The Snake, the Crocodile, and the Dog

ELIZABETH PETERS was born and brought up in Illinois and earned her PhD in Egyptology from the University of Chicago’s famed Oriental Institute. She is a prolific and successful novelist with over fifty novels to her credit and is internationally renowned for her mystery stories, especially those featuring indomitable heroine Amelia Peabody. Mrs Peters lives in a historic farmhouse in Frederick, Maryland, with six cats and two dogs. To find out more about Elizabeth Peters and the Amelia Peabody series visit www.ameliapeabody.com.

Praise for Elizabeth Peters’ Amelia Peabody novels

‘Dastardly deeds, whirlwind romances, curious mummies and all the fun and intrigue of Egyptian excavations, with a heroine who wields a sturdy parasol rather than a magnum. Accomplished entertainment.’

Guardian

‘Between Amelia Peabody and Indiana Jones, it’s Amelia – in wit and daring – by a landslide.’

New York Times Book Review

‘The doughtiest, smartest, most appealing female protagonist in mystery fiction.’

Aaron Elkins, author of Make No Bones

‘If Indiana Jones were female, a wife and a mother who lived in Victorian times, he would be Amelia Peabody Emerson.’

Publishers Weekly

‘Amelia Peabody Emerson, archaeologist extraordinaire, and arguably the most potent female force to hit Egypt since Cleopatra, is digging in again!’

Philadelphia Enquirer

‘Shines with charm and wit . . . and the winsome personality of Amelia Peabody.’

Chicago Sun-Times

Titles in this series currently available from Constable & Robinson Ltd

Crocodile on the Sandbank

First Amelia Peabody mystery

The Curse of the Pharaohs

Second Amelia Peabody mystery

The Mummy Case

Third Amelia Peabody mystery

Lion in the Valley

Fourth Amelia Peabody mystery

The Deeds of the Disturber

Fifth Amelia Peabody mystery

The Last Camel Died at Noon

Sixth Amelia Peabody mystery

The Hippopotamus Pool

Eighth Amelia Peabody mystery

Seeing a Large Cat

Ninth Amelia Peabody mystery

The Ape Who Guards the Balance

Tenth Amelia Peabody mystery

The Falcon at the Portal

Eleventh Amelia Peabody mystery

Thunder in the Sky

Twelfth Amelia Peabody mystery

Lord of the Silent

Thirteenth Amelia Peabody mystery

The Golden One

Fourteenth Amelia Peabody mystery

Children of the Storm

Fifteenth Amelia Peabody mystery

Guardian of the Horizon

Sixteenth Amelia Peabody mystery

The Serpent on the Crown

Seventeenth Amelia Peabody mystery

Tomb of the Golden Bird

Eighteenth Amelia Peabody mystery

AMELIA PEABODY, born in 1852, found her life’s work and life partner in 1884, when on a trip to Egypt she married Egyptologist, Radcliffe Emerson. Their son Walter ‘Ramses’ Emerson was born three years later, and their adopted daughter, Nefret, joined the family in 1898. Other important members of the family include several generations of Egyptian cats.

Although the Emersons own a handsome Queen Anne mansion in Kent, they spend half of each year digging in Egypt and fighting off criminals of all varieties. Amelia is planning to draw her last breath holding a trowel in one hand and her deadly parasol in the other.

Editor’s Note

A brief explanation of Arabic and ancient Egyptian terms may be in order for the benefit of readers unfamiliar with those languages. Like certain other Semitic scripts, Arabic and hieroglyphic Egyptian do not write the vowels. It is for this reason that English spellings of such words may legitimately vary. For example: the hieroglyphic writing of the name of the little servant figurines consists of five signs: sh, wa, b, t, and i or y. (Some of these may look like vowels, but they aren’t. Take the editor’s word for it, will you please? You really don’t want to hear about semi-vowels and weak consonants.) This word may be transcribed into English as ‘ushebti,’ ‘shawabti,’ or ‘shabti.’ NOTE: A glossary of Arabic words and phrases can be found on page 390.

Arabic personal and place names are subject to similar variations when written in English script. Fashions in these things change; the spellings common in Mrs Emerson’s early days in Egypt have sometimes been replaced by other, more modern versions. (Dahshoor with Dashur, Meidum with Medum, and so on.) Like most of us, Mrs Emerson tends to cling doggedly to the habits of her youth. In some cases she has modernized her spellings; in other cases she has not. Since this does not bother her, the editor sees no reason why it should bother the reader and feels that a sterile consistency in these matters might mar to some extent the dashing spontaneity of Mrs Emerson’s prose.

(The editor also wishes to remark that she is not the individual referred to in Chapter One. She has absolutely nothing against poetry.)

The quotations at the head of each chapter are from The Collected Works of Amelia Peabody Emerson, Oxford University Press, 8th ed., 1990.

I

‘Some concessions to temperament are necessary if the marital state is to flourish.’

I believe I may truthfully claim that I have never been daunted by danger or drudgery. Of the two I much prefer the former. As the only unmarried offspring of my widowed and extremely absent-minded father, I was held responsible for the management of the household – which, as every woman knows, is the most difficult, unappreciated, and lowest paid (i.e., not paid) of all occupations. Thanks to the above-mentioned absentmindedness of my paternal parent I managed to avoid boredom by pursuing such unwomanly studies as history and languages, for Papa never minded what I did so long as his meals were on time, his clothing was clean and pressed, and he was not disturbed by anyone for any reason whatever.

At least I thought I was not bored. The truth is, I had nothing with which to compare that life, and no hope of a better one. In those declining years of the nineteenth century, marriage was not an alternative that appealed to me; it would have been to exchange comfortable serfdom for absolute slavery – or so I believed. (And I am still of that opinion as regards the majority of women.) My case was to be the exception that proves the rule, and had I but known what unimagined and unimaginable delights awaited me, the bonds that chafed me would have been unendurable. Those bonds were not broken until the death of my poor papa left me the possessor of a modest fortune and I set out to see the ancient sites I knew only from books and photographs. In the antique land of Egypt I learned at last what I had been missing – adventure, excitement, danger, a life’s work that employed all my considerable intellectual powers, and the companionship of that remarkable man who was destined for me as I was for him. What mad pursuits! What struggles to escape! What wild ecstasy!

I am informed, by a certain person of the publishing persuasion, that I have not set about this in the right way. She maintains that if an author wishes to capture the attention of her readers she must begin with a scene of violence and/or passion.

‘I mentioned – er – “wild ecstasy,”’ I said.

The person gave me a kindly smile. ‘Poetry, I believe? We do not allow poetry, Mrs Emerson. It slows the narrative and confuses the Average Reader.’ (This apocryphal individual is always referred to by persons of the publishing persuasion with a blend of condescension and superstitious awe; hence my capital letters.)

‘What we want is blood,’ she continued, with mounting enthusiasm. ‘And a lot of it! That should be easy for you, Mrs Emerson. I believe you have encountered a good many murderers.’

This was not the first time I had considered editing my journals for eventual publication, but never before had I gone so far as to confer with an editor, as these individuals are called. I was forced to explain that if her views were characteristic of the publishing industry today, that industry would have to muddle along without Amelia P. Emerson. How I scorn the shoddy tricks of sensationalism which characterize modern literary productions! To what a state has the noble art of literature fallen in recent years! No longer is a reasoned, leisurely exposition admired; instead the reader is to be bludgeoned into attention by devices that appeal to the lowest and most degraded of human instincts.

The publishing person went away shaking her head and mumbling about murder. I was sorry to disappoint her, for she was a pleasant enough individual – for an American. I trust that remark will not leave me open to an accusation of chauvinism; Americans have many admirable characteristics, but literary taste is rare among them. If I consider this procedure again, I will consult a British publisher.

I suppose I might have pointed out to the naive publishing person that there are worse things than murder. Dead bodies I have learned to take in my stride, so to speak; but some of the worst moments of my life occurred last winter when I crawled on all fours through indescribable refuse towards the place where I hoped, and feared, to find the individual dearer to me than life itself. He had been missing for almost a week. I could not believe any prison could hold a man of his intelligence and strength so long unless . . . The hideous possibilities were too painful to contemplate; mental anguish overwhelmed the physical pain of bruised knees and scratched palms, and rendered inconsequential the fear of enemies on every hand. Already the swollen orb of day hung low in the west. The shadows of the coarse weeds stretched grey across the grass, touching the walls of the structure that was our goal. It was a small low building of stained mud-brick that seemed to squat sullenly in its patch of refuse-strewn dirt. The two walls visible to me had neither windows nor doors. A sadistic owner might keep a dog in such a kennel . . .

Swallowing hard, I turned to my faithful reis Abdullah, who was close at my heels. He shook his head warningly and placed a finger on his lips. A gesture conveyed his message: the roof was our goal. He gave me a hand up and then followed.

A crumbling parapet shielded us from sight, and Abdullah let out his breath in a gasp. He was an old man; the strain of suspense and effort had taken their toll. I had no sympathy to give him then, nor would he have wanted it. Scarcely pausing, he crawled towards the middle of the roof, where there was an opening little more than a foot square. A grille of rusted metal covered it, resting on a ledge or lip just below the surface of the roof. The bars were thick and close together.

Were the long days of suspense at an end? Was he within? Those final seconds before I reached the aperture seemed to stretch on interminably. But they were not the worst. That was yet to come.

The only other light in the foul den below came from a slit over the door. In the gloom of the opposite corner I saw a motionless form. I knew that form; I would have recognized it in darkest night, though I could not make out his features. My senses swam. Then a shaft of dying sunlight struck through the narrow opening and fell upon him. It was he! My prayers had been answered! But – oh, Heaven – had we come too late? Stiff and unmoving, he lay stretched out upon the filthy cot. The features might have been those of a waxen death mask, yellow and rigid. My straining eyes sought some sign of life, of breath . . . and found none.

But that was not the worst. It was yet to come.

Yes, indeed, if I were to resort to contemptible devices of the sort the young person suggested, I could a tale unfold . . . I refuse to insult the intelligence of my (as yet) hypothetical reader by doing so, however. I now resume my ordered narrative.

As I was saying: ‘What mad pursuits! What struggles to escape! What wild ecstasy!’ Keats was speaking in quite another context, of course. However, I have been often pursued (sometimes madly) and struggled (successfully) to escape on more than one occasion. The last phrase is also appropriate, though I would not have put it quite that way myself.

Pursuits, struggles and the other sentiment referred to began in Egypt, where I encountered for the first time the ancient civilization that was to inspire my life’s work, and the remarkable man who was to share it. Egyptology and Radcliffe Emerson! The two are inseparable, not only in my heart but in the estimation of the scholarly world. It may be said – in fact, I have often said it – that Emerson IS Egyptology, the finest scholar of this or any other era. At the time of which I write we stood on the threshold of a new century, and I did not doubt that Emerson would dominate the twentieth as he had the nineteenth. When I add that Emerson’s physical attributes include sapphire-blue eyes, thick raven locks, and a form that is the epitome of manly strength and grace, I believe the sensitive reader will understand why our union had proved so thoroughly satisfactory.

Emerson dislikes his first name, for reasons which I have never entirely understood. I have never inquired into them because I myself prefer to address him by the appellation that indicates comradeship and equality, and that recalls fond memories of the days of our earliest acquaintance. Emerson also dislikes titles; his reasons for this prejudice stem from his radical social views, for he judges a man (and a woman, I hardly need add) by ability rather than worldly position. Unlike most archaeologists he refuses to respond to the fawning titles used by the fellahin towards foreigners; his admiring Egyptian workmen had honoured him with the appellation of ‘Father of Curses,’ and I must say no man deserved it more.

My union with this admirable individual had resulted in a life particularly suited to my tastes. Emerson accepted me as a full partner professionally as well as matrimonially, and we spent the winter seasons excavating at various sites in Egypt. I may add that I was the only woman engaged in that activity – a sad commentary on the restricted condition of females in the late-nineteenth century of our era – and that I could never have done it without the wholehearted cooperation of my remarkable spouse. Emerson did not so much insist upon my participation as take it for granted. (I took it for granted too, which may have contributed to Emerson’s attitude.)

For some reason I have never been able to explain, our excavations were often interrupted by activities of a criminous nature. Murderers, animated mummies, and Master Criminals had interfered with us; we seemed to attract tomb-robbers and homicidally inclined individuals. All in all it had been a delightful existence, marred by only one minor flaw. That flaw was our son, Walter Peabody Emerson, known to friends and foes alike by his sobriquet of ‘Ramses.’

All young boys are savages; this is an admitted fact. Ramses, whose nickname derived from a pharaoh as single-minded and arrogant as himself, had all the failings of his gender and age: an incredible attraction to dirt and dead, smelly objects, a superb disregard for his own survival, and utter contempt for the rules of civilized behaviour. Certain characteristics unique to Ramses made him even more difficult to deal with. His intelligence was (not surprisingly) of a high order, but it exhibited itself in rather disconcerting ways. His Arabic was of appalling fluency (how he kept coming up with words like those I cannot imagine; he certainly never heard them from me); his knowledge of hieroglyphic Egyptian was as great as that of many adult scholars; and he had an almost uncanny ability to communicate with animals of all species (except the human). He . . . But to describe the eccentricities of Ramses would tax even my literary skill.

In the year preceding the present narrative, Ramses had shown signs of improvement. He no longer rushed headlong into danger, and his atrocious loquacity had diminished somewhat. A certain resemblance to his handsome sire was beginning to emerge, though his colouring more resembled that of an ancient Egyptian than a young English lad. (I cannot account for this any more than I can account for our constant encounters with the criminal element. Some things are beyond the comprehension of our limited senses, and probably that is just as well.)

A recent development had had a profound though as yet undetermined effect on my son. Our latest and perhaps most remarkable adventure had occurred the previous winter, when an appeal for help from an old friend of Emerson’s had led us into the western deserts of Nubia to a remote oasis where the dying remnants of the ancient Meroitic civilization yet lingered.* We encountered the usual catastrophes – near death by thirst after the demise of our last camel, attempted kidnapping and violent assaults – nothing out of the ordinary; and when we reached our destination we found that those whom we had come to save were no more. The unfortunate couple had left a child, however – a young girl whom, with the aid of her chivalrous and princely foster brother, we were able to save from the hideous fate that threatened her. Her deceased father had called her ‘Nefret,’ most appropriately, for the ancient Egyptian word means ‘beautiful.’ The first sight of her struck Ramses dumb – a condition I never expected to see – and he had remained in that condition ever since.

I could only regard this with the direst of forebodings. Ramses was ten years old, Nefret was thirteen; but the difference in their ages would be inconsequential when they reached adulthood, and I knew my son too well to dismiss his sentiments as juvenile romanticism. His emotions were intense, his character (to put it mildly) determined. Once he got an idea into his head, it was fixed in cement. He had been raised among Egyptians, who mature earlier, physically and emotionally, than the cold English; some of his friends had fathered children by the time they reached their teens. Add to this the dramatic circumstances under which he first set eyes on the girl . . .

We had not even known such an individual existed until we entered the barren, lamplit chamber where she awaited us. To see her there in all her radiant youth, with her red-gold hair streaming down over her filmy white robes; to behold the brave smile that defied the dangers that surrounded her . . . Well. Even I had been deeply affected.

We had brought the girl back to England with us and taken her into our home. This was Emerson’s idea. I must admit we had very little choice; her grandfather, her only surviving relative, was a man so steeped in vice as to be an unfit guardian for a cat, much less an innocent young girl. How Emerson persuaded Lord Blacktower to relinquish her I did not inquire. I doubt that ‘persuaded’ is an appropriate word. Blacktower was dying (indeed, he completed the process a few months later), or even Emerson’s considerable powers of eloquence might not have prevailed. Nefret clung to us – figuratively speaking, for she was not a demonstrative child – as the only familiar objects in a world as alien to her as Martian society (assuming such exists) would be to me. All she knew of the modern world she had learned from us and from her father’s books, and in that world she was not High Priestess of Isis, the incarnation of the goddess, but something less – not even a woman, which Heaven knows was low enough, but a girl-child, a little higher than a pet and considerably lower than a male of any age. As Emerson did not need to point out (though he did so in wearying detail), we were peculiarly equipped to deal with a young person raised in such extraordinary circumstances.

Emerson is a remarkable man, but he IS a man. I need say no more, I believe. Having made his decision and persuaded me to accept it, he admitted to no forebodings. Emerson never admits to having forebodings, and he becomes incensed when I mention mine. In this case I had a good number of them.

One subject of considerable concern was how we were to explain where Nefret had been for the past thirteen years. At least it concerned me. Emerson tried to dismiss the subject as he does other difficulties. ‘Why should we explain anything? If anyone has the impertinence to ask, tell them to go to the devil.’

Fortunately Emerson is more sensible than he often sounds, and even before we left Egypt he was forced to admit that we had to concoct a story of some kind. Our reappearance out of the desert with a young girl of obviously English parentage would have attracted the curiosity of the dullest; her real identity had to be admitted if she was to claim her rightful position as heiress to her grandfather’s fortune. The story contained all the features journalists dote on – youthful beauty, mystery, aristocracy, and great amounts of money – and, as I pointed out to Emerson, our own activities had not infrequently attracted the attentions of the jackals of the press, as he was pleased to call them.

I prefer to tell the truth whenever possible. Not only is honesty enjoined upon us by the superior moral code of our society, but it is much easier to stick to the facts than remain consistent in falsehood. In this case the truth was not possible. Upon leaving the Lost Oasis (or the City of the Holy Mountain, as its citizens called it), we had sworn to keep not only its location but its very existence a secret. The people of that dying civilization were few in number and unacquainted with firearms; they would have been easy prey for adventurers and treasure hunters, not to mention unscrupulous archaeologists. There was also the less imperative but nonetheless important question of Nefret’s reputation to be considered. If it were known that she had been reared among so-called primitive peoples, where she had been the high priestess of a pagan goddess, the rude speculation and unseemly jests such ideas inspire in the ignorant would have made her life unbearable. No; the true facts could not be made public. It was necessary to invent a convincing lie, and when forced to depart from my usual standards of candour, I can invent as good a lie as anyone.

Luckily the historical events then ensuing provided us with a reasonable rationale. The Mahdist rebellion in the Sudan, which began in 1881 and had kept that unhappy country in a state of turmoil for over a decade, was ending. Egyptian troops (led, of course, by British officers) had reconquered most of the lost territory, and some persons who had been given up for lost had miraculously reappeared. The escape of Slatin Pasha, formerly Slatin Bey, was perhaps the most astonishing example of well-nigh miraculous survival, but there were others, including that of Father Ohrwalder and two of the nuns of his mission, who had endured seven years of slavery and torture before making good their escape.

It was this last case that gave me the idea of inventing a family of kindly missionaries as foster parents for Nefret, both of whose real parents (I explained) had perished of disease and hardship shortly after their arrival. Protected by their loyal converts, the kindly religious persons had escaped the ravages of the dervishes but had not dared leave the security of their remote and humble village while the country was so disturbed.

Emerson remarked that in his experience loyal converts were usually the first to pop their spiritual leaders into the cook pot, but I thought it a most convincing fabrication and so, to judge by the results, did the press. I had stuck to the truth whenever I could – a paramount rule when one concocts a fictional fabrication – and there was no need to falsify the details of the desert journey itself. Stranded in the empty waste, abandoned by our servants, our camels dead or dying . . . It was a dramatic story, and, I believe, distracted the press to such an extent that they did not question other more important details. I threw in a sandstorm and an attack by wandering Bedouin for good measure.

The one journalist I feared most we managed to elude. Kevin O’Connell, the brash young star reporter of the Daily Yell, was on his way to the Sudan even as we left it, for the campaign was proceeding apace and the recapture of Khartoum was expected at any time. I was fond of Kevin (Emerson was not), but when his journalistic instincts were in the ascendancy I would not have trusted him any farther than I could have thrown him.

So that was all right. The biggest difficulty was Nefret herself.

I would be the first to admit that I am not a maternal woman. I venture to remark, however, that the Divine Mother herself might have found her maternal instincts weakened by prolonged exposure to my son. Ten years of Ramses had convinced me that my inability to have more children was not, as I had first viewed it, a sad disappointment, but rather a kindly disposition of all-knowing Providence. One Ramses was enough. Two or more would have finished me.

(I understand that there has been a certain amount of impertinent speculation regarding the fact that Ramses is an only child. I will only say that his birth resulted in certain complications which I will not describe in detail, since they are no one’s business but my own.)