The reported administrative chain
The dates and correspondence below are reported or quoted by Nielsen. The complete original letters, minutes and firman have not been independently examined here. The table follows the reported administrative sequence and identifies the records still needed.N24 · pp. 315–317
| Date | Action reported by Nielsen | Original record and inspection gap |
|---|---|---|
| 16–17 January 1838 | Vyse writes to Edward Hawkins proposing the object for the British Museum. Hawkins writes to Josiah Forshall supporting acquisition and transport. | The correspondence is described through an archival communication cited by Nielsen. No shelfmark is supplied. MUSEUMLETTERS |
| 27 January 1838 | The trustees accept the offered donation, arrange to approach the consul through the Foreign Office and authorise £150 for transport. | Standing Committee, vol. 16, reference 4697–4698. The original entry remains unexamined here. MINUTES38 |
| 17 February 1838 | John Bidwell writes on behalf of Lord Palmerston to consul Patrick Campbell about transport. Nielsen describes the instruction as including procurement of Egyptian export authorisation. | FO 141/4, Consular No. 3. The full instruction and enclosures remain to be examined. FO141N24 · pp. 316–317 |
| 18 May 1838 | Campbell reports Hill’s undertaking to transport the object to Alexandria for £150, refers to an enclosed contract and states that permission with a firman has been obtained. | FO 142/10, Consular No. 12. Nielsen quotes the letter; the original, enclosures and permit require examination. This £150 contract concerns Giza–Alexandria and is distinct from the trustees’ transport authorisation. FO142N24 · p. 317 |
The reported mechanism was an institutional and consular request, followed by Campbell’s statement that permission had been obtained. The assembled evidence does not establish the discussions, conditions or grounds on which the Egyptian authority made that decision.
What exactly is reported about the firman?
Nielsen attributes this statement to Campbell’s letter of 18 May 1838:
“I have procured the permission of the Pacha with a Firman for the exportation to England of the Sarcophagus”.
N24 · p. 317, note 14FO142 · original awaiting examination
This is a quotation transmitted through a later study. Nielsen states that no evidence of the permit survives apart from the mention he discusses. That is the limit of his account, rather than proof that no copy exists in any archive.
The firman’s wording, issue date, identifier, issuer and conditions have not been established from an examined copy. A complete copy would allow the scope of the reported export permission to be documented. For now, the statement is attributed to Campbell through Nielsen’s quotation.
Contemporary rules requiring original documentation
Nielsen connects the firman request with Egyptian antiquities restrictions introduced in 1835, referring to Stevenson’s study. The original instrument, its application in 1838 and the legal basis for any exemption or special grant have not been examined here. This is a research lead, not an independently verified account of every applicable rule. N24 · p. 317, note 13
The contemporary rules and the full authorisation would need to be read together to establish the scope and conditions of the reported permission. Locating and checking those documents remains an archival priority.
Original documents still needed
- The complete January 1838 offer, museum correspondence and trustees’ decision.
- FO 141/4, Consular No. 3, and FO 142/10, Consular No. 12, with their enclosures and transport contract.
- A copy or registration of the reported firman, together with the contemporary rules relevant to the export.
- The original shipment documentation, including the letter reporting embarkation.
These are research needs. The archive does not establish that every required document survives or that its current repository is known.
Return to the removal account ↗