.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
This exquisite cubit rod – an instrument used as the standard measure of length in ancient Egypt – is one of only a relatively small number known in stone. It bears an inscription on three sides dedicated to the King’s Scribe and Steward, Mery-Ptah; the other side is chamfered, following the five-sided standard profile of Egyptian cubit rods. Unlike other examples carved in wood or stone, which often bear detailed markings and inscriptions naming each unit or subdivision, Mery-Ptah’s cubit rod is more likely a symbolic or votive one, reflecting his high status in the Egyptian royal court.
Standardly, cubit rods have markings on one side that indicate the subdivisions of the royal cubit (28 fingers), a standard unit of Egyptian length measurement corresponding to about 52.5 centimeters. Normally it is subdivided into smaller units, including of a small cubit (24 fingers); remen-cubit (20 fingers); sacred cubit (16 fingers); great span (14 fingers); small span (12 fingers); double palm (8 fingers); fist (6 fingers); hand’s breadth (5 fingers); and palm (4 fingers). Here, these subdivisions are marked by simple lines and are neither accompanied by their written names nor subdivided into yet smaller gradations. Also, the hieroglyphic texts are oriented vertically, indicating its status as a votive object rather than a functional one, and perhaps implying that it was meant to be held in hand as a symbol of office and as an emblem of the standard of measurement.
There is a category of more extensively-inscribed votive stone cubit rods, whose function far exceeded the mere measurement of length. They were used to calibrate the measurement of space (area measurements) as well as time (water clocks and sundials), thereby serving as miniature almanacs (see N. Scott, “Egyptian Cubit Rods,” Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, vol. 1, no. 1, 1942-1943, pp. 70-75). As such, as a symbol of office, the votive cubit rod might represent the heights of knowledge and power achieved by its sophisticated owner. Other inscribed votive cubit rods bear dedication texts invoking Thoth, Ptah, and Amun-Re, and even “all the gods of the royal cubit,” as on a wooden votive example from the late 18th Dynasty, now at the Museo Egizio in Turin (see p. 5 in F. Monnier, et al., “The Use of the ‘Ceremonial Cubit Rod’ as a Measuring Tool: An Explanation,” The Journal of Ancient Egyptian Architecture, vol. 1). In most cases, these examples have inscriptions that request favors from the gods for the owner. In all likelihood, these votive cubit rods were royal gifts to the official, and the exquisite craftsmanship of Mery-Ptah’s cubit rod would also suggest an origin in a royal workshop.
As for Mery-Ptah’s identity, he might be the same high official from the reign of Amenhotep III, whose name is inscribed on a basin, now in the Glencairn Museum, as suggested by Wegner (op. cit.). There is also a basalt votive cubit rod in the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden in Leiden, which is inscribed for a vizier and high priest of Ptah, Ptahmose, which seems to derive from Saqqara; this Ptahmose may possibly be the brother of the Mery-Ptah who owned this cubit rod (see no. 52 in A. Eggebrecht, et al., eds., Ägyptens Aufstieg zur Weltmacht). As Wegner illuminates, there is a family monument from Saqqara that depicts two sons of the Vizier Thutmose, who was active during the reigns of Thutmose IV to Amenhotep III, namely the High Priest of Ptah, Ptahmose and Mery-Ptah, Steward in the temple of Amenhotep III at Memphis (Leiden, Inv. no. AP 11 and University College London, Inv. no. UC 14463).
Given the mention on the present example of Ankh-Tawy, a region of Memphis, and the dedication to Ptah (as well as Thoth and Amun-Re), this unusual example of a ceremonial cubit rod may derive from a now-lost tomb in the Memphite necropolis, most likely at Saqqara. A stone votive cubit rod was discovered by A.-P. Zivie at Saqqara in the tomb of Vizier Aper-el, an official of the end of the 18th Dynasty (see Découvertes à Saqqarah: Le vizir oublié, p. 130), and other examples derive from this site.
For a full translation of the hieroglyphic text on the present example, please contact the department.
Standardly, cubit rods have markings on one side that indicate the subdivisions of the royal cubit (28 fingers), a standard unit of Egyptian length measurement corresponding to about 52.5 centimeters. Normally it is subdivided into smaller units, including of a small cubit (24 fingers); remen-cubit (20 fingers); sacred cubit (16 fingers); great span (14 fingers); small span (12 fingers); double palm (8 fingers); fist (6 fingers); hand’s breadth (5 fingers); and palm (4 fingers). Here, these subdivisions are marked by simple lines and are neither accompanied by their written names nor subdivided into yet smaller gradations. Also, the hieroglyphic texts are oriented vertically, indicating its status as a votive object rather than a functional one, and perhaps implying that it was meant to be held in hand as a symbol of office and as an emblem of the standard of measurement.
There is a category of more extensively-inscribed votive stone cubit rods, whose function far exceeded the mere measurement of length. They were used to calibrate the measurement of space (area measurements) as well as time (water clocks and sundials), thereby serving as miniature almanacs (see N. Scott, “Egyptian Cubit Rods,” Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, vol. 1, no. 1, 1942-1943, pp. 70-75). As such, as a symbol of office, the votive cubit rod might represent the heights of knowledge and power achieved by its sophisticated owner. Other inscribed votive cubit rods bear dedication texts invoking Thoth, Ptah, and Amun-Re, and even “all the gods of the royal cubit,” as on a wooden votive example from the late 18th Dynasty, now at the Museo Egizio in Turin (see p. 5 in F. Monnier, et al., “The Use of the ‘Ceremonial Cubit Rod’ as a Measuring Tool: An Explanation,” The Journal of Ancient Egyptian Architecture, vol. 1). In most cases, these examples have inscriptions that request favors from the gods for the owner. In all likelihood, these votive cubit rods were royal gifts to the official, and the exquisite craftsmanship of Mery-Ptah’s cubit rod would also suggest an origin in a royal workshop.
As for Mery-Ptah’s identity, he might be the same high official from the reign of Amenhotep III, whose name is inscribed on a basin, now in the Glencairn Museum, as suggested by Wegner (op. cit.). There is also a basalt votive cubit rod in the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden in Leiden, which is inscribed for a vizier and high priest of Ptah, Ptahmose, which seems to derive from Saqqara; this Ptahmose may possibly be the brother of the Mery-Ptah who owned this cubit rod (see no. 52 in A. Eggebrecht, et al., eds., Ägyptens Aufstieg zur Weltmacht). As Wegner illuminates, there is a family monument from Saqqara that depicts two sons of the Vizier Thutmose, who was active during the reigns of Thutmose IV to Amenhotep III, namely the High Priest of Ptah, Ptahmose and Mery-Ptah, Steward in the temple of Amenhotep III at Memphis (Leiden, Inv. no. AP 11 and University College London, Inv. no. UC 14463).
Given the mention on the present example of Ankh-Tawy, a region of Memphis, and the dedication to Ptah (as well as Thoth and Amun-Re), this unusual example of a ceremonial cubit rod may derive from a now-lost tomb in the Memphite necropolis, most likely at Saqqara. A stone votive cubit rod was discovered by A.-P. Zivie at Saqqara in the tomb of Vizier Aper-el, an official of the end of the 18th Dynasty (see Découvertes à Saqqarah: Le vizir oublié, p. 130), and other examples derive from this site.
For a full translation of the hieroglyphic text on the present example, please contact the department.