The Middle Kingdom

the theme of the legitimacy of the royal power by the divine world
at local level. As we have seen, the association between Sobek of
the Fayyum and Horus had already been favoured by Amenemhat
II and probably went back to the irst dynasties. When Amenem-
hat III arrived in the Fayyum, he already had at his disposal a form
of Sobek identiied with the falcon god. But the king decided to
strengthen this identiication through a series of expedients. Par-
ticularly, the union between the two deities gained a speciic and
standardised name, ‘Sobek of Shedet (or Shedety) – Horus who
resides in Shedet’ (sbk Sdt Hr Hry-ib Sdt).
The incomplete shafts of red granite columns (doc. 17), found
by Habachi 1 km south of the local Ptolemaic temple excavated
by Petrie, are inscribed with an important dedicatory text: ‘Horus
Aa-baw, the two ladies Itjiutawy, Horus of Gold Wakh-ankh, the
king of Upper and Lower Egypt, lord of the two lands Ny-maat-ra,
the son of Ra, of his lesh Amenemhat, he made as his monument
for his father Sobek of Shedet that a hall was erected for him, its
columns and its looring in granite and its door in electrum, iri=f
di anx. Beloved of Sobek of Shedet – Horus who resides in Shedet,
lord of the wrrt-crown, with tied horns, who resides in the great
palace, lord of the great place, he gives all life, every stability and
strength to the son of (his) lesh Amenemhat, given life, happi-
ness of his heart like Ra, for ever’118.
As already stressed, it is not possible to rule out that originally
these columns stood at Hawara119, though Shedet could be re-
garded as a more probable original location. The text of the col-
umns clearly indicates that they were part of a hall (wsxt) com-
missioned for Sobek-Horus, the main god of the same city were
they were discovered. Despite the upper parts and capitals of the
columns were missing, Habachi estimated an height of 7.20 m.
He also argued that the columns once stood in the same place
where they were unearthed120. However, the excavations carried
out in 1964-65 by the University of Florence in the same area
have shown that there was no trace of any other architectural re-
main that could be attributed to a temple121. Therefore, it is likely
that the columns were cut and moved out outside the temple to

118
Hr aA-bAw nbty iti-iwat-tAwy Hr-nbw wAH-anx nswt-bit nb tAwy n-mAat-ra sA ra n ht=f imn-
m-HAt iri.n=f m mnw=f n iti=f sbk Sdt saHa n=f wsxt wAdw=s sA=s m mAt sbA m dam iri=f di
anx mry sbk Sdt Hr Hry-ib Sdt nb wrrt nwH abwy Hry-ib aH wr nb st wrt di anx nb dd wAs nb
dt n sA n ht(=f) imn-m-HAt di anx Awi ib=f mi ra dt.
119
See, for example, QUIKRE 1997, 39, 45; UPHILL 2000, 39-41, 45; GRAJETZKI 2006,
119. See also ARNOLD 1996, 45-46, 53, and HIRSCH 2004, 119-123, who assigns these
monuments to the ancient Shedet.
120
HABACHI 1955, 107.
121
MANFREDI 1965, 94; BOSTICCO 1997, 286. See also ARNOLD 1996, 45-46, and DAVOLI
1998, 151-152.

– 43 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

be re-used for the construction of a new building, possibly in the

Greco-Roman Period122.
In these columns and in a pair of other oficial monuments
the god’s name is written in a peculiar way, aiming at indicating
that both the king and the god were royal. In the columns (doc.
17) and in the relief Berlin 16953 (doc. 12), the irst part of the
name – that concerning the crocodile ‘Sobek of Shedet’ – the hi-
eroglyph of the reptile has two long arms holding an was-staff
and an ankh-sign. In order to stress the intimacy between deity
and king, their names are arranged in a perfect visual symmetry.
In the relief Berlin 16953, Sobek’s name and Horus’ name are in
front of the king’s prenomen and name respectively. The name of
the syncretistic form Sobek-Horus could also imitate that of an
Egyptian king, with its two distinctive parts written in two dif-
ferent ways. In the relief British Museum EA 1072 Sobek’s name
is in front of the nswt-bit title, while the name of the king is be-
tween two falcons perched on a serekh, containing the epithet
Hry-ib Sdt and in which the motive of the niched palace façade is
replaced by the pr-nw surmounted by the bucranium. A similar
aesthetic solution also appears in the columns, where Sobek’s
name is lanked by the Horus name of Amenemhat III and the
name of the god Horus, with his regional epithet written within
a serekh identical to the one of the British Museum relief.
More signiicantly, new titles were attributed to Sobek or pur-
posely created for him, since the old ones were not vivid enough
for his new high status. On the granite papyriform columns,
‘Sobek of Shedet – Horus who resides in Shedet’ is the ‘lord of
the wrrt-crown, with tied horns (nwH abwy), who resides in the
great palace (Hry-ib aH wr), lord of the great place (nb st wrt)’. In
the architrave (doc. 15) in granite, also coming from Medinet
el-Fayyum, the syncretised god is the ‘lord of magniicence (nb
fAw), great of awe and image in Shedet (aA Sfyt qmA m Sdt)’. On the
kneeling statue of Amenemhat III, the king is called ‘[beloved
of?] Sobek of Shedet – Horus who resides in Shedet, lord of the
wrrt-crown […]’ (doc. 30). The identiication between Sobek of
Shedet and Horus and the magniicence of this deity expressed
through these epithets were among the most important and
enduring themes of the religion of the Fayyum in the dynastic
period. A similar group of titles was used by Amenemhat III’s
successor in the temple of Medinet Madi. On the jambs of the
doorway connecting the irst hall to the second one there are
two inscriptions123; in one of these Amenemhat IV is said to be
‘beloved of Sobek of Shedet – [Horus] who resides in Shedet,

122
DAVOLI, ABD EL-AAL 2001, 208.
123
Doc. 54: DONADONI 1947, 347-348 (texts M and N).

– 44 –
 The Middle Kingdom

lord of the wrrt-crown (nb wrrt), Hnwty, who resides in the palace
(Hry-ib aH), lord of the great throne (nb nst wrt)’. In the second
one, the king is the beloved of the same god, but endowed with
the epithets ‘lord of magniicence (nb fAw), great of awe and im-
age with the diadem and the double feathers (aA Sfyt qmA m sSd
Swty)’. In the inscriptions on a bead (doc. 59), the queen Sobe-
kneferu is called ‘beloved of Sobek of Shedet – Horus who re-
sides in Shedet, lord of the land of the lake (nb tA-S), who resides
in the palace (Hry-ib aH)’. All these epithets were so characterising
that they survived Amenemhat III’s reign and were even adopted
on private documents. A statue of the Thirteenth Dynasty and
of unknown provenance (doc. 127), belonging to Hrw-nfr, has an
offering-formula to ‘Sobek Shedety – Horus who resides in She-
det, lord of magniicence (nb fAw), great of awe and of image
(aA SfSft qmA) […] double feathers (Swty)’124. In the Late Period,
they also became part of the priestly titles of the important of-
icial Ankhruty (doc. 190)125 and, subsequently, included in the
phraseology of a Sobek hymn126. Some of these epithets, such
as nb wrrt, nb fAw, aA Sfyt (and aA SfSft) already existed127, but some
of them, such as nwH abwy128, nb wrrt Hnwty129, aA Sfyt qmA m Sdt,
aA Sfyt qmA m sSd Swty130 and Hry-ib aH wr nb st wrt131 were a com-
plete novelty. Sobek of Shedet is now in possession of attributes
that overemphasise his new divine and kingly status. Some of
the epithets are connected with headgear, such as the head band
diadem (sSd), the double plume crown (Swty) and, above all, the
white crown wrrt, whose association with Sobek goes back to the
‘Pyramid Texts’. Other epithets refer to his residence (Hry-ib aH wr
nb st wrt), while aA Sfyt describes an intrinsic quality of the god,

124
On the owner of this statue and his titles, see: FRANKE 1984, no. 408.
125
Among many other titles, he was also ‘hem-priest of Sobek lord of the wrrt-crown
in the st wrt’, ‘hem-priest of Sobek Shedety – Horus who resides in Shedet, lord of the
wrtt-crown, Hnwty, who resides in the great palace (Hry-ib aH wr), lord of the st wrt’ and
‘hem-priest of the temple of Shedet, the great place’ (Hm-ntr Hwt Sdt st wrt): PETRIE 1889,
pls. II-III; ZECCHI 1999, 41-42, no. 189.
126
See the hymn in the pStrasburg 2, where the god Sobek is invoked as ‘lord of the
wrrt-crown… king of Upper Egypt with the white crown, king of Lower Egypt with the
red crown, who resides in the great palace, lord of the st wrt’: BUCHER 1928, 153-154.
127
The most ancient examples of these titles occur in the ‘Cofin Texts’ and, in the
Middle Kingdom, they were attributed, besides Sobek, to Horus and Osiris. There is
also a precedent of the epithet aA SfSft for Sobek in CT IV, 2h. Moreover, Sobek nb wrrt
and the name Ny-maat-ra are attested also on a cylinder: STRUVE 1926, 117. See: LEITZ
2002, II, 44-46; III, 613-614, 637-638.
128
LEITZ 2002, III, 555.
129
LEITZ 2002, III, 614.
130
LEITZ 2002, II, 46.
131
LEITZ 2002, III, 723.

– 45 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

his awesome nature132, and nb fAw seems to refer to the feelings

of respect that he inspires in those who behold him.
The link between Sobek-Horus of Shedet and the expressions
aH wr and st wrt is particularly striking. Yoyotte had already sug-
gested that aH wr might have been either a name attributed to the
temple of Shedet or just one of its parts133. My guess would be
that aH wr was the name of the whole temple of Sobek in Shedet
and that, together with st wrt, it had a deinite meaning in the
theology of the town. Here it was used to underscore that the
local temple was not a mere centre for the cult of Sobek, but the
mansion of a crocodile-god who was successfully identiied with
Horus and, as such, partook of the royal ideology. The fact that
aH wr and st wrt are mentioned together on the granite columns
found at Medinet el-Fayyum might conirm that they were origi-
nally erected in Shedet itself. Indeed, there is no doubt that aH wr
was in Shedet and not in Hawara or in any other localities of the
Fayyum region. In this respect, the statue of Amenemhat-ankh
in the Louvre is particularly signiicant134. This priest, who was
very likely contemporary to Amenemhat III, held titles connected
both to Memphis and to the main town of the Fayyum, suggest-
ing that, as in the Old Kingdom, the link between these two cen-
tres was still strong. He was ‘overseer of the hem-priests’ (imy-r
Hmw-ntr), ‘master of the secrets of the temple of Ptah-Sokar’ (Hry-
sStA n Hwt-ntr ptH-skr) and ‘master of the secrets of the great place
in the great palace (of) Shedet in the land of the lake’ (Hry-sStA n
st wrt m aH wr Sdt m tA-S)’. This implies that the st wrt was inside
the aH wr, which, in its turn, was in Shedet, in the Fayyum. This
is also conirmed by the title of the above-mentioned Ankhruty
‘hem-priest of the temple of Shedet, the great place’ (Hm-ntr Hwt
Sdt st wrt) and by an inscription in the temple of Kom Ombo,
mentioning Sobek, the land of the lake and ‘the great palace in
Shedet’ (aH wr m Sdt)135. The name st wrt most likely denoted only
the sanctuary, or naos, for the cult of Sobek-Horus. The term aH
wr, used to designate the ‘palace’ of the king, but also a general
term for ‘temple’136, was a very appropriate word to indicate the
temple as a whole, containing the seat of Sobek associated with
Horus. As we have seen, these terms started to appear in con-
nection with Sobek-Horus during the reign of Amenemhat III,

132
On a discussion on the concept of fear connected with kinship in ancient Egypt, see:
FRANDSEN 2008, 47-73, especially 48-58 (with bibliography).
133
YOYOTTE 1962a, 110.
134
Statue Louvre E 11053: DELANGE 1987, 69-71; BLOM-BÖER 2006, 287. See also DOLZANI
1961, 195-196.
135
YOYOTTE 1962a, 109.
136
Wb. I 214, 10-21. The noun can also denote the part of the temple where coronation
ceremonies took place: SAUNERON 1977, 25.

– 46 –
 The Middle Kingdom

when part of the god’s name could be written inside a serekh, to

mean that both king and god had an Horus name and resided
within a palace. Despite not revealing anything about the scale
of the temple and not necessarily having a descriptive function,
but only a symbolic one, the expression aH wr corroborates the
hypothesis that, in the late Twelfth Dynasty, Shedet was a chief
focus among the interests of the ruling dynasty.
The use of granite columns in cult-centres for gods before the
New Kingdom has been disputed, but Arnold has shown that
in the Old and Middle Kingdom monumental stone temples for
gods already existed137. In particular, he has suggested that the
columns found by Habachi were part of a hall of at least four
by four papyrus bundle columns built in front of a sanctuary of
the Old or early Middle Kingdom. Of this more ancient temple
nothing is known. And there is no way of knowing whether the
temple of the Old Kingdom was actually preserved or was com-
pletely replaced by a new one. However, textual and archaeo-
logical evidence point to the fact that Amenemhat III was re-
sponsible for a temple for Sobek of monumental proportions
in Shedet. This building included, at least, an wsxt in granite
consisting likely of a roofed hall or an open court with colon-
nades138, and with a ‘door (sbA) in electrum’, referring probably
either to the door-leaves, or to the door-frame made of stone and
plated with precious metal. With its at least seventeen granite
columns 7.20 m high, the temple must have been of quite con-
siderable dimension and it is not surprising that it could be call
the ‘great palace’.
As we shall see, in the Middle Kingdom, in the Fayyum, Sobek’s
duties were manifold; he exercised control over the whole world,
from the waters to the sky, but he was essentially a god who had
become Horus and, as such, connected with royal doctrines. The
image of the crocodile is no longer an image of ambiguity and
potential hostility, but the shape that Horus himself adopts when
entering the Fayyum. Moreover, the temple of Sobek became a
centre for the recognition of the royal power. The syncretism be-
tween the two deities and the new group of epithets had a specif-
ic function. They not only increased the importance of the local
– and provincial – crocodile-god, but they also served the king,
who could receive the divine essence of kingship only from a god
who was able to be strongly royal.
Three limestone fragments in the Berlin Museum (15801-
15803) preserve part of a coronation text of Amenemhat III.
Their provenance is unknown, but their content suggests they

137
SPENCER 1984, 237-242, 251; QUIRKE 1997, 40; ARNOLD 1996, 39-54.
138
SPENCER 1984, 73-75.

– 47 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

come from the Fayyum, most likely from the temple of Shedet or
perhaps from Hawara (doc. 9)139.
This coronation text has been commented by several scholars,
since it is connected with the issue of the existence of a coregen-
cy between Senusret III and Amenemhat III140. The hypothesis of
a coregency of these two kings has been supported by many, such
as, for example, Josef von Beckerath141, Leprohon142, Ingo Matz-
ker143, F. Arnold144, D. Arnold145, Josef W. Wegner146 and Wolfram
Grajetzki147. Other scholars, for example William J. Murnane148,
D. Franke149 and P. Tallet150, have been more cautious, while still
others, above all Robert D. Delia151, have pointed out the ambigu-
ous nature of the available data. The existence and chronology
of this coregency is made more problematic by the fact that the
length of Senusret III’s reign is unknown152. William Kelly Simp-
son has shown that year 1 of Amenemhat III seems to follow
directly year 19 of Senusret III153. For some scholars, this would
imply a 19-year reign of this king154, with the consequence that
Amenemhat III ascended the throne just after his predecessor’s
death. However, more recently, higher year datings, which might
refer to Senusret III’s reign155, have been found. Wegner has tried
to conciliate two facts: on the one hand that, almost certainly,
Amenemhat III became king in the year equivalent to his father’s
year 20; on the other the new data which seem to be in favour of

139
BREASTED 1906, §461, quotes Arsinoe/Crocodilopolis as a provenance. PM IV, 103
regards the Fayyum as the origin of the fragments. Some scholars have assigned
without esitation these fragments to the ancient Shedet: HIRSCH 2004, 345; GRAJETZKI
2006, 58. See also FRANKE 1988a, 118, and LEPROHON 1980, 129, 297.
140
See, for example: VON BECKERATH 1976, 46; MURNANE 1977, 228-229; DELIA 1980, 245-
246; LEPROHON 1980, 297-302; MATZKER 1986, 91-92; FRANKE 1988a, 118; WEGNER 1996,
270-271; HIRSCH 2004, 119-120; TALLET 2005, 270; GRAJETZKI 2006, 58.
141
VON BECKERATH 1976, 48-53.
142
LEPROHON 1980, 318-321.
143
MATZKER 1986, 111-116.
144
ARNOLD 1992, 27-31.
145
ARNOLD, OPPENHEIM 1995, 47-48.
146
WEGNER 1996, 249-279.
147
GRAJETZKI 2006, 54-55.
148
MURNANE 1977, 27-28.
149
FRANKE 1994, XII-XIII.
150
TALLET 2005, 270-271.
151
DELIA 1980, 253.
152
TALLET 2005, 22-30.
153
SIMPSON 1963, 62; SIMPSON 1972, 45-47.
154
See, for example, QUIRKE 1988, 4-5.
155
The hieratic administrative note found at South Abydos and dated to a year 39
has been attributed, on archaeological basis, to the reign of Senusret III: WEGNER
1996, 249-179. See also ARNOLD 1992, 27-31. The fact that this king celebrated his sed
festival has been regarded as an evidence of a long reign: SIMPSON 1963, 59-63; ARNOLD,
OPPENHEIM 1995, 47.

– 48 –
 The Middle Kingdom

a longer reign of Senusret III. He does so by suggesting a core-

gency lasting as long as two decades, which actually is no less
plausible than a shorter one156. Even though it is highly probable,
the historical existence of a coregency has not yet been deinitely
proved. As Wegner himself has pointed out157, the year-dates for
the irst two decades of Amenemhat III’s reign show that, during
the possible coregency, the regnal dates of the younger king were
in use, with the plausible consequence that the senior one no lon-
ger played a signiicant role after the beginning of the coregency.
The coronation text of the three Berlin blocks, unfortunately
very fragmentary, has been considered as one of the most im-
portant pieces of evidence available in favour of a coregency of
Senusret III and Amenemhat III158:

[…] nHn=sn ist rdi […]

[…]=f Hm n nswt-bit xa-kAw-ra r […]
[…] rdi.n n=f it=f sbk Sdt […]
[…] sSp saH=f n nswt-bit Hna dw m kAt m Htmt […]
[…] f (?) n Axt (?) […] sbk Sdt Hr Hry-ib Sdt m […]
[… isk H]m rdi.n [ntr xp]r m ib=f irit rn r […]
[…] rn=f n nbw Hr nbw wAH-anx di anx […]
[…] rn=f wr bity […]

‘[…] they rejoice. Then give (?) […]

[…] he […] the Majesty of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt
Kha-kau-ra for/to […]
[…] his father Sobek of Shedet gave to him […]
[…] receive his dignity of king of Upper and Lower Egypt to-
gether with the placing to work with the seal (?) […]159
[…] in the power (?) […] Sobek of Shedet – Horus who resides
in Shedet in (?) […]
[… But the god] caused that the creation of the name for […]
took place in his heart […]
[…] his name of gold Horus of Gold Wakh-ankh, given life […]
[…] his great name king of Lower Egypt […]’.

The text records the crowning and the creation of the com-
plete titulary of Amenemhat III in the presence, at least appar-
ently, of Senusret III. The text has been compared with the cor-

156
A long coregency has also been favoured by GRAJETZKI 2006, 54-55.
157
WEGNER 1996, 274.
158
LEPROHON 1980, 298, 301-302.
159
BLUMENTHAL 1970, A 2.21: ‘des Empfanges seiner Würden eines Königs von Ober- und
Unterägypten und sie (wohl die Namen der Titulatur) einsetzen als Werk in das Siegel’;
HIRSCH 2004, ‘… Empfangen seiner Würden des Königs von Ober- und Unterägypten
mit dem Setzen an die Arbeit am Siegel…’.

– 49 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

onation inscription of Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahari, describing

the invented scene with Thutmose I declaring his daughter his
coregent and with the creation of her titulary160. According to
some scholars161, the text of Amenemhat III is a sort of proto-
type of the Hatshepsut coronation inscription and, as such, it
must describe an actual event. The text was then borrowed by
Hatshepsut to give credit to her own legitimacy to the throne.
Moreover, given the supposed widespread use of coregency in
the Twelfth Dynasty, the text of Amenemhat III cannot have had
a mere propagandistic function. On the contrary, it would have
rather relected the historical circumstances of the coronation
of the king. Nevertheless, rather than a prototype, the text of
Amenemhat III might be one example, as Wegner himself has
pointed out, of a genre of coronation texts, with a relatively
standardised phraseology describing the passage of the king-
ship to the successor prior to the death of the older king162.
Moreover, it is not possible to rule out that also Amenemhat
III preferred, in the same way as Hatshepsut centuries later, to
alter reality in order to present his crowning in the most ideal
and favourable terms163.
However, what is really at stake, besides the issue of the
coregency, is the role of Sobek of Shedet. From the point of
view of the religious history of the Fayyum, Senusret III re-
mains in the background. Even supposing that a coregency
existed and the coronation text relected historical reality, the
inscription still expresses the creation of the royal names of
Amenemhat III. And, supposing Senusret III was still living, he
was not responsible either of the construction of the temple of
Sobek, where most likely the Berlin fragments originally stood,
or of the development of Sobek’s cult. The presence of Senusret
III in the coronation scene serves to underscore the political
legitimacy of the new king. The text conirms the signiicance,
during Amenemhat III’s reign, of the temple of Sobek of Shedet
as a place connected with the royal ideology. The temple was

160
NAVILLE 1913, pl. 62. See: LEPROHON 1980, 297-302; 2004, 119-120.
161
See, for example, SCHOTT, 1955, 201-202; REDFORD 1967, 82; MURNANE 1977, 229;
LEPROHON 1980, 298.
162
WEGNER 1996, 271, and note 84, who argues that the Hatschepsut inscription cannot
be a direct reworking of the Amenemhat coronation text, ‘since, despite clear parallels
in phrasing, the overall compositions appear to have differed. The Hatschepsut and
Amenemhat III coronation texts should rather be understood as two examples of a
wider body of similar coronation inscriptions’.
163
The opinions of scholars go from MATZEKER 1986, 91-92, who considers these
fragments as a deinite proof of a coregency between Amenemhat III and Senusret III,
to DELIA 1980, 245-246, and HIRSCH 2004, 120, who, on the contrary, argued that the
text of Amenemhat III aimed at emphasising the ideal link between this king and his
deceased predecessor.

– 50 –
 The Middle Kingdom

the place for the conirmation of the transmission of the royal

power from king to king. The divine essence of kingship de-
rived, however, from Sobek (‘… his father Sobek of Shedet gave
to him…’). If, as it seems likely, the expression ib=f refers to the
crocodile god associated with Horus, the proclamation of the
king’s titulary is made possible after his names have been cre-
ated – that is to say thought – in the heart of the local god. The
political and theological recognition of Amenemhat III’s power
is complete. It took place, ideally or actually, in the presence of
his human father and predecessor Senusret III with the support
of his divine father Sobek-Horus.
The temple of Sobek must have been decorated not only with
inscriptions, but also with ritual scenes. Unfortunately, only one
complete scene has survived and has as protagonist, not surpris-
ingly, Sobek of Shedet. The above mentioned granite fragment of
an architrave from Kiman Fares (doc. 15) contains, in sunk re-
lief, two symmetrical scenes under a winged uraes. Of the scene
on the left only a portion of the falcon-headed Horus remains.
The god, with the double crown, is depicted inside a shrine simi-
lar to those used in the heb-sed. On the right scene, inside an
identical shrine, there is the crocodile-headed Sobek, standing,
facing right and with ankh-sign in his right hand and was-staff
in his left. To my knowledge, this document is the irst icono-
graphical example of Sobek of Shedet wearing on his head the
solar disk surmounted by two tall feathers. Just above Sobek’s
face, two columns of hieroglyphs are engraved: ‘Sobek of Shedet
– Horus who resides in Shedet, lord of magniicence, great of awe
and image in Shedet […]’. In front of the god is the king, with an
inscription bearing part of his prenomen and epithets: ntr nfr nb
ir ixt [n-mAat-]ra sA ra, ‘the beautiful god, the lord who performs the
rite, [Ny-maat-]ra, son of Ra […]’. The scene depicts one of the
most signiicant rituals in the Egyptian temples, that is the wor-
ship of its main god: dwA ntr sp 4 ir=f di anx mi ra dt, ‘worshipping
god four times, ir=f di anx like Ra, for ever’164. The high symbolic
and religious value of this scene is emphasised by the attitude of
the king, with simple headgear, standing with his arms down and
making eye contact with Sobek. Despite being slightly damaged,
the sunk relief appears of high quality, with great attention to de-
tails. The fact that the scene is symmetrical to a scene with Horus
on what seems to be an architrave conirms the strong connec-
tion between the latter and Sobek. Very likely, the performer of
the ritual must have been, also in this case, Amenemhat III. But
the name and epithets of the god are missing, as well as the igure

164
For other examples of the ritual ‘worshipping god four times’ in the Twelfth Dynasty,
see LACAU, CHEVRIER 1959, pls. 27, 34, 36, 41.

– 51 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

of the king and the title of the scene. It would have been, indeed,
really interesting to see in which way these two deities could be
symmetrically associated on a ritual level.
Very likely, the temple was adorned with statues of the king165
and gods. A rather unique black granite bust with no inscrip-
tions and representing Amenemhat III was discovered in the ru-
ins of the ancient Shedet166. The king wears a heavy wig made of
tresses laid across the head, while part of the uraeus and of the
beard are missing; Amenemhat III has a skin of leopard on his
shoulders, held in place by a strap across the chest. Around the
neck is a menit-necklace, while against each shoulder there rests
a thin pole, surmounted by the head of a falcon167. Some schol-
ars have noted that some features of the statue seem purposely
archaic, such as, for example, the wig, the beard and the fan-
shaped end of the chest-band knot of the leopard skin, which
hangs down on the left breast of the king168. The king’s gear sug-
gests that he is represented in his priestly role, but as to which
god, or gods, was/were being served we do not know. The leopard
skin was the Egyptian religious garment par excellence, worn by
the sem-priests or priests, and occasionally by kings as well, per-
forming funerary rituals in the capacity of the deceased’s son.
The standards with the falcon heads would therefore suggest
that Amenemhat III was performing a rite for Horus. The menit-
necklace was a symbol of rejuvenation, in some contexts con-
nected with kid gods, such as Khonsu, Ihy and Nefertem169, but
it was also an emblem of Hathor170, and it seems very likely that
the statue represented the king also as priest of the goddess171.
A cult of Hathor seems to have been active in Shedet at least
from the Middle Kingdom172. During the reign of Amenemhat

165
The statue CG 769 (doc. 29) and that of the Saint Georges Museum (doc. 30), both
representing Amenemhat III, might have been originally located in the temple of
Sobek at Shedet or in the pyramid complex of Hawara.
166
Statue CG 395, see for example: MARIETTE 1872, pls. 39 a1 and a2; BORCHARDT 1925,
pl. 64; EVERS 1929, pls. 127-128; TERRACE, FISCHER 1970, 85-88; HABACHI 1978, 90, 92;
CHADEFAUD 1982, 3; RUSSMANN 1989, 66-67.
167
This statue might be the irst example of royal statues with standards: SATZINGER
1981, 9-43; CHADEFAUD 1982, 3.
168
See, for example, RUSSMANN 1989, 66-67; CEPKO 2005, 131-132.
169
TERRACE, FISCHER 1970, 86; RUSSMANN 1989, 130, no. 60. VON BISSING 1911-1914, pl.
30, and EVERS 1929, §§ 701-704, argued that the statue represents Amenemhat III as
a priest of Khonsu.
170
STAEHELIN 1982, 52-53; PINCH, 1993, 278-281.
171
TERRACE, FISCHER 1970, 86, 88; ZECCHI 2001, 140; HIRSCH 2004, 123. CEPKO 2005, 131-
132, has claimed that Amenemhat III is represented as a priest of Hathor (menit), of
Sobek and, owing to the archaic elements of the sculpture, of Horus of Nekhen.
172
A statue from Medinet el-Fayyum of the Middle Kingdom (JdE 43093) has an
offering formula to Sobek of Shedet, Osiris of the Fayyum and Hathor: RANKE 1941,
169-171. See also ZECCHI 2001, 80-81.

– 52 –
 The Middle Kingdom

III, the connections among the king, the goddess and the menit
are signiicant. A royal stela of Amenemhat III from Serabit el-
Khedim mentions an offering of menit-necklaces in honour of
the goddess173. A priest of Hathor, contemporary of Amenemhat
III, is depicted, as well as the king himself, with a menit174. At
Hawara, where the presence of Hathor is well attested, Petrie
found the bust of a king, very likely Amenemhat III, with a me-
nit around his neck175. Moreover, in an inscription on a relief
from his tomb176, the ‘overseer of the ields’ Ankhu bears, among
others, the titles of iry mint, ‘keeper of the menit’. Ankhu must
have been an inluential man, who served as temple scribe for
Senusret III and who ‘followed the king’s son’, while he was still
young. He is also called ‘born of the king’s sister Merestekhi’177.
To my knowledge, the title iry mint is not otherwise attested178.
It is worth noting that the relief of Ankhu is said to have come
from the Fayyum, where Amenemhat III was represented with
the menit twice. If iry mnit was not a mere honoriic title, but
expressed an actual ofice, it is plausible that Ankhu was in
charge of the menit used in a cult for Hathor in the Fayyum
itself. In short, the cumulative picture presented by the avail-
able evidence suggests that the statue from Medinet el-Fayyum
represents Amenemhat III, as suggested by Eileen Hirsch179, as a
priest of Hathor, as a sem-priest and as a son of a deity. This god
might be Horus, that is, in the Fayyum context, Sobek, who had
strong associations with the goddess Hathor within and without
the region.

Sobek in the royal complex at Hawara

The pyramid of Hawara is generally regarded as the inal

interment of Amenemhat III. The pyramid lay in the north of
a complex enclosed by a wall measuring 385x158 m. This was
referred to by some classical authors as the ‘Labyrinth’, con-
sisting of open courts, chambers, chapels and hidden crypts180.

173
CERNY 1952-1955, I, pl. 27, no. 112; II, 114; PINCH 1993, 278.
174
TERRACE, FISCHER 1970, 88.
175
PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MCKAY 1912, pl. XXV.3.
176
Boston Museum of Fine Arts 71403: SIMPSON 1972, 45-54.
177
The identiication of Ankhu’s uncle remains uncertain. According to RYHOLT 1997,
210-212, he could be Amenemhat IV. For GRAJETZKI 2006, 66-67, he was Wegaf or
another king of the early Thirteenth Dynasty.
178
SIMPSON 1972, 50; WARD 1982, 63; ZECCHI 1999, 54, 110.
179
HIRSCH 2004, 123.
180
HERODOTUS (Book II, 148); MANETHO; DIODORUS SICULUS (Book I, 61 and 66); STRABO
(Book 17, I, 3, 37 and 42); PLINY (Book 36, 13); POMPONIUS MELA (Book I, 9, 56).

– 53 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

Unfortunately, however, almost nothing of it remains and its

original appearance is therefore open for speculation181. Very
likely, within the complex there was a temple whose size and
layout remain unknown. Owing to its presumptive numerous
chapels, a comparison has been made between the Hawara
complex and that of Djoser at Saqqara182, and it also plausible
that it functioned as a ‘Mansion of Millions of Years’183. In this
respect, Ingrid Blom-Böer has drawn a parallel between the
pre-eminence of Sobek of Shedet in Amenemhat III’s complex
at Hawara and the presence of Amon in the royal cult com-
plexes of Western Thebes.
The Labyrinth was still under construction at the end of the
second decade of the reign. There is, indeed, evidence that the
works were in an advanced stage, as a number of rock inscrip-
tions in the Wadi Hammamat attest expeditions to obtain stone
both for the Labyrinth temple named ‘Ankh-Amenemhat living
for ever and ever’ (anx imn-m-HAt anx dt r nHH), and for its statu-
ary. In particular, one inscription related to an expedition led by
the overseer of stone-cutters Senusret offers useful information:
‘regnal year 19, irst month of peret, [day] 15, the good god, lord
of the two lands, lord of ceremonies, king of Upper and Lower
Egypt Ny-maat-ra, given life, stability and strength like Ra, for
ever. His Majesty sent [me] to bring for him monuments from the
valley of Hammamat (consisting in) beautiful stones of bekhen,
as far as Ankh-Amenemhat living for ever and ever, in the House
of Sobek Shedety (m pr sbk Sdty): ten statues of ive cubits seated
upon a throne, quarried in this year by the truly beloved of…
Senusret’ (doc. 88)184. This is, indeed, the irst reference ever in
the Egyptian sources to pr sbk Sdty, which, in the New Kingdom,
was used to designate the temple of Sobek at Shedet. The use of
the preposition m, ‘in’, linking the two place-names deserves at-
tention. Unless here pr sbk Sdty is not used to denote the whole
Fayyum district, which seems unlikely, this expression indicates
that there was a strong connection, if not a dependence, between
the Hawara complex and the temple of Sobek at Shedet185. We
do not know whether the works ordered by Amenemhat III in

181
On the Labyrinth, see: LD I, 47; LD Text II, 11-24; VASSALLI 1885, 37-41; PETRIE 1889,
4-8; PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 28-35; MICHALOWSKI 1968, 219-222; LLOYD 1970,
81-100; ARNOLD 1979, 1-9; ARNOLD 1980, 905-907; ARMAYOR 1985; OBSOMER 1992, 221-
324; BLOM 1989, 25-50; UPHILL 2000; BLOM-BÖER 2001; 195-197 and, above all, BLOM-
BÖER 2006. For Hawara in the Greco-Roman Period, see: UYTTERHOEVEN 2009.
182
ARNOLD 1979, 1-9; ARNOLD 1980, 905-907.
183
BLOM-BÖER 2006, 61-72; ULLMANN 2002, 3-5. See also: LORAND 2009, 175-176.
184
See also: LD II, 138e; LEPROHON 1980, 40; SEYFRIED 1981, 255-257; UPHILL 2000, 46;
HIRSCH 2004, 122.
185
BLOM-BÖER 2006, 62-63.

– 54 –
 The Middle Kingdom

the temple of Shedet were already concluded when he started to

erect his pyramid at Hawara, or whether they had not begun at
all. As a consequence, we do not know whether Sobek’s connec-
tion with royal doctrines had already reached a mature form. At
all events, despite the fact that there were other gods much better
equipped than Sobek to deal with funerary matters, he came to
play a prominent role in the Hawara complex. Unlike at el-La-
hun, where Senusret II’s cult was supported by the cult of Anubis
tpy dw=f, in the Hawara complex the royal cult186 paid new atten-
tion to local deities, above all the main god of the main town of
the region. In the Labyrinth many fragments of limestone stat-
ues of gods were found187, among which a statue of Hathor, with
human face, cow’s ears and mummiform body188; a statue of a
mummiform deity189; a fragmentary statue of Renenutet190 with
the face in the form of an upraised cobra; a statue of a deity with
a mummiform body, human face and a tall head-dress composed
of four palm branches191; a sculpture representing Amenemhat
III lanked at each side by two goddesses, with a ish hanging
from their hands192; and a statue of a falcon-headed god, per-
haps an image of Horus Hry-ib Sdt193. But it is the crocodile Sobek
who is the most represented deity both in statuary and reliefs194.
Three fragmentary limestone statues are notable, because they
are the most ancient datable three-dimensional representations
of Sobek as a headed-crocodile god195 (Figs. 5 and 6). All three

186
BLOM-BÖER 2006, especially 73-82.
187
BLOM-BÖER 2006, 192-193, no. 33-34; 145-148, no. 37-38. For Amenemhat III as god,
see BLOM-BÖER 2006, 143-145, no. 35-36, 149-150, no. 40.
188
PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 31, pl. XXIV; PM IV, 101; SCHOSKE 1988, 207; FAY
1996, 115, 122, 124, pl. 25a; UPHILL 2000, 26, 43, 70 H.10; FREED 2002, 119-120; BLOM-
BÖER 2006, 152-153, no. 43. See also: BLOM-BÖER 2006, 141-142, no. 32.
189
BLOM-BÖER 2006, 151-152, no. 42.
190
BLOM 1989, 26, no. 3, pl. 1c; FREED 2002, 121; BLOM-BÖER 2006, 158-159, no. 50.
191
PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 31, pl. XXV.2,4; SCHOSKE 1988, 207; BLOM 1989, 40;
UPHILL 2000, 27 H.14; FREED 2002, 120-121; BLOM-BÖER 2006, 150-151, no. 41.
192
PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 31, pl. XXVI; PM IV, 101; BLOM 1989, 40; FAY 1996,
129, ig. 19; SEIDEL 1996, 104-106, no. 45; UPHILL 2000, 27 H.15; FREED 2002, 113; BLOM-
BÖER 2006, 137-138, no. 28.
193
Munich ÄS 7077: SCHOSKE 1988, 206-207; FAY 1996, 115; BLOM-BÖER 2006 159-160,
no. 51.
194
See, for example, BLOM-BÖER 2006, 156-158, no. 47-49, 248, no. 171 (AEIN 1413),
269-270 no. 207 (Munich ÄS 6080).
195
Statues: a) Ashmolean Museum, Oxford 1912.605: PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY
1912, 31, pl. XXIV.2; PM IV, 101; DOLZANI 1961, 182, ig. 8; UPHILL 2000, 26-27, 43, 70
H.11, pls. 23-24; FREED 2002, 118-119; BLOM-BÖER 2006, 153-154, no. 44; b) Museum
Fine Arts, Boston 12.1003: PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 31, pl. XXIV.4; PM IV,
101; FAY 1996, 115, 122, 124, pl. 25b; BLOM-BÖER 1998, 111-112; UPHILL 2000, 27, 43,
70 H.13; FREED 2002, 118-119; BLOM-BÖER 2006, 155, no. 45; c) Cairo 1/10/14/2: PETRIE,
WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 31, pl. XXIV.3; PM IV, 101; FAY 1996, 115, 122, 124, pl. 25c;
UPHILL 2000, 27, 43, 70 H.12; FREED 2002, 118-119; BLOM-BÖER 2006, 156, no. 46. A few

– 55 –
 Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

statues represent Sobek with a

striated and tripartite wig with
horizontal bands at the bottom of
the hair sections, and one of them
still preserves the god’s right arm,
holding a was-staff.
At the south-east corner of the
pyramid, Petrie brought to light
a large limestone block with two
crocodiles and traces of a third196.
Petrie suggested that this was part
of an altar with a row of crocodiles
from various localities. Indeed he
found on the north side of the
pyramid a block with the names
of three forms of Sobek197: Sobek
lord of xAw(t)y), Sobek lord of
Srt-bnbn (?), Sobek lord of bA[…].
The irst one is an unknown local-
ity198, while the reading Srt-bnbn is
uncertain199. The last place-name
could be read bA[yt] or bA[tiw] and
indicate the main town of the VII
nome of Upper Egypt200.
The ritual contexts of all these
sculptures is uncertain, but it is likely that all the deities rep-
Fig. 5 - Statue of
Sobek Ashmolean resented, especially Sobek of Shedet, had a special status and
Museum 1912.605. speciic cult places within the Labyrinth201. The importance of
Sobek of Shedet within the Hawara complex is further conirmed
by the numerous occurrences of his name on architectural ele-
ments and royal statues, in which Amenemhat III is often called
‘beloved of Sobek of Shedet’ or of ‘Sobek of Shedet – Horus who

fragmentary sculptures and reliefs representing the crown with stylized feathers and
sun disk, most likely belonged to Sobek of Shedet, have been found: BLOM-BÖER 2006,
134-140, no. 29, 241-244, no. 158-164.
196
PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 31, pl. XXVII.4; PM IV, 101; DOLZANI 1961, 184,
ig. 10; UPHILL 2000, 27, 43 H.16; Freed 2002, 121; BLOM-BÖER 2006 129-130, no. 22-25.
197
PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 31-32, pl. XXVII.2; PM IV, 101; YOYOTTE 1957, 93;
UPHILL 2000, 27-28, 43 H. 17; BLOM-BÖER 2006, 127-128, no. 20; ZECCHI 2006, 32 no.
40. According to Petrie, this block was originally placed over the altar with the Sobek
crocodiles.
198
GOMAÀ 1984, 802.
199
GOMAÀ 1984, 795. Petrie read the place-name ‘meret-neter’. See also: BLOM-BÖER
2006, 128. Sheret-benben is, however, a locality in the Fayyum and dedicated to
Hathor: ZECCHI 2001, 171-172.
200
GOMAÀ 1984, 791-792.
201
UPHILL 2000, 43; BLOM-BÖER 2006, 63.

– 56 –
 The Middle Kingdom

Fig. 6 - Statue of
Sobek Ashmolean
Museum 1912.605.

resides in Shedet’ (doc. 19-25, 27)202. Petrie also unearthed two

blocks of white limestone, originally two statue bases, with in-
scriptions. The irst one (doc. 26) has a text in three columns:
‘[The beautiful god] Ny-maat-ra, given life, | beloved of Horus
who resides in Shedet, has come to | [Sobek of Shedet ?], with
crowned head, who is in Shedet’, [ntr nfr] n-mAat-ra di anx | mry Hr
Hry-ib Sdt ii n | [sbk Sdt ? s]tn-HAt imy Sdt. In this period, the epithet
stn-HAt, ‘with crowned head’, ‘exalted of front’, seems to be a char-
acteristic of Sobek-Horus in the Fayyum, since it occurs again in
the hymns to the god of the pRamesseum VI (doc. 85)203.
The second statue base has two texts204:
On the right: ‘The beautiful god Ny-maat-ra, given life | be-
loved of Ra-hes, restful of feet’, ntr nfr n-mAat-ra di anx | mry rA-Hs
Htp-rdwy.
On the left: ‘Ra-hes, restful of feet, | who presides over the
pure ields | […]’, rA-Hs Htp-rdwy | xnty sxwt wabwt | […].

202
See also: BLOM-BÖER 2006, 208, no. 104, 212, no. 112, 226, no. 133, 228, no. 137.
203
pRamesseum VI, 103, 140-141: GARDINER 1957, 52, 54.
204
Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Leiden F 1939/2.51: PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912,
32, pl. XXVIII; PM IV, 101; SCHNEIDER, RAVEN 1981, 62-63, no. 38; BLOM 1989, 25, 28, no.
20, pl. 3; RAVEN 1996, 31, no. 8; UPHILL 2000, 31, 43, 70 H.42; BLOM-BÖER 2006, 184-186
no. 91; ZECCHI 2006, 17, no. 12.

– 57 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

It is not clear whether Htp-rdwy, ‘restful of feet’, should be re-

garded as an epithet of Ra-hes or whether he was an independent
crocodile god who was merged with the irst one, creating the
new form Ra-hes-hotep-redwy. However, hotep-redwy was suc-
cessively used in the hymns to Sobek of the pRamesseum VI as
a name of the crocodile god of Shedet205. Also the origin of rA-Hs,
whose name ‘mouth of terror’, ‘mouth of ierceness’, evokes the
dangerousness of the crocodile attack, is uncertain. His identii-
cation with the Upper Egyptian iAHs, mentioned in the ‘Pyramid
Texts’ (§§ 994 and 1476) is actually based on a graphic resem-
blance of their names and on the fact that in one case iAHs is
replaced by rAHs206. However, Ra-hes appears again in the hymns
of the pRamesseum VI as a form of Sobek of Shedety207. It is
possible that originally he was a crocodile god of the Fayyum re-
gion, who merged with the more predominant Sobek of Shedet.
It is also plausible to maintain that Ra-hes was a crocodile-god of
the eastern area of the Fayyum. The location of the sxwt wabwt,
placed under his control, is unknown. Nevertheless, unless they
do not denote a mythological place, they should be looked for in
the eastern area of the Fayyum208. Moreover, the so-called ‘Book
of the Fayyum’ lists a locality called pr-rA-Hs, called also brgt,
which was likely situated in the eastern entrance to the Fayyum
depression209.
The most famous sculpture from Hawara is perhaps the seat-
ed statue CG 385 of Amenemhat III, wearing the royal kilt and
nemes (doc. 28). On the front of the throne, to the left and right
of the king’s legs, there is an identical column of text: ‘The Horus
Aa-bau, Ny-maat-ra, son of Ra, beloved of Sobek of Shedet, given
life’. On the basis of the position marked by Petrie as its ind
spot210, Eric P. Uphill has claimed that this statue might come
from the valley temple of the royal complex211. There is no need,
however, to suggest that the monument was originally erected
elsewhere in the Fayyum because of the king’s epithet ‘beloved of
Sobek of Shedet’212. The Middle Kingdom sources give evidence
of the existence of a crocodile cult in the Labyrinth, but do not
allow us to suppose that there was a speciic Sobek of Hawara.
As has already been pointed out, there was likely a strong link
between the royal complex and the main town of the region and,

205
GARDINER 1957, 50. See also Kom Ombo, 61, 94, 107, 255, 491.
206
On a discussion of the etymology of rA-Hs/rAHs, see: YOYOTTE 1962a, 134-136.
207
GARDINER 1957, 48, 52.
208
ZECCHI 2001, 173-174.
209
YOYOTTE 1967, 135; ZECCHI 2001, 206-208.
210
PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 29, pl. XXXII.
211
UPHILL 2000, 44, 62.
212
POLZ 1995, 205.

– 58 –
 The Middle Kingdom

indeed, it is the name of Sobek of Shedet, as we have seen, that

occurs, not only on this statue, but on several architectural ele-
ments as well, indicating that it was this form of Sobek to be
worshipped in the local royal complex.
A royal temple lintel of Amenemhat III might come either
from the temple of Shedet or from Hawara (doc. 13)213. This piece
resembles, both for its aesthetics and symbolic values, the relief
Berlin 16953, whose exact provenance is as well unrecorded. In
the case the lintel belonged to the Hawara complex, it could have
been originally placed in the king’s funerary or valley temple214.
As in the relief Berlin 16953, the text is arranged symmetrically.
In the centre, the right-facing cartouche (imn-m-HAt), placed over
the axis of the doorway, is lanked by the name of Horus ‘who
resides in Shedet’ (Hr Hry-ib Sdt), written as a royal Horus name,
with the falcon perched on an enclosure including a temple sur-
mounted by the bucranium, above which are the signs Hr and ib.
Next is the royal epithet ‘given life and stability’ (di anx dd). This
is lanked by the name of ‘Sobek Shedety’ (sbk Sdty), written with
the sign of the crocodile above a naos, the signs Sd + t, followed
by two signs of the temple associated with Shedet, that is the
pr-nw with bucranium. Sobek’s names face vertical lines of text
which originally ran down the sides of the doorway, now lost:
‘the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, lord of the two lands, the
lord who performs [the rite…]’, nswt-bit nb tAwy nb iri [ixt…].
Two red granite naoi were found by Petrie in the Hawara
complex215. They contain a igure, on the left, with khat and an
ankh-sign in both his hands, the left hanging down and the right
arm across his chest towards another human igure of equal size
beside him and with nemes. The identity of these two igures is
uncertain. It has been suggested that both the images represent
Amenemhat III216 or that the igure with khat is a deity offering
the ankh to Amenemhat III217. Also more recently this hypoth-
esis has been maintained by David Lorand, who has claimed that
the god might be Sobek of Shedet218. In this respect, however, it
should be noted that this deity preferred to be depicted in the

213
British Museum EA 1072: PM IV, 101; HALL 1913, 7, pl. 13 (said to come from
Hawara); BLOM 1989, 40 (Hawara); QUIRKE 1990, 15; PARKINSON 1999, 118 no. 35
(from the Fayyum, but exact provenance unrecorded); UPHILL 2000, 34, 44, 66 H.60
(Hawara); HIRSCH 2004, 348-349, no. 298 (Medinet el-Fayyum); BLOM-BÖER 2006, 111-
113 no. 5 (Hawara).
214
UPHILL 2000, 44.
215
Cairo JdE 43289 and Copenhagen 1482: PETRIE, WAINWRIGHT, MACKAY 1912, 30-31, pl.
XXII. Petrie also saw the fragment of a third shrine.
216
MOGENSEN 1930, 6; LLOYD 1970, 90; SEIDEL 1996, 201-203; UPHILL 2000, 25.
217
EVERS 1929, 111; VANDIER 1958, 196-197.
218
LORAND 2009, 177-178.

– 59 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

guise of a reptile or semi-anthropomorphically as a man with the

head of a crocodile and that in Hawara – or in any other local-
ity – he was never represented in fully anthropomorphic form.
Other scholars offered a different interpretation of the naoi and
regarded both the igures as royal images. Some have suggested
that the dyads show Amenemhat III offering life to a king of the
Thirteenth Dynasty219 or that they show Senusret III, with khat,
next to his junior coregent Amenemhat III220 or, on the contrary,
Amenemhat III giving life to his coregent and successor Amen-
emhat IV221.
The name of Sobek of Shedet occurs in other documents
from Hawara. It is recorded, possibly as part of a priestly title,
on a limestone block fragment found in the tomb chapel of the
mastaba of Amenysenebu (doc. 99). Moreover, it appears in the
offering-formula of three vases in silver (doc. 89-91) found in the
burial chamber of the tomb of the princess Neferuptah, daugh-
ter of Amenemhat III and located about 2 km south-east of her
father’s royal complex. The offering-formula invokes Ny-maat-
ra, Geb, Ptah-Sokar-Osiris, Sobek of Shedet – Horus who resides
in Shedet and the Great and Small Enneads. The presence of
Sobek-Horus of Shedet on these vases seems to enhance the role
of the god in funerary contexts in the territory of Hawara.

The temple of Medinet Madi

Medinet Madi, 30 km south-west of Medinet el-Fayyum, con-

tains a small and well preserved temple with inscriptions and
scenes with the names of Amenemhat III and Amenemhat IV. This
temple was originally excavated by a mission of the University of
Milan, directed by Achille Vogliano222, and, starting from 1966, by
a mission directed by Edda Bresciani of the University of Pisa223.
In the hieroglyphic inscriptions of the building, the temple is
constantly called Hwt-ntr rnnwtt anxt nt dA, ‘the temple of Rene-
nutet, the living of Dja’, evidently the ancient name of Medinet
Madi. The name of this cult centre indicates that it was dedicated

219
HABACHI 1977, 1073, note 12; OBSOMER 1992, 262-263; JORGENSEN 1996, 170; ZECCHI
2001, 142-143.
220
FREED 2002, 108-110.
221
HABACHI 1978, 87-88. See also BLOM-BÖER 2006, 132-136, no. 26-27.
222
VOGLIANO 1936; CdE 1937, 55-57; VOGLIANO 1937; CdE 1938, 70-72; VOGLIANO 1938;
CdE 1939, 87-89; VOGLIANO 1939.
223
See, for example: BRESCIANI 1968; BRESCIANI 1971, 201; BRESCIANI 1976; BRESCIANI
1986, 7-14; BRESCIANI, BETRÒ, FERRI, NICOLA, ARIOSO 1990, 4-18. See also: NAUMANN 1939,
186-189, pl. 30; DONADONI 1988, 61-67; GIAMMARUSTI 2006, 9-21.

– 60 –
 The Middle Kingdom

Fig. 7 - Scene on
the west wall of the
transversal room of
the temple of Medinet
Madi.

to the cobra goddess Renenutet224, even though, as we shall see,

it is Sobek-Horus who plays the most inluential religious role.
The temple measures 10.50 x 9.70 m and consists in a sort of
pronaos (actually a twin columned portico), and a short corridor
leading to a transversal hall with three niches recessed in the
back wall. The walls of the temple are covered with hieroglyphs
and ritual scenes, unfortunately today badly damaged, but suf-
iciently preserved to show their high quality and attention to
details. The Middle Kingdom temple was then restored in the
Ramesside Period and expanded, front and back, in the Greco-
Roman Period.
The texts and the scenes of the Middle Kingdom temple have
been studied by Siegfried Schott225, Sergio Donadoni226, Hirsch227
and also myself228, and more recently Bresciani has published an
article on the Middle Kingdom temple, including the drawings of
the scenes made by Lucia Grassi and Flora Silvano229.

224
DOLZANI 1978, 95-100.
225
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 17-36.
226
DONADONI 1947.
227
HIRSCH 2004, 123-130, 355-366, 376-382.
228
ZECCHI 2001, 151-162.
229
BRESCIANI 2006, 22-41.

– 61 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

The inscriptions are extremely interesting as they shed light

on the role of Renenutet and, above all, of Sobek-Horus of She-
det in the last phase of Amenemhat III’s reign (Fig. 8).
The two jambs of the entrance of the temple have two sym-
metrical scenes, with Amenemhat III on the west side and Amen-
emhat IV on the east side, wearing a short kilt, nemes with uraeus,
and wsekh pectoral and holding an ankh-sign and an was-staff.
The west side230 preserves the whole igure of Amenemhat III,
surmounted, most likely, by an image of Nekhbet in the guise of
a vulture, and part of the inscription:
[bsw-nswt m Hwt-ntr rnn]wtt anxt nt dA,
‘[The entrance of the king in the temple of Renen]utet, the
living of Dja’.
[nxbt Hdt dmAt] pdwt nb(t) pt Hnt tAwy
‘[Nekhbet, the white of Hierakonpolis], who ties the bows,
lady of the sky, mistress of the two lands’.
[ntr nfr nb] Awt ib | [nswt-bit n-]mAat-ra | [sA ra imn-]m-HAt | di anx
dd Hr st Hr | Hna kA=f mi ra dt | di anx Awt ib=f mi ra
‘[The beautiful god, lord] of the happiness of heart, [king of
Upper and Lower Egypt Ny-]maat[-ra], [son of Ra, Amen]emhat,
given life and stability on the throne of Horus, together with his
ka, like Ra, for ever. Given life and whose heart is glad, like Ra’.
The text relative to Amenemhat IV is completely missing231.
The two papyriform columns of the pronaos have similar in-
scriptions. On the west column232: ntr nfr n-mAat-ra | sA ra imn-m-HAt
di anx dt | mry rnnwtt anxt nt dA, ‘The beautiful god Ny-maat-ra,
son of Ra Amenemhat, given life, for ever, beloved of Renenutet
the living of Dja’.
The east column233 has an identical text, but for the cartouche
with the throne name of Amenemhat IV, mAa-xrw-ra.
It should be noted that, in this most external part of the tem-
ple, both the kings call themselves ‘beloved of’ the cobra goddess
and that Sobek is not mentioned.
The irst part of the building has scenes which do not involve
offerings to gods, but ceremonies connected with the beginning
of the life of the temple. The west wall of the pronaos has a very
interesting scene showing Amenemhat III, between Anubis and
Sobek, with his arms down and turned towards the entrance of

230
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 22-23; DONADONI 1947, 335-336 (A); HIRSCH 2004, 355-356
(doc. no. 321a); BRESCIANI 2006, 22-23 (G, 1).
231
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 23; DONADONI 1947, 336 (B); HIRSCH 2004, 376 (doc. no.
342a); BRESCIANI 2006, 22 (G, 2).
232
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 25; DONADONI 1947, 336-337 (C), HIRSCH 2004, 356 (doc. no.
321b); BRESCIANI 2006, 24 (F, 8).
233
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 25; DONADONI 1947, 336 (D); HIRSCH 2004, 376 (doc. no.
342b); BRESCIANI 2006, 24 (F, 7).

– 62 –
 The Middle Kingdom

Fig. 8 - Scene in the

central niche of the
temple of Medinet
Madi.

the temple234. The king is called nswt-bit nb ir ixt n-mAat-ra sA n ht=f

imn-m-HAt, ‘the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, the lord who per-
forms the rite Ny-maat-ra, son of his lesh Amenemhat’235. Both
the deities raise a hes-vase, pouring water made of ankh-sings, on
the king’s head, and pronounce the following words: dd mdw wab
tw wab kA=k mw ipnw anx, ‘words to be spoken: you are puriied,
your ka is puriied with this water of life’.
Anubis’ name is followed by the epithet nb [tA-w]ryt and above
him there are three vertical columns of hieroglyphs containing
his words:
d[d mdw di.n n=k anx wAs] nb dt | dd mdw [di.]n n=k dd nb dt |
dd mdw di.n n=k [snb] nb dt
‘Words to be recited: I give to you all the life and strength, all
the stability, all the health, for ever’. The words spoken by Sobek,
who is accompanied by the inscription sbk Sdt di[=f anx], are
completely destroyed.
In front of this scene, on the east wall of the pronaos, there
is a representation of the ceremony of the foundation of the

234
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 24; DONADONI 1947, 338-340 (E); HIRSCH 2004, 356-357
(doc. no. 321c); BRESCIANI 2006, 24-25 (F, 3).
235
This text has completely broken away: BRESCIANI 2006, 25.

– 63 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

temple236 by Amenemhat IV and Sefekhet-abui, hypostasis of

Seshat, of whom only the name (sfxt-abwy) remains. The title
of the scene is pd Ss m Hwt-ntr [rnnwtt Apdw ir=f di anx] ‘stretch-
ing the rope in the temple [of Renenutet. Offering fowls ir=f di
anx]’. King and goddess drive a stake on the ground to bound
the plan of the building. Behind the king there is a fragmentary
inscription:
[wn=f xnty kAw anxw] nbw [Awt ib nb]
‘[He is the irst of the kau] of all [the living and of all the joy]’.
Above him: ‘[Nekhbet, the white of Hierakonpolis], she gives
life and strength’, [nxbt Hdt nxn] di=s anx wAs.
Next to this scene, there are two superimposed registers237.
The uppermost one preserves the cartouche with the throne
name of Amenemhat III (n-mAat-ra), followed by the two legs of a
igure walking towards the entrance of the temple. In the lower
register there is the sign of the sky, under which there is a igure
of a king238, with the inscription: Hr xpr-xprw mry [rnn]wtt anxt [nt
dA] | […] mAa-xrw-ra […]. ‘Horus Kheper-kheperu-ra, beloved of
[Renen]utet, the living [of Dja] | […] Maa-kheperu-ra […]’.
On the wall west of the entrance of the corridor leading to the
transversal room, there is a badly damaged scene239 of Sobek-
Horus and Anubis leading Amenemhat III by the hands towards
the door of the temple: bsw-nswt m Hwt-ntr […], ‘the entrance of
the king in the temple […]’. Above the three protagonists there
are the vulture nxbt Hdt [nxn] nbt pt di=s […], ‘Nekhbet, the white
[of Hierakonpolis], lady of the sky, di=s […]’, part of the titulary
of the king and the name of ‘Wadjet of Pe and Dep’ (wAdt p dp).
Anubis, called nb [tA-wryt di=f anx wAs nb dt], ‘lord [of Ta-wryt.
He gives all the life and strength, for ever]’, pronounces the fol-
lowing words:
dd mdw di.n n=k anx wAs nb [dd nb Awt ib nb dt] | dd mdw di.n
n=k t Aw nbw xAswt nbw dt
‘I have given you all the life and strength [all the stability and
all the happiness of heart, for ever. I have given you all the lands
and all the mountains, for ever’.
The crocodile god is accompanied by the inscription:
sbk Sdt Hr [Hry-ib Sdt di=f anx wAs] nb dt
‘Sobek of Shedet – Horus [who resides in Shedet. He gives] all
[the life and strength], for ever’. And his words are: dd mdw di.n

236
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 23; DONADONI 1947, 345-346 (K); HIRSCH 2004, 376-377
(doc. no. 342c); BRESCIANI 2006, 26 (F, 4).
237
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 23-24; DONADONI 1947, 346-347 (L); HIRSCH 2004, 377 (doc.
no. 342d); BRESCIANI 2006, 26 (F, 4).
238
This igure is now completely disappeared: BRESCIANI 2006, 26.
239
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 24; DONADONI 1947, 340-342 (F); HIRSCH 2004, 357 (doc. no.
321d); BRESCIANI 2006, 27 (F, 2).

– 64 –
 The Middle Kingdom

n=f anx wAs nb [dd nb Awt ib nb dt] | dd mdw di.n n=k dfAw nb(w)
Htpwt nbt dt, ‘I have given you all the life and strength, [all the
stability and all the happiness of heart, for ever]. I have given you
all the provisions and all the offerings, for ever’.
The symmetric scene, on the east of the entrance of the corri-
dor, is no longer visible240. It has been described as containing the
igure of a king and part of the ears of Anubis241, and therefore
it was very likely in parallel with the scene with Amenemhat III,
Sobek and Anubis.
The irst part of the temple has scenes depicting introducto-
ry rites, performed before the king can present himself as a do-
nor in front of the deities residing in the sanctuary. It is worth
noting that all the gods involved in the pronaos play an active
role. Anubis and Sobek pour water on Amenemhat III’s head;
Sefekhet-abui cooperates with Amenemhat IV in the creation of
the plan of the building; then, Sobek and Anubis lead both the
kings to the door to the most internal part of the temple. Only
Sobek-Horus will be seen again within the transversal room
and in the niches. On the contrary, the presence of Anubis and
Sefekhet-abui seems to be functional to speciic tasks and, once
they have been fulilled, these two gods cease carrying out any
role and do not become recipients of offerings. It is, however,
the presence of Anubis on the west wall of the pronaos that is
enigmatic. Usually, the oficiating deities in this kind of ritual
are Horus and Thoth, the latter sometimes replaced by Seth242.
Gardiner argued that this kind of scenes was not merely intend-
ed for the puriication of the king for his priestly functions, but
served also to bestow or conirm royal prerogatives by the deities
who presided the four cardinal points: Horus and Thoth would
have been envisaged as gods of the west and east respectively, as
Horus and Seth represented the north and the south. As the title
of the scene at Medinet Madi suggests, ‘you are puriied, your ka
is puriied with this water of life’, the king undergoes cleansing
by means of water, which serves as a puriication before oficiat-
ing in the temple. In this case, however, the puriication stream
is made of ankh-signs and, therefore, it is life that is conveyed to
the king by Anubis and Sobek. Amenemhat III, thanks to a con-
stantly renewed life, is ready to enter as a pure and legitimate
oficiant into the divine world. But why are Anubis and Sobek

240
BRESCIANI 2006, 27.
241
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 23; DONADONI 1947, 345-346 (J); HIRSCH 2004, 377 (doc. no.
342e). Of the king’s inscription only [… di anx] dt remain.
242
For this ritual see GARDINER 1950, 3-12, who has gathered examples from the New
Kingdom onwards. See also GARDINER 1951, 111, for a mention of the scene of Medinet
Madi.

– 65 –
Sobek of Shedet. The Crocodile God in the Fayyum in the Dynastic Period

involved here? If the latter is the equivalent of Horus, it might

be supposed that the irst is intended as a substitute of Seth or,
most likely, of Thoth. Moreover, it is not clear if a geographical
connotation is also implied in this scene, and the meaning of
Anubis’ presence is made more uncertain by his epithet. This
has been read by Donadoni as nb tA-wryt, on the basis of the
data provided by Schott, who saw the signs […]r+y+t, preceded
by the sign of the bird wr. Unfortunately, nowadays no signs of
the god’s epithet is visible. Recently, Hirsch243 has claimed that
the epithet should be read as nb wryt, ‘Herr der wryt Halle’, a
hall attested in the ‘Cofin Texts’ in relation to Anubis and the
death and embalming of Osiris244. In this context, the epithet
would not have funerary nuances, rather it would underscore
the role of Anubis in a ceremony necessary for the puriication
of the king’s ritual entrance in the godly world. However, the
interesting hypothesis by Hirsch cannot be maintained since,
even more recently, Angiolo Menchetti245 has published a graf-
ito, of Roman age, on a wall of the temple of Medinet Madi
with an image of Anubis with the epithet nb tA-wryt. This form
of Anubis is not elsewhere attested and it is not possible to rule
out that the place-name indicates a settlement or cult-centre
in the Fayyum or in the vicinity of Medinet Madi246. If so, the
ritual scene with Anubis and Sobek-Horus would have a local
connotation. But it seems likewise plausible that tA-wryt might
be a variant of tA-wr, the nome of Abydos, and, indeed, a form
of Anubis nb tA-wr is known in the Old Kingdom247. In this case,
the ritual would have wider implications. The godly gift of the
puriication stream of a renewed life would derive from a god,
Sobek, who, syncretised with Horus, might represent the north,
and from a form of Anubis who might represent the south, so
that the access of the king into the temple would be symboli-
cally sanctioned by the whole of Egypt248.
After Amenemhat III has been puriied and Amenemhat IV
has organised the construction of the building, they are lead by
Anubis and Sobek to the entrance to the most sacred part of the
temple249. And here, on the jambs of the door250, the kings meet

243
HIRSCH 2004, 127.
244
CT I 217f, 221a; III 232e.
245
MENCHETTI 2007, 174-175, 183.
246
There is evidence of a form of veneration in honour of Anubis in the territory of
Medinet Madi in the Greco-Roman Period: BRESCIANI 1980, 10, 13.
247
LD II, 112d; LEITZ 2002, III, 769-770.
248
It should be stressed that Anubis and Sobek had already been associated in
connection with the royal power in Pyr. § 1564-1565a.
249
For a similar role of Anubis, see the chapel of Senusret I at Karnak, where the
king, lead by Anubis, is represented entering the building: LACAU, CHEVRIER 1959, pl.
13 and XXVI.
250
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 26; DONADONI 1947, 342-343 (G); HIRSCH 2004, 358 (doc.

– 66 –
 The Middle Kingdom

the two gods who are the beneiciaries of offerings inside the
building: Sobek himself and Renenutet, who makes her irst ap-
parition on the walls of the temple here. On the west jamb, under
the vulture Nekhbet251, the embrace between Amenemhat III and
the cobra-goddess is shown, with the inscription:
nswt-bit nb irt ixt n-mAat-ra | sA ra [imn-]m-HAt | di anx dt | mry
rnnw[tt] anxt nt dA’
‘the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, the lord who performs
the rite Ny-maat-ra | son of Ra [Amen]emhat | given life, for ever
| beloved of Renenu[tet], the living of Dja’.
On the east jamb252, the scene is surmounted by the falcon
Behdety253. Below, the embrace is between Amenemhat IV and
Sobek-Horus, accompanied by the inscription:
nswt-bit nb irt ixt mAa-xrw[-ra] | sA ra [imn-]m-HAt | di anx dt | mry
sbk Sdt Hr Hry-ib Sdt
‘the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, the lord who performs
the rite Maa-kheru[-ra] | son of Ra [Amen]emhat | given life, for
ever, | beloved of Sobek of Shedet – Horus who resides in Shedet’.
In these scenes, the two kings acts on the same level. And their
close proximity to the deities implies that they are recognised as
the legitimate rulers, who are allowed to enter the holiest part of
the temple.
The scene on the external lintel is in pretty good conditions.
It has two symmetrical scenes254, in which, once again, the two
kings act in a sort of ritual symbiosis, the one imitating the oth-
er. On the left, Amenemhat III, wearing khat with uraeus, is in
front of Sobek and Renenutet. Above the king there are traces
of his cartouche. Behind him, there is a standard with arms,
above which is a ka-sign holding the cartouche, surmounted
by two plumes, with the king’s name, preceded by the epithet
‘foremost of the chapel’ (imn-m-HAt xnty dbAt). The king grasps
a rnpt-sign, which ends with the heb-sed-sign, and a bunch of
three ankh, given by Sobek255, with the solar disk. Behind the
crocodile-god, Renenutet is represented standing, holding an
ankh-sign and a rnpt-sign, which terminates with the sign for
10.000 years. Name and epithet of the goddess have broken

no. 321e); BRESCIANI 2006, 28 (F, 1).

251
The goddess is accompanied by the inscription: nxbt Hdt nxn nbt pt Hnwt tAwy,
‘Nekhbet, the white of Hierakonpolis, lady of the sky, mistress of the two lands’.
252
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 26; DONADONI 1947, 342-343 (H); HIRSCH 2004, 377-378
(doc. no. 342f); BRESCIANI 2006, 28 (F, 6).
253
bHdty ntr aA sAb Swty di=f anx, ‘Behdety, great gof, sAb Swty, he gives life’.
254
SCHOTT, in VOGLIANO 1937, 26; DONADONI 1947, 344 (I); HIRSCH 2004, 378 (doc. no.
342g); BRESCIANI 2006, 29.
255
Of the god’s inscription only the t and the determinative of city are preserved. It can
be restored as: [sbk Sd]t [Hr Hry-ib Sdt].

– 67 –