Cairo Fragments

In 1910, the Egyptian Museum bought three pieces of Egyptian chronicles on the local antiquities market. They are registered in the journal under the numbers 44859, 39735 and 39734.

Their origin has never been established. In the report, the Cairo Fragment No. 3 came from the El-Mini area, which “is hardly credible” in the opinion of some scholars (especially the German Egyptologist Wolfgang Helk ). But soon the fourth fragment was opened near the ruins of Memphis , and entered the collection of the Egyptian museum under the number 44860. Thanks to this discovery, the scientists came to the conclusion that this chronicle was installed in the temple of Memphis or its surroundings. Helk asserted that a stone with a chronicle was found in the courtyard of the temple of the god Ptah .

The fifth Cairo fragment was bought by Jean-Louis de Cenival in 1963 from a Cairo antiques supplier. Its origin is not registered. Has a number in the journal of the Egyptian Museum - 18,220.

Cairo fragment 1 has dimensions: 42 cm (height), 26 cm (width) on the front side and 36 cm (height) by 26 cm (width) on the reverse side. The thickness of the stone varies between 6 cm by 6.5 cm. The second Cairo fragment is 8.4 cm (height) and 9.2 cm (width). Cairo fragments 3 and 4 have dimensions - 11 cm (height) and 9 cm (width); 11.5 cm (height) and 7.5 cm (width). Fragment number 5 - 9 cm by 9 cm.

The Frenchman, Henri Gautier, was the first to present the acquired Cairo fragments to a wide society of scientists. In a brief preliminary article, he described the general character of the fragments and successfully positioned the Cairo fragment 1 relative to the Palermo Stone by means of the chronicle of the V dynasty on the reverse side. The full publication of the inscriptions of four fragments from Cairo, accompanied by photographs, drawings and translations containing several errors and omissions. Like other scientists of his generation, Gauthier believed that the chronicle was important for restoring the history of the first five dynasties, and did a lot to promote the idea of ​​the Cairo fragments, as essential additions to the Palermo stone .

In 1965, Jean-Louis Kenyval suggested that the remaining parts of the chronicle form the basis of all the early dynastic history and early Egyptian chronology, he said with confidence that the chronicle was a historical text. In addition, the texts with more confidence were more worthy and correct from the point of view of the study of early Egyptian history.

• Cairo Fragment 4, recto (Clagett, vol. I, fig. I.39, p. 779).
• Cairo fragment 5, recto (de cenival, by Clagett Vol. I, Fig. I.40).