The Date of the Byblos Temples Buildings II, XVIII, and XL

In his recent Fouilles de Byblos (Paris, 1939), Volume I, Maurice Dunand publishes three buildings of monumental character and the evidence for his interpretation of their dates. The buildings in question were set on sloping ground, and their excavation, in view of the differential levels involved, made for exceedingly complicated architectural digging. The success which M. Dunand achieved in the excavation and presentation of these buildings deserves only the highest praise. The matter in hand is merely concerned with his interpretation of the evidence for dating these buildings. Were it not for the specific invitation made to the reader of his volume to make original interpretations, I should hesitate to present mine publicly, for I am firmly convinced that no opinion can bear so much weight as that of the excavator himself. Fully realizing the huge responsibility with which the excavations of Byblos charged him, M. Dunand dug entirely by a system of 0.20 m. levies, each levee peeled off one after the other, and each kept "rigoureusement horizontale." The system has both advantages and disadvantages. It is only pertinent here that objects are generally noted by levee rather than by relation to a specific occupational floor. The plan presented here (Fig. 1) was made by assembling on one sheet the tracings of the individual buildings published in the Fouilles de Byblos, Volume I. The section was constructed on the basis of the assembled plan and with the aid of various statements in the text (pp. 290-308). The buildings and their dates as published by M. Dunand are: la. Building II (dernier etat du corps principal)--Middle Kingdom, on the basis of the Twelfth Dynasty materials found in the jars of foundation offerings, underneath pavements of the building. lb. Building II (premier etat)-Old Kingdom to as early as the offerings of Khasekhemui (pp. 298, 304).2 1 I am obliged to George R. Hughes and Richard A. Parker for checking the pertinent Egyptian inscriptions, and to Harold D. Hill for the finished drawing. 2 Since the Khasekhemui inscription was found on the surface, the dating is by implication only and need not apply specifically to Building II.