. ασο δε Ηλιοπολιος ες Θηβας εςι ανασλοος εννεα ημερεων
L. 9. 9.
26 Vol. 2. pag. 1158.