Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt: The case of Tell Ibrahim Awad 9781407353678, 9781407356099

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Acknowledgements
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures
List of Plates
List of Tables
Foreword
Abbreviations
Abstract
1. The Archaeological Framework and the Research Questions
2. Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology
3. The Deposits
4. The Votive Offerings
5. Elements used in the Temple Ritual
6. Tiles and Inlays
7. Temple Deposits: Synthesis and Conclusions
The Catalogue
Concordance Excavation Numbers-Catalogue Numbers
Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

BAR S2931 2019

2019

‘The vast majority of the data presented is new, and it is all of the highest possible value to the subject area. … The book represents a very important contribution to knowledge in the field of Egyptology/Egyptian archaeology, as well as to the understanding of ancient complex societies in the broader sense.’ Prof. Mary-Ann Pouls Wegner, University of Toronto ‘[This] material is of importance for Delta research and for “provincial temples”. It … [will] make a nice contribution for specialists in the field, but also for people interested in general votive activities in Egypt.’ Prof. Dr. Julia Budka, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich Willem van Haarlem studied Egyptology at the University of Amsterdam. In 1989, he became Curator of the Egyptian Department of the Allard Pierson Museum in Amsterdam. From 1991 to 2014, he was director of the excavations at Tell Ibrahim Awad in Egypt. In 2014, he earned a PhD from the University of Leiden.

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

This book offers an extensive discussion of the several types of deposits (mainly consisting of votive objects like human and animal figures, model boats and shrines, mace heads and jewellery) found in the Early Dynastic temple of Tell Ibrahim Awad, in the Eastern Nile Delta of Egypt. The introduction presents a general description of the site, its geographical and historical context and a specific description of the successive temple layers (between 3300 and 1950 BC). This is followed by a detailed discussion of the votives themselves (material, production, meaning, ritual presentation) and other objects (ceramics, animal bones, lithic tools and temple decorations) found in the deposits, the rituals with which they were associated and comparisons with finds from other sites in Egypt and abroad (Syria/Palestine and Mesopotamia). Images and a detailed catalogue of the objects are also included in the volume.

VAN HAARLEM

B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 2 9 3 1

B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 2 9 3 1

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt The case of Tell Ibrahim Awad W I L L E M VA N H A A R L E M

2019

B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 2 9 3 1

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt The case of Tell Ibrahim Awad W I L L E M VA N H A A R L E M

2019

Published in 2019 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 2931 Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt ISBN 978 1 4073 5367 8 paperback ISBN 978 1 4073 5609 9 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407353678 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library © Willem van Haarlem 2019 Cover Image Selection of the libation vase repertoire. The Author’s moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

BAR titles are available from: Email Phone Fax

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, ox2 7bp, uk [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

Acknowledgements My sincere thanks are due to Prof Dr Peter Akkermans, my PhD supervisor, and the other members of the promotion commission, especially Prof Dr Manfred Bietak, my mentor of many years. I am grateful to the team members of the excavations at Tell Ibrahim Awad between 1992 and 2012 for their invaluable contributions, especially Dr Diethelm Eigner for his work on the temple, Drs Ron Leenheer, Dr Jorrit Kelder, Ms Liesbeth van Tol-Sinnige, Prof Dr Salima Ikram (American University Cairo) for investigating the animal remains, Prof Dr Thomas Hikade (University of British Columbia) for his work on the lithic tools, and Prof Dr Jerome Rose (University of Arkansas) for identifying the human remains. Many team members of the Austrian excavations at Tell el-Dab’a gave invaluable assistance and support to our work. Thanks to all consecutive members of the Board of the former Netherlands Foundation for Archaeological

Research in Egypt and all staff members of the NetherlandsFlemish Institute in Cairo for their efforts and providing indispensable facilities and assistance, as well as to many staff members of the Royal Netherlands Embassy in Cairo for their support. For our working permissions, I am grateful to many staff members of the Ministry of State for Antiquities Affairs in Cairo, Zagazig and Faqus, and to Dr Edgar Pusch (Pelizaeus-Museum, Hildesheim) for providing accommodation for my team and me in the excavation house at Qantir between 1996 and 2000. Last but not least, I should mention here the organisations which supported the research financially: the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO); Djoser Travel BV; the Center of Egyptological Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences; the University of Alcala de Henares (Spain), and the Fondation Michela Schiff Giorgini.

Contents List of Figures................................................................................................................................................................... viii List of Plates....................................................................................................................................................................... xi List of Tables..................................................................................................................................................................... xiii Foreword........................................................................................................................................................................... xiv Abbreviations.................................................................................................................................................................... xv Abstract............................................................................................................................................................................. xvi Chapter 1. The Archaeological Framework and the Research Questions..................................................................... 1 1.1. Research Questions and Aims................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Research Problems.................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.3. Introduction to the Site.............................................................................................................................................. 3 1.4. Research Context...................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.4.1. Palaeo-ecology of the Region........................................................................................................................... 5 1.4.2. Surveys and Excavations................................................................................................................................... 6 1.5. The Structure of This Study...................................................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 2. Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology.................................................................................................. 8 2.1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................... 8 2.2. The Physical Context................................................................................................................................................ 8 2.2.1. The Palaeogeography of the Region around Tell Ibrahim Awad....................................................................... 8 2.2.1.1. Nile Branches and Archaeological Sites of the Late Predynastic and Early Dynastic Periods (3200-2550 BC)............................................................................................................................... 8 2.2.1.2. Nile Branches and Archaeological Sites of the Old Kingdom and the First Intermediate Period............. 8 2.2.1.3. Nile Branches and Archaeological Sites of the Middle Kingdom............................................................. 8 2.3. The Excavations (see Figure 2.4).............................................................................................................................. 8 2.3.1. Stratigraphy and Architecture............................................................................................................................ 9 2.3.2. Identification of the Largest Construction in Area A as a Temple................................................................... 15 2.3.3. The Cemetery and Settlement in Area A......................................................................................................... 15 2.3.3.1. The Cemetery in Area A.......................................................................................................................... 15 2.3.3.2. The Settlement in Area A......................................................................................................................... 21 2.3.4. The Cemetery and Settlement in Area B......................................................................................................... 21 2.3.4.1. The Settlement in Area B......................................................................................................................... 21 2.3.4.2. The Cemetery in Area B.......................................................................................................................... 22 2.3.5. Excursus: The Excavation Methods................................................................................................................ 24 2.3.5.1. Actual excavation.................................................................................................................................... 24 2.3.5.2. Recording................................................................................................................................................ 25 Chapter 3. The Deposits................................................................................................................................................... 28 3.1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................. 28 3.2. Definitions............................................................................................................................................................... 28 3.3. The Function of Offerings in General..................................................................................................................... 28 3.3.1. Foundation Deposits........................................................................................................................................ 28 3.3.2. Offering Deposits (or Remains)...................................................................................................................... 30 3.3.3. Votive Deposits................................................................................................................................................ 31 3.3.3.1. The Specific Function of Votive Offerings: Definitions.......................................................................... 31 3.3.3.2. Function and Meaning............................................................................................................................. 31 3.3.3.3. Appearance.............................................................................................................................................. 32 3.4. Other General Aspects............................................................................................................................................ 32 3.4.1. The Donor........................................................................................................................................................ 32 3.4.2. Presentation..................................................................................................................................................... 32 3.4.3. The Recipient.................................................................................................................................................. 33 3.5. The Deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad......................................................................................................................... 33 3.5.1. Descriptions of the Individual Deposits.......................................................................................................... 34 v

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt 3.5.2. Stray Objects (= Objects Found Outside a Deposit Context).......................................................................... 40 3.6. Summary................................................................................................................................................................. 40 3.7. Chronological Considerations................................................................................................................................. 41 Chapter 4. The Votive Offerings...................................................................................................................................... 43 4.1. Introduction: ‘Preformal’ Temples and Culture...................................................................................................... 43 4.2. Identification of the Objects in the Deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad as Votives....................................................... 43 4.3. Categories................................................................................................................................................................ 44 4.4. The Tell Ibrahim Awad Votive Offering Objects: Manufacture, Production and Distribution............................... 44 4.4.1. Raw Materials and Manufacture..................................................................................................................... 44 4.4.2. Production and Distribution............................................................................................................................ 46 4.5. Other Specific Aspects: Storage and Eventual Disposal......................................................................................... 48 4.5.1. Storage............................................................................................................................................................. 48 4.5.2. Disposal........................................................................................................................................................... 48 4.6. The Categories of Votive Offerings Found and Their Meaning.............................................................................. 48 4.6.1. Human Figures (Cat. nos. 1-85, Plate 1-2 of the Catalogue).......................................................................... 48 4.6.2. Baboons (Cat. nos. 86-202; Figure 4.6).......................................................................................................... 51 4.6.3. Hippopotami (Cat. nos. 203-18, Plate 7)......................................................................................................... 52 4.6.4. Lions (Cat. nos. 219-26, Plate 8)..................................................................................................................... 52 4.6.5. Antelopes (Cat. nos. 227-28, Plate 8).............................................................................................................. 52 4.6.6. Birds (Cat. nos. 232-41, Plate 9)..................................................................................................................... 53 4.6.7. Crocodiles (Cat. nos. 242-74, Plate 10).......................................................................................................... 53 4.6.8. Frogs (Cat. nos. 275-276, Plate 9)................................................................................................................... 53 4.6.9. Boats (Cat. nos. 278-86, Plate 11)................................................................................................................... 53 4.6.10. Shrines (Cat. nos.287-96, Plates 12-13)........................................................................................................ 53 4.6.11. Gaming Pieces (Cat. nos. 297-321, Plate 14)................................................................................................ 54 4.6.12. Natural Stones (Cat. nos. 393-418, Plate 18)................................................................................................ 54 4.6.13. Jewellery (Cat. nos. 419-50, Plate 19).......................................................................................................... 54 4.6.14. Vessels (Cat. nos. 452-545, Plates 20-21)..................................................................................................... 54 4.7. Summary of the Chronological Considerations...................................................................................................... 55 4.8. The Recipient of Votive Offerings at Tell Ibrahim Awad........................................................................................ 55 4.9. Comparisons with Other Sites: Egypt..................................................................................................................... 55 4.9.1. Elephantine (Figure 4.9a-b)............................................................................................................................. 56 4.9.2. Abydos (Figures 4.10-4.11)............................................................................................................................. 57 4.9.3. Hierakonpolis (Figures 4.12-4.13).................................................................................................................. 58 4.9.4. Kofler-Truniger ‘Site’ (Figure 4.14)................................................................................................................ 60 4.9.5. Dahshûr........................................................................................................................................................... 60 4.9.6. Saqqara............................................................................................................................................................ 61 4.9.7. Armant............................................................................................................................................................. 62 4.10. Comparisons with Other Sites: Syria / Palestine, Mesopotamia (Figure 4.15)..................................................... 62 4.10.1. Byblos (Figure 4.16)..................................................................................................................................... 62 4.10.2. Ai (et-Tell) (Figure 7.6)................................................................................................................................. 62 4.10.3. Nahariya (Figure 4.17).................................................................................................................................. 62 4.10.4. ‘En Besor....................................................................................................................................................... 62 4.10.5. Tell Brak........................................................................................................................................................ 62 4.10.6. Lachish.......................................................................................................................................................... 63 4.10.7. Other Sites with Temple Deposits................................................................................................................. 63 4.11. Summary............................................................................................................................................................... 64 4.11.1. The Votive Objects: Egypt............................................................................................................................. 64 4.11.1.1. Tell Ibrahim Awad.................................................................................................................................. 64 4.11.1.2. Other Sites............................................................................................................................................. 65 4.11.2. The Votive Objects: Abroad.......................................................................................................................... 65 Chapter 5. Elements used in the Temple Ritual............................................................................................................. 66 5.1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................. 66 5.1.1. Mace Heads (Cat. nos. 349-392, Plates 16-17)............................................................................................... 66 5.1.2. Flint Tools (Figures 5.1-5.2; van Haarlem/ Hikade 2006).............................................................................. 67 5.1.3. Pottery (Figure 5.4a-b).................................................................................................................................... 70 5.1.3.1. Offering Stands (Cat. nos. 707-47, Plates 28-30).................................................................................... 70 5.1.3.2. Hes- (Libation) Vases (Cat. nos. 835-930, Plates 34-37)........................................................................ 70 vi

Contents 5.1.3.3. Bowls (Cat. nos. 748-67, Plate 31).......................................................................................................... 71 5.1.3.4. ‘Beer’ Jars (Cat. nos. 768-91, Plate 38)................................................................................................... 71 5.1.3.5. Other Vessels (Cat. nos. 792-834 and 931-55, Plates 32-33 / 38-39)...................................................... 71 5.1.4. Animal Remains.............................................................................................................................................. 72 5.2. Tentative Reconstruction of the Temple Ritual....................................................................................................... 74 Chapter 6. Tiles and Inlays.............................................................................................................................................. 76 6.1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................. 76 6.1.1. Tiles and Inlays at Tell Ibrahim Awad............................................................................................................. 76 6.1.2. Tile Marks....................................................................................................................................................... 77 6.2. Parallels from Other Sites (Figure 6.1 and Table 6.2)............................................................................................. 77 6.2.1. Abydos............................................................................................................................................................. 81 6.2.2. Hierakonpolis (Quibell and Petrie 1900; Quibell and Green 1902; Adams 1999).......................................... 82 6.2.3. Elephantine (Dreyer 1986: 11-12)................................................................................................................... 82 6.3. Tentative Reconstruction of the Shrine at Tell Ibrahim Awad................................................................................ 83 Chapter 7. Temple Deposits: Synthesis and Conclusions.............................................................................................. 86 7.1. Research Questions................................................................................................................................................. 86 7.1.1. The physical context of the deposits: the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad (chapter two)................................... 86 7.1.2. The deposits: formation process and spatial distribution (chapter three)........................................................ 87 7.2. The deposit objects: functions................................................................................................................................. 88 7.2.1. Votive objects (section 4.6)............................................................................................................................. 88 7.2.2. Objects specifically used in the ritual (as a separate category, see chapter five and section 7.7.3)................ 89 7.2.3. Tiles and Inlays (chapter six).......................................................................................................................... 91 7.3. The deposit objects in connection with ritual(s)..................................................................................................... 91 7.3.1. Votive objects.................................................................................................................................................. 92 7.3.2. Ritual objects................................................................................................................................................... 92 7.3.3. Constructional elements (mainly tiles)............................................................................................................ 92 7.4. Wider context of the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad................................................................................................. 92 7.4.1. In Egypt........................................................................................................................................................... 92 7.4.2. Outside Egypt.................................................................................................................................................. 93 7.5. The Nature and Function of the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad................................................................................ 95 7.6. Further implications of the results of this study...................................................................................................... 96 7.7. Future Research: an Outlook................................................................................................................................... 97 The Catalogue................................................................................................................................................................... 98 Concordance Excavation Numbers-Catalogue Numbers............................................................................................ 188 Bibliography.................................................................................................................................................................... 193 Index................................................................................................................................................................................. 208

vii

List of Figures Figure 1.1. Map of Egypt with the location of Tell Ibrahim Awad and the other main sites mentioned in the text............. 3 Figure 1.2. Map of the survey region around Faqus............................................................................................................. 4 Figure 1.3. The situation of Tell Ibrahim Awad: the surviving tell surface in red; the original surface as established by drilling in blue............................................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 1.4. Rainfall in the Cairo region................................................................................................................................ 6 Figure 2.1. Nile Branches and Settlements in the survey area, Predynastic to Middle Kingdom, with modern place-names........................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 2.2. Pre- and Early Dynastic nucleus sites with Old Kingdom satellite settlements................................................. 9 Figure 2.3. Area A: view to the South in 2001.................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 2.4. Excavation Grid................................................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 2.5. Phases of the Temple Pottery............................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 2.6. Section of one of the fireplaces with vessels.................................................................................................... 12 Figure 2.7. left-Phases 6c/d-7a/b; middle-Phase 6b; right- Phase 6a................................................................................. 12 Figure 2.8. left-Phases 6a/5d; middle-Phase 5c; right-Phases 5a/b.................................................................................... 14 Figure 2.9a. Phase 2c of the Temple................................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 2.9b. Reconstruction of Phase 2c of the Temple..................................................................................................... 17 Figure 2.10. Phase 2a-b of the Temple; Phase 2a is indicated by the dotted outline of the enclosure wall........................ 18 Figure 2.11. Phase 1 of the Temple..................................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 2.12. Comparable temples of the Middle Kingdom................................................................................................ 20 Figure 2.13a. Phase 1.......................................................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 2.13b. Phase 2.......................................................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 2.14. South Profile of Square A 140/190................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 2.15a. West Profile of Square A 140/190................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 2.15b. Symbols........................................................................................................................................................ 22 Figure 2.16. Plan of the cemetery with tombs of all phases............................................................................................... 23 Figure 2.17. Water jar of the Phase 1 Cemetery................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 2.18. Early Middle Kingdom Scarab....................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 2.19. Button Seal of the Late First Intermediate Period.......................................................................................... 24 Figure 2.20. Seal Impression of Userkaf............................................................................................................................ 24 Figure 2.21. Age Group Distribution.................................................................................................................................. 25 Figure 2.22. Part of the First Intermediate Period-Settlement in Area A............................................................................ 25 Figure 2.23. Meidum-bowls, A 130/220/68 and A 130/220/71.......................................................................................... 26 Figure 2.24. Flints Hoard.................................................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 2.25. Sherd with Narmer Serekh............................................................................................................................. 27 Figure 2.26. Find slip.......................................................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 3.1. Marking the corner points, and stretching of the cords by Seshat and the King (Karnak Temple).................. 30 viii

List of Figures Figure 3.2. Location of the Deposits in the Phase 2 Temple ............................................................................................. 30 Figure 3.3. Graph showing absolute amounts and relative comparisons between the deposits with non-ceramic contents ......................................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 3.4. Deposit 1.......................................................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 3.5. Deposit 2.......................................................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 3.6a. Deposit 3, Situation 1 .................................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 3.6b. Deposit 3, Situation 2 .................................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 3.7. Deposit 5, Situation 1 and 2 ............................................................................................................................ 37 Figure 3.8. Deposit 4, Situation 1 ...................................................................................................................................... 38 Figure 3.9. Deposit 4a ........................................................................................................................................................ 38 Figure 3.10. Deposit 6........................................................................................................................................................ 39 Figure 3.11a. Deposit 10 .................................................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 3.11b. Deposit 12 and 13 ........................................................................................................................................ 41 Figure 3.11c. East-west section through the Deposits 10, 12 and 13 ................................................................................ 41 Figure 4.1. A large piece of Pyrrhotite, found on the desert surface near Aswan .............................................................. 45 Figure 4.2a. Example of the varying quality of the baboons: Cat. no. 106 ....................................................................... 47 Figure 4.2b. Example of the varying quality of the baboons: Cat. no. 172 ....................................................................... 47 Figure 4.3. The Mirgissa shrine with baskets containing votive jewellery in situ ............................................................. 49 Figure 4.4. Graph showing the quantities of selected object groups compared ................................................................ 50 Figure 4.5. Graph showing a relative comparison of the same object groups ................................................................... 50 Figure 4.6. A selection of the baboon repertoire ................................................................................................................ 51 Figure 4.7. Crocodile figure from Abydos, now in the Allard Pierson Museum, Amsterdam ........................................... 53 Figure 4.8. Ceramic head of a baboon (A 140/190/298).................................................................................................... 56 Figure 4.9a. The Deposit situation at Elephantine ............................................................................................................. 56 Figure 4.9b. Some objects from the Deposits at Elephantine ............................................................................................ 56 Figure 4.10. The Deposit situation at Abydos.................................................................................................................... 58 Figure 4.11. Some objects from the Abydos Deposits ....................................................................................................... 59 Figure 4.12. The Deposit situation at Hierakonpolis ......................................................................................................... 60 Figure 4.13. Some objects from the Hierakonpolis Deposits ............................................................................................ 60 Figure 4.14. Some objects from the Kofler-Truniger Collection ....................................................................................... 61 Figure 4.15. Distribution of the Deposits outside Egypt; for the numbers, see the text .................................................... 63 Figure 4.16. The Deposit situation at Byblos with examples ............................................................................................ 64 Figure 4.17. The Deposit situation at Nahariya ................................................................................................................. 64 Figure 5.1. Lithic sequence from the temple area I ........................................................................................................... 67 Figure 5.2. Lithic sequence from the temple area II .......................................................................................................... 67 Figure 5.3. Selection of the hes-vase repertoire ................................................................................................................. 72 Figure 5.4a. Pottery categories in absolute numbers ......................................................................................................... 72 Figure 5.4b. Pottery categories in relative figures ............................................................................................................. 73 Figure 5.5. Graph of the animal bones distribution ........................................................................................................... 74 Figure 5.6. Pierced shells from Phase 6a ........................................................................................................................... 75

ix

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Figure 5.7. The Realms of the Hidden and the Revealed (or portable) Image................................................................... 75 Figure 6.1. Corpus of the tile marks from Tell Ibrahim Awad and other sites.................................................................... 77 Figure 6.2. Different types of tiles from Tell Ibrahim Awad............................................................................................... 80 Figure 6.3. Tile decoration from the Djoser complex......................................................................................................... 81 Figure 6.4. Detail of a tile pattern from the Djoser complex.............................................................................................. 81 Figure 6.5. Reconstructed backside view........................................................................................................................... 82 Figure 6.6. The early Satet temple on Elephantine, Phase VIIx-y...................................................................................... 82 Figure 6.7. Granite naos from the Satet temple in the Louvre........................................................................................... 83 Figure 6.8. Reconstruction of the tiled naos in the Tell Ibrahim Awad temple.................................................................. 84 Figure 6.9. Reconstruction of a reed-and-wood shrine after a seal impression.................................................................. 84 Figure 6.10. The gezira level at Tell Ibrahim Awad............................................................................................................ 85 Figure 7.1. Offering stands in front of Amun (Hatshepsut temple at Deir el Bahari)........................................................ 90 Figure 7.2. Pharaoh Sethi I offers a jar with ointment to Amun (Temple of Sethi I at Abydos)........................................ 91 Figure 7.3. Pharaoh offering incense and making a libation, from the Deir el Medina temple.......................................... 92 Figure 7.4. Graph with the relative numbers of significant object groups from the sites under view................................ 94 Figure 7.5. Graph comparing faience baboon types........................................................................................................... 94 Figure 7.6. The Acropolis Temple at Ai.............................................................................................................................. 95 Figure 7.7. Decorated Ware fragment from Area B............................................................................................................ 96

x

List of Plates Plate 1. Human figures I.................................................................................................................................................... 131 Plate 2. Human figures II.................................................................................................................................................. 132 Plate 3. Human figures III: kneeling, crawling and holding objects................................................................................. 133 Plate 4. Baboons I............................................................................................................................................................. 134 Plate 5. Baboons II............................................................................................................................................................ 135 Plate 6. Baboons III........................................................................................................................................................... 136 Plate 7. Hippopotami........................................................................................................................................................ 137 Plate 8. Lions and Antelopes............................................................................................................................................. 138 Plate 9. Miscellaneous animals......................................................................................................................................... 139 Plate 10. Crocodiles.......................................................................................................................................................... 140 Plate 11. Boats................................................................................................................................................................... 141 Plate 12. Shrines I............................................................................................................................................................. 142 Plate 13. Shrines II............................................................................................................................................................ 143 Plate 14. Gaming pieces.................................................................................................................................................... 144 Plate 15. Miscellaneous objects........................................................................................................................................ 145 Plate 16. Mace heads I...................................................................................................................................................... 146 Plate 17. Mace heads II..................................................................................................................................................... 147 Plate 18. Stone objects...................................................................................................................................................... 148 Plate 19. Jewellery............................................................................................................................................................ 149 Plate 20. Vessels I............................................................................................................................................................. 150 Plate 21. Vessels II............................................................................................................................................................ 151 Plate 22. Tiles I................................................................................................................................................................. 152 Plate 23. Tiles II: with back projections............................................................................................................................ 153 Plate 24. Tiles III: with reed pattern.................................................................................................................................. 154 Plate 25. Tiles IV: plain..................................................................................................................................................... 155 Plate 26. Tiles V: plain...................................................................................................................................................... 156 Plate 27. Tiles VI: plain.................................................................................................................................................... 157 Plate 28. Offering stands I................................................................................................................................................ 174 Plate 29. Offering stands II............................................................................................................................................... 175 Plate 30. Offering stands III.............................................................................................................................................. 176 Plate 31. Bowls................................................................................................................................................................. 177 Plate 32. Model vessels I.................................................................................................................................................. 178 Plate 33. Model vessels II................................................................................................................................................. 179 Plate 34. Libation vases I.................................................................................................................................................. 180 Plate 35. Libation vases II................................................................................................................................................. 181

xi

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Plate 36. Libation vases III............................................................................................................................................... 182 Plate 37. Libation vases IV............................................................................................................................................... 183 Plate 38. Miscellaneous vessels I...................................................................................................................................... 184 Plate 39. Miscellaneous vessels II.................................................................................................................................... 185 Plate 40. Object pictures I. 3 – 25 – 50 – 202 – 228 – 278 – 290, front – 290, back........................................................ 186 Plate 41. Object pictures II. 349, top – 349, underside – 379 – 452 – 529 – 550 – 726 – 726, detail – 735.................... 187

xii

List of Tables Table 2.1. Comparative chronological table....................................................................................................................... 11 Table 2.2. Cemetery phases................................................................................................................................................ 24 Table 4.1. Detailed table of the arm positions of the standing and sitting figures, with reference to the Catalogue.......... 49 Table 5.1. Chronological distribution of lithic artefacts in A 130-140/190........................................................................ 68 Table 5.2. Primary production at A 130-140/190................................................................................................................ 68 Table 5.3. Tools at A 130-140/190...................................................................................................................................... 69 Table 5.4. Simplified table with absolute and relative numbers of taxa from the temple area from unpublished reports............................................................................................................................................................. 74 Table 6.1. Distribution of tile categories among the Deposits and the other sites.............................................................. 76 Table 6.2. Comparison of the tile marks from Tell Ibrahim Awad with other sites............................................................ 78 Table 6.3. Iconographical features of the state shrine models............................................................................................ 84

xiii

Foreword The first version of this study has appeared as ‘Temple Deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad, Amsterdam 2009’. It was composed mainly for the sake of securing our working permission, which would have been revoked without a substantial publication. An extended and updated version

appeared in 2014 as ‘Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt: The Case of Tell Ibrahim Awad’, my PhD thesis at the University of Leiden. Finally, the publication in hand is a thoroughly updated version of this dissertation, in fact a 3rd edition.

xiv

Abbreviations

OK: Old Kingdom FIP: First Intermediate Period MK: Middle Kingdom NK: New Kingdom SIP: Second Intermediate Period

xv

Abstract I. The Subject of this Study Tell Ibrahim Awad is a settlement hill at a remote location in the central part of the eastern Nile Delta. Over the course of the centuries about 90% of the original tell area has disappeared. Since 1986, excavations have taken place there. The research question for this study can be formulated in five sub-questions: 1. What is the physical context of the objects mentioned? 2. What was the function of these objects when they were stored in the temple deposits? 3. How did the temple ritual relate to these objects? 4. Where can these objects and their context be compared to? 5. Is it possible to determine the nature of the Tell Ibrahim Awad temple with these objects? II. The Discovery of the Temple Remains Tell Ibrahim Awad consists of two locations, A and B. The emphasis was on A, where a large temple from the MK was uncovered. About 80 mostly poor tombs were also found outside the temple walls. A much smaller temple was found below this MK one. This temple consisted of a narrow room with a niche as a location for a shrine. Under this temple, more temple phases from respectively the 3rd and 2nd dynasties were found. In the earliest phase, no temple has been encountered, but just a solid wall with a passage. The so-called sand gezira was reached here. Finding this meant that the earliest phase, around 3200 BC, was reached. In B, two large tombs were found, both from the 1st dynasty, in addition to traces of a settlement. III. Deposits A temple deposit is a collection of objects stored at a location within the temple compound. Beside votive deposits, there are also foundation and offering deposits. In some rooms in the temple, a large number of objects were found that shed light on the rituals that were performed here. As property of the temple deity, they had to be stored in the temple grounds, in 13 separate deposit rooms. It concerns a total of nearly 1000 objects. These objects functioned as a means of communication for a specific request to the deity. Offering those gifts increases his or her powers. He can for his part use these powers in favour of the suppliant. IV. Votive offerings The objects found can be divided as: human figures: animal figures, such as baboons, hippos, lions and crocodiles; boat and shrine models; game pieces; bizarre stones; model vases and jewellery. Their function is not always clear. These objects were also found in other early temples. A comparison is made with temples and votive issues in neighbouring regions: Syria / Palestine and Mesopotamia. It is plausible that there are certain connections.

xvi

Abstract V. Ritual Objects A number of other categories of objects found in the temple do not strictly belong to the votive offerings but are stored together with these, because they had acquired the same status by being in the proximity of the deity. They provide more insight into the rituals that must have taken place in this temple. Firstly, there are the flint tools; another category is the ritual pottery. A third group consists of the remains of animals used in rituals: shells, goats and sheep, cattle and even donkeys, but especially fish and pigs. VI. Building Elements Finally, remnants of temple decoration (faience tiles and inlays) stored in the same way and for the same reason give an idea of the interior of (a part of) this temple. A large variation in dimensions and shapes has been found. An attempt is made to reconstruct the appearance of this part of the temple by means of these elements. Noteworthy are the marks on the back of some tiles, probably intended as production markings. This also occurs on almost identical tiles found in the underground chambers of the Dozer pyramid, and in the temples of Abydos, Hierakonpolis and Elephantine. VII. Conclusions The hypothesis that the finds of Tell Ibrahim Awad and related sites are an expression of the early ‘folk religion’, followed by the official state religion, seems to be confirmed. Comparisons with other collections of deposit objects within Egypt provide differences and similarities. This must have been an expression of different local traditions. For the nature and function of the temple there are three ex aequo possibilities: 1. A function as a mortuary temple; 2. A function in the ancestor worship; 3. A function in the cult of a deity. The finds confirm the image of a gradual replacement the Delta cultures by influences from the south until a practically unified culture was reached in the Early Dynastic period.

xvii

1 The Archaeological Framework and the Research Questions 1.1. Research Questions and Aims

temple (R.H. Wilkinson 2003: 46; Baines 1987: 88-93). Moreless the same votive objects were found in both local sanctuaries (as Tell Ibrahim Awad and Elephantine, see section 4.9.1., and Bussmann 2011b) and large temple complexes (Hierakonpolis and Abydos, ibid).The variety in category and quality of votive objects, partly as items of personal expression, like the child figurines for an alleged wish for children, is an indication for the intimate and local character of votive donations (Bussmann 2011a)3.

This study aims to analyse the objects deposited in several rooms of the Old Kingdom temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad within their archaeological and functional contexts. These object deposits were sealed in the 4th Dynasty (ca. 2550 BC), by the destruction debris of the OK temple, but include many objects that are in all probability much older (Early and Pre-Dynastic). In addition, these objects are compared to various assemblages from elsewhere in Egypt, as well as several relevant sites outside Egypt. As one of the largest of this kind of collections in Egypt, with many unparalleled items, it can be regarded as a reference set for existing and future cases (see chapter seven).

The temple of the early Middle Kingdom at Tell Ibrahim Awad, with a double shrine, one for an unknown deity and one, supposedly, for a royal cult (section 2.3.1, Phase 1) probably marks the last phase at this site of a tendency to uniformise local cults and put these under state control, as effectively illustrated by the apparently obligatory addition of a royal cult at other sites like Elephantine as well (Bussmann 2010: 512-13). This was preceded by a long period of relative freedom of local religious expressions (Bussmann 2010: 506-09), and probably more accessible temple precincts than in later times (sections 3.4.1 and 5.2), unlike some interpretations to the contrary (Baines 1987: 92). Like in the case of the early votives found in the comparable temple site at Elephantine, which was apparently only later attributed to the goddess Satet, there is nothing among these objects, by name or iconography, which refers to a deity before the MK. One would expect some connection between the votive objects and the goddess herself, at least attested as such at a later date, which is not the case (Kopp / Raue 2008: 45).

It is argued in this study that most of these objects are votive objects of a relatively humble kind and as such an expression of an early, independent religious substratum, defined as ‘popular’ religion to differentiate it from, and followed by the emerging, more centralized state religion; an alternative terminology would be ‘great’ and ‘little ‘traditions1 (cf. also sections 4.1 and 7.2.1; Kemp 1991: 64-107; Assmann 1995: 190; Stevens, 2006: 17-23 / 291-93 / 327-29; Bussmann 2010: 427-30; id. 2016; LÄ V, 1061-062). While the established state cults were meant to preserve the stability of the Egyptian universe and maintained by temple professionals (from the NK onwards)2, individuals had their own religious practices that related more directly to daily life: rites de passage such as birth, coming of age, and death; wishes for children and healing, and protection against all kinds of evil (Sadek 1987: 1-2; Baines 1987: 83). These concepts preceded and partly stood at the cradle of the state religion (Sadek 1987: 5-10; Kemp 1995: 82-83), but were not replaced by it, albeit more or less tightly controlled (Sadek 1987: 2; Baines 1987: 97; see also section 4.1 on Preformal culture, the embodiment of ‘little’ cults). This hypothesis is not new, and both concepts are not diametrically opposed to each other or mutually exclusive, but partly co-existing (Sadek 1987: 2-3 / 294-95; Routledge 2006). There were forms of interaction for common people with manifestations of the state religion: processions of gods outside their shrines during religious festivals, in special chapels against the outer walls of large temples (the inside was strictly out of bounds), access to divine statues in front of the temple pylons, and last but not least through dreams, sometimes in special sleeping pavilions near the

Hierakonpolis might be an exception, as the local Horus as a warrior god occurs earlier than Satet or Osiris, and his warrior aspect may be reflected in the large number of mace heads found there (see Figure 7.4). It seems that all these shrines were only later appropriated for, and attributed to, these deities, possibly on a centralized basis, to coordinate the cults and link them to the royal cult. This general tendency seems to have been instigated during the OK, and continued with more emphasis in the MK and later, as such reflected in a marked change in the temple architecture: larger and more uniform than before (Seidlmayer 1996: 125-126). For Tell Ibrahim Awad, this is illustrated by the striking difference of the MK temple layout compared with the earlier temple phases (see section 2.3.1), and the possibility of an additional royal cult (section 2.3.1: Phase 1). MK temples tend to be much more uniform in their layout than earlier temples (section 2.3.2 / Figure 2.13).

Assmann (1995: 190) even differentiates between official, local, popular and personal religion. 2  Before the NK, priestly functions seem to have been more of a parttime occupation on a rotation basis, besides administrative duties, as signified by titles (LÄ IV, 1084-097). 1 

From the MK onwards, votive practices were increasingly controlled by the official state religion (Pinch 1993: 356-60).

3 

1

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt with a selection of sites outside Egypt? What are the similarities and differences, and what are the further implications of all this? This is the focus of sections 4.9 and 4.10. 5. Is it possible to identify the main divinity or divinities associated with the temple? If not a temple for a specific deity, was it a mortuary or an ancestor temple? What does this mean for the relative position of this temple within the whole range of temples in the course of time? This will be dealt with in chapter four and the final chapter 7.

What is the relation between ‘great’ and ‘little’ traditions in the case of Tell Ibrahim Awad? A hypothesis on this distinction is formulated below on the basis of the results acquired during the temple research activities between 1988 and 2001 at Tell Ibrahim Awad (see section 1.3). More analysis of this phenomenon is relevant for a better understanding of one of the basic concepts of ancient Egyptian religion in general (Sadek 1987: 1-3; David 2002: 273, 276-77). To verify this hypothesis, the spatial units in which these objects were found, and the way they were developed, have to be investigated, and the objects themselves catalogued and analysed. As a next step the set at Tell Ibrahim Awad is compared with other contemporaneous sets in Egypt and abroad, and the similarities and differences analysed. The same hypothesis may be applicable for these assemblages, or at least for some of them (see section 7.2.1).

As noted above, these issues are addressed by comparing the situation at Tell Ibrahim Awad with other contemporary sites in Egypt. Sites included and extensively treated in this connection are Abydos, Hierakonpolis, Elephantine and Tell el-Farkha. Both Abydos and Hierakonpolis were investigated a long time ago, with methods that, while being adequate for the period, are now insufficient for a reliable analysis; an attempt will nevertheless be made to make the best of this poorly documented material. Elephantine is well published, but does not reach as far back in time as Tell Ibrahim Awad: until about 3000 BC, the beginning of the 1st Dynasty. As such, it is the main reference corpus for the Tell Ibrahim Awad set in this approach. The material at Tell el-Farkha (Ciałowicz 2007; Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2012: 201-31) is much less in number (ca. 70 pieces) and as such less suitable.

Another hypothesis interpreting the sites with deposits as focal points of an early royal cult instead of a divine cult seems to focus too much on the exceptional site of Hierakonpolis, with questionable validity for the other sites (McNamara 2008: 926-932). Except for the ambiguous presence of baboons, sometimes associated with royal ancestor figures (see section 4.6.2), there are no indications of royal connections at Tell Ibrahim Awad before the Phase 1 temple. Non-royal ancestor cult, a likely part of popular religion, is difficult to point out before the New Kingdom (Fitzenreiter 1994: 51-56). The baboons may have played a role as ancestor figures (see sections 4.6.2 and 7.2.1; Dreyer 1986: 69-70).

An attempt has been made to relate these finds to similar contexts in the neighbouring region of Syria/Palestine. Criteria were not only comparable circumstances, but also whether the finds included (originally) Egyptian or Egyptianising material. Not all these sites are contemporary with the finds from Tell Ibrahim Awad; some are later, but are included anyway for a wider perspective in time and space.

The argument that the deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad, represented in this study, belong to a phase of popular (non-official) worship, preceding a formalized state cult, as expressed in the features of the MK temple is presented in a five-fold approach:

1.2. Research Problems

1. What is the physical context, the formation process of the deposits and the spatial distribution of the votive objects in the deposits within the site of Tell Ibrahim Awad? Was there a difference in the function of the individual deposit units? Which conclusions can be derived from the answers to that? These questions will be discussed in chapters 2 and 3. 2. What was the function of these objects at the time they were deposited? This includes the votive objects per se and the other categories found, like discarded material related to the cult (mainly ceramics) and decorative elements of earlier temple constructions, such as tiles (chapters four, five and six). 3. Was there an impact of these objects (or some of them at least) on the temple ritual at Tell Ibrahim Awad and how could this have been effected? What are the implications of this for other comparable sites? This will be the subject of chapter five. 4. What was the wider context of the site and its finds in the Delta, in Egypt as a whole, and compared

Challenges to be considered in the analysis and interpretation of the data are mainly due to the lack of reference possibilities, for example in the dating and identification of individual objects. More extensive definitions of the problems, which are to be expected, can be formulated as follows: 1. A positive identification of the sequence of buildings in question as a sequence of temples. Could it be a residential building, or any other with a more or less public function? In that case, a sacred precinct, to be expected in a settlement of this size (see below), must be located elsewhere on the (former) tell area. To overcome this problem, a set of evidence criteria has been developed to identify the building and its context as such (section 2.3.2). 2. Viable definitions of the concepts of votive and other offerings and deposits. To counter this, clear definitions are formulated for the concepts mentioned (see sections 3.3.1-3.3.3). However, not the function of 2

The Archaeological Framework and the Research Questions all objects from the deposits could be clearly attributed within the framework of these definitions, like in the case of the mace heads (see chapter five). 3. The scarcity of the inscribed material recovered so far seems to impede the realisation of the research aims: hardly any royal names, no mention of any divinity, no votive inscriptions. However, they can be accomplished almost just as well in other ways, by analysing comparable and contemporaneous contexts. 1.3. Introduction to the Site The ancient settlement site of Tell Ibrahim Awad is situated just outside the village of Umm Agram in a remote corner of the central part of the Eastern Nile Delta, in the province of Sharqiya (30.50’ N, 31.49’ E.; Figure 1.1 / 1.2). The highest point is now just ca. 2 m. above the agricultural plain, but this must have been more in earlier days. About 30 years ago, the central part of the tell was levelled for a fruit tree orchard, thus destroying part of the archaeological record. An extensive subsoil drilling program has shown that the present site surface of approximately 20,000 m2 comprises not much more than 10 per cent of the original tell size, and has revealed the subsoil presence of a sandy gezira there (Figure 1.3). About 90 per cent of the original tell has been reclaimed gradually for agricultural activities (van den Brink 1986: 85, Figure 8)4. Finds made in 19995 during drainage activities in the cultivated area to the North of the tell have further confirmed this original extension, apparently a substantial settlement, at least some time during its history. The remaining surface of the tell is rather level, and is covered by low vegetation like camel thorn and halfagrass. Remains of an old irrigation ditch are visible in the Western part (Figure 2.4). The core of the tell was formed by a sandy turtleback or gezira in the curve of a former Nile branch, but this original sandy gezira is now covered with settlement and flood deposits. There were several shifting Nile branches nearby; in fact, these shifts may have been the cause of the abandonment of the tell after the early MK (ca. 2000 BC), making the site less accessible. This is comparable to the fate of nearby Piramesse as residence after the NK, when this river port became inaccessible due to the silting up of its waterways (ca. 1100 BC; Bietak 1975: 215-17).

Figure 1.1. Map of Egypt with the location of Tell Ibrahim Awad and the other main sites mentioned in the text (© NASA).

The site of Tell Ibrahim Awad was singled out because of the wide-ranging pottery repertoire (PD to MK) found during a survey in 1984 by the Amsterdam University Survey Expedition (AUSE), the predecessor of the Netherlands Foundation for Archaeological Research in Egypt (NEFARE) (Figure 1.2). The first season of excavations took place in 1986, after soundings had struck

upon a rich tomb (in the zone later designated as Area B) and a large mud-brick wall, which appeared to belong to the temenos of a temple (in Area A; van den Brink 1986). Several other surveyed tells in the area around Tell Ibrahim Awad featured remains from the PD to the MK. Some of these, such as the Late Predynastic site of Tell el-Iswid (South), were investigated more thoroughly because of the early periods which they covered (van den Brink 1989)6.

4

The drill cores show settlement debris and gezira sand in the highlighted areas in Figure 1.3 (van den Brink 1988, Figure 8). A planned magnetic survey might produce more data about the original extension (see Figure 1.3). 5 Pottery and stone vessels, apparently partly in a funerary context.

6 Tell el-Iswid (S) is since 2007 being excavated by the Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale in Cairo (Midant-Reynes 2007; 2014).

3

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 1.2. Map of the survey region around Faqus (from Van den Brink 1987).

4

The Archaeological Framework and the Research Questions

Figure 1.3. The situation of Tell Ibrahim Awad: the surviving tell surface in red; the original surface as established by drilling in blue (© Google Earth).

3. To get a better idea of the extension and features of the settlement. So far, settlement and cemetery seem to have covered the same area, although the chronology of the settlement vis-à-vis the cemetery remains not fully settled as yet. Tombs seem to have been situated in abandoned residences.

From 1988 to 2004, regular excavations have proceeded on the site of Tell Ibrahim Awad under the aegis of the NEFARE, which had been founded for this purpose in 1988 (van den Brink 1992; van Haarlem 1995, 1996c, 1998a, 1998b; Belova 2001; van Haarlem / Hikade 2006; van Haarlem 2009). Until 1991, the fieldwork was directed by Edwin C.M. van den Brink; since then, by Willem M. van Haarlem. From 1988 to 1993, research was carried out in both locations, A and B (see Figure 2.4)7. Between 1994 and 2004, the work has been focused on Area A, with a temple and a settlement with a cemetery.

The excavation of the temple site, discovered in Area A, was completed in 2001, when the sand of the original gezira, the supposed building site of the first temple, was reached. This cult location was almost continually in use from Naqada IIa to the early MK. The most intriguing and numerous finds were made in temple deposits (chapter three) of the FIP / Late OK. With this, the first objective on the architecture of the temple was realized (van Haarlem 2009).

The objectives of the first excavations were, respectively: 1. To obtain a better insight in the poorly understood ancient Egyptian temple architecture and temple ritual before the SIP (ca. 1750 BC)8. Therefore, the sequence of temple layers at Tell Ibrahim Awad was investigated. 2. To obtain a representative picture of the inhabitants of the settlement concerning health, age and mortality. So far, very little is known of the early communities in the Egyptian Nile Delta, as opposed to those in the Nile Valley. To that end, the research in the cemetery, discovered beside the temple site, was continued, producing ca. 80 burials in four phases (van Haarlem / Rose 2009).

The excavation of the cemetery is not finished, particularly for the deeper levels (see section 2.3.3.1; van Haarlem / Rose 2009). The settlement has not been excavated extensively enough for a coherent picture (see section 2.3.3.2). 1.4. Research Context 1.4.1. Palaeo-ecology of the Region The natural environment of Tell Ibrahim Awad is dominated by the many Nile (sub) tributaries in the area. Settlements like Tell Ibrahim Awad were largely confined to the many sandy geziras and natural levees (see section 1.1 and 2.2.1),

Most of the records of Area B are, unfortunately, unavailable to me. After that, the standard for temple architecture and ritual is set and well documented (Cauville 2012).

7  8 

5

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt as the lower plain would have been submerged during the autumnal Nile floods. Except in the northern Delta, these plains were not permanent marshlands, but only seasonally flooded (Butzer 1976: 25), and otherwise suited for farming, or at least grazing. The natural vegetation would have consisted, i.a., of papyrus and reeds, and trees like tamarisks and acacias, and several palm tree species. Domestic plants were mainly emmer wheat and barley (van Zeist 1986). Although in Predynastic and Early Dynastic times the climate was somewhat more humid than now (Murray 1951), the annual rainfall alone would have been insufficient for farming (Figure 1.4). Consequently, river irrigation was the major element in agriculture. Failing Nile floods at the end of the OK caused widespread hunger (ca. 2550 B.C.; Stanley / Krom 2003).

Figure 1.4. Rainfall in the Cairo region (from https:// climate-data.org).

Natural fauna consisted of fish, tortoises and fowl; hippopotami and gazelles were common (Boessneck / Von den Driesch 1986). No crocodile remains were found at Tell Ibrahim Awad, as one should expect to encounter in a marshy area. Domestic animals were foremost pigs, then cattle and sheep. In time, the number of sheep increased at the cost of pigs. Donkeys were used for transport (see section 5.1.4). Wild animals, particularly fish, were still a considerable source of food at Tell Ibrahim Awad (Boessneck / Von den Driesch 1992b).

This picture only changed around the middle of the 20th century, when more and more missions started to work in this region. One of the first was the Austrian Mission to Tell ed-Dab’a (Bietak 1975). The extensive research undertaken by this mission in the Eastern Delta paved the way for further exploration in this specific area. The Delta landscape was characterised by several main Nile branches and numerous minor ones, continually changing their courses. In the river bends, sand, carried in the water, was deposited as the current slowed down there, forming so-called turtlebacks, or geziras. These were preferred for settlement in this marshy region. The German excavations at Qantir / Piramesse focused on the same area (since 1981; Pusch, et al., 2017). Also active in the Central Delta is the German Archaeological Institute at Buto / Tell elFara’in (Hartung / Ballet 2010).

1.4.2. Surveys and Excavations The Egyptian Nile Delta has traditionally been an underexplored region, compared with the archaeological activity in the Upper Egyptian Nile Valley. This has been the case since archaeological exploration started in earnest around the middle of the 19th century, following the great impetus earlier in that century by Napoleon’s Egyptian Expedition and the decipherment of Egyptian writing by Champollion, with the notable exception of Alexandria.

Between 1984 and 1988, an extensive survey has been conducted by E.C.M. van den Brink for the AUSE in an area of 30 x 30 kms around the town of Faqus, as part of a project called ‘Regional Diachronic Investigations into Settlement Patterns in the Eastern Nile Delta’. This project was set up firstly to gain insight into the development of settlements and the diversity and functionality of the sites in the Eastern Delta, and secondly to investigate the nature, intensity and productivity of land-use, starting from a reconstruction of the ancient ecological environment, i.c. the hydrology system.

The archaeological remains in Upper Egypt, generally situated in the desert near the edge of the cultivation area are as a rule more prominent and easier to be exploited than those in the Delta. Due to more intensive agriculture and a higher number of people and settlements, thick alluvial sediment layers and the nature of the ancient traces there (perishable mud brick rather than durable stone), the Delta always seemed less inviting for research9, with a few exceptions like the work carried out at the end of the 19th century on behalf of the Egypt Exploration Fund by W.M.F. Petrie (Petrie 1885; Petrie / Smith 1886, Petrie / Griffith 1888) and E. Naville (Naville 1885, 1887, 1890, 1891) and later again at Tanis / San el-Hagar (Montet 1947-1960)10.

This survey has located about 90 potentially interesting archaeological sites (about one per 10 km2), ranging from the Predynastic to the Roman period (van den Brink 1987). Special attention was paid to the past and present geomorphology and hydrology of the area (van Wesemael 1986; Sewuster 1987; de Wit 1988; Markus 1990).

In Reeves 2000, only seven out of the 70 sites mentioned are situated in the Delta. 10  Up to the present continued by the French Mission there (Leclère 2015). 9 

In 1987, an Italian team conducted a comparable survey to the northwest of the first survey area, resulting in the location of more than 30 sites, and finally in the excavation 6

The Archaeological Framework and the Research Questions of Tell el-Farkha by a Polish mission (Chłodnicki 1991; Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2012). The French excavations at Tell el-Iswid (South) are already mentioned (section 1.3). Finally, the Egypt Exploration Society adopted the Delta Survey-project11 since 1997, resulting in excavations in Sais (Wilson 2006) and Minufiyeh (Rowland / Zakrzewski 2008).

In chapter four, more specific physical aspects of the votive objects are treated, and a functional analysis is attempted of the different object categories encountered in the deposits and their specific meaning. A candidate for the patron deity of the temple is discussed. A comparison follows of the Tell Ibrahim Awad finds with similar cases in Egypt and abroad, mainly the neigbouring Levant.

1.5. The Structure of This Study As the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad presents the archaeological context for the votive and cult objects, it is introduced in chapter two, preceded by the questions and aims of the research presented here. Included is a general introduction to the physical environment of the region and a survey of the excavation methods used. The chronology of the site proper is extensively discussed here as well. The concluding part of this chapter surveys the other discoveries, mainly in the settlement’s cemetery.

In order to arrive at a better understanding of the temple ritual, it is attempted to determine the possible uses of the various cultic vessels and other potential cult objects from the Deposits in the temple (chapter five).

The following chapter three is devoted to a definition and explanation of the several kinds of deposits, focusing on votive offering deposits. General aspects involved in the donating of votive objects are discussed. It concludes with a discussion of how the objects were deposited where they were found.

The work is concluded with a summary of the results and general conclusions pertaining to the objects and the temple itself (chapter seven), and an extensive catalogue of the source material, split up in non-ceramic and ceramic categories. A bibliography, concordance, lists of Plate s and figures and indexes complete the volume.

11 

The study is continued with a tentative reconstruction of the way the faience tiles discovered might have been used in the temple architecture, compared to other contemporary temple sites (chapter six).

http://www.deltasurvey.ees.ac.uk

7

2 Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology 2.1. Introduction

2.2. The Physical Context

This might be explained by assuming that these were situated along an old coastline, running east-west, although there is no evidence for the Mediterranean extending that far to the South. The hypothesis that they were lining an old east-west trade corridor to Palestine (van den Brink 1993: 295-297), providing way stations for trade missions is more likely. However, drillings did not show a watercourse here.

2.2.1. The Palaeogeography of the Region around Tell Ibrahim Awad

2.2.1.2. Nile Branches and Archaeological Sites of the Old Kingdom and the First Intermediate Period

The Nile Delta is a largely alluvial creation by the Nile and its branches, which go their separate ways north of modern Cairo. There were once as many as seven Nile branches (with many secondary watercourses) in the Delta, whereas only two remain now: the Rosetta Branch in the West, and the Damietta Branch in the East. Sand, deposited in the river bends, eventually formed turtlebacks or geziras, which stayed dry during the inundation season, and were as such preferred for settling. Further north, fluctuating sea levels were also a factor to be reckoned with for settling.

Whereas the earlier settlements seem to be rather evenly and spaciously distributed, those of this period have the tendency to cluster around only some of the older sites (Figure 2.2). Tell Ibrahim Awad (no. 5 in Figure 2.2) is rather isolated here at the eastern end, close to the Pelusiac branch. This centralisation in the older nuclei could reflect a growing perception of insecurity of the area (van den Brink 1993, 300-02), as population concentrations can be more easily defended than widely scattered settlements. Most of the 28 sites are, like before, still situated closer to the Tanitic than to the Pelusiac branch, which was probably formed later, with only five sites (including Tell Ibrahim Awad) in the vicinity.

Expanding on the basic information given in the previous chapter, this chapter aims at providing further details and clarification on the physical and chronological context of the deposits as main topic of this study.

In the case of Tell Ibrahim Awad, two waterways join due East of the gezira (van den Brink 1988, 77). This condition may have contributed to the commercial and strategic importance of Tell Ibrahim Awad (Figure 2.1), and its abandonment after these waterways shifted. In the following, the geographical distribution of archaeological sites in the region around Tell Ibrahim Awad concerning the periods relevant for this study will be discussed, to place this site in a wider context.

2.2.1.3. Nile Branches and Archaeological Sites of the Middle Kingdom Contrary to the earlier periods, the small number (7) of sites with MK remains is mainly concentrated in the area of the Pelusiac branch. This is pointing to a later date for this fluvial system (Bietak 1975: 47-112; Sewuster 1987; de Wit / van Stralen 1988: 13; Markus 1990)1 than for the Tanitic branch. Apparently, the increased water supply in this area because of the new Nile branch enabled extension of the area fit for cultivation and new settlements. This might have been accompanied by a reduced water supply in the older, Tanitic branch and thus a shift from the older to the new settlements.

2.2.1.1. Nile Branches and Archaeological Sites of the Late Predynastic and Early Dynastic Periods (3200-2550 BC) The 11 settlement sites of these periods are situated in the area of the former Tanitic branch of the Nile, further from the former Pelusiac branch more to the East. These are the easternmost branches of the seven original branches of the Nile in the Delta. Perhaps the latter branch only became active after the Early Dynastic period (see below) so that the Tanitic branch formed the easternmost border of human settlement, east of which the desert extended (van den Brink 1987:19; van den Brink 1993; de Wit 1993).

2.3. The Excavations (see Figure 2.4) For an introduction to the site, see section 1.3. Modern development (an orange grove) has cut the site of Tell Ibrahim Awad in two areas. Area A is rather level, with halfa-grass and camel thorns growing on it (Figure 2.3); Area B is more uneven, with remains of an old irrigation ditch (see Figure 2.4).

Although the water courses, the location of which was mainly established by drillings, generally follow a southwest-northeast direction, a notable string of evenly spaced Pre-and Early Dynastic settlements, including Tell Ibrahim Awad, followed an east-west direction, not parallel to the water courses (see Figure 2.1).

1  The Pelusiac branch is tentatively considered to be the older one here, but it is only fair to say that data on the Tanitic branch at that time are unavailable. See also Czerny 1999: 14-15.

8

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology

Figure 2.1. Nile Branches and Settlements in the survey area (see Figure 1.2a-b), Predynastic to Middle Kingdom, with modern place-names.

cemetery was further investigated by extending the excavated area in 1998 and 2000. Unfortunately, a large pit partly disturbed the cemetery there. Deeper layers of the cemetery produced settlement traces as well. Eventually, in 2001 virgin (gezira) soil was reached only in two squares (A 130-140/190), where the core of the temple always had been situated. After study seasons in 2002 and 2004 work will be resumed in the future. In Area B, the excavation was extended in 1988 from the first sounding southwards, where more Early Dynastic (but disturbed) tombs were found, and the first traces of an Early Dynastic settlement. The excavations were therefore further extended towards the West. Deeper layers were attributable to Predynastic times. An extension to the East in 1990 produced a second intact first Dynasty tomb (van Haarlem 1996a). Work here ceased after 1993, for the time being; since then, all efforts have been concentrated on Area A.

Figure 2.2. Pre- and Early Dynastic nucleus sites (number indications, 5: Tell Ibrahim Awad) with Old Kingdom satellite settlements (letters, k: Umm Agram). The radius is 2.84 km, i.c. the average distance between the nuclei. Cf. Figure 2.1. (from Van den Brink 1993).

2.3.1. Stratigraphy and Architecture

In Area A (the 1986 sounding at the edge of the orchard) massive mud brick walls of the MK were revealed. For this reason the excavation was extended in 1988 to the East and the South to establish the nature of the construction. This uncovered as much as possible of what appeared to be a temple of the MK (see below), including a temenos wall. Scant remains of the original extension of the temple were traced under the orchard. In one of the squares of the extension (A 140/210), the first tombs came to light of what later turned out to be a larger cemetery. Another extension square (A 150/200) showed traces of a settlement. The

First attempts at generating a stratigraphic sequence for Area A were made in 1992 (van den Brink 1992: 45). After deeper levels had been reached and larger surfaces uncovered, this led to a corrected table (Table 2.1, column extreme right; Eigner 2000: 17). The building phases 7 to 5c/d show without exception a relatively quick succession (within one or not more than two generations) of oblong buildings, differing only slightly in size and location. Apparently, each building was 9

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 2.3. Area A: view to the South in 2001.

Figure 2.4. Excavation Grid (from van Haarlem 2000).

10

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology Table 2.1. Comparative chronological table (after Von Beckerath 1997) Years BC

Dynasty

3300-3200

Upper Egypt

Lower Egypt

Phases at TIA

Naqada II d

Buto III a

7a-b

3200-3000

0

Naqada III a-b

Buto III b-f

6a-d

3000-2800

1

Naqada III c-d

Buto IV-V

5a-d

2800-2650

2

Buto V-VI

4

2650-2550

3

Buto VI

3

2550-2100

4-10

2a-c

2100-1950

11-12

1

dismantled carefully and the debris removed (excluding a levelling layer) before construction of the next phase began. Whether this was the average life cycle of a mudbrick temple construction-possibly different from other kinds of mudbrick buildings-is not certain; there may have been other reasons for replacement, like increased prosperity, matters of prestige, or religious change (Figures 2.7-2.8). The construction layout of phase 5a/b is significantly different, apparently consisting of two rooms with a corridor in between. Apart from that, Phases 5a/b to 3 show the same history of dismantling and removal of debris as the previous phases. Phase 4 constitutes a gap in the sequence, with only settlement deposits without any wall remains. Construction remains of Phase 3 are almost completely removed, apparently before construction of Phase 2 began; the sub-phases of Phase 2 are built immediately on top of each other. It seems, that the latest Phase 1 was only built after the temple remains of Phase 2a/b had been exposed to the elements for some time, judging by a layer of washed or blown-in material (Figure 2.15a-b, no. 3). On that layer, the foundation was laid for the temple of the latest Phase 1 (Figure 2.15, no. 1-2), with a changed orientation. Later layers are non-existent (see below). Figure 2.5 shows the selected key pottery corresponding to these levels. With the pottery of each Phase, references to dated parallels are cited to corroborate the chronology of that particular Phase. Phase 7a-b (Naqada IId; Buto IIIa)

Figure 2.5. Phases of the Temple Pottery.

The temenos (?) walls A and B (Figure 2.7) of this phase are situated in the NW corner of Square A 140/190 (resp. 7a and b, 1.57-1.93 m. above sea level- the deepest wall level reached (see also Figure 5.6.8). A building may have been situated outside the excavated area, on the other side of the walls. Just east of Wall A and B, a sort of production area was found, with fireplaces containing intact upright, tall jars with a high cylindrical neck and a high shoulder (see Kroeper / Wildung 1985: 48 / Figure 135; Köhler 1998: 18 / Plate 11, 2). So far, this is a somewhat enigmatic feature, found in Area B as well. These features may have had something to do with the production of ritual oils,

unguents, and perfumes: heating may have been part of the process, to concentrate the substance by evaporation (See Figure 2.6 and 2.7 right; Shimy 1998: 219-225; Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 406; van Haarlem 2010). Nearby Tell elFarkha has similar features of the same date (Chłodnicki 2002a: 90). Under the walls a layer of sand mixed with ashes was found (Figure 2.16, no. 30), and finally, below that, the pure sand of the original gezira (no. 31). 11

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 2.6. Section of one of the fireplaces with vessels.

Figure 2.7. left-Phases 6c/d-7a/b; middle-Phase 6b; right- Phase 6a (from Eigner 2000).

the temenos (?) wall (Dynasty 0 / Naqada IIIa-b, levels 2.00-1.82, Figure 2.7 right, C) was preserved, more to the southeast than the earlier ones (A / B) in 7a/b. The same features (like the fireplaces, D1-D5) as in 7a/b are still present here, with as addition a sort of shed. The Phase 6a building features a series of anterooms indicated with A (Dynasty 0, 2.04-2.25 m. above sea level; Figure 2.7 right). The oblong layout seems to have been preserved in essence for later phases as well.

Pottery from this phase is better represented in Area B, where fire-pits contain tapering vessels of a rough, strawtempered ware (Nile C ware, in the Vienna System; van den Brink 1992: 52 / Plate 17). Wavy-handled pottery (Figure 2.5k; van den Brink 1992: 53 / Figure 9) has parallels in El Kab and Buto, from well-defined contemporary contexts (Hendrickx et al., 1994: Plate IX, H 55 [Type UFY 8]); Köhler 1998: 34 / Plate 59-61). Decorated pottery, impressed with incised figures is found (Figure 2.5l) with parallels in Tell el-Farkha (Chłodnicki 2002a: 108 / Figure 14,27) and Palestine (Levy 1997: 20 / Figure 17,4), as well as pottery with cut-out triangles like in Buto (Figure 2.5m; Köhler 1998: 32-33 / Plate 57) and Hierakonpolis (Adams / Friedman 1992: 327, Figure 8d / 330). Enigmatic fragments with two or more smoothed edges (Friedman1992: 202; Köhler 1998: 28-29 / Plate 50) and fragments with ridges (cf. Adams 1993) complete the set.

The key pottery forms here are cylindrical jars with cord impressions like in Buto (Figure 2.5i; Petrie 1953: Plate 8,47t and 9,48s; Köhler 1998: 33). Furthermore, there are small bag-shaped jars (Figure 2.5j), with parallels in Buto (Köhler 1998: 19-20 / Plate 16) and Tell el-Farkha (Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2002a: 108 / Figure 14.10) for the Delta, and Abydos (Petrie 1900: Plate 35,141-150; Randall-MacIver 1902: Plate 8,4), Armant (Mond / Myers 1940: Plate 46,8) and El-Kab (Hendrickx, et al.: 1994: Plate X, H 110 [Type RRJ 1] / Plate XI, H 955 / M 71 [Type RRJ 3]); also Petrie 1953: Plate 25,86) for Upper Egypt.

Phase 6a-d (Dynasty 0; Naqada IIIa-b; Buto IIIb-f; Figure 2.7) A striking feature of the 6b building is the niche (N) for – presumably – the divine image, comparable to the situation in Phase 2 (Figure 2.9a-b). This building (Dynasty 0, 2.012.04 m. above sea level) is the earliest construction proper on the site, because the (alleged) 6c/d temple seems to have been located just outside the excavated area; only

Finally, storage jars with roll rims and almost horizontal shoulders as in Buto (Köhler 1998: Plate 3, 2-6) are found. All references are from well-defined contemporary contexts. 12

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology Phase 5a-d (Dynasty 0-1; Naqada IIIc-d; Buto IV-V; Figure 2.8)

Phase 2a-c (First Intermediate Period / 4th Dynasty; Figures 2.9a-b and 2.10)

The building of 5c/d, as the earlier ones of Phase 6, although once again differing in orientation, already displayed the oblong rectangular layout, essentially retained in the later phases until Phase 2. Building 5c and 5d (Dynasty 0-1, 2.25-2.45 m above sea level) overlap each other almost fully.

Phase 2c (4th Dynasty, 3.39-3.64 m above sea level, Figure 15) constitutes the earlier plan of the temple complex, with a curved outer temenos wall instead of the angular version of Phase 2a/b. Phase 2a is a reconstruction phase after the western wall of the Phase 2b shrine had bulged in (Figure 2.10). The miniature vessels (Figure 2.5d; van den Brink 1992: 47-48 / Figure 4; Eigner 1992; Petrie 1924: Plate XXIX, 20d-20m-23g-23n; Reisner / Smith 1955: Figure 105, 2511-119 / 107, 25-1-311 & 25-12-83) buried under altar D (see Figure 2.12) of the building of Phase 1 provide a date of Phase 2a/b in the FIP / Late OK, together with the beer jars from Pit 5, which have their parallels at other sites (Figure 2.5d; Faltings 1998: 221-22).

However, the building of Phase 5a/b (1st Dynasty, 2.452.60 m. above sea level, Figure 2.8 right) features a corridor separating two buildings, of slightly different dates. A tomb (A 130/190, No. 1; Figure 2.8 right), located outside the construction and sunk from the same level, is doubtless attributable to the first half of the 1st Dynasty, according to the pottery found in it (Figure 2.5h), and determines the date of Phase 5. The pottery is closely paralleled by pottery from Minshat Abu ‘Omar (Group 4, Kroeper 1986: 16 / Figure 161-180; Kroeper / Wildung 2000: 20-21 [Tomb 127/800]), Saqqara (Emery / James 1954: 72, Fig. 98,E2 [Mastaba 3504]; Emery / Klasens 1958: Plate 31,E2 [Mastaba 3505]; Petrie 1953: Plate 5, 31E – 9,56G – 27,90Q – 29,94t) and Abydos (van Haarlem 1985; Dreyer / Hartung 2000: 79, Figure 14a-b/107and Figure 21c-d-e).

The rather small and basically rectangular construction of Phase 2c (see Figure 2.9a-b) has as its main feature a niche A with a platform B in front of it, and in the back a series of small, bricked-up rooms containing the deposits. A possibly bricked-up door in the middle of the Eastern wall of the building might point to an overall layout of the construction similar to the Near Eastern ‘broadroom’temple (see section 7.4.2 for an extensive discussion of the implications for this). The alleged door seems to be rather carelessly and / or sparsely blocked up with obliquely and lengthwise positioned bricks and filled in with mortar. Brick pavements partly cover remains of earlier walls. Other features were traces (emplacements) of large vessels in several places, most likely containing purification water, required for ritual purposes in the temple area (like on Figure 2.10, near the SE corner). A sort of bench near the entrance(s) completes the picture (Figures 2.9a-b and 2.10; Eigner 2007: 86-87 / Figure 7).

Phase 4 (2nd Dynasty; Buto V-VI) This seems to have been a gap in the building sequence, apparently showing only settlement remains-mainly pottery (2.65-3.00 m. above sea level; Figure 2.16, layers no. 14 and 15). It is dated on the basis of the frequent examples of the typical large, rough bread moulds (Figure 2.5g; Type A, Jacquet-Gordon 1981: 12-15), with parallels in Buto (Köhler 1998: 27 / Plate 45) and Abydos (Petrie 1902: Plate 29,59).

On the section drawing of the S.-profile of Square A 140/190 (see Figure 2.14), the distinction between the large bricks used for the MK construction wall (no. 1) and the smaller bricks for the earlier walls (nos. 11, 12, 15) is clearly visible3. Under the inner wall of the MK building a layer of max. 0.30 m of foundation sand (no. 2) was encountered, resting on a thin layer of silt (no. 3) on the bottom of the foundation trench for this wall. This silt had apparently washed in after the excavation of the trench, but before it was filled in with sand. The trench seems to have razed the top of some walls of the building of Phase 2a-b, which were the separation walls between some of the Deposits. Additionally, the ruins of this temple may have been exposed to weathering for some time (5th-6th Dynasty, top wall levels now: 3.99-3.60).

Phase 3 (3rd Dynasty; Buto VI) Most of the construction of this phase has disappeared, except for some walls (3.01-3.39 m. above sea level; Eigner 2000: 28). The absolute dating of this phase is somewhat problematic, as by far most of the pottery attributable to this phase is cultic pottery from the deposits (see chapter three), and as such (usually more conservative in its forms) probably less suitable for dating purposes than household pottery. The numerous libation vases in particular with parallels in earlier times2 do not show any typological development (see section 5.1.3.2). However, there are some fragments from a temple context outside the deposits: a.o. the typical carinated polished Meidum bowls of the 3rd Dynasty (Figure 2.5f; Kroeper 1986: 7 / 9, Figure 4; Petrie 1910: Plate 25, 19; Kaiser 1969; 57-88 & 91 / 59-108; Kaiser / Bommas 1999: 185-186 / Figure 40, 2; Köhler 1998: 24/Plate 31, 11-1; Op de Beeck 2004).

2 

The deposits date mostly from Phases 2b-c (Dynasty 4, sealing of the deposits) and for a small part from the preceding Phase 3 (like Deposit 8). It is significant that most of the votive objects sensu strictu were found in the 3  For a chronology of bricks according to size, see: Spencer 1979, 14748 and Plate 41.

Like the conspicuous black-topped examples, see Sowada 1999.

13

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 2.8. left-Phases 6a/5d; middle-Phase 5c; right-Phases 5a/b (from Eigner 2000).

Another possible relative is the brick temple of S’ankhka-Re’ Mentuhotep in the Theban hills, far to the South (Vörös / Pudleiner 1997: 283-87; Vörös 1998). This temple has a tripartite sanctuary as well. A small double statuette of a couple, devoted to that same king, was purchased in the 19th century at Khata’na, some kilometers from Tell Ibrahim Awad (Petrie 1888: 45/ Plate XLII; Page 1976: 18-19 [no. 21, UC 15516]), one of the few traces of this king in the Delta. It is not impossible that this king built the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad as well, and that the statuette came from this temple as another votive object. Otherwise, no building activity is known for him outside Upper Egypt.

rooms behind niche A (Deposits 10, 12 and 13) apparently already in use for storing these when the building was still functional, and that the discarded cultic equipment (vessels) was stored in probably no longer functional rooms and corridors (Deposits 2, 3, 6 and 7) after the abandonment of the temple; see extensively chapter four. Unfortunately, faience plaques with royal names as found in similar deposits in one of the successive Satet temples at Elephantine (Dreyer 1986, 148-51) are missing in the deposits here. They could have provided firmer dating anchors (see IV.4.1). The date of the Elephantine deposits is now established as not later than the beginning of the 6th Dynasty on the basis of stratigraphical, iconographical and textual evidence (royal names on votive objects), but many of the individual objects may go back to far earlier times. The close iconographical ties with the deposit finds at Tell Ibrahim Awad are obvious (see section 4.9.1), although the deposits were sealed somewhat earlier at the latter site.

The layout (see Figure 2.11) showed traces of two sand beds (A and B) strewn with limestone chips, probably the remains of destroyed limestone naoi, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the largest one (A) may have been intended for the cult of some divinity, and the smaller one (north of B) for a royal cult, possibly of the aforementioned king. The architectural features do not exclude an alternative interpretation as a chapel for the Ka of this divinity or the king (LÄ III, 284-287). The three altars (or rather, pedestals for offering tables) also point to two cults: two (C and D) to the north of the large cult place (which probably opened in that direction) and one (B) to the south of the small one, which was consequently probably open in that direction.

Phase 1 (11th / early 12th Dynasty; Figure 2.11) About 100 m. to the East from the first sounding (section 1.3), a second one revealed the massive brick foundations of what appeared to be a temple of the MK, measuring ca. 35 x 50 m (3.90-4.75 m. above sea level). Preserved and unaltered temples of this period are quite rare in Egypt; most were either levelled or incorporated in later temples, as any new temple would have to be constructed on the same sacred location: a custom in many cultures (see section 2.2.3). When still standing, this construction must have been one of the largest known MK temples. There are, however, some parallels for this construction, like the MK temple at ‘Ezbet Rushdi near Tell ed-Dab’a (Czerny 2015: 80-88) Like at Tell Ibrahim Awad, there is evidence here for a main cult in the back of the sanctuary, and a secondary cult in the front (Eigner 1992: 76; Seidlmayer 1996: 125-26). A difference is the fact, that the Rushdi temple has a tripartite sanctuary, whereas the Tell Ibrahim Awad sanctuary has only two rooms, a larger northern one and a smaller southern room.

This phase is characterised by some fragments of the typical conical bread moulds with flat bottom (Type C) of the MK (Figure 2.5a; Jacquet-Gordon 1981: 16-17; Petrie 1890: Plate 14, 14; Seidlmayer 1990: 390 / Figure 165 / 23) and the just as typical small hemispherical cups (Figure 2.5b-c); van den Brink 1992: 46-48 / Figure 2, 4/5; Bietak 1991a: 50; Arnold 1982: 60-62) 4. In addition, 4   Only two complete cups were found in the temple area, A 130/190/2 with index 198 and diameter 11.4, and A 130/190/8 with index 238 and diameter 10. This would place them in the early stage of the M K; see also Czerny 1999, 125-28. His index:diameter plotting produces the same date, and this is once more confirmed when the morphological criteria from Seidlmayer 2005: 285-91 / Figure 4-9, are applied.

14

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology flat bowls with round base and faint carination (Arnold 1982: 35 / Figure 11,7; Czerny 1999: 145 [Nf 149-151]) and high-necked jars are found. (Kaiser / Bommas 1999: 198-199 / Figure 43,2; Czerny 1999: 194 [Mc 165-66]).

objects which can be designated as votive objects (chapter three). The presence of these is one of the distinctive criteria to label a construction as religious (Kemp 2006: 114-15)5. 5. Closely related objects were found on other contemporaneous sites in Egypt, notably in a construction which is part of another sequence of temples at the island of Elephantine, which is identified as such by inscriptional evidence (section 4.9.1). 6. The layout of the Phase 2 (and earlier) constructions at Tell Ibrahim Awad seems to be closely related to the so-called ‘broadroom’-shrines in the Near East, with the nearest examples in Palestine (section 7.4.2). 7. In Egypt, as in other regions, sacred places tend to stay sacred throughout the ages; this means, that new sanctuaries are often built on top of older ones (Porter / Moss 1972: 311). As the Phase 1 building is confirmed as a temple, the case for the underlying structures to be identified as temples as well is strong, among all the other circumstantial evidence mentioned above.

For the period after the MK, no settlement remains have been discovered at Tell Ibrahim Awad. They either never existed – the site may have been abandoned due to the silting up of waterways- or were removed by sebakhactivities, although one would expect that in the latter case at least some pottery fragments of later periods would have been found. The first possibility thus seems the most likely option. This continuous sequence of temples is one of the longest in Egypt, reaching back to unprecedented early stages (at least Naqada II d), and the buildings have no clear architectural parallels (Eigner 2000). Consequently, the temple of Phase 6 might be the earliest attested (mud brick) temple so far in Egypt. The earliest Satet temple at Elephantine is dated in the 1st Dynasty (section 4.4.1). The situation at Tell el-Farkha is different; there are two approximately rectangular, but not freestanding shrines, of which in one (cult room no. 211) a jar with votive objects was found, but apparently not earlier in date than Dynasty 0 (section 4.9; Ciałowicz 2009b; Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2012: 171-80 / Figure 26).

All the above arguments considered, it does seem justified to assume that the building complex under discussion does have a religious function as opposed to an interpretation as a construction for any other public or private use. 2.3.3. The Cemetery and Settlement in Area A

In Hierakonpolis, an oval structure known as HK 29A was discovered, dated as Naqada II b-d (Adams 1999). Because of some large postholes, possibly indicating a large wooden structure, the presence of remains of young sheep or goats, evidence for the presence of craftsmen and some unusual pottery, this structure has been interpreted as a cult centre. However, this interpretation is open to doubt. It may well have been another kind of structure.

2.3.3.1. The Cemetery in Area A Directly east of the massive temenos wall of the Phase 1 temple, a cemetery was discovered (Figures 2.11 and 2.16; van den Brink 1992: 46). No clear extension pattern is visible, owing to a large pit in the northeastern part of it which has disturbed the archaeological coherence. All human remains were in a very bad state. Very young individuals have so far hardly been found, and were probably mostly buried elsewhere, as was not uncommon (van Haarlem / Rose 2009: 161). The ca. 80 burials can be subdivided into four chronological groups (van Haarlem / Hikade 2006; van Haarlem / Rose 2009). This subdivision is mainly based on relative stratigraphy, absolute levels, tomb features and the few instances where the tomb finds could be dated with any reliability.

2.3.2. Identification of the Largest Construction in Area A as a Temple There are several convincing grounds for this attribution, as follows: 1. The construction of Phase 1 is in all probability a temple, based on comparative and contemporaneous (of the MK) constructions in Egypt (Figure 2.12). All show basically the same layout: a square or rectangular shrine with a front room and a bi- or tripartite sacellum inside a rectangular enclosure wall, entered by a pylon. 2. The layout of the buildings of Phase 1 and 2 is based on the royal cubit, as customary for temples and other official buildings (Figure 2.13a-b). This seems to be the case for the earlier phases as well (Eigner 2000: 29-35). 3. The supposed sacellum of the Phase 1 building was built on a layer of clean sand as is required for cultic constructions, constructions, symbolizing ritual purity. 4. The construction directly below the latest temple has a series of rooms where cultic pottery was stored, clearly attested as such, and also a large number of small

1. The first group, dating in the early MK (11th and early 12th Dynasty, ca. 2100-1950 BC), comprises 17 bricklined tombs, probably originally containing now decayed wooden coffins (average 4.62 m. above sea level). Almost all contained water jars (Figure 2.17)6, and in one case 5  Other criteria are: 1. Attention is focused on a religious function by location, orientation and design; 2. A clear separation between the profane and the sacred; 3. There are sacred images or pointers to the presence of a higher entity; 4. The perimeter is protected, both for and against the sacred presence; 5. There is access and a facility for participants in sacred activities. 6  For the dating: see Seidlmayer 1990: 274-285 / 298-300 / 395. 11 of the in total 16 water jars (Type ST 736, Sedment IA-IIB) from the cemetery fall in Phase 1, with a date from the early Dynasty 11 onwards. See also Czerny 1999:121-23 / 155.

15

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 2.9a. Phase 2c of the Temple (from Eigner 2000).

16

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology

Figure 2.9b. Reconstruction of Phase 2c of the Temple.

a scarab (A 140/210/7, Figure 2.18), useful as dating evidence (van den Brink 1992: 47)7. See also Table 2.2.

decayed kind of bandaging, as a form of primitive mummification.

2. The second group, dating in late FIP (2250-2100 BC), comprises 31 graves, mainly consisting of pits lined and covered with reed mats (average 4.48 m. above sea level). Three graves had remains of red ochre on or around the bones, and two contained remains of yellow plaster. The latter feature may point to some use of plastered wood; maybe the red pigment was used to paint a now completely

There were hardly any tomb gifts, apart from some pottery and beads and in one case a so-called button seal, a wide date marker for this period (A 140/210/61, Figure 2.19)8. Similar tombs from the same period are now known from Mendes / Tell el-Rob’a (Redford 2010: 42 57). 8  See Seidlmayer 1990: 185-194 / 209-10: a date in Qau-Matmar IIIA-B (after Pepi II, the absolute date for IIA), the latest stage for a seriation which begins in the late OK. Cf. Brunton 1928: Plate XXXIV, no. 228; Wiese1996: Plate 48 (nos. 991,997-99): all dated in the FIP. For the shape, see Wiese 1996: 59 (Plate 13), no. 14a.

Analysis by Chr. Mlinar, cf. Petrie / Brunton 1923: Plate LXV (no. 323); Ward 1978; Plate VIII, no. 224.

7 

17

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 2.10. Phase 2a-b of the Temple; Phase 2a is indicated by the dotted outline of the enclosure wall (from Eigner 2000).

18

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology

Figure 2.11. Phase 1 of the Temple (from Eigner 1993).

3. The third group, of the early FIP, counted 21 graves (average 3.99 m. above sea level). These tombs are dug out much more deeply and regularly than those of Phase 2, with thick (or multi-layered) reed mats covering all sides as a sort of reed coffin. One tomb may have contained a wooden coffin, as traces of a plaster finishing seem to indicate. Only seven graves were provided with funerary gifts, which do not differ from those of Group 2.

present, and with the imprint of the decayed wood still visible. A reliable chronological anchor for this group is now provided by a seal impression (A 130/230/32, Figure 2.20) with the Horus name of Userkaf, iry-mAa.t, the first king of the 5th Dynasty (Petrie 1902: Plate XVI, 2). The cemetery was made up of males and females in fairly even proportions. A quarter of the females died between the ages of 25 and 35, probably due to the stresses of childbirth and nursing. Males tended to have a slightly higher life expectancy than females. The demography of Tell Ibrahim Awad appears to indicate decent health when compared to other sites in Egypt. Over all periods, a large percentage of individuals (38 per cent) showed evidence of hypoplasias (childhood stress markers) on their teeth. Those individuals with hypoplasias had a younger average age at death (26.1 years) than those individuals who did not have any hypoplasias (33.9 years). Considered for each period separately, the rate of hypoplasias and the average age at death indicate that the overall health of Tell Ibrahim Awad declined slightly from the FIP to the MK.

4. The fourth and last group of the late OK has two examples only (3.22 and 3.49 m. above sea level). One was a large brick tomb. The actual burial was placed in a pit of 2.30 x 0.80 m, dug out below the level of the lowest brick course, and covered on all sides with reed mats. Several of the bones were embedded in plaques of a cement-like material, possibly the remains of a collapsed cover lid9. The other burial was even more singular. It was situated at the lowest level reached so far in the cemetery area. The outline formed a very regular rectangle, with in many places plaster used to finish the wooden coffin still A lining consisting of plaster, without any support, was used in several contemporary tombs in Kom el-Hisn, (Western Delta), see Hamada elAmir 1947: 101-41

9 

19

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 2.12. Comparable temples of the Middle Kingdom (from Eigner 1993).

Figure 2.13b. Phase 2 (from Eigner 2000).

Figure 2.13a. Phase 1 (from Eigner 1992).

20

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology

Figure 2.14. South Profile of Square A 140/190 (see 2.15b). 1. Wall of the Middle Kingdom temple (Phase 1). 2. Sand foundation layer of the Middle Kingdom temple. 3. Washed-in layer after the levelling of the First Intermediate Period / Old Kingdom temple. 4. Wall remains. 5. Washed-in brick material. 6. Level of Deposit. 7. Walls of the First Intermediate Period / Old Kingdom temple (Phase 2a/b). 8. Division wall in the First Intermediate Period / Old Kingdom temple. 9. Fill material. 10. Brick debris of several walls.

A graph (Figure 2.21) shows the age group distribution in the cemetery within the four Phases. Phases 3 and 2 show a marked mortality increase in the younger age groups, with a decrease in the same groups in the early MK. It seems that the conditions of the FIP, a time of political unrest and famines due to failing Nile floods, are reflected in the higher mortality rate in the younger age groups in Phase 2 especially (Rösing 1987: 142; Seidlmayer 1987: 213, in contrast with: Kraus 2004: 178-81 / 198-204 / 206-08).

The fact that a giant pit reaching the level of the OK has apparently eradicated a large part of the FIP settlement in the northeastern part of the site does not make things clearer. A provisional analysis of the pottery suggest that the settlement levels investigated so far seem to coincide chronologically with the first two temple layers encountered, as such:

2.3.3.2. The Settlement in Area A

Level 2: FIP / 4th Dynasty

Unfortunately, strata which could have provided information about the relation of this cemetery with the latest (MK-) temple are missing, due to the denudation of the tell (see 1.3), although their vicinity and contemporaneity suggest a close connection.

2.3.4. The Cemetery and Settlement in Area B

Level 1: 11th/early 12th Dynasty

In this part of the site, a sounding was made during the survey, which produced a large tomb of the First Dynasty (see section 1.3). Traces of a settlement were found nearby (see below). The fact that the upper layers are undoubtedly missing here due to denudation (no remains later than the early OK were encountered), prevents an analysis of the relationship of this area with any phase of Area A. Perhaps the settlement shifted from B to A over time. Almost unique for the Delta is the fact that the Early Dynastic layers here are not below the subsoil water level, which made excavation much easier.

In the FIP, the tombs were laid out in an apparently abandoned part of the settlement, in the middle of a living quarter, which was, however, still functional in the late OK (cf. Wenke / Buck 1988: Figure 5). For Egypt, generally only children qualify for a burial inside a settlement (Von Pilgrim 1996: 36, n. 84). In contrast to this, mostly adults have been interred here. What has been uncovered so far from the settlement looks like one or two large buildings, subdivided into smaller ‘rooms’, of which one may have had a kitchen function (see the arrow in Figure 2.22).

2.3.4.1. The Settlement in Area B A striking feature here is the evidence for a relatively sudden change in character from Pre- to Protodynastic architecture (van Haarlem 1996b). The earlier architecture is of a rather improvised nature: thin brick walls and postholes, as opposed to the massive walls just above them, built according to a plan, and sometimes disturbed by later tombs. The area cleared so far, however, does not provide sufficient insight into the layout of this village. More clearance is necessary here. A puzzling factor is the occurrence of several pits with burnt material, in which intact vessels were standing upright; possibly for the production of some commodity (van den Brink 1992: 54; van Haarlem 2010). In the temple compound in Area

Two Meidum-bowls were found here, of which A 130/220/68 can be dated in Dynasty 4 (ca. 2550 BC) at the latest, and A 130/220/71 in the FIP (see Figure 2.23)10. A number of animal bones and other remains, including sweet water shells and kitchenware were found here. A further remarkable find there was a hoard of flint knives beside a wall (see Figure 2.23, arrow at left corner; section 5.1.2; Figure 2.24), possibly for safekeeping as valuable objects in uncertain times. According to the analytical and morphological criteria set by Op de Beeck 2004.

10 

21

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 2.15a. West Profile of Square A 140/190 (see Figure 2.15b). Phase 1: 1. Disturbed upper layer. 2. Layer containing limestone chips of the smashed naos. 3. Pit with clean sand. 4. Temple walls of Phase 1b. 5. Foundation sand layer for no. 4. Phase 2: 6a. Temple walls of Phase 2a. 6b. Temple walls of Phase 2b. 7. Temple walls of Phase 2c. 8. Layer with brick fragments from no. 7. 9. Floor levels belonging to no. 7. Phase 3: 10. Settlement layers with ashes and carbon. 11. Leveling layer with wall remains. Phase 4: 12. Fat clay. 13. Pit. 14. Settlement layers with ashes and carbon. 15. Leveling layer with wall remains. Phase 5: 16. Settlement layers with ashes and carbon. 17. Temple walls of Phase 5c. 18. Floor levels belonging to no. 17. 19. Settlement layers. 20. Fire Pit. Phase 6: 21. Temple wall of Phase 6a. 22. Floor levels belonging to no. 21. 23. Vessel pit. 24. Settlement layers with ashes and carbon. 25. Leveling layer. Phase 7: 26. Temenos wall of Phase 7. 27. Leveling layer. 28. Floor levels belonging to no. 26. 29. Settlement layers with ashes. 30. Gezira sand mixed with ashes. 31. Pure Gezira sand.

A, similar contemporary constructions can be observed (Figure 6.10). The first traces of writing appear on clay stoppers on vessels as hardly legible seal impressions and as royal names on wine jars, like Narmer, B 200/150/165+192 (Figure 2.25; T.A.H. Wilkinson 2000: 24-25). Unfortunately, inscriptional evidence is scarce at Tell Ibrahim Awad. 2.3.4.2. The Cemetery in Area B The first tomb – discovered during the 1986 soundings – was intact. It dated back to the 1st Dynasty, and contained skeletal remains in a contracted position, much pottery (mainly wine and beer jars), stone and copper vessels and ivory gaming pieces (van den Brink 1988; van Haarlem 1993). A second contemporary tomb was discovered nearby. Although this one had been robbed, a large number of objects (stone and pottery) was left behind in the tomb, including some large calcite Plates, unceremoniously pushed aside by the robbers in the search for more valuable objects (van Haarlem 1997). A third 1st Dynasty tomb, cleared in 1993, was again intact (van Haarlem 1996a). It contained a large amount of pottery (mainly storage jars; some imports), schist and

Figure 2.15b. Symbols.

22

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology

Figure 2.16. Plan of the cemetery with tombs of all phases.

Figure 2.18. Early Middle Kingdom Scarab.

Figure 2.17. Water jar of the Phase 1 Cemetery.

23

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Table 2.2. Cemetery phases Date

Tomb features

Burial gifts

Dating evidence

1. Early Middle Kingdom

-brick lined tombs -probably wooden coffins

-‘water bottles’ -head rest -calcite vessels

scarab

2. Late First Intermediate Period

shallow oval pits with reed mats

-small jars -bone beads

button seal

3. Early First Intermediate Period

rectangular pits with reed mat ‘coffins’, sometimes covered with (painted) plaster

-small jars -bone and faience beads

button seal

4. Late Old Kingdom

-brick lined tombs -burials with thick plaster lining, with and without reed foundation -wooden coffins

bone and carnelian beads

Userkaf seal impression

the Unification at the beginning of the 1st Dynasty. By contrast, the near absence of Near-Eastern import vessels suggests contacts with areas beyond Egypt’s borders were restricted, contrary to what one would expect for the eastern Delta. These tombs also suggest that Tell Ibrahim Awad must have been a substantial community at that time. The wealth of these tombs (of which more are to be expected in the unexcavated part of this area) is in stark contrast with the impoverished tombs of the Late OK and the FIP, and may have had something to do with the importance of the temple. It is possible that the main cemetery and settlement shifted from Area B to A between the 1st and 4th dynasties. However, this remains to be investigated.

Figure 2.19. Button Seal of the Late First Intermediate Period.

2.3.5. Excursus: The Excavation Methods 2.3.5.1. Actual excavation The actual excavation work since the start of the activities at the site of Tell Ibrahim Awad in 1986 was performed by local workmen for the removal of the bulk of the soil, usually in 0.1-0.15 m. layers at a time. Qufti workmen were engaged for expert tasks; these workmen from the Upper Egyptian town of Quft are traditionally experienced digging specialists and engaged in excavation work all over Egypt (Quirke 2010). Local people work under their supervision.

Figure 2.20. Seal Impression of Userkaf.

The Coordinate System

calcite vessels like cylinder jars and bowls. The body was buried in a contracted position. The superstructure of this three-chamber tomb was entirely built of mud brick. Originally, it must have looked somewhat like a miniature version of the contemporary 1st Dynasty mastabas in Saqqara, without the niche facades.

The excavation was organised based on two separate NorthSouth grid systems (one for Area A, the other for area B). Unfortunately, they are not linked (Figure 2.4). Each grid square measures 10 x 10 m. A 50 cm wide area at the sides of each square has been left unexcavated, forming a ‘baulk’ with a thickness of 1 m. with the adjoining 50 cm of the next square. This profile baulk is intended for observation and recording of the vertical profile, and to be able to walk around the site without disturbing the excavated floors. The separate squares are referred to according to the position of their northeastern corner relative to an imaginary grid

The deceased must have belonged to the local nobility to be able to afford the valuable objects in the tomb: most of the stone vessels must have come a long way from Upper Egypt. At the same time, this testifies to elaborate trade between Upper and Lower Egypt, soon after 24

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology

Figure 2.21. Age Group Distribution.

Figure 2.22. Part of the First Intermediate Period-Settlement in Area A.

origin. The squares are designated by a code consisting of the north-south coordinates in meters, a slash, and then the East-West coordinate. The letters A or B for the respective areas (like A 130/190) precede this. All features (level plans, pits, tombs etc.) and finds from one square receive a running number, starting from no. 1 for each separate square, sometimes with further subdivisions (example: A 130/190/83/15), and regardless of the level plan, or Planum. Profiles are labelled according to the compass. The altitudes “above mean sea level” are derived from the scale indications on a nearby canal bridge.

and detailed photography (rarely profiles), and a written excavation diary. All movable finds were labeled with object slips (Figure 2.26). Further recording, like object photography and drawing was done in the house. Separate description forms for pottery and non-pottery were used (see the Catalogues for the items), with sketches included. Squares As soon as the fresh surface of a new layer (generally about 0.10 m in thickness) of a 10 x 10 m. square has been excavated, it is photographed, and then 1:50 plans are drawn. On the first Planum (=successive level plan of a floor) drawing of a square, the altitudes of every meter point on the baulk are recorded as well; after that, only relevant points on the floor.

2.3.5.2. Recording The following records were compiled in the field: general square and profile drawings (profiles only when appropriate), plans of details (usually tombs), general 25

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 2.23. Meidum-bowls, A 130/220/68 and A 130/220/71.

Profiles are drawn 1:20; important details (tombs, deposits, sometimes profiles) at the scale of 1:10.

The field data are recorded, and then they are transported to the excavation house. Here, they are recorded on lot cards for statistical evaluation, with section drawings, measurements, and determination of the clay material11, and then stored.

Detailed stratigraphic analysis of the square and profile drawings, mainly focusing on architectural features, together with object study, focused on ceramics, finally has produced a viable stratigraphy and chronology for the site (see section 2.3.1).

3. C-finds: finds from the surface, pits, disturbed layers etc. After checking these for interesting fragments, they were discarded in the field, as coming from disturbed contexts.

Movable Finds 1. A-finds (=more than half preserved single objects in an undisturbed context)

Samples are a special category: they can be botanical, C14, DNA, or vessel contents; in the last case, samples are taken from just outside the vessel as well for comparison of the chemical proportions of both samples.

After initial recording in the field (Figure 2.26) and transport to the excavation house, the object is drawn, photographed and recorded in detail, after which it is stored.

To obtain a more comprehensive picture, extensive object lists according to location and category are produced. After initial recording, flint tools and animal bones are handled separately for expert analysis.

2. B-finds (ceramic lots) The sherds are split up according to rim-, base-, handle, and body fragments on the spot. The first three groups are preserved, after the body fragments are checked for special features (unusual clays, painting, potmarks etc.). These are kept, and the remainder is discarded on the waste mound.

11  At first, every diagnostic fragment in a lot was drawn on separate sheets, but this method was replaced by recording them more efficiently on lot cards.

26

Excavations, Stratigraphy and Chronology

Figure 2.24. Flints Hoard.

Figure 2.25. Sherd with Narmer Serekh.

Figure 2.26. Find slip.

27

3 The Deposits 3.1. Introduction

1959; Erman 1886; Goedicke 1970; Harrington 2013) or the daily ritual in the temple (Cauville 2012). The second option will be discussed here; this is not the place for a detailed discussion of the first option.

This chapter begins with a treatment of several kinds of deposits (see Müller 2017, 161-64) and a more detailed analysis of votive offering deposits. This is followed by a description of the find circumstances of the temple deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad. Chronological considerations conclude the chapter.

Offering materials do not constitute an offering per se; it is only the act of presentation (communication), accompanied by a certain ritual1, that charges them as a real offering (see extensively in section 3.4.). This charging takes place during the act of presentation, as the offering power is transferred to the deity in question as a life-giving force. This induces the deity in its turn to use its heightened powers for the benefit of the donor (Assmann 1969: 27071). The fact that the empha sis is not on the intrinsic value of the offering, but on the value added to it in its dedication to the deity, enables the introduction of Ersatz-offerings, like miniature versions of the real thing. In this view, the material offered is no more than a vehicle for this added value. The intrinsic value is not supposed to make any difference in the granting of wishes (LÄ IV, 579-84).

3.2. Definitions We consider a temple deposit as a collection of associated objects, intentionally buried or stored and sealed in a secluded place for ritual purposes in or near the temple grounds (derived from Dreyer 1986: 59-60). A distinction can be made between: 1. Foundation deposits, intended to sanctify a temple site (see section 3.3.1); 2. Offering deposits: to provide food and drink offerings to a deity or the dead (see section 3.3.2):

This concept is applied in funerary practices as well. Models and miniatures of realia, even as pictures or reliefs on tomb walls, or just mentioned in spoken utterances, could have the same impact as real offerings by magical implication.

a. In the forecourt of a temple b. In the temple c. Next to tombs or tomb groups

3.3.1. Foundation Deposits

d. In houses or courtyards;

This type of deposits is generally defined as a type of offering placed in or beneath the foundations of a building or in its vicinity at the time of its founding (often under corners or other focal points such as doorways). It does not include objects or food items deposited after the structure was completed. In Egypt, the foundation ceremony for a temple was only the initial part of a ritual sequence which was not considered finished until the completed building had been ritually presented to its chief deity by a king or a deputy. Hence, any offerings laid down before the completion of the final dedication rites must be included as foundation offerings. Votive objects which were composed and inserted in or beneath the structure after the dedication rites were finished do not qualify as foundation deposits (Weinstein 1973: lxix)2, but the difference is difficult to establish archaeologically.

3. Other deposits, consisting of sanctified objects (Dreyer 1986, 60): a. Votive Offerings sensu strictu b. (Model) Offerings c. Elements used in the temple ritual (see chapter five) d. Decorative elements of the temple construction (see chapter six). The borders between the categories are sometimes unclear, and various interpretations seem possible in some cases, especially for the distinction between 3a and b (as used in Dreyer 1986: 60). Category 1 and 2a are possibly occurring at Tell Ibrahim Awad (see sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2); 2c and 3a-d are attested, however (see section 3.3.3).

The function of these deposits has been argued as to serve the sanctification and purification of the pertinent location,

3.3. The Function of Offerings in General

See for a definition of ritual: Insoll 2004: 10-12. Dreyer (1986, 59) suggests that a more or less random distribution of votive objects like in the Satet temple developed into the later custom of burying foundation deposits at the focal points of a building. 1  2 

In Egypt, offerings can be brought within the framework of the funerary cult for the sustenance of the dead (Gardiner 28

The Deposits protection of the construction by means of the inclusion of amulet figures (from the NK onwards; Hölscher 1939: 87-88 / Plate 52), the commemoration of the founder (by adding his name on bricks and plaques) and elaboration by the addition of surplus objects like beads to enlarge the quantity of objects in the deposit (Weinstein 1973: 433436; Ellis 1968).

The few foundation deposits from before the MK usually contain not much more than pottery, mostly as models, a substitute for ‘life-size’ pottery (see also below and Weinstein 1973: 23-32). From the MK onwards, the deposits consist usually of sacrificial animals or vegetables, miniature pottery, miniature or real constructional tools, miniature or real objects used in the foundation ritual, and (miniature) bricks or plaques, sometimes with royal names on them.

The foundation ceremony is essential for the temple construction. It was ideally performed by the king, but in fact probably mostly by a representative (Weinstein 1973: 1-23, esp. 15-16). This ceremony is infrequently referred to before Ptolemaic times, but, in all probability, characterised traditionally by the following features, related to functional building phases. For most stages, some (in)direct material remains can be pointed out (Weinstein 1973: 416-37) together with pictorial and textual references (el-Adly 1981; Cauville 2012: 263-68).

7. After completion of the temple, but before delivering it to the pertaining divinity, the building was purified and consecrated. Ointment jars (Weinstein 1973: 24-25) and natron salt fragments, most probably for this purpose, have been found in deposits; 8. The building was presented to the pertaining divinity. The king or his representative probably held a sceptre at this last stage, possibly matching miniature sceptres in some deposits7.

1. It must have been executed partly at night because of the orientation of the building towards the stars, as sometimes required for temples;

According to the definition, the early deposits from Abydos and Hierakonpolis are not foundation deposits, because they are not placed under focal points of the building. The exception is Abydos deposit M 65/89, which was placed under a temple feature, in this case a threshold. The Main Deposit in Hierakonpolis was found lying partly on a stone pavement, and not in or beneath any architectural feature. The deposit found near the temple of Armant is a borderline case (Mond / Myers 1940: 29).

2. The corner points of the temple construction were established in accordance with the orientation as fixed, and marked with sticks under the patronage of the goddess of measurement and arithmetic, Seshat 3 (Figure 2.26); 3. Cords tied to these sticks were used to trace the foundation trenches (known as ‘the stretching of the cord’; Von Bissing / Kees 1923)4; In connection with 2 and 3, miniature equipment was added to the deposits;

One of the most famous deposits is the so-called ‘Treasure of Tôd’, consisting of four bronze boxes with a multitude of objects, found under the MK temple of Montu there (Bisson de la Roque 1950; Pierrat 1994; Müller 2017: 163164). However, according to a strict definition, this deposit does not qualify as a foundation deposit, because not a single foundation deposit, explicitly identified as such, contains intrinsically valuable objects (Weinstein 1973: lxxii), and it is not placed under a specific temple feature. Deposits like this (or better ‘cachettes’) should rather be considered as (temple) treasures hidden for safekeeping against robbery or destruction.

4. The foundation trenches for the walls were dug out, and filled with sand (Von Bissing / Kees 1923). Temple foundation trenches filled with sand have been found frequently (see Figure 2.14, no. 2), but whether this can be regarded as evidence for a ritual, or just a technical matter, is ambiguous; 5. Brick making, symbolic for the building of the temple, was performed (Von Bissing / Kees 1923). Real or model bricks, probably made at that point, could be included in the deposit as well5 (but not necessarily);

Archaeological evidence for foundation deposits before the MK is rather scarce. There is only one undisputed foundation deposit attested before Dynasty 4, consisting of miniature stone vases, and this concerns a royal funerary complex (Djoser: Weinstein 1973: 23-32; Petrie 1903: 20 / Plate LXII). From the MK until Roman times, foundation offerings sensu strictu were common. It is possible that stray votive offering objects (not the larger concentrations) were placed on purpose in specific places – observed in Elephantine (Dreyer 1986: 59) – as a kind of forerunner for the later foundation offerings. Concerning Tell Ibrahim Awad, a real foundation deposit was found under one of the

6. The foundation offering objects were deposited in pits at focal points of the building6, and covered with a sand layer. Several foundation deposits were found with such a cover layer, like in Karnak (Ricke 1937: 72).

Early representations of the foundation ceremony are rare: el-Adly 1981; Engelbach 1934; Von Bissing / Kees 1923: Bl. 1; Fakhry 1961: 94-97. 4  This is also the overall name for the complete ritual, attested already on the Palermo Stone for Dynasty 1 and early Dynasty 2 (Schäfer 1902: 20, 22 / Plate I – recto 3,7 & 4,2). 5  Petrie 1897: 15 / Plate 17, 1 (by Queen Tausert). In this foundation deposit a deformed brick, probably not sufficiently dried when it was put in; see also Willems 1996: 104. 6  Von Bissing / Kees 1923. In this temple apparently consisting of sacrificial animals and miniature pottery. 3 

7  el-Adly 1981: 78-304, with some variations (like the application of plaster as a separate stage).

29

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 3.1. Marking the corner points, and stretching of the cords by Seshat and the King (Karnak Temple).

Figure 3.2. Location of the Deposits in the Phase 2 Temple (from Eigner 2000; see Figures 2.9-2.11).

altars (Figure 2.12, C) in the MK temple, containing about two dozen pieces of miniature bowls (Cat. nos. 796-815, van den Brink 1992: 47). Miniature pottery is standard in foundation deposits before the MK (see 3.2.1 and Allen 2006; Weinstein 1973: 23-32). There is a possibility that in one case (Deposit 11, Figure 3.2) votive offerings from an emptied early deposit (no. 8) were secondarily buried under the foundations of the MK temple (see Figure 2.14, in layer no. 2 under wall no. 1) as a kind of foundation deposit, although not under a corner point. Another possible example is the shrine (Cat. no. 290) found at the southeast corner of Deposit 10: this looks like a kind of foundation offering by the nature of the miniature shrine, well suited as a foundation offering for a real and life-size shrine, and situated near a corner point of the temple.

One offering deposit was found at Tell Ibrahim Awad, clearly fitting the definition and just outside the temple temenos of Phase 1, consisting for 75 per cent of so-called ‘beer jars’ (Pit 5, A 140/200/54; van den Brink 1992: 49)8. As such, it is not included in this study. Several offering deposits were found at Tell el-Dab’a (Müller 2008a) in temple areas, mostly consisting of miniature pottery. However, most offering deposits at Tell el-Dab’a were found in funerary contexts or in and near living quarters, probably marking private cult practices. These offering pits contained mainly remains of what is interpreted as cultic meals and burnt-offerings, qualified as such by charred animal bones and pottery. This practice seems to be at least partly of foreign origin. This will be shown in chapter five. The practice is probably attested in Tell Ibrahim Awad in a temple context (see section 3.5.1, Deposit no. 9). However, unlike at Tell ed-Dab’a ((Müller 2008a: vol. 1, 237-38), no intentionally broken pottery or pottery with burning traces was included in the case of Tell Ibrahim Awad, and just a few non-charred animal bones. Here, a variety of objects occur which could be interpreted as belonging to offering deposits (pottery in deposits and non-charred animal bones). However, the bones were scattered over the area and not found in any special concentration near the pottery. Again, this pottery did not show signs of intentional breaking or extensive burning. Contrary to the aforementioned Pit 5, it is not certain that these are really offering deposits.

3.3.2. Offering Deposits (or Remains) An offering deposit usually consists of buried containers with provisions intended as offerings to a deity, mostly housed in some shrine nearby. Offering deposits were mostly placed in plain pits, containing mainly storage or household vessels like beer jars, cups and bowls, or miniature versions of these, rather than cultic vessels, and sometimes supplemented by animal bones (Müller 2008a: vol. 1, 237-38). Different from foundation deposits, they are not placed in or under specific architectural features, but in open spaces near the shrine of the deity for which the offerings were intended. They also differ from votive offerings, which usually contain smaller objects like figurines, as well as small vessels which may have contained precious substances.

Referred to here as a deposit for disposed cultic pottery, but an interpretation as an offering pit seems more likely. Garstang 1904: Plate 22 / R 68; Firth / Quibell 1935: Plate 25 (below).

8 

30

The Deposits One tomb (No. 8, in A 130/230) of Cemetery Phase 2 (see section 2.3.3.1 and Table 2.2) was extended with a pit containing animal bones, and the fireplaces in between some of the tombs could be considered as remains of offering practices as well. Contrary to Tell el-Dab’a and other places (Müller 2008a: vol. 1, 237-38), however, these fireplaces did not contain animal bones, neither charred nor non-charred.

the 7th pylon of the Karnak temple, along the processional way leading from the Amun-temple proper to the Temple of Mut, G. Legrain found ca. 800 statues and ca. 17000 smaller objects, buried in Ptolemaic times. Because in other parts of the temple smaller similar assemblages were found as well, it seems that the temple stores were cleared over and over again, when they were once again overflowing with votive objects. In North Saqqara11, several cachettes of temple equipment and votive objects were found during excavations in the Sacred Animal Necropolis there, near the temenos walls of the temple terrace. Apart from deposits for storing excess votive objects, there were also foundation deposits here, and deposits for the safekeeping of sacred objects, all of them after Saite times (Green 1987: 1-2 / Figure 1). The NK sanctuary at Gebel Zeit also produced a large quantity of votive objects, like female figurines, baboons and (miniature) pottery (Castel / Soukiassian 1984: 104 / Plate IV-V).

3.3.3. Votive Deposits 3.3.3.1. The Specific Function of Votive Offerings: Definitions As distinct from other kinds of offerings, a votive offering is an object dedicated by a person to a deity in exchange for an expected specific favour to be granted by this deity (the do ut des principle. LÄ VI, 1077-1081; Helck 1977: 82; Wildung 1977-1: 277; Meskell 2004: 108 / 131; Mauss 1990: 18-22; Bussmann 2010: 211-212)9. It can also be an object which is donated after the favour has already been granted by a deity (the do quia dedisti principle; Assmann 1975: 353), but the latter is apparently much less frequently the case, judging from the evidence (Gunn 1916: 83-85). Propitiation is a reason for donating ex-votos as well10. Apparently, they could have a secondary magical role too, as re-used baboon and lion figurines were once found as part of a magician’s equipment in his tomb (Bourriau 1988: 110-11). More votive-like figures were found in other funerary contexts (for the MK as well; Bussmann 2010: 369-427; Harrington 2013: 81). It concerns objects like faience baboons and dwarfs, from Abydos Tomb 416 and other sites (Kemp / Merrilees1980: 105-75). Sporadic use in tomb contexts does not have to conflict with a votive function for similar objects in temple deposit contexts.

The countless animal mummies of later periods can be considered as votive offerings as well, as they are known to be presented as such12. 3.3.3.2. Function and Meaning The main impetus for donating votive offerings must have been to ask for healing of illness and defects (Ranke 1932: 414-15 / Plate 66; Kemp 1995: 25-29; Vernus 1977: 146 /149)13, of the supplicant him- or herself or of members of his or her family. Very important as a motive as well seems to have been a wish for children, mainly expressed by women (Desroches-Noblecourt, 1953). Inscribed exvotos also mention wishes for general well-being and protection now and in the afterlife. It seems that if the correct procedure was followed, a sort of silent covenant between donor and deity was concluded and one could consider the wish more or less automatically granted (Pinch 1993: 354).

As opposed to the specifically located foundation deposits, votive offering deposits are usually defined as a collection of votive objects (Dreyer 1986: 59), intentionally buried or stored and sealed in a secluded place inside a sacred compound due to their being dedicated to a deity relevant to the particular context. They were usually placed under the pavement, in pits or in abandoned parts of the temple (LÄ VI, 1079-080), and deposited after the shrine had run out of storage space and had to be vacated for new ex-votos. Apart from the close parallels in Elephantine, Hierakonpolis and Abydos, which are extensively treated in chapter four, more votive offering deposits are also known from many sites of the NK until the Late Period, among others in several Hathor shrines (Pinch 1993). From then on, votive practices were increasingly controlled by the state. Well-known is the very large deposit from the Karnak temple (Porter / Moss 1972: 136-167) containing, a.o., large numbers of abandoned statuary (including votive bronze figures). In the floor of Court I in front of

However, sometimes it was considered necessary to stir the gods to action by threatening to deny them their sacrifices if they would not act according to one’s desires14. The difference between a sacrifice and a votive offering is sometimes also defined as consisting of perishable goods in case of the former and of durable material in case of the latter (Pinch 1993: 335). Still, some of the faience and stone vessels from the deposits from Tell Ibrahim Awad may have held perfumes and/or ointments. The first, almost simultaneous appearances of ex-votos in Egypt are recorded for Hierakonpolis, Abydos, Elephantine and Tell Ibrahim Awad (see sections 4.9.1- 4.9.3). In later times, the practice of presenting them is attested for the Emery 1971: 6-8, on a cache of bronze votive offerings. Ikram (ed.) 2005: 1-15; contrary to Kessler 1989: 3-7, where they are considered to be the sacred animals themselves. 13  More grounds to appeal to a deity in: Brunner 1958: 15-18 14  Like in PT Spell 485. 11 

For the Egyptian phrase: Sandman 1938: 91, l. 9. Pinch 1993: xxv prefers the more general indication ‘gift to a deity’. 10  Gunn 1916: 86-87; in the text mentioned here combined with an expression of thanks for a healing.

12 

9 

31

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt whole of Egypt, and continues at least into the Late Period (LÄ VI: 1078-079).

for visiting temples. It has been suggested that elements of rites the passage could have played a part (Pinch 1993: 351). This could be the case at Tell Ibrahim Awad if it is true that the temple here was a mortuary shrine; for which suggestion (see section 7.5). On the stone pedestal of the cult statue in the MK temple at Mirgissa a thick layer of whitish deposits was found, apparently remains of libations (Vercoutter 1970: 319 / Figure 18: 328; Kemp 1995: 27-29 / Figure 1).Votive stelae of the NK and later often show acts of praying and / or sacrifice, apparently accompanying a presentation (Pinch 1993: Figure 8-9). Even elements of sightseeing or a feeling of obligation for travellers – often state officials on government business – to honour deities in shrines which they were passing by were reasons for a visit, at least in Ramesside times (Franke 2004)17.

Ex-votos and the particular way they are disposed of (including abandoned cultic objects) are by no means specific for Egypt. Elsewhere as well, they were gathered in deposits located on the temple grounds according to the same principle. The practice of donating votive offerings is still widespread in the Greek-Orthodox and Roman Catholic Church and in Hinduism15. See also section 4.10 for votive offerings abroad. 3.3.3.3. Appearance In Egypt, ex-votos could assume many forms: sculpture in the round, stelae, actual and miniature cult vessels, images of animals, cosmetic palettes and mace heads, but also cherished personal belongings like jewellery etc. See section 4.6 for details on the specific categories at Tell Ibrahim Awad.

It is often assumed that entering the temple’s inner sanctum was usually strictly limited to people associated with the temple cult in one way or another; and that others had to stay out, being only permitted inside the temple compound. There is, however, no certain evidence that such strict rules were applied at Tell Ibrahim Awad. Arguably, other rules may have been observed in smaller provincial temples than in state shrines (T.A.H. Wilkinson 1999: 303-05). Contrary to the general rule, the sanctuary of the Roman temple at el-Qal’a was, for instance, sometimes open to be seen by visitors in the frontal part of the building (Pantalacci / Traunecker 1984: Figure 2).

3.4. Other General Aspects 3.4.1. The Donor Some aspects of the relation between the donor of exvotos and the deity involved have already been discussed (sections 3.3.3.1 and 3.3.3.2; LÄ II: 788-91; T.A.H. Wilkinson 1999: 269-72). In Egypt, supplicants could be local people, or, in the case of larger temples, possibly pilgrims (Malaise 1987: 55-82; Yoyotte 1960). Religious festivals were obvious opportunities for visits (LÄ II: 172-91), and could provide suitable occasions for prayers and the presentation of votive offerings to confirm good relations with deities.

Also, different types of temples / chapels may have differed in this regard. In the NK, private shrines at Deir el-Medina and in Amarna (Bomann 1991; Peet / Woolley 1923: 92108; Kemp / Nicholson 1987: 56-62; Stevens 2003 and 2006) suggest that the priesthood was not necessarily a full-time occupation; the workmen themselves could act as full-fledged priests in these local cults (Bomann 1991: passim; Bierbrier 1997: 96-97; Valbelle 1985: 328-331). No explicit information exists on the nature of the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad, and the fact that, in the various phases of its use, its plan changed drastically more than once, suggests that what applied at one stage, may not have in others. However, the small Phase 2-temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad with its narrow and twisting corridors and small forecourt certainly does not give the impression of being accessible for more than small groups of people at the same time (also in the case of sacrificial or funerary feasts; Eigner 2000, 26 / Figure 5). These characteristics at least reduced visual contact with the interior as well. It is not unlikely that this spatial disposition created an intimate inner sphere. Limitations to access seem not unlikely, therefore.

As mentioned already (section 3.3), it is risky to try to derive social status from the quality of the ex-votos, as this did not seem to matter for the granting of a wish. Only significantly crude or simple objects might testify to the poverty of the donor (see for examples from Tell Ibrahim Awad baboons like Cat. no. 100) or, on the other hand, significantly wellexecuted objects, to his or her prosperity. The fact that a local elite is attested at Tell Ibrahim Awad fits in with the presence of high-quality objects in the deposits (like those of ivory). Social status is apparently not connected with a specific kind of votive objects; there are no indications that any category is exclusively linked to either the elite or the non-elite (Bussmann 2010: 426 / 430 / 491-92). Personal piety (Stevens 2006; Weiss 2009)16, particular requests or the heightening of one’s status could be reasons

3.4.2. Presentation

15  Like the ‘naval’ ex-votos, mainly ship’s models or painted ships, well represented until now in churches near Paris and in the Provence; see Joubert / Lepage 1977. In the Middle Ages, objects often accompanied the transfer of land to the Church, for prayers in return; see Bijsterveld 2007: 63-82. Greek-Orthodox votives have parallels in Gallo-Roman practices: Deyts 1994: 10-16 16  Probably already a factor in early times (Baines 1987; Sadek, 1987: 5-10), contrary to Assmann 1984.

There is little evidence showing in detail how votive offerings were administered in the temple, so the following consideration must remain somewhat speculative.

17 

32

As stated in the prologue of many of the letters in Wente 1967.

The Deposits 3.4.3. The Recipient

For the actual place where the votive presentation was made, it would be logical to think of an open place or court outside (the ‘Contra Temple’) or just inside the temple precinct (Eigner 2007: 101-02)18, where the votive offerings were handed over by supplicants to temple staff, who brought them in turn somewhere in the presence of the deity. The ritual was meant to facilitate the transfer from the profane into the sacred sphere.

In principle, all deities could be eligible for receiving ex-votos, both the major state deities and the minor or ‘household’ gods. In popular worship in later times, for example in Deir el-Medina, foreign gods played an important role as well (Bomann 1991: 73-74). Furthermore, deified private persons could also receive votive offerings, like Heka-ib on Elephantine, Imhotep and Amenhotep, son of Hapu (Wildung 1977a/b; Habachi 1985; Franke 2004). Statues of revered persons like Amenophis I and Ahmes-Nefertary in Deir el Medina and Imhotep in Saqqara, normally acting as intermediaries for passing on prayers directed to a deity via them, could also act as intermediary recipients of votive offerings (Pinch 1993: 347; Kemp 1995: 36; Clère 1968). For the possible recipient at Tell Ibrahim Awad, cf. section 4.8.

Ablutions in advance to obtain a state of ritual purity for everybody concerned may have been obligatory: in many temples, basins for that purpose were present, like in mastaba chapels (Reisner 1942: 47), in front of the main entrance to the Hathor-temple at Dendera, and in the first court of the temple of Seti I at Abydos. There is evidence for this at Tell Ibrahim Awad, in the form of traces of emplacements of large vessels in the forecourt of the temple(s) (Eigner 2000: 31/ Plate IIIa; see also Figure 2.11).

3.5. The Deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad

When the object was accepted, several actions might have been requested from the temple employee (Pinch 1993: 340 ff.), for example, the personalisation of the object, to link it with its donor. This could already have taken place during the production of the object, for instance by the addition of name inscriptions. At Tell Ibrahim Awad, several objects are fitted with marks which could be interpreted as signs of identity like crosses or circles, although they could be production marks as well (cf. Cat. no. 122; Emery 1971, 6-8)19.

In the 1989 excavation season, the first objects appeared which later turned out to be discarded constructional elements of the temple. They were fragments of large faience tiles, of which one was found in the foundation sand below one of the MK temple walls (see the Catalogue, nr. 662). In the 1993 season, most of the ceramic and faience deposits came to light, including a collection of stray votive objects; in the following seasons the remainder appeared, the last in the 1997 season.

A sort of consecration ritual may have been required in the case of personal possessions being donated instead of especially produced ex-votos, like jewellery (at Tell Ibrahim Awad: rings [Cat. no. 420] or beads [Cat. no. 434]).

All were found in the squares with the designation A 130/190 (northern half) and A 140/190, after the dismantling of the Phase 1 temple, and belong to Phase 2 (see Figures 2.92.11). They came from between the absolute levels of 4.15 and 2.55 m. above sea level, in layers of a total of 1.60 m. in thickness. A total of 706 non-ceramic objects, complete and fragmentary, have been recovered from the deposits, and a number of 250 complete or almost complete ceramic vessels, not including the fragments.

A substitution ritual could be employed when less valuable objects were offered as Ersatz for more expensive versions. There is no real evidence for that, neither in Egypt in general nor specifically in Tell Ibrahim Awad, probably because the intrinsic value of a votive offering object was not important (see section 3.3). However, some (miniature) faience vessels imitating stone vases are included in the Deposits, like Cat. no. 463.

The sealing of these deposits took place, in all probability not later than the 4th Dynasty (Phase 2; see sections 3.7 and 2.3.1).

Nullification by ritual destruction is intended to prevent reuse of the objects or to emphasise that they are passing into the ownership of the deity (Pinch 1993: 341; Mauss 1990: 18-22). It is best known from funerary contexts (LÄ VI: 1390-397; van Dijk 1993:173-88; Seiler 2005), although the ritual breaking of pottery may have more to do with the symbolic destruction of enemies, both in funerary and temple evidence (Müller 1996: 272-75/297302). There is no evidence for this at Tell Ibrahim Awad.

Deposit 1: 14 offering-stands Deposit 2: 30 miscellaneous objects Deposit 3/5: 74 miscellaneous objects Deposit 4: 80 non-ceramic objects Deposit 4a: 13 miscellaneous objects

There is very late evidence for that in the Dakhla Oasis (Hope 1994; Hope / Kaper, 1989, 6-11 / Plate IIIb). 19  Compare also the personal character of button seals (Pantalacci / Traunecker 1996, 359-67). 18 

Deposit 6: 42 ceramic objects Deposit 7: contained only pottery fragments 33

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Deposit 1 (Figure 3.4) contained only ritual pottery, being 14 offering stands of different size and quality. They were all lined up neatly in a single file against the inside of the Eastern NNE-SSW wall of the inner sanctuary. For this reason, the collection should probably not be regarded as a ‘Deposit’ proper. The stands give the impression of having been lined up in storage or ready for use, when the temple wall collapsed on top of them: the wall has a notable bulge there, and they are covered with brick material. Level: 3.72-3.31 m. Phase 2b.

Deposit 8: 5 non-ceramic objects Deposit 9: 22 ceramic objects Deposit 10: 310 miscellaneous objects Deposit 11: 12 non-ceramic objects Deposit 12: 70 miscellaneous objects Deposit 13: 152 non-ceramic objects

Deposit 2 (Figure 3.5). The objects were embedded in a dark, humic layer in a narrow space between the Eastern temenos wall and the inner sanctuary wall, probably a disused corridor. The content was quite homogenous, consisting only of pottery (mainly hes-vases), with the exception of one small stone vessel (Cat. no. 456). Level: 4.04-3.60 m. Phase 2b.

The Deposits 2, 3/5, 6 and 7 are situated in what looks like disused corridors, whereas Deposit no. 9 seems to be placed just outside the temple proper, but still within the temple compound. The Deposits 4, 4a, 5, 10, 12 and 13 were put in what looks like purposely-built chambers for them. Included are a number of objects, clearly votives, found inside the temple, but outside the deposits proper (see the Concordance and the Catalogue).

Deposit 3 (Figure 3.6): a large ceramic collection in two layers, composed mainly of hes-vases once again, with additional offering stands, bowls and miniature vessels, and a couple of faience pieces. Most of it had been pushed against the side wall of the alleged cult niche, on top of which a later wall was built which partly covered the Deposit (see Figure 3.2). This was originally probably a room or corridor with a different function, subsequently reused for this large deposit. It was filled with humic material. Level: 3.95-3.11 m. Phase 2b.

The deposits contain in most cases either ceramics or nonceramics. As can be deduced from the graph in Figure 3.3, there are considerable divergences between the individual Deposits. The high proportion of beads in Deposits 4 and 4a stand out, as well as the high numbers of baboon figurines, vessels and tiles in Deposit 10, as compared with the others. Consequently, one and the same deposit could contain votive offerings, discarded cult equipment and temple decorations, like Deposit 4 (see below).

Deposit 5 (Figure 3.7) was discovered after Deposit 3 to the South, but probably belonged together with it, as it was only separated from it by a later division or supporting wall (the same wall which covered part of Deposit 3), built partly on top of some of its contents. It contained more hesvases, offering stands and miniature vessels, in two layers. The miniature vessels may constitute a separate deposit, as they are concentrated in one small separate heap. The fill was humic soil. Level: 3.71-3.12 m. Phase 2c.

3.5.1. Descriptions of the Individual Deposits For the objects from each deposit, see the Concordance of Excavation numbers with Catalogue numbers. See for the location Figure 3.2. The subsoil under all deposits consisted of humic fill material from Temple Phase 3. The attribution to different phases is based upon absolute levels and the position in either disused corridors (Dep. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7) or original chambers (Dep. 4, 4a, 10, 12 and 13), unless stated otherwise.

Deposit 4 (Figure 3.8) was discovered in a small room (1.4 x 0.6 m), completely sealed off by brick walls, and

Figure 3.3. Graph showing absolute amounts and relative comparisons between the deposits with non-ceramic contents.

34

The Deposits

Figure 3.4. Deposit 1. For the numbers, see the Concordance.

Figure 3.5. Deposit 2.

Everything was embedded in dark, humic soil. These votive objects were probably still in the cachette where they were deposited, when the temple of Phase 2a was abandoned, and left there. Level: 3.42-3.12 m. Phase 2c.

directly behind the platform in front of the alleged cult niche. It contained a large number of non-ceramic objects, both architectural, like faience tiles, and purely votive, like beads, figurines and stone mace-heads in three layers, each separated by a thin layer of silt, with a total thickness of 0.30 m. As a sort of cover layer, several large tiles and tile fragments (Cat. nos. 643-646, 648-651, 653 and 658) were placed on top of the other objects; beside this, an exceptional silver bowl was found (Cat. no. 452).

The architectural analysis (see section 2.3.1, Phase 2a-c and 3) of the location of this deposit behind the platform, together with the Deposits 4a, 10, 12 and 13 behind the niche, suggests that the chambers where they were put were the original places where they were stored directly after donation. The level of the walls of both the temple proper and the chambers and the brick material and size is the same.

A curious feature was the presence of several ivory or bone rods between the layers (Dreyer / Hartung 2000:163)20. 20 

Possibly thin gaming rods.

35

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt When the Phase 2a-temple was abandoned, the objects of these deposits were simply left where they were. The additional objects (mainly cultic pottery) to be discarded were then placed in the other corridors and rooms of the temple, which had lost their function when the Phase 2a-temple was abandoned (the Deposits 2, 3/5 and 6/7; Eigner 2000: 17-36). The bottom level of these latter loci is significantly higher than the bottom level of the other Deposits. Alternatively, Deposit 4, being situated where one would expect the cult statue, may have been arranged there after the niche had lost its function (that is, after the removal of the cult statue). Deposit 4a (Figure 3.9): from another sealed brick room beside no. 4, behind the back wall of the alleged cult niche, and measuring 1.5 x 0.5 m. A small, mixed collection with faience objects, hes-vases and the bizarre stone (Cat. no. 402). Level: 3.01-3.10 m (humic fill with a thick organic, black layer from 3.90 m downwards on top). Phase 2c. Deposit 6 (Figure 3.10): a large ceramic deposit, wedged in the narrow space between the two L-shaped walls of the temenos and the inner sanctuary, in all probability a disused corridor (the same as Deposit 2, north of it). Most of the contents consist again of libation-vases, with some bowls and miniature vessels, and one mortar-like limestone object (Cat. no. 453). The fill contained more sand than the previous Deposits; it may consist of levelling material for the Phase 1 temple. Level: 3.88-3.60 m. Phase 2b. Deposit 7 (Figure 2.9a): South of Deposit 6 on a lower level and only consisting of sherds, mostly of bowls and

Figure 3.6a. Deposit 3, Situation 1.

Figure 3.6b. Deposit 3, Situation 2.

36

The Deposits

Figure 3.7. Deposit 5, Situation 1 (above) and 2 (below).

The other ceramic vessels (see the Concordance) were found under this stand and under a second layer of bricks beside it. They consisted of many bowls and bowl fragments, with fewer hes-vases than in the other deposits, and some beer jars. They were interred just outside the Southern inner sanctuary wall in a sandy fill, probably because space inside had run out. Level: 3.53-3.16 m. Phase 2b.

offering stands. The fill is a mix of sandy and humic soil. Possibly belonging to no. 6, or even to no. 2. Level: 3.503.20 m. Phase 2b. Deposit 8: this was found almost empty, with only some (faience) objects left. It appeared to be lined on one side with (reused?) ceramic tiles, and filled mainly with sand and some fat clay. It was probably emptied during reconstruction activities, when its contents were presumably moved to a new location, perhaps as Deposit 11. According to level and position (under the eastern NNE-SSW wall of the inner sanctuary of Phase 2), this is probably one of the oldest Deposits, perhaps even belonging to the almost disappeared Phase 3 temple. Level: 3.02-2.91 m.

Deposits 10, 12 and 13 were possibly originally meant as one large cache behind the cult niche (measuring 3.75 x 1.0 m, containing more than 500 objects in all; mostly votive and architectural objects, with a few ritual vessels), because, as the deposits were removed, the two internal division or supporting walls (see Figure 2.9a) appeared to be somewhat later additions, built partly on the first layer of objects (Figure 3.11c). These objects may have been retained in their original position, contrary to the objects deposited later (like 4 and 4a). Thus, three separate mud brick rooms instead of one large one were formed. Like

Deposit 9 (Figure 2.9a): this ceramic deposit was covered with a layer of mud bricks belonging to the same Phase 2. Below this layer, fragments of a very large offering stand (Cat. no. 708), with a height of more than 1.00 m. and a diameter of ca. 0.45 m came to light. 37

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 3.8. Deposit 4, Situation 1.

Figure 3.9. Deposit 4a.

38

The Deposits

Figure 3.10. Deposit 6.

with six objects (nos. 73, 152, 326, 489 and 589), among which the hollow faience shrine (Cat. no. 290). Both vessels were found at the deepest level in the chambers, and must have been placed there along with the first items. Only a few objects were found under the division wall separating it from Deposit 12. Level: 3.36-2.81 m. Phase 2c.

Deposit 9, these were covered with a layer of bricks. Under this layer, the bones of one or two small goats or sheep21 were found as a food or foundation offering. Beside this was placed a large ovoid jar (Cat. no. 933) containing some unusual objects, like a standing baboon figure (Cat. no. 87) and some ivory objects, among which another standing baboon (Cat. no. 86), a sort of separate Deposit22. The fill of all chambers was a dark, humic soil.

Deposit 12 (Figure 3.11b): the smallest room of the three, measuring 0.75 x 0.50 m., and containing about 75 objects, most of them of faience, and some ivories. Under the division wall separating it from Deposit 13, a number of objects were found, including two large bowls (Cat. no. 755-756), upside down, and a number of mace heads was concentrated in the southern part. Level: 3.39 – 2.85 m. Phase 2c.

Deposit 10 (Figure 3.11a): the largest (eastern) of the three subdivided rooms, measuring 1.50 x 1.25 m. It contained almost 300 objects, the large majority made of faience, with only some of ivory, stone or pottery. They were packed in several layers; no special concentrations of specific materials or representations could be discerned. In the southeast corner were found, as a sort of separate sub- deposits, a large bowl (Cat. no. 946) containing 21 objects (A 130/190/70/268-288) and a Plate (Cat. no. 940)

Deposit 13 (Figure 3.11b): the third brick room, measuring 1.00 x 0.50 m. It contained about 130 objects, including the majority of the ivory votive objects from this site (ca. 50), all embedded in a congealed mass of damp, humid soil and salts. Stone mace heads were concentrated in the northwest corner and faience baboons in the southwest part. Level: 3.44-2.79 m. Phase 2c.

21  Unfortunately, shortly after the uncovering of the bones, and before identification, they were smashed by neighbourhood children. 22  A large number of the figurines found at Tell el-Farkha was also deposited in a jar (Ciałowicz 2007).

39

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 3.11a. Deposit 10.

3.6. Summary

Deposit 11: consists of a dozen faience objects found close together on the very bottom of the foundation trench of the southern MK inner sanctuary wall (see Figure 2.14, no. 2). It was possibly a reburial of objects found during the building activities for this temple (maybe from Deposit 8?), as a sort of foundation deposit. Level: 4.07 m. Phase 1.

The filling of the all deposit rooms in Tell Ibrahim Awad must have taken place over a relatively long period of time, as in two cases (Deposits 3/5 and 10/12/13, all of Phase 2c) additional division walls were built on a first layer of votive objects. These were not bonded into the earlier division walls. The entire layout of all Deposits (see Figure 3.2) shows quite plausibly that the Deposits with non-ceramic objects (4, 4a – in part -, 10, 12 and 13, all of Phase 2c) were situated in the inner shrine of the building, neatly divided among carefully built brick chambers. One deposit (no. 4) was situated in the back of the ‘naos’ niche, with in front of it a brick platform, where the Phase 2b/c shrine with the divine image may have been placed. This position gives the impression that the votive objects were placed there during the functional phase of the temple, and not after its abandonment, comparable to the situation in the shrine in Mirgissa (Vercoutter / Elhai 313-29). The top layer of objects in Deposit 4 may be the

3.5.2. Stray Objects (= Objects Found Outside a Deposit Context) Stray objects were only encountered inside the temple compound of Phase 2; the levels between which they were found vary from 4.40 to 3.00 m. Most of them probably accidentally turned up during later building activities in the temple area and then reburied at random, or just lost during the functional phase of the shrine (See the Concordance).

40

The Deposits

Figure 3.11b. Deposit 12 and 13.

Figure 3.11c. East-west section through the Deposits 10, 12 and 13. 1: outer deposit walls; 2. inner division walls; 3. primary layer of objects; 4. secondary layer of objects.

equipment. Deposit 1 (Phase 2b) may be exceptional, because the vessels were apparently lined up for use beside a wall when it collapsed on top of them (see Figure 2.11).

exception, because this consisted almost entirely of large tiles which must have been used for the naos decoration in its last functional period; they were added to the previously donated votive objects as destruction – but nevertheless sacred – debris, and then all Deposits were sealed.

3.7. Chronological Considerations One of the major problems for a comparative study of the architecture is the scarcity of (well-) published contemporaneous (OK and FIP) brick temple architecture. Apart from Elephantine (Dreyer 1986, Figure 4), there is only a short list of other well-published temples (like in Bubastis, Medamud and Abydos) from the period (Bussmann 2010, 40-113; Spencer 1979: 63). The plans of

The ceramic Deposits (2, 3/5, 6, 7 and 9 – except 3/5, which is of Phase 2c, all of Phase 2b) seem to have been distributed in a much more improvised way, in disused corridors and corners. They may have been placed there immediately before the abandonment of the shrine as being superfluous and antiquated, but still sacred, cultic 41

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt the temple installations at the sites mentioned (Bussmann 2010, vol. 2, 1-24; Lange 2006) do not provide much help with respect to the interpretation of the Tell Ibrahim Awad constructions, as they seem to be quite different. The Pepi I temple at Tell Basta consists of an oblong structure of ca. 100 x 60 m, with remnants of a small colonnade and a number of chapels and rooms. The Abydos Building H is a square construction of about 40 x 40 m, whereas the Medamud temple has a very irregular layout, probably dictated by the physical environment (Vandier 1955: 57581). Apparently, local differences still played a large role in this period (Bussmann 2010: 493-503).

The only – remotely – possible comparative situations are to be found in the apparently bricked-in Deposit M69 against (?) one of the walls of Building H in the Abydos complex (Petrie 1903: Plate L-LIV; Kemp 1968: Figure 3), and possibly in Hierakonpolis as well (see Figure 4.12). Many of the votive offerings sensu strictu must have been accumulated over a long period of time, perhaps as much as several hundreds of years. Their production date can easily have been much earlier than the moment they were placed in the deposit rooms (beginning of Phase 2c), or when these rooms were sealed (end of Phase 2b), definitely in case of relocation. Some of their characteristics may go back to Early Dynastic times, or even the Predynastic period, when they were originally offered in a temple of an earlier phase, and carefully kept in the temple stores of successive construction phases (Bussmann 2010: 423). Location, let alone stratification (if at all possible) can as such be of limited relevance for the dating of the votive offerings. Comparative iconography seems more promising in these cases (see section 7.2.1; Dubiel 2008). The scope of this study does not include such an approach.

The Phase 2 temple of Tell Ibrahim Awad is an approximately rectangular brick building (see Figures 2.92.11; section 7.4.2). The separation walls of the deposits of this phase were not bonded in the walls of this building; however, they do seem to be contemporary, because they were built at the same level and of bricks of the same composition and size. The deposits 10, 12 and 13 were sealed directly with a layer of bricks. Belonging to the MK temple, and on level of about 30 cm above the preserved tops of the Phase 2 temple walls, a sort of brick floor was laid, roughly covering a part of the Deposits. The remainder of the deposits was situated under one of the temenos walls of the Phase 1 temple (Eigner 2000).

The individual objects will be discussed in the following chapters: four for the Votive Offerings, five for the Ritual Objects, and six for the Tiles and Inlays.

42

4 The Votive Offerings 4.1. Introduction: ‘Preformal’ Temples and Culture

the main temple on the site very well (Kemp 1991: 25-54; Seidlmayer 1996: 116). It is also argued that there was more interaction between Preformal and Early Formal than Kemp supposes, suggesting contemporaneity rather than successive stages (Seidlmayer 1996: 115-19).

It is argued that the small number of early shrines has so many features which distinguish them from later temples, that it is plausible to consider them as a separate style. Shrines in Elephantine, Hierakonpolis, Abydos, Coptos, Gebelein, Tell Ibrahim Awad and Tell el-Farkha are among the examples. This is called the ‘Preformal’ style, as opposed to the ‘Early Formal’ and ‘Formal’ culture, according to the standards set from the FIP onwards (Kemp 1991: 64-107). Especially the Preformal temples at Medamud, Hierakonpolis (see Figure 4.12) and Elephantine are displaying atypical and asymmetrical layouts.

However, a point in favour of the centralizing theory is the presence in the deposits of finds associated with these early temples of objects with a royal connotation, like mace-heads as a power symbol: this would require at least some state influence, or even suggests some royal cult (Wengrow 2006, 134). Also the fact that a number of objects from all the deposits show a great deal of uniformity pleads for a centralized national culture (McNamara 2008).

The latter is the expression of a centralizing national tendency, whereas the former embodies an older, autonomous element (Bussmann 2010: 7-8). The simple, linear division between Predynastic and Early Dynastic does not suffice any more to describe these phenomena which are running partly as parallels, but has to be replaced by this new nomenclature. This centralizing process did not come to a conclusion before the beginning of the MK, eloquently illustrated at Tell Ibrahim Awad by the Phase 1 temple (section 2.3.1), replacing the completely different (smaller and simpler) temple of Phase 2 with a much larger temple, different in orientation, and with an installation reserved for the royal cult (section 2.3.1). This is in line with the hypothesis on popular vs. state religion put forward in sections 1.1 and 7.2.1.

Nevertheless, this is not the case with some early finds from Coptos, which seem to be at least one exception to this rule (if it is a rule). The colossal statues found there seem to fit in no other scheme than in a local and different Preformal culture (Kemp 1991: 79-82). The same goes for the gilded wooden figures found at Tell el-Farkha (Ciałowicz 2007). All in all, arguments in favour of the hypothesis ‘Preformal vs Formal Culture’ predominate.

An interesting related question is whether there was more involvement for common people in the relatively small early shrines than in later, Formal temples. Although there are modest votive objects present, a large part (such as the ivory objects and the mace heads) seems to stem from the elite, however ambiguous the evidence is (see section 2.3; Kemp 1995: 45). Whether common people were really more welcome there than in later periods is thus questionable (see section 3.4.1).

1. The construction of Phase 1 is without much doubt a temple, based on parallels. 2. The layout of the buildings of Phase 1 and 2 is based on the royal cubit, as customary for temples and other official buildings. 3. The supposed sacellum of the Phase 1 building was built on a layer of ritually clean sand, required for sacred areas. 4. In Egypt, as in other regions, sacred places tend to stay sacred throughout the ages. 5. The layout of the early phases of the Tell Ibrahim Awad constructions seems to be closely related to the so-called ‘broadroom’-shrines in the Near East. 6. Objects, closely related to the objects from the deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad were found on other contemporaneous sites in Egypt, identified as temples from inscriptional evidence.

4.2. Identification of the Objects in the Deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad as Votives Firstly, the sequence of constructions in question at Tell Ibrahim Awad is in all probability a sequence of temples, based on the following grounds (see section 2.3.2):

Not everybody agrees with the above concept. One alternative is that some early shrines are only satellites for (as yet undiscovered) larger, Early Formal and state-run temples, or can be interpreted as secondary Ka-chapels (O’Connor 1992; LÄ III, 284-87)1. A weak point in this theory is that these larger temples remain to be discovered, and are sometimes difficult to project in the available locations. Apart from that, several early shrines (like the Satet-temple on Elephantine) seem to fit the role as

1 

A part of the objects in the deposits can be considered as votive offerings (mainly human and animal figures), partly because they do not fit in another category (Dreyer 1986: 60). This is sometimes arbitrary. They can be

Only in Bubastis a Ka-chapel is attested (Lange 2006).

43

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt considered as votive objects because of their context in Early Dynastic temple deposits; in another context (e.g. funerary) the same objects may have a different meaning (see section 3.3.3.1; Bussmann 2010: 211-12 / 369-427).

Shaw 2000: 30-38; De Putter / Karlshausen 1992: 70-76; Aston 1994: 13-15; Klemm / Klemm 1992, 423-26). One disc-shaped mace-head is recorded for Hierakonpolis (Adams 1974a, 5 / Plate 5 – no. 7).

4.3. Categories

Limestone (Cat. nos. 21, 25, 88, 197, 350, 352-355, 359, 363, 406, 453-60)

The objects in the Deposits can be subdivided per se as follows (section 3.2; Dreyer 1986: 60):

4.4. The Tell Ibrahim Awad Votive Offering Objects: Manufacture, Production and Distribution

Found in numerous quarries in basically six varieties, but the best quality is limited to only a few sites, like Tura (Lucas / Harris 1962: 52-56; Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 40-42; De Putter / Karlshausen 1992: 61-69; Aston 1994: 35-39;  Klemm  / Klemm 1992: 29-197). Only one dummy vase and one mace head of this material have been found at Elephantine [Dreyer 1986: resp. no. 345 (133 / Plate 44) and no. 369 (137 / Plate 46)], whereas many limestone mace heads have been found at Hierakonpolis (Adams 1974a, 5-13).

4.4.1. Raw Materials and Manufacture

Pebblestone (Cat. nos. 407 & 409-419)

At Tell Ibrahim Awad, the votive offering objects were made of the following materials (see also Bussmann 2010: 343-51):

Mostly only discerned from flint by the lighter colour; the use is the same (Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 28-29).

a. b. c. d.

Votive Offerings sensu strictu (in this chapter) (Model) Offerings (in this chapter) Elements used in the temple ritual (see chapter five) Tiles and Inlays (see chapter six)

Pyrrhotite (Cat. nos. 399 t/m 404; Figure 4.1)

Stone2

A brownish-bronze iron sulphide mineral (FeS), characterised by weak magnetic properties and used as an iron ore.

Basalt (Cat. nos. 14, 232) A dark volcanic or igneous stone, mainly quarried on selected spots in the Western Desert, at Abu Zabal near the Eastern Delta, and in the Fayum (Lucas / Harris 1962: 61-62; Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 23-24; De Putter / Karlshausen 1992: 51-54; Aston 1994: 18-21; Klemm / Klemm 1992: 413-23; Harrel / Bown 1995: 71-91). The stone was used to produce vases, which were widely distributed in the Predynastic period, but from the 1st Dynasty onwards found mainly around Abydos, Naqada and Saqqara. In the Deposits, basalt is only used for small figurines; Tomb 1 in B 200/170 of the 1st Dynasty contained one basalt vessel, which seems to be very rare for the Delta (Mallory-Greenough 2002, Type 8a; van Haarlem 1996-1: no. 35, p. 11 / Plate 13).

Quartzite (Cat. nos. 92, 192, 352, 368-375, 377-379, 381, 382, 385, 390-393) A crystalline sandstone, quarried at the Gebel Ahmar near Cairo, and on other sites in the Western and Eastern Desert and the Sinai (Lucas / Harris 1962: 62-63; Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 53-54; De Putter / Karlshausen 1992:, 134; Aston, 1994:, 64-66; Klemm / Klemm 1992: 283-303; id. 1984; Bongrani Fanfoni 1990). Schist (Cat. nos. 89, 329, 330, 405) A usually green sedimentary (layered) stone, best known from the Wadi Hammamat quarries (Lucas / Harris 1962: 411-12; Nicholson / Shaw 2000:57-58; De Putter / Karlshausen 1992: 134; Aston 1994: 28-32).

Calcite or alabaster (Cat. nos. 87, 220, 356-360, 362, 36467, 380, 383, 384, 386-89, 455-59) A sedimentary, translucent stone, extensively quarried, but mainly in the Eastern Desert (Lucas / Harris 1962: 59-61; De Putter/ Karlshausen 1992: 43-46; Aston 1994: 42 / 47-51; Klemm Klemm 1992: 199-223).

Flint objects are a separate case: worked as blades or other tools, they were still in use a long time after the introduction of copper / bronze, due to the greater availability of the material (and thus, probably, lower price), mainly from sites in the Eastern Desert (Lucas / Harris 1962: 419-420; Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 28-29; van Haarlem / Hikade 2006). Several of the flint blades found in or near the Deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad can be considered as ritual tools (see chapter five).

Diorite (Cat. nos. 313, 328, 349, 354) Best known as the veined material of the famous Chephrenstatues (Engelbach 1938; Saleh / Sourouzian 1987: no. 31); quarried in the Eastern and Western Desert, around Aswan and in the Sinai (Lucas / Harris 1962: 408-10; Nicholson /

Semi-precious Stone Chalcedony or carnelian (Cat. nos. 15, 49, 50, 300), occurring on a small scale in the Eastern desert, often as

2  The nomenclature in the different publications consulted is not always consistent and sometimes confusing (Klemm / Klemm 1991: 57-70).

44

The Votive Offerings

Figure 4.1. A large piece of Pyrrhotite, found on the desert surface near Aswan.

pebbles (Lucas / Harris 1962: 391-92; Nicholson / Shaw 2000 26-27; De Putter / Karlshausen 1992:, 130-131; Aston 1994: 67-68). Details on quarrying methods, transport and manufacture are found elsewhere3. As most sources are far from Tell Ibrahim Awad, the question arises whether the raw material was transported to the site and worked there, or whether ready-made objects were imported, and, in the latter case, how the import trade was organised. This question will be dealt with later in this chapter.

to the Delta area; the last population apparently became extinct not later than the beginning of the 19th century A.D. near Damiette (LÄ IV: 503). As for Tell Ibrahim Awad, it was not always possible to determine with certainty which of the two species supplied the ivory material, but the majority seems to have come from the elephant4, and must consequently have been imported. The fact that the hippopotamus was a relatively common inhabitant of the area, at least in the period under discussion5, makes this all the more paradoxical. However, it emphasizes the role of imports and trade routes, taking into account the difficulties of the distinction between ivory from the tusks of either the African or the Asian elephant, both of which are possible sources. Unfortunately, it is not yet possible to determine which of both species supplied the elephant ivory here.

Reddish minerals – like carnelian – as bearers of a colour with an unfavourable impact, had to be used with care (Aufrère 1982-83: 3-21; Aufrère 1991: 95-112). Others, like lapis lazuli, could have either a purifying or medical / magical impact (protective / apotropaic), as some people still believe today (Aufrère 1982: 3-21; Aufrère 1991: 118-30).

Similar ivory objects to those found at Tell Ibrahim Awad, such as figurines, lions and gaming-piece, have been found in the deposits at Abydos, Elephantine and Hierakonpolis [Petrie 1903: 23-24 / Plate II, 2; Dreyer 1986: 116 / Plate 35 (no. 190) & 122 / Plate 40 (no. 249); Adams 1974a: 68-69 / Plate 43 (nos. 355-58)].

Ivory (94 items, see the Catalogue) can originate from either elephants or hippopotami (the latter produce a harder variety: Drenkhahn 1986), with concentric lines in section; the former has intersecting lines). The elephant was in historical times probably no longer native in Egypt proper, and therefore its ivory had to be imported from the south, or possibly from Syria, as far as the Delta is concerned. Hippopotami were in early times fairly common everywhere in Egypt, but were later gradually restricted

Verbal communication by S. Ikram. General and other sources on ivory figures: Penniman, 1952; Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 320-31 (also on manufacture); van Haarlem 2002; Whitehouse 2002. 5  As the relatively numerous hippopotamus figurines in the deposits suggest (see the Catalogue), and equally the relatively high number of hippopotamus bones found on the tell (Boessneck / Von den Driesch 1986). 4 

3  Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 5-20 (including detailed quarry maps) / 64-66 (vessels and sculpture technology). For manufacture: Stocks 2003.

45

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Bone: only one object, Cat. no. 261; Lucas / Harris 1962: 28; Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 28-29). Undetermined.

and Tell el-Farkha9 (see also section 4.4.2).We do not know exactly what the time span of this faience corpus is; it may be as much as several hundreds of years (see section 3.7).

Silver: one silver bowl (Cat. no. 452).

A final interesting feature of the faience pieces from Tell Ibrahim Awad must be mentioned. Contrary to the common assumption that faience was either formed by hand or in a mould (see above), a limited number of baboons (Cat. nos. 96-106) seems to have been cut out from a thin slice of faience with a blade, then to be incised superficially on one side to indicate the limbs10.

Although silver occurs in Egypt naturally as an alloy with gold and other ores, the silver content is usually very low and difficult to extract, so it is more likely to have been imported from Western Asia (Lucas / Harris 1962: 245-53; Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 170-171; Gale / Stos-Gale 1981). Faience (520 items): the earliest occurrence of this typically Egyptian material is already recorded for the late Predynastic period. Actually, faience is a misleading term, as this is reserved for a special kind of pottery originating from the Italian city of Faenza; silicious ceramic would be a better term. It consists essentially of quartz powder mixed with a binding agent such as an alkaline material (ash) and / or natron (Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 186-87; Friedman 1999: 18)6. When water is added, it can be formed either by hand or in a mould (Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 187-89). After preliminary drying, the object can be fired. The glazing can be accomplished in three basic ways: self-glazing, glazing by application and glazing by cementation (Kaczmarczyk / Hedges 1983: Figure 23). Except for the first technique, refiring is necessary.

A substantial loss of glaze can be observed on many faience objects from the Deposits. This is probably due to the efflorescence of salts, migrating to the surface from the nucleus, eventually separating the glaze from the surface of the faience proper. This process is enhanced by the periodically changing subsoil water level in the area, leaving the faience alternately in a dry and wet environment. Pottery clays: an extensive treatment falls outside the scope of this study, but all fabrics determined at Tell Ibrahim Awad conform to the descriptions of the Vienna System (Arnold / Bourriau 1993: 142-187). There is only one Marl clay jar present (Cat. no. 933).

The green colour, observed as a basic colour in almost all faience objects from the Tell Ibrahim Awad deposits7 is acquired by adding copper in any form to the basic material (Kaczmarczyk / Hedges 1983: 148-49). The black or brown colours, sometimes added for details (like hair, i.a. on Cat. no. 55), are mostly achieved by using soot, or sometimes manganese (Blom-Böer 1994: 66), mixed with a binding agent (Lucas / Harris 1962: 351-53).

Due to the unfavourable environment, no objects from perishable materials such as textile or wood have been found in the Deposits, although they may have been included originally11. Contemporary examples can be observed in Hindu temples, where many votive offerings consist of perishable items (flowers, fruits and vegetables). There is hardly a disposal problem, and they leave no traces (Pinch 1993: 337).

The techniques of faience manufacture are treated in more detail here than the techniques used for other materials because of some peculiarities of the faience object corpus from Tell Ibrahim Awad. It is plausible that most of the objects were formed in moulds. The majority of the tiles seem to have been produced from one or several very similar moulds (like the so-called ‘cake’-tiles, Cat. nos. 560-92). They may have come from a central production unit (Dreyer 1986: 91-92). The tiles from Elephantine, Abydos and Hierakonpolis seem very similar; however, whether they are really identical cannot be judged from the pictures and / or drawings (Dreyer 1986: Plate 49-50; Petrie 1903: Plate VIII; Adams 1974a: Plate 25)8.

4.4.2. Production and Distribution Regarding the place of production of votive offerings, several problems arise. Judging from the size of at least the MK temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad (Eigner 1992: 74-75) and the sheer number of objects found (see section 3.5.1), it must have been a relatively important religious centre, although the basis for comparison with other sites is small. As such, it is likely to have attracted not only local people as donors, but perhaps also pilgrims from a larger area (see section 3.4.1). The objects may thus have been produced locally (Stevens 2006: 260-67), but also in the native settlements of pilgrims, who then brought them along as dedication to the temple. The present state of

This is not the case with the human and animal figurines; no specimen seems to be really identical with another piece, and as such to have come from the same mould. This is also applicable for Elephantine, Abydos, Hierakonpolis

9  As for the baboon figures, Cat. no. 186 is very similar to Petrie 1903: Plate VI, no. 61 to the left baboon figure on Ciałowicz 2004: 386, Figure 9; Cat. no. 191 to Dreyer 1986: no. 119 (Plate 24); Cat. no. 147 to Adams 1974a: Plate 20, no 136. For the human figures: Cat. no. 26 to Dreyer 1986: no. 42 (Plate 17). 10  Also to be observed in Abydos: Petrie 1903: Plate VI, 58; Needler 1984, 357-58 (no. 284). 11  Pinch 1993: 102-134, on probably ready-made and, on the other hand, commissioned votive objects.

Clay could also be used (Lavenex Vergès 1991: 30-31). Varying from Munsell Glossy Finish 5G 7/2 to 5G 8/1. 8  See also Bussmann 2010: 351-95 (where tiles are not under consideration). Possible serial production of objects from other materials is also treated here. 6  7 

46

The Votive Offerings research does not enable us to identify different production centres, although some faience objects from Elephantine and other similar sites are almost identical to objects from Tell Ibrahim Awad: some human figures12, baboons13 and tiles (see chapter six; Bussmann 2010: 350-69). This may point to some common form of production. Although the moulds cannot have been identical, individual examples look very similar; see also the section on faience in 3.2.1.1 and Kaczmarczyk / Hedges 1983. This at least suggests a shared technology and shared ideas on the appearance of these objects (McNamara 2008)14. Another matter is whether the objects in general were mass-produced as ready-mades, the names being filled in later when applicable, or separately on commission, in which case a higher quality might be expected. There is evidence for both, at least in later times, at Deir el-Bahari and Deir el-Medina (Pinch 1993: 326-27). The craftsmen who produced them may have been full time specialists or non-specialists, part- time artisans, state or temple employees and may have worked on private orders as well (Stevens 2006: 267-69)15. It is not certain whether a transaction was a completely private matter (assuming that private enterprise existed at all in the early periods: Gutgesell 1983: 67-80; Janssen 1975a: 161-64; Kemp 2006: 308-19; Warburton 1998: 143-70; Warburton 2000; Sayed 2008) or whether the temple was involved and perhaps required an additional fee. The workshops proper could have been attached physically to the temple16. There is no evidence for this at Tell Ibrahim Awad, but the presence of unfinished objects in other temple precincts may point to production facilities (Pinch 1993: 328; Holmes 1992). Due to a lack of sources, however, many of these assumptions must remain speculative.

Figure 4.2a. Example of the varying quality of the baboons: Cat. no. 106.

The variety in quality of the objects (especially of the baboons, see Figure 4.2a-b and Cat. nos. 86-202) suggests variable payment possibilities according to means, although quality may not have been supposed to make any difference in the granting of wishes. Payment could be made in quantities of grain, oil or precious metals, as can be deduced from the Hekanakhte Papyri in the MK (Kemp 1991: 240; Bleiberg, 1995)17. The constructional elements in the deposits (tiles) are another matter (see also chapter six). There are indications for the existence of a central production unit of these tiles, like the so-called production marks, probably workshop signs intended to keep track of the production process Cf. Cat. nos. 94 and 189 to Dreyer 1986: Plate 24/no. 119, Cat. no. 127 to resp. Plate 25 / no. 122 and Plate 17/42. 13  Cat. no. 26 to Dreyer 1986: Plate 17/42. 14  Arguments against a central production place: Dubiel 2008: 210-211; Bussmann 2010:351-95. Both do not consider the tiles. 15  Like the potters of ‘Ayn-Asīl, who also produced votive objects (human and animal figures): Soukiassian / Pantalacci 1990: 123-128; Drenkhahn 1976: 138-140 / 142154. 16  For a faience kiln near the Osiris temple at Kom el-Sultan in Abydos: M.D. Adams 1998: 27-28. 17  For the NK: Janssen 1975b: 101-111, 510; Demarée / Janssen (eds.) 1982: 104. 12 

Figure 4.2b. Example of the varying quality of the baboons: Cat. no. 172.

47

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt (Dreyer 1986: 91-92 [Figure 23] / Figure 51-53)18. Some of the signs from Saqqara and Elephantine are similar to those at Tell Ibrahim Awad (see section 6.1.2 and Figs.7576).

for deconsacration (Meskell 2004: 108). More likely, therefore, they would be reverently buried inside the temple area, for which there is ample evidence (Meskell 2004). The later habit of burying foundation deposits under certain parts of buildings may have originated from this (see section 3.3.1; Dreyer 1986: 59)19.

Most of the cultic vessels (see chapter five) were probably produced locally, judging from the abundantly present local clays (mainly Nile IA-C, see above), and probably in accordance with the demand.

At Tell Ibrahim Awad, at least part of the votive offerings must have been buried intentionally (in Deposit 11- in this case possibly as a sort of foundation offering; see section 3.5.1); but most of them were simply left where they were put initially (apparently the case for the Deposits 4, 4a, 10, 12 and 13, see above).

4.5. Other Specific Aspects: Storage and Eventual Disposal 4.5.1. Storage

4.6. The Categories of Votive Offerings Found and Their Meaning

The votive offering objects must have been deposited somewhere in the temple complex, and they remained there until the reconstruction of the building necessitated their being removed and stored again (buried) in a safe place. In isolated places like NK Mirgissa (Vercoutter / Elhai 1970: 313-362) they were not cleared away afterwards, so we can get an idea of the original emplacement. Votive offering stelae were propped up against the back wall of the shrine; the smaller objects seem to have been scattered at random, though sometimes they remained in the reed baskets in which they apparently had been collected (Figure 4.3).

We have seen the distribution of the categories of votive objects which occur in the individual Deposits in section 3.5.1 / Figure 3.3. The graphs of Figures 4.4 and 4.5 show the occurrence frequency of selected object categories from Tell Ibrahim Awad, Elephantine, Abydos and Hierakonpolis in absolute numbers and percentages20 (see also Bussmann 2010: 343-51)21. Figure 4.10 shows the separate Deposits of Abydos. Such a separation is not very well possible for Elephantine, where the objects were not found in well-defined contexts (see Figure 4.9a) or for Hierakonpolis, due to the unclear publication (Figure 4.12; see also section 7.4.1; Bussmann 2010: 215-17).

The architectural evidence suggests that some votive offering objects may have been found in their original place in Tell Ibrahim Awad, like those in the Deposits inside and right behind the cult niche (nos. 4, 4a, 10, 12 and 13; see section 3.5.1).

Below, an attempt has been made at an interpretation of the different categories of votive objects. This may seem sometimes obvious in our perception, but the contemporary views may have been different22. For some categories an interpretation seems possible, like for the human figures, the hedgehog-boats or the mace heads (see below and section 5.1.1); for others this is less probable (animal figurines in general). An attempt has been made nevertheless.

It is not likely that this also happened in major cult centers like Abydos because of the huge amounts of votive offerings (see section 3.3.3.1). There, the votive offerings were probably cleared away after a relatively short period and put in some sort of more permanent storage facility, to be rediscovered there.

4.6.1. Human Figures (Cat. nos. 1-85, Plate 1-2 of the Catalogue)

4.5.2. Disposal After a longer or shorter period of time the storerooms must have been choked with objects, and must have required clearing. This could also have been occasioned by reconstruction activities and / or a change in cult practices; both might have been the reasons why the ex-votos were deposited as they were in Elephantine (Dreyer 1986: 59).

They are executed in faience, ivory, limestone, carnelian and basalt, and most of them were found in Deposit 10, just as the baboons (see below). Of all the more less complete human figurines, 12 are female, 25 male, and five are of undetermined sex (see Table 4.1: crawling figures and fragments without arms not included there [Ucko 1965: 237; Dubiel 2008: 240-43]); of the whole assemblage, 11 are rendered sitting down, and 31 standing upright. 19 of

In principle, two possibilities were open for the disposal of large quantities of these objects. A first, perhaps only thoretical, possibility would be to simply dump the objects outside the temple along with other waste, but then probably only after a sort of deconsacration ritual, preventing them from returning into circulation (Stevens 2006: 327-28). However, there seems to be no evidence

19  This may apply for the Satet temple, but there is no evidence for it at Tell Ibrahim Awad. 20  Data from Abydos and Hierakonpolis are based upon counts of the objects mentioned in the respective publications, which may not be completely representative. 21  At Tell el-Farkha, human figures are by far the largest group, followed by animals and vessels (Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2006; Chłodnicki 2012: 201-31). Only a few baboons were found (Ciałowicz 2004: 384 / 386) 22  See, however, Dreyer 1986: 59-97, who is less reserved about his interpretations.

Also common in quarries and on blocks of stone, see Kemp / Nicholson 1989: 138-41.

18 

48

The Votive Offerings

Figure 4.3. The Mirgissa shrine with baskets containing votive jewellery in situ (from Vercoutter / Elhai 1970). Table 4.1. Detailed table of the arm positions of the standing and sitting figures, with reference to the Catalogue Standing, kneeling

Male

Female

I. L & R hanging

5, 9-13, 15, 16, 25

2

II. R bent, L hanging

34, 35, 62

III. L bent, R hanging

3

IV. R. mouth, L hanging

26-30

V. L & R holding objects

82

VI. R holding objects, L hanging

85

Undetermined

14

7 77, 78

VII. L & R folded

63

VIII. holding breasts

18, 33, 39, 40

6

Sitting A. L & R on knees

49-52

B. R mouth, L on knee

55-57

C. holding objects

79, 81

54, 58

49

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 4.4. Graph showing the quantities of selected object groups compared.

Figure 4.5. Graph showing a relative comparison of the same object groups.

the males have hair, and all of the women. Some women have rather elaborate hairdressers, like Cat. no. 3223 and 3324. Most figurines are naked, except Cat. nos. 78 and 82, which seem to wear robes, and one of the crouching figures (Cat. no. 72) which is wearing a belt. Consequently, a clear majority is male, and most of the statues are standing, with their arms hanging down at the sides. Contrary to the male figurines from, a.o., Hierakonpolis (Quibell / Green 1902: Plate VIII/X), those from here do not seem to wear penis sheaths.

if any, of the different attitudes may remain forever elusive, but the general idea that these figures, with the exception of the children, represent the donors themselves, seems to be not too far-fetched (Dreyer 1986: 60). As such, they have the possibility to remain in the presence of the deity forever, over and over repeating their wishes. It may be significant that many of them were found side by side with baboons as ancestor figures (see below). The kneeling women (Cat. nos. 59-63), with clearly indicated pubic areas, are almost without parallel26. Their meaning is unclear, but one may suggest their attitude is one of adoration or supplication, perhaps for offspring. The (later) fertility figurines may be a continuation of this practice (Pinch 1993: 221-25). The children’s figurines can

Several of the ivory standing figurines (the ‘dwarf’ figurines, cat. nos. 10-13 and 16) seem to be Early Dynastic in date or even earlier25. The probably hidden significance, cf. Ashmolean E.341 and Cairo 3217 All instances of the special form of bipartite wig may be considered as a prototype of the so-called Hathor-wig (Sourouzian 1981: 445-463; Baumgartel 1968: Plate VI / 11; Smith 1958: Plate 12a-b) 25  Some of the recent finds from Tell el-Farkha (Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2006; Buszek 2008; Ciałowicz 2009a) are very closely related to ivory figurines from Tell Ibrahim Awad (e.g. Cat. nos. 11-13 and 33). Cf. in 23  24 

great detail: Ucko 1968; Hornblower 1929; Baumgartel 1968: 9-10. The overview given in Harrington 2004 concerns mainly funerary contexts, as in Nowak 2004. The ‘tags’ mentioned in Nowak 2004: 896-99 resemble Cat. nos. 11-13. 26  Compare, however, Capart 1905: Figure 128

50

The Votive Offerings perhaps be interpreted likewise (Dreyer 1986: 66; Needler 1984: 347-48)27. Figures holding vessels (Cat. nos. 77-85) may be meant as taking part in the offering ceremonies. The unusual crawling figures (Cat. nos. 64-76) seem to occur otherwise only in Tell el-Farkha (Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2001, 107; Ciałowicz 2004: 384-85), Abydos [Petrie 1903: Plate IX, 187 (Cairo 36123)], and the KoflerTruniger Collection (H.W. Müller 1964: 35-37). They apparently represent supplicants in prostration before a deity, and are as such in all probability substitutes for the individuals presenting these figures as ex-votos to a deity. Because of their Early Dynastic appearance (most have beards, and are naked except for a kind of belt) some scholars have argued for a very early date (Dynasty 0-1: Dreyer 1986: 63).

Figure 4.6. A selection of the baboon repertoire.

Some of the dwarf figurines from Tell el-Farkha are remarkably similar to ivory figurines from Tell Ibrahim Awad (Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2006: Figures 3-4).

From the several baboon species in the series, the large majority seems to be male (with only one clear exception, Cat. no. 188) and to belong to the species Papio Hamadryas Anubis, like the Hedj-Wer30, but not the Papio Hamadryas Hamadryas, the ‘Thot’ baboon31.

4.6.2. Baboons (Cat. nos. 86-202; Figure 4.6) These are executed in faience, ivory, limestone, quartzite and schist, and form one of the largest single groups of objects in the Deposits: see Plate 4-6. The majority originates from Deposit 10, just as the human beings. As this pairing is also to be observed at Elephantine28, it may say something about the interpretation of baboons as representatives of ancestor figures (see, however, section 4.7), whereas the human figures, found nearby, could represent the donors themselves (see above). Most are represented as sitting, in two main variations: either with the hands resting on the knees (the large majority, Cat. nos. 89-108, 110, 112-14, 120-38, 140, 144, 146-52, 154, 156-65 and 167-70), or with the hands hanging down between the knees (Cat. nos. 111 and 171-92)29. Only one specimen, a rare ivory item (Cat. no. 193), has its right arm hanging down and the left hand on the knee. Some are holding vessels (Cat. nos. 197-201), and only a few of them are ithyphallic (Cat. nos. 169-72). One fragment shows a female baboon with a young on the back (Cat. no. 202). One standing stone baboon holds the left hand to its ear, and the right hand on the chest (Cat. no. 87). Sizes vary from two to more than ten centimeters, and the quality is very uneven. An extraordinary object is the boat with baboons (Cat. no. 278, see section 4.6.9; Belova, et al., 2001: 165-78). Small baboon figures occur in sometimes large numbers at the related sites of Elephantine, Abydos, Hierakonpolis and Tell el-Farkha (Dreyer 1986: Plate 24-31; Petrie 1903: Plate VI, IX-XI; Adams 1974a: Plate 18-23; Ciałowicz, 2004: Figure 9). Of the 111 faience sitting baboons, 101 are more or less superficially executed, five very detailed, and five with individual aspects (holding objects or a young; Bussmann 2010: 223-227 / 352-56).

Only two, sitting with their hands on their knees, seem to belong to Vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus Aethiops Pygerythrus; Dreyer 1986: 71)32; they are made of schist and ivory instead of faience, the material for the large majority, and are as such exceptional as well (Cat. nos. 89 and 90). A distinction between the several coexisting species seems to be present in many representations, both in 2D and 3D (Goudsmit 2000: 111-25). Analysis of (late) baboon mummies has shown that a number of at least eight monkey species were represented; besides several baboons also vervets and even Barbary macaques (Goudsmit 2000: 28 / 95-98 / 104). At least in later times, none of these animals was indigenous in Egypt and had to be imported – as adult animals, young examples did not occur- from elsewhere in Africa (Goudsmit 2000). Dating this group is only possible with a wide margin, as they seem to occur from the 1st Dynasty onwards at least to the late OK (Dreyer 1986: 69). Like the Hedj-Wer (Houlihan 1996: 95-96; Andrews 1991: 27), and of the same species, but without its royal connotation (Dreyer 1986: 69), they seem to represent ancestor figures with a chtonic aspect, participating in this form in the sacrificial feast. Some even hold vessels to that effect (Cat. nos. 197-99)33. 30  Also known as the green baboon, and as such apparently the only baboon species known in Egypt until the NK: Goudsmit 2000: 28 /112-13. 31  On the connection of Hedj-wer and Thot: Spiess 1991: 14-17. 32  These stand out as well because of their detailed execution. Cf. Goudsmit 2000: 95-98 / 113; Boessneck (ed.) 1987: 160-64. 33  Cf. the human figures with vessels: Dreyer 1986: 68-72. More ambiguous in his interpretation is Krauss 1994: 230. Cf. Winter 2006: 447-454; Kaplony 1966: 91-99 / Plate 20-23 (another Hedj-wer statue-of doubtful authenticity: Winter 2006: 449); LÄ II, 1078-080.

Exactly the same phenomenon occurs in Hindu temples. Dreyer 1986: 26 (Complex 6954) / 28 (Complex 7956). 29  Interpreted as Hedj-wer (Goudsmit 2000: 112). 27  28 

51

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt However, the baboon can have a regenerative meaning as well, connected with its erotic connotation (Hornung / Staehelin 1976: 106-108; Vandier-d’Abbadie 1964; Valloggia 1993)34. Neither interpretation can be excluded in this stage.

wet: Behrmann 1996:117-23)39. The hippopotamus hunt is in Early Dynastic contexts frequently associated with the king; this is not contradicting a protective role for the hippopotamus, because the hunt is meant to bring control over chaos, and thus can be apotropaic in itself (Helck 1987: 31-33; Hendrickx 2004; Säve-Söderbergh 1953). Other interpretations, like the supposed regenerative capacity of the animal (see under crocodiles, section 4.6.7) are also not to be excluded (Hornung / Staehelin 1976: 127-29; Andrews 1991: 64).

That the baboon had already much to do with Thot in the Early Dynastic period is quite unlikely, let alone connecting it as such with its occurrence in Book of the Dead texts or the Demotic story of Setne-Khaemwaset (Spiess 1991; Bonnet 1971: 7)35.

4.6.4. Lions (Cat. nos. 219-26, Plate 8)

It cannot be excluded that the large number of these figures may have had something to do with the cult practiced here. Some fragments of a large ceramic baboon were found in the Phase 6 temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad (A 140/190/298 and 312), suggesting by their size to be parts of a cult statue. This is so far the only indication there is for a patron deity of the temple. A (cult?) statue of calcite, representing the Hedj-Wer baboon (a royal ancestor figure), possibly from Abydos and of approximately the same date is preserved in Berlin (Krauss 1994: 222-30; LÄ II, 1078-080). This might be an indication for the temple as an ancestor cult temple, maybe in connection with the as yet unexcavated earlier layers of the cemetery (if at all present).

Executed in ivory and calcite, and all of them lionesses in a reclining position, they are probably meant as gaming pieces (for more usual pieces, see below), as is the interpretation for the vast majority of lion figurines of this size (max. 5.5 cm in length), of the same materials and from this period [Spencer 1980: 70 / no. 496; Needler 1984: 355-56 (no. 282)]40. Games, apparently, belonged to the cult inventory of temples (Pusch 1979; Piccione 1980: 55-58; Dreyer 1986: 81)41. Parallels are known from Abydos, Elephantine and Hierakonpolis [Petrie 1903: Plate VI, 68 and XI, 246; Dreyer 1986: 116 / Plate 35 (no. 190); Adams 1974a: 68-69 / Plate 43 (nos. 355-58)].

4.6.3. Hippopotami (Cat. nos. 203-18, Plate 7)

Lions, often paired, are common in Pre- and Early Dynastic iconography (Asselberghs 1961: Plate XXIV / XXXIX / XCV; de Wit 1951: 191-195; Yoshimura 2005: 390-391 / Plate 55c).

All are executed in faience; sizes vary between 2.1 and 13.3 cm in height. Hippopotami were quite common around Tell Ibrahim Awad, as the preserved animal bones and at least some of the ivory objects show (Boessneck / Von den Driesch 1992b). Parallels have been found at Elephantine and Abydos [Dreyer 1986: 114 / Plate 32 (no. 165-66); Petrie 1903: Plate VI (69-71)]36.

Lion figures, possibly included here not only as gaming pieces but for their connections per se as well, can be interpreted as representing the royal and divine forces associated with them (Schweitzer 1948: 9-25). 4.6.5. Antelopes (Cat. nos. 227-28, Plate 8)

In Predynastic and Early Dynastic times, the hippopotamus was among the most frequently depicted animals, especially on pottery vessels (white cross-lined; Bothmer 1948: 64-69; Baumgartel 1947: 30)37. The figurines might be considered as a means to deliver a request to a protective hippopotamus deity as well as of appeasing a malevolent one, as both capacities can be incorporated in the hippopotamus38. It has been suggested that the benevolent role was incorporated by the female, and the opposite by the male (Bonnet 1971: 228-30; Dreyer 1986: 74; Säve-Söderbergh 1953: 45-49 / 55-56; Müller 2008b: 477-93). In the first case, there might be a connection with the somewhat enigmatic early hippopotamus-goddess Hedjet (possibly, as such, not meaning ‘the White One’, but ‘the Shiny One’, as being just resurfaced and still

Material: faience. Both seem to represent ibexes, judging from the long, but still rather massive horns (Huyge 2004). The apparent rattler function of one of the antelopes (no. 228) is matched by the ovoid rattlers found in a deposit at Tell el-Farkha (Ciałowicz 2004: 384 / Figure 11; Hickmann 1954: 116-25)42. Possible interpretations are the appeasement or blocking of malevolent influences (coming from the desert)43, or model-offerings (as substitute for the real animal; Dreyer 1986: 75).

Heb-Hedjet should in this case not mean the festival of, but the catching of; see also Kaiser 1988 and 1996; Altenmüller 1994; LÄ I: 503. 40  Perhaps in the sort of game depicted in Emery 1961: Figure 150. 41  However, textually attested only later: Pieper 1931. 42  See also especially Cairo JdE 69723. 43  In the Pyramid texts, an antelope’s head with the pointed horns can be a protector for the king: Spiegel 1971: 414-17; Derchain 1962: 10-12. They are already shown being hunted in the ‘Painted Tomb no. 100’ in Hierakonpolis: Quibell / Green 1902: Plate LXXVI-LXXVIII, and on the Lion-hunt palette: Quibell / Green 1902: Plate LXV / Figure 122. 39 

Cf. PT Spell 320, which mentions the ‘Bull of the Baboons’. Contrary to Belova / Sherkova 2001: 165-77. 36  For an overview of early hippopotamus representations: Hendrickx. 2004. 37  Also Behrmann 1991: Dok. 1-61 (up to the OK, incl. Decorated Ware) and Behrmann 1996: 31-32 / 140-43. The author considers the hippopotamus only as a benign influence in this period. 38  Hendrickx 2004: 815. Here, a positive role only is favoured as well. 34  35 

52

The Votive Offerings 4.6.6. Birds (Cat. nos. 232-41, Plate 9) In basalt, faience and ivory; they vary in size from 1.5 cm in height and 3.6 cm in length to 8.3 cm and 13.1 cm, respectively. Most of them seem to be falcons (Cat. nos. 232-237). There is one example (Cat. no. 241) which looks more like a lapwing (Gardiner G23). Most of these birds or bird-like objects (except Cat. nos. 237, 238 and 241) have a hole in the bottom for attaching them to a pole (for ritual use?) or the like, such as the parallels from Abydos and elsewhere (Petrie 1903: Plate VII, 81-84; Needler 1984: 368-69). For this group, a ritual use, originally different from being a merely votive object, might be supposed. However, in early Dynastic tombs in Helwan, similar figures were found together with faience Min-symbols (Gardiner R23); in one case, the (bronze) falcon was still attached to one of the projections of a Min-symbol (Saad 1947: 166-67 (Figure 15) / Plate LXXI-LXXII). Because of the tombs, the date of these could be set at Dynasty 1-2. The unidentified birds could have been just intended as model-offerings, just like the antelopes previously discussed.

Figure 4.7. Crocodile figure from Abydos, now in the Allard Pierson Museum, Amsterdam (APM 15304; see also Figure 4.11).

spontaneously out of the Nile mud in great numbers, the frog is associated with creation and fertility (Leclant 1978: 561-72). Hence, they are traditionally associated with the birth goddess Heket, already attested in in the Early Dynastic period (Kaplony 1963: 486-87, 532), and can be regarded as a plea for a good delivery or for children (Dreyer 1986: 75). Also present in Abydos (Petrie 1903: Plate XI, 240; Needler 1984: 370-71).

4.6.7. Crocodiles (Cat. nos. 242-74, Plate 10) All in faience, except one in bone (Cat. no. 261) and one in ivory (Cat. no. 243). Their sizes vary between two and 16 cm in length, and most of them stem from Deposit 10. On many of them the scales of their armour are indicated (Cat. nos. 242 , 246-48, 250-54, 256-58, 261, 266, 272, 273). Their large number in Tell Ibrahim Awad may be explained by the marshy physical environment, ideally suited for crocodiles. Of the Elephantine examples, two have scale armour indicated (no. 173 and 178; Dreyer 1986: no. 173-85 [115-16 / Plate 33-34]); there are only two, without details, pictured from Abydos (Figure 4.7; Petrie 1903: Plate XI [no. 212 & 216]).

4.6.9. Boats (Cat. nos. 278-86, Plate 11) Several types of boats occur in the Deposits, in faience, clay and ivory. The cargo-boats (like Cat. no. 281) have parallels in the Abydos deposits, at Tell el-Farkha and at Saqqara [Petrie 1903: 26 / Plate VII, 98-90; Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2006: Figure 6; Yoshimura 2005: 371 / 373 (Figure 9 / Plate 52b)]. The almost unprecedented boat fragment with a company of baboons – of elusive meaning – is one of the most striking (Cat. no. 278; Belova / Sherkova 2001: 165-77; Yoshimura 2005, Plate 63b), along with an incomplete so-called hedgehog-ship (van Haarlem 1996d: 197-98; von Droste zu Hülshoff 1980). The hedgehog may be interpreted as the night-appearance of the Sun-god, guiding the boat with the deceased through the night sky, thus being contemporary with the well-known scenes of ships with hedgehog bows. Other interpretations suggest an apotropaic function. According to the Elephantine evidence, these boats seem to stem from the OK45.

The offering of crocodile figures as ex-votos is a wellknown practice to appease the ambivalent (both protective and malevolent) character of the animal, as is the case with the malevolent form of the hippopotamus (Dreyer 1986: 76; Wiese 1996: 144-45)44. However, more interpretations are possible, as the supposed regenerative power of the animal (Hornung / Staehelin 1976: 122-26), just as for the hippopotamus (Bussmann 2010: 216-17). One of the earliest representations of the crocodile as the god Sobek dates back to the 1st Dynasty (Petrie / Wainwright.1913: 21-22 / Plate 2).

4.6.10. Shrines (Cat. nos.287-96, Plates 12-13) All are executed in faience, just as the parallels from other sites. They are found all over the Deposits. Two groups can be discerned: naoi (Cat. nos. 293-96) and models of the pr-nw / pr-nsr (Cat. nos. 287-92). The smaller (max.8.5 x 6 cm) naoi go back to vaulted reed chapels for a divine image [Kemp 1991: 93 (Figure 33); Petrie 1903: Plate VII, 131-32; Yoshimura / Kawai 2005: 372-73 (Figure 9 /

4.6.8. Frogs (Cat. nos. 275-276, Plate 9) Both are small (less than three cm) and executed in faience. They are well known as amulets (Reisner 1907: 187-93 / Plate XXIII-XXIV; Andrews 1991, 63), from Preynastic times onwards. By its nature, seemingly popping

Dreyer 1986: 77-79. The interpretation as protector against Cataract dangers seems more likely for Elephantine. Also: Altenmüller 2000. For an alternative interpretation: G.A. Belova/ Sherkova 2001: 138-43.

45 

They also occur as appliques on an offering stand from Deposit 1 (Cat. no. 726).

44 

53

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Plate 52b)]; Kaiser 1983)46. Vertical incisions in the basis of several examples (like Cat. no. 293, 295), apparently imitating reed stems, testify to that.

pyrrhotite). Many of these natural stones were apparently selected for their bizarre shape, sometimes suggesting an animal or human figure (Cat. no. 410). In one case, a baboon figure in stone may have been the result of adapting a natural stone (Cat. no. 88), as seen in parallels in Elephantine (Dreyer 1986: 96-97 / no. 158). Somewhat enigmatic is a group of stones of a very stylized shape, possibly to be associated with scorpions (a.o. Cat. no. 394; Dreyer 1986: 76; Bussmann 2010: II, 119 / 145). A bizarre assemblage of stones (a.o. Cat. no. 402) is similar to pyrrhotite stones found in the sanctuary at Mirgissa (Vercoutter / Elhai, 1970: 329 / Figure 27-28; Kemp1995: 27-29; Meskell, 2004: 140)48. A phallic symbolism may have been attached to this last group, connected with the fertility aspects of the Hathor cult there. As for the others, they may have been regarded as a sort of fetish.

The other category consists of models of the national Lower Egyptian shrine (max. 15 x 7.5 cm), as known from sealings and mace-heads (Figure 6.9). Doorways, flanked by flag posts, are clearly indicated, together with the characteristic extended side-posts and the plaited reed construction work. One specimen is hollow (Cat. no. 290). The latter category seems to be only occurring at Tell Ibrahim Awad (van Haarlem 1998). Due to the occurrence of the pr nw / pr-nsr, the date is probably to be set in the Early Dynastic period, perhaps as early as Dynasty 0. Later occurrences of similar constructions seem to be limited to the funerary sphere (Kuhlmann 1996)47. They may have been donated accompanying a request to the deity worshipped in such a shrine, in this case probably Wadjet (LÄ VI: 906-911), as the main goddess of Buto, the site of the national shrine of Lower Egypt. See also section 6.3.

4.6.13. Jewellery (Cat. nos. 419-50, Plate 19) This category comprises ivory rings (Cat. nos. 420-421), and bracelets (Cat. nos. 422-432)49 and beads of varying forms (Cat. nos. 433-51)50 made of faience. Some, especially the smaller beads, may have been produced especially for votive purposes, because they do not show any traces of wear (Dreyer 1986: 83-86). Some of the frogs and human figures, catalogued under their respective categories (Cat. no. 50, a carnelian male figure, and the frogs no. 275 and 276), are pierced for use as beads as well. Some (bracelets: Cat. nos. 25, 26, 28-31) may show traces of wear, but this is difficult to discern owing to postdepositional damage.

4.6.11. Gaming Pieces (Cat. nos. 297-321, Plate 14) Occurring in ivory, faience, carnelian (Cat. no. 300) and diorite (Cat. no. 313). There are two basic forms: the discshaped pieces (Cat. no. 314-15) and the more or less conical pieces (Cat. nos. 297-313, 316-322), with or without a knob on the top. Both varieties were also encountered in a funerary context at Tell Ibrahim Awad (van den Brink 1988, 83 / Figure 24 & Plate 7b). Close parallels were found in Early Dynastic Tomb 3504 in Saqqara (Emery 1954: 6-59 / Plate XXIX; Dreyer 1998: 158-164 / Plate 39).

It is possible that much of the jewellery had been actually worn, later to be offered as a piece of precious personal adornment to the deity as a personal offering.

Many of the gaming pieces, especially the ivory ones, must have been employed in senet-games or comparable board games, possibly with a ritual use, like the ivory lions mentioned above, which may be regarded as gamingpieces as well. An interpretation as model granaries for the cylindrical pieces seems less likely, as the hieroglyphic form (Gardiner Y6) stands for gaming piece (Dreyer 1986: 80-81). The ivory pieces are probably Early Dynastic, whereas the faience cones should be dated somewhat later, as they are typical for the later senet-game (Dreyer 1986: 80-81). As such, they may have rather a ritual significance than an ex-voto implication.

4.6.14. Vessels (Cat. nos. 452-545, Plates 20-21) Only one silver bowl (Cat. no. 452) was found; stone vessels (made of limestone, calcite and diorite, Cat. nos. 453-60) constitute a small minority. Some faience vessels are decorated to imitate the natural veins of stone (Cat. nos. 461-65). Some resemble libation vases (Cat. nos. 478-82)51 or look like miniatures of ceramic offering stands, complete with triangular holes, supporting a bulbous vessel (Cat. nos. 466-77). Such stands have been found in the deposits as well (cf. Cat. no. 717). A special category is formed by the beehive-like lids, to be attached to basket-models (Cat.

4.6.12. Natural Stones (Cat. nos. 393-418, Plate 18) These are of widely diverging shapes, sizes and kinds of stone (calcite, limestone, schist, pebblestone, flint and

The same kind of mineral is still found in the desert around Aswan. Parallels: faience bracelets in Elephantine: Dreyer 1986: 133 / Plate 43, no. 334) and schist bracelets in Hierakonpolis: Adams 1974a: 36 / Plate 26). On Early Dynastic jewellery in general: A. Wilkinson 1971: 13-22. 50  Cf. faience beads from Elephantine: Dreyer 1986: 133 / Plate 42, no. 304, 306a-b, 310a-b). For bracelets and beads from Abydos: Spencer 1980: Ch. XII (75-78). 51  Cf. their ceramic counterparts, Cat. nos. 830-831 (miniatures) and 835-930. 48  49 

Similar constructions are known in Mesopotamia: Frankfort 1970:2 7-28/Figure 12 / n. 28-29. For the function of similar constructions in the so-called ‘Butic Funeral’: Bietak 1994. At least until the 1960’s, astonishingly similar reed structures were built in the Euphrates / Tigris Delta in Iraq, in approximately similar physical conditions as in the Nile Delta: Kuhlmann 1996; Thesiger 1964: 16-17 / Plate 93-96. 47  There is one curious limestone example of a much later date from Mendes (Redford 2010: 166 / Figure 11.26). 46 

54

The Votive Offerings nos. 483-88), also known in stone and as realia (Dreyer 1986: 82; Petrie / Wainwright 1913: Plate X) 52.

with the specific deity who – to our knowledge at least in later times – was the proprietor of the temple in which they were presented (Kopp / Raue 2008: 45). Apparently, the same votive objects could have been offered to any local deity (Kemp 1995: 27-29). This is in contrast to the architectural diversity of the temples (section 3.3.3).

The stone vessels and their imitations in faience are Predynastic to Early Dynastic: Cat. no. 454-56 (only 455 is exceptional) and 462-46553. The vessels may have been votive objects with or without any contents, such as oils or unguents. Only the many massive dummy vessels must have been ex-votos per se (Cat. nos. 460, 478-80, 482, 492-96, 515-17, 519-29 and 536).

However, it cannot be excluded that the large number of baboon figures found at Tell Ibrahim Awad may have had something to do with the cult practiced here after all. Some fragments of a large ceramic baboon were found in the Phase 6 temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad (A 140/190/298 and 312)55, suggesting by their size to be parts of a cult statue (Figure 4.8; see also section 7.5).

4.7. Summary of the Chronological Considerations Most of the votive objects are difficult to date. As mentioned above (section 2.3.1), only the date of the sealing of the votive object Deposits has been established with a degree of probability as the end of the 3rd or the beginning of the 4th Dynasty, but this does not fix the dates of the individual objects. The majority seem to be Early Dynastic, considering the separate groups mentioned above, but most cannot be dated more precisely for lack of comparisons (Dreyer 1986: 59). The parallel assemblages in Hierakonpolis, Abydos and Elephantine suffer from the same problem. Some objects may go back to Early Dynastic or even Predynastic times, like the dwarf figures, while others, like some of the tiles, may have been added just shortly before sealing the Deposits, being essentially debris from a recently demolished cult room. There seems to be no reliable way of determining the date of the oldest objects stratigraphically. The only reliable date is the terminus ante quem: end of Dynasty 3-beginning of Dynasty 4 (see section 4.5.2).

This is so far the only indication there is for a patron deity of the temple. A (cult?) statue of calcite, representing the Hedj-wer baboon (as a royal ancestor figure), possibly from Abydos and of approximately the same date is preserved in Berlin (see 4.3.1.1, Baboons). As another interpretation, it is possible that the other baboon figures there were meant to participate as representatives of ancestors in the temple cult and benefit from the sacrifices-hence the containers some of them are holding (see 4.3.1.1; Dreyer 1986: 69-70). Other votive offerings, like the children’s figures, must have been intended for the benefit of the living, which brought them there in the first place, to beg for offspring (see 4.3.1.1). 4.9. Comparisons with Other Sites: Egypt The evidence from Tell Ibrahim Awad can only be fully understood when it is studied in connection with comparable material from elsewhere (Bussmann 2011b). In his analysis of the situation encountered at Elephantine, Dreyer also discussed the confused archaeological situation in the Preformal temples in Hierakonpolis and Abydos (Dreyer 1986: 37-54). There is no need to fully repeat this exercise here, but we will begin our own inquiry by offering a summary of Dreyer’s account in 4.1 to 4.3. He ascribes the Kofler-Truniger collection to Abydos (Dreyer 1986: 54-59): see section 4.9.3.

4.8. The Recipient of Votive Offerings at Tell Ibrahim Awad The identity of the deity venerated at Tell Ibrahim Awad can probably not be deduced from the votive offering objects (see, however, below): although baboons54 are very strongly represented (more than 21 per cent of the total number of objects, excluding the tiles), there were many crocodiles and hippopotami as well. It is probably significant that the same categories are widely attested in Elephantine too (see Figures 48 and 49). In this case it is striking that the figures bear no relation at all to the goddess Satet, whom we know to have been venerated there in the OK (Ricke 1960: 54, n.18). This clearly standardized set of objects strongly suggests that their use does not reflect the diversity of local deities that is likely to have existed throughout Egypt. The probable implication is that the effigies do not represent deities. It does not seem to be necessary for ex-votos to have a direct connection

More recently, similar votive offerings have been found at Tell el-Farkha (Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2001: 107; Ciałowicz 2004: 384-87; Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2006; Ciałowicz 2007; Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2012: 208-31)56 consisting of, a.o., a variety of ivory figures (Kurzyk 2016)-mainly in human form- baboons, crawling figures and rattlers57. Parallel finds have even more recently been encountered in North Saqqara, although in a confusing context (Yoshimura / Kawai 2003: 38-40; id. 2005: 369-74 / Plate 52b). A similar head from Hierakonpolis is in the Kestner Museum, Hannover (Inv. Nr. 1935.200.38): Von Bissing 1934: 15 / Plate XIII,12526; Quibell / Green 1902: Plate LXII / 1. 56  The context of these votive objects seems to have been a kind of shrine (Ciałowicz 2009b). 57  Similar to the fruit-like rattlers mentioned in Hickmann 1954; Crowfoot Payne 1993: No. 808 / Figure 35. 55 

For a complete real example from Tarkhan, including container and lid: Petrie 1914: Plate V, 13; cf. Cairo JdE 25998. 53  el-Khouli 1978: respectively, the types 2537, 4129 and 145, 2454, 2119, 1442; Dreyer 1986: 82-83. 54  Probably in the form of hd-wr, ‘The Great White One’: LÄ II, 1078080. 52 

55

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 4.8. Ceramic head of a baboon (A 140/190/298), 7.8 x 7.3 x 8.6 cm.

The situation at Coptos, where contemporary religious installations with different parameters have been found, seems to be exceptional within this framework, compared with the other sites mentioned (Kemp 1991: 79-83). One of the differences between Elephantine and the other sites, including Tell Ibrahim Awad, is the almost total absence of ivory figurines at the former site. Statistical comparisons are hazardous for Abydos and Hierakonpolis, but human figurines seem to be very strongly represented in Elephantine (almost 26 per cent of the total), whereas baboons predominate in Tell Ibrahim Awad (more than 21 per cent), and mace heads, although almost completely missing in Elephantine, form the largest group in Hierakonpolis (more than 40 per cent; Bussmann 2010: 263-64 / 346-51).

Figure 4.9a. The Deposit situation at Elephantine (from Dreyer 1986).

4.9.1. Elephantine (Figure 4.9a-b) Elephantine is a large island in the Nile opposite Aswan, the southern part of which is the traditional southernmost stronghold of Egypt proper, where the beginning of the yearly flooding of the Nile used to be monitored officially. The settlement on this site shows a continuous occupation from Naqada II until the Middle Ages (Von Pilgrim 1998). As there is no modern occupation on the south part of the island, contrary to most of the traditional towns in Egypt, the site can be investigated meticulously and without time pressure. In Pharaonic times, the main patron deities of the island were Khnum and Satet. The temple of the latter has been excavated completely and in all its stages, going back from a significant Roman period temple to at least the 1st Dynasty (Dreyer 1986: 11-12), when it was a simple shrine with thin brick walls in a natural niche formed by some large granite boulders. Deposits with votive objects comparable to those found at Tell Ibrahim Awad were encountered in the temple layers V-VII (Dyn. 1-5), when an altar and successive courtyard walls were added to the renovated shrine58. Figure 4.9b. Some objects from the Deposits at Elephantine (from Dreyer 1986).

58  Also interpreted as a foundation for the naos (Bussmann 2006 and 2007; see section 6.2.3).

56

The Votive Offerings The votive object deposits under discussion were found both inside and directly outside the shrine proper, partly under a later wall (the dotted lines on Figure 4.9a). The spatial distribution can thus be compared well with the situation at Tell Ibrahim Awad (Kopp / Raue 2008). At a later stage, votive objects were also discovered in debris layers just outside the temple area proper (Kopp 2018: 85-90). In all probability, they originated from the temple. They comprise hedgehog ships, faience figurines and tiles (Kopp 2013: 313-20; id. 2018: 91 / Figure 54 and Plate 17).

1980: 24-27 / 45-47). Another interpretation is the use of a hedgehog-ship for the nightly transport of the tomb owner to his destination (Altenmüller 2000). Mace heads are almost completely missing at Elephantine, contrary to Tell Ibrahim Awad, and especially the large numbers of them found at Hierakonpolis (see section 4.9.4). Another difference is the way in which the objects have been deposited: concentrated in rooms at Tell Ibrahim Awad, but more scattered at Elephantine (Dreyer 1986: 32-36). 4.9.2. Abydos (Figures 4.10-4.11)

Of all the temple sites in question, Elephantine is by far the best-documented one, except for the publication of the pottery, which is still pending (Kaiser / Dreyer 1975: 57-58/Plate 26c; Kaiser / Dreyer 1976: 81-82; Kaiser 1977: 79/Plate 20d), as is a complete architectural presentation. Contrary to Tell Ibrahim Awad, the concentrations of votive objects are not so clearly separated from each other by division walls; the total thickness of the soil layers in which they were found is approximately the same (more than 1.5 m). The temple sequence is continued into a much later period than at Tell Ibrahim Awad. However, the latter temple appears to be much older. A curious feature at Elephantine is, that in later times a shaft was sunk into the remains of earlier periods, as if there was a wish to see these earlier remains, possibly considered to be more sacred (Kemp 1991: 72). This underscores that there was a continuing awareness of the value of the earlier usage of the temple, which is also implied by the votive deposits. As for the date, the largest concentration of objects (the ‘Big Deposit’ inside the shrine) is with a high degree of certainty stratigraphically attributable to the (end of the) 5th Dynasty: plaques with the name of Pepi I (6th Dynasty) are to be considered as a terminus ante quem. An idea about the time span is given by the presence of a small headless statue with the name of Pharaoh Djer of the 1st Dynasty [Dreyer 1986: 65 (no. 28)]. The objects themselves consist of a large number of small human figures, the largest category here. Besides that, there are substantial groups of baboons and crocodiles, ‘hedge-hog-ships’ (see above), model vessels, jewellery (mainly beads), faience tiles of different kinds, and bizarre stones. The object categories and the quantities of single finds from Elephantine show marked differences with Tell Ibrahim Awad. The latter site contains a significantly larger proportion of baboons, tiles (of the small, thick variant, of which the number is three times as high; the number of medium-sized, thin tiles is ten times higher in Elephantine59) and mace heads, whereas human figures (26 per cent on Elephantine as opposed to 12 per cent at Tell Ibrahim Awad) and (name-) plaques (non-existent in Tell Ibrahim Awad) are more frequent in Elephantine. In a detailed look at the differences, the fact that hedgehog-ships are much more frequent in Elephantine is easily explained, considering the greater need for a protective deity against Nile rapids there than in the Delta (Dreyer 1986: 79; von Droste zu Hülshoff,

59 

Abydos was the most ancient centre of the Osiris / Khontamenty cult, but the site of the main sanctuary, very near the site now known as Kom es-Sultan (O’Connor 2007: 81; M.D. Adams), is unfortunately largely destroyed due to sebakh-digging, leaving only a confused accumulation of mud brick walls. Temple occupation can be traced back through the occurrence of royal names from the 17th dynasty to Early Dynastic times. Excavations were conducted at the beginning of the last century by W.M.F. Petrie. Judging by present-day standards, his excavations at Kom es-Sultan in Abydos are not adequately documented60. It might not have been the sanctuary proper where he has excavated, but rather a complex of Ka-houses (O’Conner 2007: 81). However, the material has been reanalyzed repeatedly in later years (Kemp 1968: 138-155; Dreyer 1986: 4758), creating a more coherent picture. Admittedly, the interpretation still remains quite problematic. There are three deposits, M 64, M 65/89 and M 69. It is not clear whether they were situated in pits sunk in older brickwork, or in ready-made brick chambers (Dreyer 1986: 47 and 51)61, situated in or near different constructions (M 64 apparently in a 6th Dynasty temple, the other two near a temenos wall). Previously, the consensus was that the construction of these had taken place not later than in the OK. However, Kemp has convincingly argued, on stratigraphical and typological grounds (at least for some of the objects, which are clearly NK), for an 18th dynasty date for the construction of these pits / chambers. This does not mean that a large number of the objects cannot be Early Dynastic or OK, because the 18th Dynasty is merely a terminus ante quem. It does mean that every object has to be examined individually to establish its date, and that an Early Dynastic or OK date cannot be taken for granted because of the supposed date of the deposit as a whole. Not everybody agrees on a date in the 18th dynasty, however (Legrand 1971, 11-12)62. At least the construction of all three deposits seems to have taken 60  At least in the published records: Petrie 1900 and Petrie 1903; his unpublished notebooks show much more details: see Adams 1975. 61  The label ‘latrines’ (Petrie 1903: 23) seems highly improbable. 62  Because of uniformity and the lack of objects from FIP or MK times.

See for the varieties in tiles section 6.1.1.

57

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Deposit’. Both scholars seem to have used a different orientation point in their architectural descriptions (their north-directions do not coincide; Dreyer 1986: 38). Much later, additional notes surfaced, enabling a reinterpretation of the original findings (Adams 1974a and 1974b; Kemp 1991: 76 / Figure 25). Apart from this Main Deposit some valuable, but nevertheless obviously obsolete objects were buried in two rooms, probably of a MK temple with many (store-) rooms; of a hypothetical earlier temple nothing remains (Dreyer 1986: 37-38). However, the deposition of these objects took place apparently independently from and later than the Main Deposit. The most famous of these objects are the golden falcon’s head (Saleh / Sourouzian 1987: no. 66) and the copper statues of Pepi I and his son (Quibell / Green 1902: Pl. XLIX)63. The objects are quite varied, including, apart from those already mentioned, stone vases, palettes, hippopotami, frogs, baboons, scorpions, lions, flint knives and faience tiles.

Figure 4.10. The Deposit situation at Abydos (from Kemp 1968).

The ivory objects are mainly human figures and fragments of these, mace handle covers and knife handles. The precise extent, horizontally and stratigraphically, of the Main Deposit is difficult to establish. Although opinions differ about the date of some of the individual objects, especially the ivories64, the stratigraphy suggests a date for the deposition in the OK or FIP as a terminus ante quem (Dreyer 1986: 44-46), confirmed by the accompanying pottery (mainly offering stands and hes-vases)65.

place more or less contemporaneously. Differences in the relative composition of the deposits do not seem to be chronologically significant. Petrie does not mention any specific pottery in connection with the deposits, so that does not give any clarification. At least a part of the stray finds seems to originate stratigraphically, as far as can be judged, from the OK or earlier (Dreyer 1986: 52). The objects consist of human figures, animal figures like frogs, baboons, lions, birds and hippopotami, gaming pieces, beads, large tiles, model vessels, palettes and, like at Elephantine, plaques with the names of Pepi I and II.

Of all the sites under discussion in this section, the objects deposited at Hierakonpolis have produced the most valuable historical clues concerning the importance of the city as a possible early Upper Egyptian capital or residence. Besides the already mentioned objects, several large ceremonial mace-heads with reliefs of Narmer (Quibell / Green 1902: Plate XXVI A-C) 66 stand out in importance. Apart from these, the ivory objects seem to be the most numerous from all the sites mentioned, although they were in a very bad state when found (comparable to the find situation of the Tell Ibrahim Awad ivories) and now distributed over many locations (as the other Deposit objects from here)67. As far as can be judged, several ivories have close parallels among the Tell Ibrahim Awad corpus: the female figurine Cat. no. 2 with Ashmolean E.340, the human figurines Cat. nos. 11, 12, 13 and 16 with E.330 and the human figure Cat. no. 33 with E.494868.

As for the object groups, the absence of mace-heads is conspicuous, especially when compared with Hierakonpolis. Apparently, mace-heads had no ritual function in the Osiris/Khontamenti cult, as opposed to the warrior aspect of the Horus of Hierakonpolis. The bizarre stones are only known from Elephantine and Tell Ibrahim Awad. 4.9.3. Hierakonpolis (Figures 4.12-4.13) The Horus temple, in use from Predynastic times to at least the NK, is the focus of the third comparable votive object collection. Hierakonpolis was one of the earliest and most important centers of the Thinite kingdom: the famous Narmer palette was found on this spot.

Recent reconstruction: Hawass 2004, 56-57. Baumgartel 1948: 543 ff.; Baumgartel 1968: 7-14 (for a later date) against Legrand 1971, 11-12 (for an early date);also Weinstein 1971: 133-35. 65  Quibell / Petrie 1900: Plate XXXV: the date suggested by the excavators (‘intermediate... between the later prehistoric and the early dynastic’, p. 11) is too early. See also the pottery on Quibell / Green 1902: Plate LXVI (lower part), dated in the 6th Dynasty. 66  Now in Cairo, London and Oxford. 67  Most of the ivories are now in the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford; the remainder is in the Petrie Museum in London and other locations: Adams 1974b, 133-162. 68  Not published. 63 

Here, the occupation situation is even more complicated. The principal excavator, J.E.Quibell, left the excavation soon and was succeeded by F.W. Green. Both contributed to the final publication (Quibell / Petrie 1900; Quibell / Green 1902), which lacks editing and consequently, coherence; for example, the place where the votive objects were found is mostly referred to as the ‘Main Deposit’, but sometimes also as the ‘Great Deposit’, and the ivories seem to originate from a separate location, called the ‘Ivory

64 

58

The Votive Offerings

Figure 4.11. Some objects from the Abydos Deposits (from Petrie 1903).

59

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 4.12. The Deposit situation at Hierakonpolis (from Kemp 1991).

Figure 4.13. Some objects from the Hierakonpolis Deposits (from Adams 1974a) (Courtesy of the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, UCL).

As for the other object categories, some are only represented here and at Tell Ibrahim Awad, such as antelopes69 and ivory handles70, although the objects themselves are not identical. The large number of stone vessels, however, is in stark contrast to Tell Ibrahim Awad, probably due to the greater availability of stone in the Nile valley71. The large number of mace heads in Hierakonpolis, in comparison with all the other sites, is especially conspicuous. This may have something to do with the warrior aspect of Horus here, or the presence of a state cult (section 4.1).

They include palettes, animals like frogs, scorpions, baboons, hippopotami, pigs, crocodiles, lions and birds, shrines, tiles, human figures in standing, sitting and crouching positions, gaming pieces and vessels, and are datable to the 1st Dynasty. Although the provenance was stated in most of the cases as Kom es-Sultan at Abydos or somewhere nearby, this was based on information provided by the traders and is perhaps not very reliable. Any statistics are tentative; however, they are included in the statistics for Abydos here (Figures 4.4-4.5 and 7.4-7.5).

4.9.4. Kofler-Truniger ‘Site’ (Figure 4.14)

Looking at the individual objects, it is striking that only in this collection the same bearded, crouching figures occur as in Tell Ibrahim Awad: compare A 49 with Cat. no. 64, A 50/51 with 67, A 52 with 66 and A 53 with 72/75 (Müller 1964: 36-38). Also, some of the faience vessels imitating stone are very similar (A 68 and Cat. no. 462)72.

Between 1955 and 1960 a number of objects similar to those discovered in the Hierakonpolis and Abydos deposits turned up on the art market, and were acquired by several museums and art collectors: the museums of Munich and Hannover, and the Brooklyn and Metropolitan Museums (Dreyer 1986: 54-58). Most objects were obtained for the private collection Kofler-Truniger in Luzern, Switzerland (H.W. Müller 1964: 10-46), and a few for other collectors.

4.9.5. Dahshûr Dahshûr is only mentioned for the sake of completeness because five ceramic fragments of so-called hedgehogships (Dreyer 1986, 76-79) were found in debris outside

Cf. Cat. nos. 227-28 to Quibell / Petrie 1900: Plate XXI-XXII. Cat. no. 335 and Adams 1974a: Plate 38 / 325. 71  Although the early tombs at Tell Ibrahim Awad paint a different picture: van Haarlem 1996a: 8-34. 69  70 

Cf. from Tell el-Farkha: Ciałowicz, 2004: 358 (Figure 8, similar to Cat. no. 67 / 72).

72 

60

The Votive Offerings

Figure 4.14. Some objects from the Kofler-Truniger Collection (from H.W. Müller 1964).

4.9.6. Saqqara

the Valley Temple of the Bent Pyramid of Pharaoh Snofru (4th Dynasty; Fakhry 1963: 14/Plate XLIXb). These objects have otherwise been found only in the deposits of Elephantine (the large majority), Abydos (Petrie 1903: Plate XI, no. 241) and Tell Ibrahim Awad (van Haarlem 1996). In contrast to Abydos and Elephantine, this temple was dedicated to a royal mortuary cult.

In northwest Saqqara, in the substructure (originally a tomb) of an enigmatic brick construction from the MK, some objects with a strong resemblance to material from Tell Ibrahim Awad, Abydos, Hierakonpolis and Elephantine (Yoshimura / Kawai 2005: 361-402) were 61

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt found. They probably originate from some cult installation in the neighbourhood, and were collected there in connection within the framework of some kind of cult, continued there in the MK (Yoshimura 2005: 400). These items are: two cylindrical beads no. 5-6 (Yoshimura 2005: 373 / Figure 9Plate 52b), corresponding with Cat. no. 433; a boat model no. 7 with Cat. nos. 281-83; a shrine model no. 8 with Cat. nos. 293-95; a basket model no. 9 with Cat. nos. 483-488; and a model vessel in a stand no. 10 with Cat. nos. 466-77. This find shows that this kind of objects should not be detached too strongly from residence culture. Maybe the line between Preformal and Formal features is not so intransigent anyway (see section 4.1; Kemp 1991: 64-83).

61-139/Plate XXIII). The deposits, which the excavator dubbed ‘foundation deposits’, consisted of seals, stone and ceramic vessels, human figures, birds, baboons, cats, bulls, antelopes, lions, gaming pieces, scarabs and jewellery. Part of the objects was found inside a (nonEgyptian) jar: scarabs, inscribed plaques, human figures, vessels, jewellery and toggle pins. Montet explicitly dates the deposits in the 6th dynasty because of the latest royal names on stone vases occurring in them, Pepi I and II (Montet 1928: 71-74 / 128-29). Stylistically, some of the objects of Egyptian origin (most of the deposit), like the scarabs, might belong to a slightly later date (Ward 1978: 8-9). There are some close parallels with deposits in Egypt: sitting baboons75, sitting figures with a hand under the chin76 and cylindrical gaming pieces77.

4.9.7. Armant

4.10.2. Ai (et-Tell) (Figure 7.6)

What can probably be considered a deposit of votive object consists of the contents of two Early Dynastic vessels found under the forecourt of the Montu temple at Armant73. These were filled with many of the curious so-called mud squeezes, folded rolls of clay of uncertain meaning, encountered, a.o., in Abydos (Petrie 1903: Plate XIV, 285-87) as well. Although the excavators consider this as a foundation deposit, it probably was not (Weinstein 1973: 23-24), but a votive deposit.

A broadroom sanctuary from the Early Bronze Age was discovered here, with cultic pottery (Marquet-Krause 1949: I, 16-21 / II, Plates XVI-XXIII and XCVIII; Callaway 1996) and fragments of a votive bed and a (votive?) calcite hippopotamus and other calcite vessels, probably from Egypt and to be dated in Dynasty 2-3 [Marquet-Krause 1949: 186 (no. 1459)/ II, Plate XIII (bottom)]. Whether this can be regarded as a deposit is not clear from the publication.

4.10. Comparisons with Other Sites: Syria / Palestine, Mesopotamia (Figure 4.15)

4.10.3. Nahariya (Figure 4.17) In the temple here, a simple broadroom temple with a socalled ‘High Place’ south of it, a number of votive objects was found in a kind of buried cachette in front of the ‘High Place’, not like at Tell Ibrahim Awad, although in a much later context (Middle Bronze II / SIP). They include miniature vessels, incense stands, beads, other jewellery and animal figurines like lions, birds, sheep, bulls and monkeys. A special group are the female deities in silver and bronze (Dothan 1956: 16-23 / Plate 3-6; Mazar 1992).

Comparisons with find contexts abroad are relevant within the framework of this study for the following reasons. The temple and the adjoining cemetery as a mortuary complex may have been functioning in a more or less Lower Egyptian tradition, which could have been under the influence of traditions from Western Asia74 (see section 7.4.2). The sites mentioned below are selected because cachettes were found there in or near the sacellum where votive offering objects were deposited and left in place, and because they are more or less contemporaneous with Tell Ibrahim Awad. Additionally, the objects themselves are similar to the votive offering objects found at Egyptian sites, which suggests, at least, actual contact with Egyptian spheres. More evidence for contacts are obvious, among others by means of related iconography, e.g. in cylinder seals (T.A.H. Wilkinson 2000: 28-29; Teissier 1987).

4.10.4. ‘En Besor This site seems to have been an Egyptian outpost in the Negev during Dynasty 0 / 1 (Gophna / Gazit 1985). The lower part of a baboon statuette with a vessel, similar to one from Elephantine was found here in Stratum III, possibly indicating a shrine [Gophna 1993; Dreyer 1986: no. 149 (Plate 28)].

4.10.1. Byblos (Figure 4.16) As is well known, Byblos has been linked to Egypt since very early times. The deposits in question were found beneath the floor tiles of a forecourt of the Egyptian Temple, found by Montet, of which only a few walls were left (like Deposit 9; Figure 61 E; Montet 1928:

4.10.5. Tell Brak

Mond / Myers 1940, I: Plate s ii-iii, x-1-2, xlv-9-10; II: 29-30, 113 (P. 375-76). 74  As contemporary parallels are so far non-existent, see for later evidence from the 2nd Intermediate Period: Bietak 1991b: 23-24; Müller 2008a: vol. 1, 332-337; see also Bomann 1991: 82-8; Bietak 2004; Bietak 2010.

75  Montet 1928: nos. 176 (91 / Figure 38) / 405 & 09 (116-17 / Plate LXII), cf. Cat. nos. 96-106 / 152. 76  Montet 1928: no. 147 (86 / Plate L) / no. 401 (115-16 / Plate LXII). Both executed in bronze, contrary to the faience figures Cat. nos. 54 / 56 77  Montet 1928: no. 333 (103 / Plate LVI) / no. 334 (103 / Figure 48), cf. Cat. nos. 297-98 / 300-03 / 305-06 / 318-22.

The Grey Eye Temple (Mallowan 1947: 32-44 / Plate LVII), as it was called by the excavators, contained large quantities of votive objects, deposited under the latest phase

73 

62

The Votive Offerings

Figure 4.15. Distribution of the Deposits outside Egypt; for the numbers, see the text.

4.10.6. Lachish

layer of the excavated shrine (ca. 3000 B.C.), consisting of an oblong hall with many side chambers. Most of these consisted of beads and the curious eye idols, after which the excavators named the temple. The excavators suggest that an element of substitution (inanimate models instead of living organisms) may have been involved concerning the images of humans, animals (lions, baboons and frogs) and vegetables (Mallowan 1947, 44), unlike Egyptian practise. The layer of the latest phase was preceded by at least four earlier construction layers (Mallowan 1947, 37-38). On the basis of the archaeological evidence, the objects are not interpreted as foundation deposits, but as votive object deposits, left intentionally in their original place in the substructures by the builders of the later temple phases (Mallowan 1947, 36-37), like a part of the objects at Tell Ibrahim Awad. Two calcite seated baboons (one holding a vessel), and two frog figurines, one of lapis lazuli and a calcite one found show a close resemblance to Egyptian examples78, possibly testifying to some sort of actual connection (Mark 1998: 45-47). No cultic equipment seems to have been found.

In the so-called Fosse Temple (in three building phases, all LB) a large number of, a.o., ivory objects (like clappers) and tiles, but mainly pottery, including ritual pottery – such as offering stands – was discovered, partly in situations (‘caches’) suggesting their use as deposits of votive and discarded ritual objects (Tufnell 1940: Plate XIV-LXV; Bietak 2002: 74). 4.10.7. Other Sites with Temple Deposits These are selected and mentioned only for the concept of storing votive offering objects in a temple cache. Not all are contemporaneous with the Egyptian material, nor do they contain any objects which are related to it. They include: Megiddo (Loud 1948: Text, 44-45 / Figure 101-102), Tel Haror (Katz 2000), Tel Yarmut (De Miroschedji 1988: Figure 2 / Plate 8), Tell Chuera (Moortgat 1967: 32-35 / Figure 23a-c / Plate IV), Tell Mumbaqa (Orthmann 1976: 28), Khafaje (Delougaz / Lloyd 1942: 18-20 & 134 / Plate 3), Tell Asmar (Delougaz / Lloyd 1942: 180-183 & 188-191 / Plate 19-20) and Uruk (Heinrich 1936: 4-6; Nöldeke 1936: 15). Some temples show architectural similarities with the Tell Ibrahim Awad temple (Bietak 2004; 2006; 2009; 2010).

78  Mallowan 1947: p. 97-98 / Plate VII, 6-7 with Petrie 1903: Plate VI, 51-61 / XI, 238 and Cat. no. 200; Mallowan 1947: 100 / Plate IX, 1 & 3 with. Petrie 1903: Plate XI, no. 240.

63

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 4.16. The Deposit situation at Byblos with examples (from Montet 1928).

4.11. Summary 4.11.1. The Votive Objects: Egypt 4.11.1.1. Tell Ibrahim Awad With the reservations mentioned above (section 4.6), the summing up is as follows. The human figures seem to have different meanings; female figurines (mostly naked) may well have something to do with a wish to preserve or enhance fertility. While it seems obvious that children‘s figurines in all probability reflect a wish for children, an interpretation as representatives for the donor is also possible, both for the male and female figurines (Dreyer 1986: 60). It has been argued that the crawling and kneeling figures may be begging continually for the desired favours (Dreyer 1986: 63). Those holding vessels may have these ready to receive their share of offerings, possibly representing ancestors taking part in the funerary feasts (Müller 1996: 269-70). Alternatively, they may signal that offerings have been presented, and are still being presented (section 4.6.1; Dreyer 1986: 64). The connection of baboons with ancestor cults79 is attested by the role of the divine Hedj-Wer as a royal ancestor (see

Figure 4.17. The Deposit situation at Nahariya (from Dothan 1956).

79  The range of ancestor cults in Egypt is difficult to assess due to the essentially non-literary (mainly archaeological, and thus incomplete) evidence: Fitzenreiter 1994: 51-72.

64

The Votive Offerings sections 4.6.2 and 4.8). Both aspects of the baboon, as a deity, possibly venerated at Tell Ibrahim Awad, and as an ancestor figure, incorporated in the baboon images, can play a part here (section 4.6.2).

record of Hierakonpolis and Abydos under review, and the coincidences of excavation. One of the differences between Elephantine and the other sites, including Tell Ibrahim Awad, is the absence of ivory figures at Elephantine. Statistical comparisons are not completely conclusive as for Abydos and Hierakonpolis (Bussmann 2010: 213-14), but human figures seem to be very strongly represented on Elephantine, whereas baboons predominate at Abydos and Tell Ibrahim Awad, and mace heads, though almost completely missing on Elephantine, form the largest group in Hierakonpolis. Conspicuous as well is the presence of penis sheaths on the male ivory figures in Hierakonpolis, and the absence of those on comparable figures from Tell Ibrahim Awad (see the Catalogue). We simply do not know enough to be able to determine whether this is a regional, a semantic, or a chronological feature. The context of the deposits at Abydos and Hierakonpolis are different in scale, as these temples seem to have been much more important cult centres in Early Dynastic times than those at Elephantine and Tell Ibrahim Awad. The deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad are more clearly defined than at Elephantine. The context of the finds at Tell el-Farkha is not yet clear enough for a satisfying analysis or comparison (Ciałowicz 2009b).

Some baboons are holding vessels as well, with apparently the same intention as is the case with the human figures (Dreyer 1986: 72). The idea behind the occurrence of other animals as hippopotami (Dreyer 1986: 74), crocodiles (especially as both of these can be both benevolent and malevolent, see sections 4.6.3 and 4.6.7; Dreyer 1986: 76) and lions is less apparent. However, it would be understandable if they were used as substitutes, being used in rites intended to offer protection, for instance, against the depicted animal. However, the exact meaning of every single votive object, attached to it by the donor, remains elusive (Bussmann 2010: 217; id. 2016: 46-47). The other categories (sections 4.6.5-4.6.6 and 4.6.8-4.6.14) present a mixed picture: the appearance of shrine models as votive objects in a shrine is not surprising, although the specific meaning in this context is not known, and one of the possible ideas behind the donation of hedgehog-ships (safe passage) is also understandable. Gaming pieces (belonging to ritual games), parts of furniture, clappers etc. have probably been included because of their cultic associations, and are no votive offerings in the strict sense. Personal items like jewellery and perhaps maceheads, on the other hand, probably did represent ex-votos. The natural stones must have been regarded as a sort of fetishes, and as such donated to the deity (Dreyer 1986: 96-97). Mace heads may have been a power symbol (see section 5.1.1). Vessels of all kinds may have contained precious substances, or have acted as replacements for real and precious vessels, like the faience vases with indicated veins (cf. Cat. no. 461) instead of real stone vases.

4.11.2. The Votive Objects: Abroad Ex-votos (including abandoned cultic objects) and the particular way they are disposed of are by no means specific to Egypt. Hiding temple treasures to prevent looting may also have played a part in some cases80. Close parallels with Egypt can be found at several sites in the Near East. Especially in the Near Eastern region comparisons are relevant because of the probable contacts with, and the influence on the Nile Delta. In both the Delta and the Near East they were gathered in deposits located on the temple grounds according to the same principle, and there are iconographical connections concerning the baboons and other animal figures, so mutual influence might have been involved here, judging by some architectural similarities as well (see section 7.4.2). This concerns mainly the sites in the Levant (listed in section 4.10), as the more distant sites in Mesopotamia do not show iconographical connections. These sites are only added to illustrate the general idea of collecting votive objects in temple caches (see also section 4.5). The practice of donating votive objects seems to appear almost simultaneously both in Egypt and the Near East (Mark 1998: 45-47).

Most of the tiles probably date back to Early Dynastic times, when they might have been used in the decoration of the shrine of Temple Phase 3. 4.11.1.2. Other Sites Any conclusion regarding similar sites can only be speculative, due to the incompleteness of the archaeological

A good, although much later example is the gold hoard from Kharga (Reddé 1992).

80 

65

5 Elements used in the Temple Ritual 5.1. Introduction

of the smaller specimens were meant as models rather than as the real thing (Dreyer 1986: 88).

Except, possibly, when cultic pottery is involved (see section 5.1.3), no apparent distinction was made between the categories of objects in the deposits discerned in this study. All kinds of objects had been stored beside each other at the temple sites in question (see section 3.5.1 and Dreyer 1986: 59). The only thing that they apparently had in common was their being sacrosanct due to the presence of the deity. This also applies to the objects discussed in the next chapter six (Tiles and Inlays). For this reason, they are included in this study, but discussed separately. The inclusion of mace heads below is a case in point.

The mace heads are generally divided into Predynastic and Early Dynastic types. Among the first group four types can be distinguished: conical, conico-piriform, piriform (including those with animal’s heads), and biconical. Within the groups the typology is further refined. This procedure is also followed for the Protodynastic pieces, but here there are only two main groups: conical and piriform. The few decorated examples belong to the last sub-group, and are probably ceremonial because of their large size and delicate relief (Quibell / Petrie 1900: Plate 26). Their significance in the funerary cult as tomb-gifts and other religious beliefs is difficult to determine. Both the diskor conical shape and the piriform or ovoid variation are represented in Tell Ibrahim Awad, although the former by one diorite example only (Cat. no. 349). Most of the maceheads were found in the Deposits 4, 12 and 13, of which the latter one contained most of the ivory objects; the other ones had very mixed contents (see chapter two). 82 per cent of the mace heads were ovoid; the material is mostly quartzite or calcite, with a few made of limestone.

The elements used in the temple ritual can be divided into four groups: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Mace heads (preliminary attribution) Flint tools (for sacrificial purposes) Specific cultic pottery Animal remains from sacrificial practices.

5.1.1. Mace Heads (Cat. nos. 349-392, Plates 16-17) For convenience’s sake, these objects are included here, although the evidence for ritual use is ambiguous1. Mace heads were put on a wooden stick and then secured with leather straps for use, although ivory handles are generally the only ones preserved. There is one exception: Tomb 24 in the Predynastic cemetery at Adaima contained the remains of three conical mace-heads with wooden handles, which were encased in stucco with a decoration of red and black stripes on a white background (Midant-Reynes 2002: 79-82 / 469). As such, using it as a real weapon seems unlikely, contrary to a ritual (funerary) role (see below).

A number of very decayed ivory sticks was present in Tell Ibrahim Awad (Dep. 4), but not in clear conjunction to any of the mace heads. In general, they seem to be too thin to be used as handles anyway. The remains of an ivory cylinder (Cat. no. 333) may be interpreted as a cover for a wooden mace handle (LÄ III: 414-41; Petrie 1901: Plate V, B 86; Whitehouse 1992)3. When these mace heads were deposited in Tell Ibrahim Awad, they may have been already a relic from (much) earlier (Predynastic) times. At that time, they were used at first as real weapons, but this changed in Dynastic times (Wolf 1926: 4-8 / Plate 1; Gilbert 2004: 35-41). Were they donated by warriors to the temple as a sacred memory of their fighting days? Of course, throughout Egyptian history they figure in stereotyped reliefs as the ceremonial club with which the Pharaoh is about to ritually crush the skulls of his enemies (Swan Hall 1986: 4-7). They could have been used, at least in Dynastic times, purely as a symbol of power, like a scepter (Gilbert 2004: 40 / Figure 5; Ciałowicz 1987: 59-60)4. The fact that they occur in such large numbers, especially in Hierakonpolis (Main Deposit; Adams 1974: 5-13; Dreyer 1986: 88) and to a lesser degree at Tell Ibrahim Awad has been

The mace heads could be made from a large variety of materials, including ivory and clay, but mainly of stone, like limestone, basalt, calcite and quartzite. Apart from their occurrence in temple deposits in Early Dynastic times, they are found in settlements (Rizkana / Seeher 1988): 51-52 / Plate 94-96; Eiwanger 1988: Plate 57; Brunton / Caton-Thompson1928: Plate LIII / LXX, 40) and in funerary contexts (both male and female burials: Baumgartel 1960: 106-21; Petrie 1901: 33 / Plate V / B 86; Petrie 1920: 22-24; Randall-MacIver / Mace 1902: 16 / 13);2 in Predynastic times. It has been argued that some

See, however, Bussmann 2010: 404-07, where mace heads are considered as votive objects. 2  A particularly fine example, with a handle of ivory and gold leaf, decorated with animal figures, was found in a tomb in Sayala: Boehmer 1974b: 18-19 / Figure 4. 1 

3  Also Crowfoot Payne 1993: 150 / Figure 60 (no. 1234), called ´horn´ here. 4  See for an exceptional piece Ashmolean E.134, with two bull’s heads: Quibell / Petrie 1900: Plate XIX / 3.

66

Elements used in the Temple Ritual interpreted in various ways: (1) they were handed in by chiefs from conquered regions as a symbol of dependence to the new central administration and then deposited in the temple (Hoffman 1984: 302-03); (2) they were exvotes specifically for Horus as warrior-god, which might be a possibility for Hierakonpolis (Ciałowicz 1987: 62; Baumgartel 1960: 112), but for which there is no indication at Tell Ibrahim Awad. Another possibility is that they had a ritual function: either to kill sacrificial animals or for use in a purely symbolic way in some sort of re-enactment of an ancient myth (Otto 1958; Goebs 2002: 27-59)5. An interesting conjecture is the theory that the maces, as weapons and symbols of power, were systematically ‘deconstructed’ in Hierakonpolis and at Tell Ibrahim Awad (as mace-heads and ivory handles were found apparently on purpose separated from each other; Quibell / Green 1902: 29-30; Whitehouse 2002: 431-432). This could signify a sort of nationwide trend, at Tell Ibrahim Awad earlier than in Hierakonpolis (Wengrow 2006: 184). We can only guess at the reason for this. So far, there is no really satisfactory explanation for their inclusion in the Deposits. Outside Egypt proper, several hundreds of piriform copper, haematite and limestone mace heads of Chalcolithic date were found in a cave near the Dead Sea (Bar-Adon 1980: 116-31)6.

Figure 5.1. Lithic sequence from the temple area I (from van Haarlem and Hikade 2006).

5.1.2. Flint Tools (Figures 5.1-5.2; van Haarlem/ Hikade 2006) These are not included in the Catalogue. Most of them were found outside Deposit contexts, but within the temple proper, as stray objects. As such, whether they can be considered as votive objects is doubtful (see, however, Bussmann 2010: 490-91). Although copper was already in use in the Late Predynastic, and bronze since Early Dynastic times, flint tools continued to be used for a very long time, at least until the late NK (Tillmann 2007: 11, 120-50). Apart from the everyday use of flint tools, it was tradition to use flint knives for the slaughter of sacrificial animals, due to their association with primeval times (Eggebrecht 1973: 11123; Ikram 1995: 63-70). It is to be expected that such knives, being connected with the cult, occurred in temple contexts, as at Tell Ibrahim Awad (Figures 5.1-5.2) even if the actual slaughtering probably did not take place in the temple itself (Eggebrecht 1973: 124-37). The excavations have provided 170 chipped-stone artefacts from the temple squares A 130-140/190. The sequence of 5  The existence of myths in early times is contested: Schott 1964 versus Assmann 1977. 6  Further parallels come from Megiddo, Jericho, Beersheba, and Tepe Gawra.

Figure 5.2. Lithic sequence from the temple area II (from van Haarlem and Hikade 2006).

67

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt either directly from the centralised workshops or through intermediaries. Based on the assemblage of Tell Ibrahim Awad this distinct flint is to be observed predominantly as sickle blades. However, at other sites, such as Elephantine in the far south, with a similar disadvantage of a lack of local flint resources or at least good quality flint, this new raw material was also common for bifacial knives and standardized large blade tools.

over 1000 years makes it possible to describe the lithic tool kit of this temple over time. As with the earlier excavation the majority of the finds date to the Ok and only 16 per cent date back to the time before the 1st Dynasty (Table 5.1). The MK is not represented in the lithic assemblage due to the fact that little of the MK levels was preserved and apparently contained no lithic material. The following datings are based on the stratigraphy (see chapters two and seven).

A look at the primary production (Table 5.2) indicates that by far the most common blanks were blades and large blades with a length of over 5 cm and a width greater than 2 cm.

About the raw material at Tell Ibrahim Awad, the prime observation is the significant use of a certain type of flint during the Early Dynastic Period.

The average length of all blades is 5.1 cm, their average width being 1.4 cm, resulting in a length/width ratio of ca.1:4. This ratio is not maintained when the large blades are examined which are more slender than the shorter and more robust sickle inserts. On average large blades are 6.9 cm long and 2.6 cm wide, which is a ratio of only 1:2.7. Large blades and larger blade tools seem to have been used predominantly in the period from the 1st to the 3rd Dynasty. The whole sequence shows a grade of continuity and hence highlights the standard of blade production in the 3rd millennium BC in Egypt. Second in frequency of tools are core tools, while flakes account for only seven per cent.

During the preceding late Predynastic, workshops were based next to the residence of the rulers at important sites such as Hierakonpolis, Naqada and Abydos in Upper Egypt. At Abydos, for instance, a dense light to midbrown flint with pinkish discolouration was the preferred local material and was used for distinct tool types such as oval, regular endscrapers and elongated endscrapers. In addition many of the so-called ripple-flaked knives were manufactured from this raw material and like the abovementioned scraper types were traded throughout Egypt, probably directly from the workshops at Abydos. With the unification of Egypt and the move of the residence to Memphis in the 1st Dynasty a new source of raw material was made available. It was a caramel coloured flint often with white bands and lenses. This raw material quickly became widespread throughout Egypt and it seems not far-fetched that with the northerly move to Mendes new quarries were opened. From these centres nodules as well as blanks and finished stone tools were transported to other locations. The settlement of Tell Ibrahim Awad, lacking flint sources in the Delta, received its stone tools

Considering the existence of a temple the almost complete lack of debitage and core remnants is not surprising. However, this missing waste does underline the fact that the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad was at the end of a production or trade line to which overwhelmingly semifinished or finished products were shipped. Strategies for exploiting quarries and for a primary production were not developed and it was sufficient to be able to resharpen and repair stone tools. Of all chipped-stone objects around two-thirds were altered and modified, i.e. retouched, and can therefore be classified as tools. Table 5.3 shows that the various

Table 5.1. Chronological distribution of lithic artefacts in A 130-140/190 Period

Percentage (n=170)

Middle Kingdom (Phase 1)

0

First Intermediate Period (2a)

15

Type

Quantity

Percentage

4th – 5th Dynasty (2b)

12

Cores/core remnants

1

1

3rd – 4th Dynasty (2c)

10

Crested blades

1

1

2nd – 3rd Dynasty (3)

11

Debitage

1

1

Early Dynastic settlement (4)

8

Bifacial thinning flakes

5

3

1st – 2nd Dynasty (5a-b)

7

Flakes

12

7

1 Dynasty (5c-d)

6

Bladelets

7

4

Naqada IIIb2/c1 (6a-b)

6

Blades

107

62

Naqada IIIa/b (6c-d)

10

Large blades

19

11

Undated

15

Core tools

17

10

Total

100

Total

170

100

st

Table 5.2. Primary production at A 130-140/190

68

Elements used in the Temple Ritual rectangular form in the 2nd Dynasty, maintaining this significant design until the 4th Dynasty (Hikade 2001: 311 / Figure 1).

segmented blades, serrated and/or backed ones (ca 50 per cent), alongside the bifacial knives (ca 12 per cent) constitute the major groups of tools. Almost half of the blade tools bear sickle sheen and give evidence for the harvesting activities of temple personnel. Good parallels for sickle blades come from other Delta sites such as Tell el-Farkha (Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2000: 71 / Figure 7. 1-2, 8-11) and Buto (Schmidt 1989: 306 / Figure 17. 7-10; Buchez / Midant-Reynes 2007: 62). Examining the development of sickle blades throughout the sequence it becomes clear that the same design was chosen. These blades were truncated at their basal and terminal end and were often put into wooden sickle bows together with pointed endpieces (cf. Figure 5.2, Phase 3; Emery 1938: Plate 15). Only a few pointed sickle blades occurred here in the recent assemblage confirming previous observations (Schmidt 1992, 83) leading to the conclusion that the end of the row of sickles was not always taken by triangular inserts.

Phase 4 of the Early Dynastic settlement interlude produced neither a significant type nor amount of stone tools. From the context of the 2nd / 3rd Dynasty comes a bifacial retouched knife measuring 15.8 x 3.8 x 0.9 cm and weighing ca. 55 gr. (Figure 5.2, top). It strongly resembles contemporaneous finds of the 3rd Dynasty from Beit Khallaf (Garstang 1902: Plate XV) near Abydos, and a knife from the Austrian excavations at Giza (Kromer 1978: Plate 1.1), as well as an unpublished knife from a 3rd Dynasty context at Satet North on Elephantine. The latter is a little shorter but also shows the deliberate leftover remains of cortex on the handle. As already mentioned, the island of Elephantine lacks good local flint exactly as is the case in the Delta region, and so standard knives and especially high-quality tools needed to be delivered to these places from workshops or government distribution centres. How clearly this line was drawn is very well illustrated by the 3rd millennium lithic assemblage on Elephantine where a distinction between coarse and heavy tools of local Nile pebble on the one side and the imported standard tools of non-local material on the other side can be observed. The form of knives tended to a broader form after the 3rd Dynasty for which the knife from Phase 2b (Figure 5.1) is a good example. Very likely, the knife from Phase 2c had a similar shape but it cracked due to a heavy blow and became burinated. The usual shape of the knife has a relatively straight back, and rounded tip while the handle is pronounced and is also rounded and the end. The retouching is quite regular but can vary greatly due to the resharpening process.

Only a few artifacts come from the early phase, amongst them a bifacial tool and some bifacial thinning flakes (Table 5.2) hinting at some production of tools. The next phase, 5a-d (1st – 2nd Dynasty temple, Table 5.2) yielded two type fossils of this period. First is the triangular scraper that in this case still has extensive remains of cortex on the dorsal and a retouch at the wider convex working edge at the terminal. Second is the basal and terminal truncated endscraper. This typical Egyptian tool had an oval shape during the 1st Dynasty and developed into its straight Table 5.3. Tools at A 130-140/190 Tool type

Quantity

Percentage

Dorsal/ventral retouched blades

19

17

Serrated blades

9

8

Serrated and segmented blades

14

12

Segmented blades

28

24

Segmented and backed blades

3

3

Segmented, serrated and backed blades

6

5

Notched blades

1

1

Borers

2

2

Endscrapers

4

4

Micro endscraper

1

1

Triangular scraper

2

2

Rectangular/oval endscraper

6

5

Chopping tools

2

2

Ambiguous bifacials

2

2

Bifacial knives

14

12

Total

113

100

Quite frequently, knives of this type are depicted in OK mastabas. A very elaborate and detailed example comes from the mastaba of Ptahhotep at Saqqara (de Garis Davies 1901: Plate XXIII) Here in two registers butchers conduct their work slaughtering cattle. The knives are of the same type as those found at Tell Ibrahim Awad although apparently longer. Even the resharpening with a retouching stick is depicted. The ongoing use of the triangular scraper is given evidence by the large specimen produced on a flake (Figure 5.1). The last bifacial knife of the sequence is of a rather bulky form (Figure 5.1). Its back is still straight but it has a pointed tip, leading to a straighter cutting edge. The handle is broad and not as long as the older examples. The specimen from the FIP is very different from the younger standardized knives that we know of, for example at Tell el-Dab’a (Tillmann 1992: Plate 68-70) or from several slaughtering scenes in MK tombs (Eggebrecht 1973: 238291). Even in the latest Phase 2a sickle blades do not differ greatly from their predecessors from almost 1000 years before. In regard to the knives their accounting for 11 per cent of the total tool kit is a clear indication for the 69

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt widespread use and value of bifacial knives in temple activities, i.e. presumably in slaughtering cattle. Findings from Abusir emphasise this importance in the best possible manner (Vachala / Svoboda 1989: 174-81). That even broken knives were considered as precious and worth keeping at places like Tell Ibrahim Awad is documented by the intriguing find of a small hoard unearthed near a wall in A130/220. A group of ten elongated blades, three irregular broad blades, and two flint knives without handles were discovered, apparently stashed away for safekeeping (see section 2.3.3.2 and Figure 2.24). While localized production certainly continued, the 3rd millennium BC saw the development of a highly organised and expert flint industry in Egypt, from the exploitation of the raw material, to preproduction of standard blanks, the final production of tools, and their trade and distribution throughout the whole country. Once the basic tool kit was set (sickle blades, broad regular truncated endscrapers, triangular scrapers and bifacial knives) little need was seen for a change to those tools. As has been seen even a limited assemblage such as the lithic sequence Tell Ibrahim Awad can illustrate the scope of Egypt’s flint industry, the quality of the production and the standardisation of forms.

show no difference in forms8.Vice versa, stands from one and the same context vary considerably in size and shape, like those from the already mentioned Deposit I (Cat. nos. 713-26), so that does not help either. A lot of pictorial evidence (Wildung 1976: 43; Ziegler/ Letellier 1997: 117; Junker 1938: 171 / Figure 31b) shows that, apart from its use to support round-bottomed vessels, it was also used to support other forms of vessels and offering plates or table tops9. A curious feature is the occurrence of triangular or rectangular holes in most of the stands, which may have been intended as decorative elements, although a practical element (easier to carry around like that) may have played a part as well10. Although offering stands could play a part in libations (Newberry 1893: Plate 35), it is very unlikely that the libation water was poured in them in order to flow out again through the holes, as has been suggested (Sherkova 2001: 153). One of the stands from Tell Ibrahim Awad shows clear traces of exceptional crocodile applications on it (Cat. no. 726). It does not seem to be the case that both ends could be used as either top or bottom, as usually one end is much flatter than the other, and therefore better suited to serve as the bottom part, as it would not be able to support round-bottomed pottery properly like that. As no significant traces of burning have been found on the stands of Tell Ibrahim Awad, a use in burnt offerings or incense burning seems unlikely. This has been recorded, however, for the stone variety. Similarly, no evidence of intentional breaking has been found. The same holds good for the other categories, notably the bowls (see below; Müller 2008a: vol. 1, 360-364). In Qau el-Kebir, among other sites, stands were found in a funerary context, often together with hes-vases (Brunton 1928: Plate XCII). They could also occur in stone (el-Khouli 1978: Plate 128-129; Abou-Ghazi1980: no.57048; Fischer 1963: 235-245) and, in later times, in metal11. The basic form and purpose, at least, seem to have lasted a long time.

5.1.3. Pottery (Figure 5.4a-b) By far, most of the pottery under discussion was found in the Deposits, with only a few stray finds (See the Ceramic Catalogue in combination with the Concordance). Most of the pottery from the Deposits turned up in separate rooms and corridors, apart from the non-ceramic objects, with the exception of Deposit 4a (see section 3.5.1), which was a mixed Deposit. Most of it belonged to one of the following categories, all typical for cultic purposes (perhaps with the exception of beer jars (section 5.1.3.4): 5.1.3.1. Offering Stands (Cat. nos. 707-47, Plates 28-30)

5.1.3.2. Hes- (Libation) Vases (Cat. nos. 835-930, Plates 34-37)

This characteristic pottery category was found in considerable numbers among the Deposit pottery, and as miniatures in faience as well (see Cat. nos. 466-477). Deposit 1 of Phase 2b (see section 3.5.1) consisted only of a variety of 14 offering stands, apparently lined up for use. That they had something to with the erection and consecration of a new temple (in this case the temple of Phase 2a), as has been suggested (Sherkova 2001: 153), does not hold good, because Phase 2a was a partial rebuilding of the temple after the collapse of a Phase 2b wall on these stands (Figure 2.11 / Eigner 2000: 17). Like here, it has been found in situ in funerary contexts as well (Junker 1938: Plate VIIIb; Reisner 1935: 71 / Figure 3)7. On related sites, like Abydos, this kind of pottery was present too and apparently in use from the 1st Dynasty onwards (Petrie 1903: Plate XLIV; Petrie 1953: Plate XXX, Type 100). Establishing a chronological development presents problems, as differently dated stands (until Dynasty 11)

This group from Tell Ibrahim Awad probably constitutes one of the largest known assemblages of the so-called hes- (libation) vases. About 1/3 comes from Deposit 6, the remainder from the Deposits 2, 3, 4a, 5, 9 and 13 (Phases 2b/c). The pottery repertoire from the Early Dynastic royal tombs in Abydos provides useful parallels (Petrie 1903: Plate XLIV)12. Their tall, slim shape, flaring rim, marked shoulder and widening foot usually distinguish them. Most of them were polished outside. A cultic vessel par excellence, it was used almost exclusively for libation and purification purposes; the specific form makes it easy to hold. They occur in contexts from Early Dynastic times 8  Köhler 1998: 27-28:Dynasty 0-1; Seidlmayer 1990: 176 (Figure 76): OK-FIP (settlement context); Brunton 1928: 6 / Plate XCII, Type 96:Dynasty 9-11 (funerary context). 9  For an in situ find (in a tomb chapel) with a bowl on top: Rzeuska 2006: Plate XI,4. 10  However, there is one stand with two rows of holes (Cat. no. 743). 11  Tanis. L’or des pharaons (Paris 1987), 210 (no. 63). 12  See also UC 17548 (Tomb of Peribsen, Abydos).

7  Especially Rzeuska 2006: 350 / Plate 154 (no. 786 is a close parallel for Cat. no. 724).

70

Elements used in the Temple Ritual into the OK (Sowada 1999: 99), also in representations (Balcz 1934: 71-74). They are found as richly decorated wooden dummies in the mortuary temple of Neferirkare (Borchardt 1909: 59-66). For the possibilities concerning a chronological typology, enabling more precise dating, the opinions vary: for Naga ed-Derr an attempt has been made (Mace 1909: 46), but this does not seem possible for Qau el-Kebir, where they are too diverse within each period13. Wide-mouthed vases seem to be characteristic for an Early Dynastic date (Sowada 1999: 99); with this in view, most of the Tell Ibrahim Awad material would fall within this period. However, as a variety of forms was found there within the same contexts (see above), this might not be a useful chronological criterion.

stands-probably the result of clearing activities), where they are attributed to early Dynastic times as well (Kaiser 1977: 79; Kaiser / Dreyer 1975: Plate 26c). In miniature black-topped form (Cat. no. 831) they are paralleled by finds from the Main Deposit in Hierakonpolis and Saqqara (Adams / Friedman 1992, 332-33; Yoshimura / Kawai 2005: 385 / Figure 18,5). 5.1.3.3. Bowls (Cat. nos. 748-67, Plate 31) A non-specific kind of vessel for both common household and cultic uses [Rzeuska 2006: 256 / Pl 107 (no. 547)]17. Most of the bowls found in Tell Ibrahim Awad are polished, with concave walls. The apparently purely practical and functional form is not distinctive for Early Dynastic or OK times, as it appears as such in later times as well18. One precious silver bowl (Cat. no. 452) was found in the Deposits19. Specifically this kind of multifunctional pottery could have been used in funerary feasts, as some show traces of use, like wear and stains caused by cooking fires (see section 7.4.2), as well as for holding liquids.

The libation liquids to be poured could be, apart from water, beer, milk or wine. The act of libation had two purposes: purification and the restoration of powers, not least in a funerary context (Lapp 1986: 163-69 / 171-74 / 180, 182-83 / 188; Barta 1968: 47; LÄ III: 1014-015)14. In temple contexts, hes-vases are explicitly used, mostly by Horus and Thot to purify the king for his priestly functions in the temple (Gardiner 1950: 3-12; Altenmüller-Kesting 1968: 90-13). Constant purification was an important element in the temple routine (Moret 1902: 171-78), required whenever somebody or something entered the temple area from outside, to emphasise the difference between and the transition from the profane world into the sacred atmosphere, as manifest in many religions.

5.1.3.4. ‘Beer’ Jars (Cat. nos. 768-91, Plate 38) A specific class of rough, hand-made vessels (by way of coiling, except perhaps the rim; Rzeuska 2006: 48-49 / Plate 6), with pointed or blunt bottoms, for convenience sake indicated as beer jars. As only a few complete vessels were found in the Deposits, deriving a date from these is hazardous. Parallels are very numerous throughout the OK, from temple, cemetery and settlement contexts (Faltings 1998: 209-22)20. Apparently, they could also hold grain (Barta 1996: 129, n. 17) and serve as a kind of standard measure. In Dynasty 5, one beer jar may have equalled about half a hekat-measure (Barta 1996: 127-31). As such, a unit of one beer jar may have been important for exchange and estimate purposes (Moussa / Altenmüller 1977: Plate 24). It is possible that they were sometimes smashed after use (Ginter / Kozlowski 1998: 92-96). A number of these were found in an offering pit just outside the temple temenos wall, in Sq. A 140/200. These are not included here, as they do not seem to belong to any Temple Deposit, but may have belonged to the cemetery. The date of most of these is Dynasty 3 (Kroeper 1990: 6-9)21. In Dynasty 6 or later, they evolve into straight tube-like forms (Faltings 1998: 222; Rzeuska 2006, 381-88).

Hes- vases (Figure 5.3) often appear in the iconography with spouts (Shedid 1994: 69). This may be the metal version (Von Bissing 1901: 44)15, as, so far, few ceramic hes-vessels have been retrieved furnished with a spout (Petrie 1903: Plate XLIV, 95; Junker 1928: 11 / Figure 11,1). Unfortunately, metal vases are rare as well. In Tell Abraham Awad, no metal libation vases have been retrieved, but most of the pottery versions are polished – possibly intended to imitate a metallic shine. The fact that they all come from the temple does not corroborate the hypothesis that metal vases were used mainly in temple contexts, as ‘the real thing’, and the ceramic imitations in tombs (LÄ V: 216)16. They were also executed in miniature format (like Cat. nos. 830-831). A special feature is that some of the vases are ‘blacktopped’ (like Cat. no. 923), even in the miniature format. This may have something to do with reminiscences of the Predynastic Black-topped Ware (Sowada 1999: 85-102). Such vases occur in Abydos (in a temple context which is difficult to date, see section 4.9.2) and Elephantine too (found in a similar context as at Tell Ibrahim Awad, in a Deposit just outside the shrine, together with offering

5.1.3.5. Other Vessels (Cat. nos. 792-834 and 931-55, Plates 32-33 / 38-39) This class includes elongated or squat storage jars (intended for liquids or grain) and miniature vessels in Close parallels: Köhler 1998: Plate 33,2 (Settlement, Dynasty 1); Petrie 1902: Plate XXVIII, 19, 20, 21, 23 (Osiris naos, Early Dynastic). 18  e.g. for the 18th Dynasty in Petrie / Brunton 1924: Plate LXIII, 13T. 19  Bronze examples are known from Abydos: Petrie 1903: Plate 21,3-4. 20  Rzeuska 2006: 60 / Plate 9 (No. 1) is a close parallel, not later than the end of Dynasty 5. 21  The range falls within the 3rd Dynasty: Faltings 1998: 212-13.

13  Brunton 1928: 6 / Plate LXXXVIII (Dyn. 6-8) & XCII (Dyn. 9-11) [Type 95]. 14  Also Bonnet 1956 (referring to, i.a., PT 1748). For libation tables from the OK: Abou-Ghazi 1980: 57001-57023. 15  Cf. Allard Pierson Museum Inv. 8000 and 14.238. 16  See also Petrie 1903: Plate 21,1: this is a bronze vase from a temple context.

17 

71

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 5.3. Selection of the hes-vase repertoire.

Figure 5.4a. Pottery categories in absolute numbers.

the form of jars or miniature hes-vases (Cat. nos. 831-32, see section 5.1.3.2; Allen 2006). Of the last kind, almost all were found in one Deposit (no. 5, in Sq. A 140/190 – see section 3.5.1). It is likely that they have been used as votive objects, in some cases perhaps originally containing a substance22 to be offered to the temple, or as Ersatz for real vessels (see section 4.6.14). A distinction has to be made between miniature and model vessels: the former are real vessels, in miniature form – as such, mostly executed in clay; model vessels are also miniature versions of larger, real vessels, but then partly or wholly massive (dummies), 22 

and made in stone (Allen 2006: 21-22; as Cat. no. 460). Miniatures occur in foundation deposits, but mostly in funerary contexts (M. Barta 1995). 5.1.4. Animal Remains A graph (see Figure 5.5) and Table 5.4 give an indication of the animal species of which bones were discovered within the temple area for Phases 2 to 623. Most of them do not originate from the Deposits, but are stray finds within the temple area. They are probably not just waste

Samples have been taken, but not yet analyzed.

23 

72

From unpublished reports by S. Ikram.

Elements used in the Temple Ritual

Figure 5.4b. Pottery categories in relative figures.

products; their contexts do not suggest that-see below. The high number of pig and fish bones and the scarcity of cattle and sheep or goat remains are striking features (Wenke / Buck 1988: 15). The preponderance of pig bones can partially be explained by the fact that pigs have more foot bones (metapodials) than cattle or ovicaprids. Apparently, the later abomination of pigs because of their association with the evil god Seth (LÄ V: 762-64) in the religious atmosphere seems to be practically non-existent here. This conforms to the developments at Tell el-Dab’a, where pig bones are frequent occurrences until the end of the MK, but only a minority in the temples of the 2nd Intermediate Period, and even non-existent in Temple III (Boessneck / Von den Driesch 1992a: 45 / 49-50; Müller 1996: 208210); most of the animal bones belong at that time to goats or sheep, and to a lesser extent to cattle.

As for the shells (Figure 5.6), most of them were found in Room A of the temple of Phase 6a (see Figure 2.7, left). At least two species were present: Cerastoderma edule and Acanthocardia tuberculata. The shells were all pierced so that they could be strung. For the shells that could be examined, it was clear that they had been deliberately drilled in the umbo area so that they could be strung and suspended and possibly used as amulets. The area where the holes appear does sometimes have a natural opening due to wear, so it is possible that some of these shells were collected, most probably from the Mediterranean coastline, because they already were pierced, while the remainder were deliberately drilled. Shells were frequently used as amulets and for adornment. The most common shell amulet or adornment is the cowrie shell. The cowrie, or a representation of the shell made in another material (e.g. gold), was worn by women and is representative of female genitalia and fertility, and as such, was worn as part of a girdle (Aldred 1971: 15-16 / Plate 33-35). The next most common shell ornament is half of a bivalve, probably a cockle shell. Examples from the MK executed in gold are common (Aldred 1971: 146 / Plate 79), and the shell itself is found in Predynastic burials (Brunton 1928: 38; Dubiel 2008: 147-57 / Plate 9-13). Its symbolism is unfortunately unclear.

As for the other animal bones found in the temple: the few donkey bones might be an indication that donkeys were eaten, but this is perhaps not very probable (Boessneck / Von den Driesch 1986: 117)24. In these early times, donkeys were not yet vilified as animals associated with Seth. Their presence in a temple area is thus not as unexpected as it would have been in later times. The number of hippopotamus bones is surprisingly high; that may have something to do with a ritual (section 4.6.3; Säve-Söderbergh 1953: 55-56).

The donkey and cow bones are all elements from the metapodials and below, the portions of animals that are discarded. The ovicaprids have skull, tooth, and tibia fragments, together with the below metapodial bones. The pig remains are primarily skulls and teeth, with some of the other body parts represented. Thus, virtually all the bones are of the non-meat bearing kind: they come from the head (skull fragments and teeth) and the lower leg areas. There are no bones that come from meat-bearing areas, i.e., shoulder (scapula and humerus) or thigh (femur) and other long bones, ribs or vertebrae present in the entire assemblage25. Apparently, these were taken away and consumed elsewhere (see below).

Similarly, the frequent occurrence of fish bones all over the temple area apparently predates the taboo on fish in the sacred atmosphere introduced in later times (Brewer / Friedman 1989: 7-15 / 17-19). The several catfish species like Clarias and Synodontis may have had a significance concerning fertility or a role in the travels of the sun during the night [Brewer / Friedman 1989: 60-63 / 67-69 / 86-87 (A3) / 90-91 (A5); Gamer-Wallert 1970: 116-119]. In any case, their presence indicates a role as sacrifice in the ritual. 24  See also Osborn / Osbornova 1998: 134-36. The reference to donkeys here as sacrifices is based upon upon a mistaken translation of a passage in the Story of the Shipwrecked Sailor: Erman 1971: 509.

25 

73

From an unpublished preliminary report by S. Ikram (2002).

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 5.5. Graph of the animal bones distribution.

5.2. Tentative Reconstruction of the Temple Ritual

just put there with the intention to add more vessels as surplus cultic equipment, when this was cut short when the wall collapsed. The significance of mace heads in the overall picture is not clear.

In general, there are not many features in other early temples (like the Satet-temple on Elephantine) which may help us to understand the ritual here (T.A.H. Wilkinson 1999: 306-320). The Satet-temple on Elephantine is just about the only one of which the architecture provides helpful clues about the ritual significance of the areas of the Hidden and the Revealed cult image (see below; Kemp 1991: 70 / Figure 23 & 94-95). Surviving ritual attributes consist of a few possible cult statues, with as the earliest the colossi found at Coptos (Petrie 1896: 7-9 / Plate 3-5). The Pyramid temples are a category in itself, being royal in nature, very different in layout (Badawy 1954: 89-114), and thus probably hardly or not relevant in this matter.

The reason why so many intact libation vases were found may be that they were cleared away in one action to be replaced by bronze versions. Unfortunately, bronze objects tend to be melted down and recycled. By the end of theFIP, copper and bronze production and cost-effectiveness of it had improved significantly to enable replacement of the ceramic versions in the temple service, this time in the Phase 1 temple (Lucas / Harris 1962: 212-17). The smaller containers may have been filled with oils, perfumes and unguents. The enigmatic fireplaces and the position of intact upright vessels just outside the temple compound may have had something to do with the production of these liquids (see section 2.3.1 and Figure 2.6): cooking can play a part in this process (Nicholson / Shaw 2000: 406; Shimy 1998, 219-25).

It should be remembered that many aspects of ritual probably left hardly any physical traces (or none at all; Insoll 2004). Only speculative analogy and extrapolation from later sources might give some clues. In what follows, only some particularly promising physical remains are analysed regarding their possible ritual function (Stevens 2006: 21-22 / 271-284).

Table 5.4. Simplified table with absolute and relative numbers of taxa from the temple area from unpublished reports)

The large vessel impressions found near the entrance of the temple (see Figure 2.11, near the southeast corner) point to the presence of vessels which were in all probability filled with water for purification purposes before entering the temple. Several large vessels found in the temple area may have served the same purpose. Especially the cultic pottery like the offering stands and libation vases can give clues about the ritual in the temple. Both forms apparently do not continue beyond the FIP / MK times, like elsewhere. Most instructive are the offering stands as found covered by the debris from the collapsed wall of Temple Phase 2b: apparently, they were lined up for immediate service in front of the cult niche with its platform or bench when the wall came down (Figure 2.11). They were probably meant to carry trays, jars or bowls with offerings in the daily ritual. Either that, or they were 74

Temple

Quantity

Percentage

Bos

5

0.9

Sus

201

34.5

Ovis / Capra

22

3.8

Asinus

13

2.2

Hippo

29

5.0

Bird

8

1.5

Clarias

66

11.3

Other fish

3

0.5

Shells

236

40.5

Total

538

100

Elements used in the Temple Ritual the inner sanctum, only accessible for insiders, and its revealed image in the courtyard (see Figure 5.7), where the deity is shown to the public on special occasions. This is exemplified by a slightly later phase of the Satet temple at Elephantine as well (Kemp 1991: 70 /Figure 23 & 9495). A portable tent shrine with the deity inside, for use in the realm of the revealed image was most likely a feature at Tell Ibrahim Awad as well, judging from the votive tent shrines found (Cat. nos. 294-96).

Figure 5.6. Pierced shells from Phase 6a.

The animal bones may give an indication about the offerings made in the temple (see above). As all the bones under discussion come from the temple itself, this might be an indication of a ritual held in the temple, as opposed to letting the offerings simply decay, and throw them out afterwards. Only bones from the inedible parts of the animals were found. This probably indicates that the meat-bearing parts were taken away and consumed elsewhere by temple staff, leaving the remainder as a pars pro toto sacrifice to the deity 26. It pleads against a simple ritual killing of animals with connections to Seth like pigs, donkeys etc. (Ikram 1995; LÄ VI: 1010)27. The temple architecture in itself provides some insights in the ritual as well. Only in the forecourt, a small congregation could gather for sacrificial feasts on the benches of the temple of Phase 2. The location of the door in the wall at the long side of some of the temple phases necessitates a so-called bent axis approach to face the deity. See chapter seven for an extensive evaluation of the temple architecture. Furthermore, a basic feature of (Preformal) temples (section 4.1) can be distinguished at Tell Ibrahim Awad: the separate spaces for the hidden image of the deity in

Figure 5.7. The Realms of the Hidden (A) and the Revealed (or portable) Image (B and C) (from Eigner 2007).

26  This seems to correspond with OK funerary practices: De Meyer / van Neer 2005. 27  Also Eyre 2002; this study of PT 580 is also concerned with the practical side of sacrifices (pp. 52-57 / 181-207).

75

6 Tiles and Inlays 6.1. Introduction

6.1.1. Tiles and Inlays at Tell Ibrahim Awad

Except, possibly, when cultic pottery is involved (see section 5.1.3), no apparent distinction was made between the categories of deposit objects, discussed separately in this study. All kinds of objects had been stored beside each other at the temple sites in question (see section 3.5.1 and Dreyer 1986: 59). The only thing that they apparently had in common was their being sacrosanct due to the presence of the deity, like the tiles and inlays of this chapter as well. One of the largest categories of objects found in the Tell Ibrahim Awad Deposits, it is composed of tiles (and some inlays) of many shapes and sizes. Actually, it is the largest variety found so far on any known Early Dynastic or OK site (see Table 6.1; Porta 1989: Plate LXVI-LXVII; Spencer 1980: 72-73 / Plate 59 [nos. 511-525]; Lacovara 1996) with these objects.

The categories found at Tell Ibrahim Awad are listed as follows (see the Catalogue): 1. Multicoloured, more or less rectangular tiles (Cat. nos. 546-53), or possibly inlays: mostly abstract decoration in red/brown pigment lines and dots, but two have traces of hieroglyphs (546, 549); size usually around 5 cm or less. Cat. no. 552 may have been a rectangular pendant instead of a small tile. Instead of wall decorations, they could have been used for other purposes-the same goes for variety no. 2. 2. Inlays (Cat. nos. 554-59); circular, rectangular or triangular in shape, or sometimes with plant motives (Dreyer 1986: 93 & 147 / Figure 54 & Plate 54 [no. 417-18]); size usually around 5 cm or less. 3. ‘Cake’-tiles (Cat. nos. 560-92), indicated as such because of the shape in the form of a cake, with a slightly larger surface on the front than on the back, and sides thus sloping inward; no. 560 is a corner piece. They are always pierced for being attached to a wall (see section 6.2). Size usually around 3.5 x 3.0 x 2.0 cm (see also Figure 6.3). The largest collection, together with Category 4. Cf. the Djoser complex (Figure 6.4, top rows). 4. ‘Reed’-tiles (Cat. nos. 593-620), large tiles with a reed pattern, and meant as a life-like reproduction, in combination with each other, of walls covered with reed mats. The largest tiles are ca. 22 x 10 cm, of varying thickness. The largest collection, together with Category 3. 5. Rectangular tiles with pierced back projection (Cat. nos. 621-29). These are the commonest tiles as found in Saqqara and Elephantine (Dreyer 1986: 91-92), but

The material of all these objects is faience (see section 4.4.1; Kaczmarczyk and Hedges: A83-85), and the colour is basically green, varying from 5G 7/2 to 5G 8/1 (Munsell Glossy Finish Selection). Tiles can be executed in ivory or wood as well (Petrie 1900: Plate XXXVII, 64-79). Items are designated as tiles when they are larger than about 5 cm or have clear traces of the way in which they were attached to a wall. Smaller, multicoloured or non-rectangular objects are designated as inlays; they might have been attached to other, moveable objects like furniture (Dreyer 1986: 93-95). Firstly, the material from Tell Ibrahim Awad will be discussed, and then the material from other sites, in context with the architecture there. As a synthesis, a reconstruction of the original context of the Tell Ibrahim Awad material is attempted (section 6.3).

1

Cat. 4

1

Cat. 5

1

Cat. 6

2

1

1

1 6

15 1

12

1

2 17

21

1

10

76

Elephantine

2

Abydos

1

Dep. 13

1

Total

Cat. 3

2

Stray

1

Dep. 12

Cat. 2

Dep. 11

Dep. 8

Dep. 4a

1

Dep. 10

Cat. 1

Dep. 4

Dep. 3

 

Hierakonpolis

Table 6.1. Distribution of tile categories among the Deposits and the other sites

1

6

1

1

6

4

1

28

3

5

25

7

1

8

12

4

3

74

6

8

66

3

10

234

3

19 10 6

Tiles and Inlays not here. Size ca. 5.5 x 3.5 x 1.5 cm, as at the other sites (Figure 80). 6. Miscellaneous (Cat. nos. 630-706). These include one tile which is hemispherical in section (no. 641, see also Figure 6.5), two vaulted tiles (nos. 647-48, see section 6.3; Dreyer 1986: no. 390), several large and oblong rectangular tiles (nos. 642-46, 650, 653-54) and many fragments. The sizes vary considerably. Categories 3, 4 and 5 have their parallels from the other sites, but no. 1, most of no. 2 and the some items from no. 6 are unique. A number of the larger tiles were found as a sort of final, cover layer on top of Deposit 4 (Cat. nos. 643-46, 648-51, 653 and 658; Figure 3.8) with otherwise mainly votive objects (see the Concordance): either this was purely functional (as a cover), or they were put there because the construction which they decorated was taken down after the functional phase of the Deposit as storage for the ex-votos and before it was finally sealed. Unfortunately, we cannot assume that the original place of the tiles can be deduced from their position in the deposits. The other tiles were found dispersed over the non-ceramic Deposits and as stray finds, but 1/3 of them comes from Dep. 10. There does not seem to be a preferred combination of types. The number of ‘cake’tiles is clearly higher than the amount from other sites (see Table 6.1). 6.1.2. Tile Marks These are in all probability production marks, as they are scratched in before firing; many of them are simply numbers. All known marks from Saqqara (Borchardt 1892: 83-87), Elephantine and Tell Ibrahim Awad are listed in Figure 6.1 for the sake of completeness. Many of the tiles from all the parallel sites mentioned bear marks on the back and / or on the sides (see Table 6.1). Categories 1 and 2 are the exception: they bear no marks, possibly because they are inlays. The corpus from Saqqara seems to consist only of marks on Cat. 5 tiles, although this is not sure. They have been interpreted as production marks, like those found on blocks of stone, mentioning numbers and possibly abbreviated unit names (Dreyer 1986: 91-92 / Figure 49-53 / Figure 23). This might suggest a central production facility, as many tiles from all sites are very similar as well (see section 4.4.1). However, only a few of the same marks occur on tiles from more than one site.

Figure 6.1. Corpus of the tile marks from Tell Ibrahim Awad and other sites.

However, the tiled rooms in the so-called South Tomb (with the ‘Sed’-festival scenes) could be seen in a funerary context (Figures 6.3 and 6.4). There, they were intended as an Ersatz for the real reed mats which used to cover tomb (and palace) walls during earlier times (Emery 1939: 17/ Plate 7B). How this relates to the temple context of the other sites with tiles is not clear. The ‘cake’-tiles (no. 3) and especially the rectangular tiles with back projection (no. 5) have close parallels with the tiles from the Djoser complex (see Figures 6.3 and 6.4) and Elephantine; as for the latter site, there are parallels with the reed tiles (no. 5) and the larger tiles (no. 6) as well (Dreyer 1986: 138-148). The size variety of all kinds of tiles is not significantly different for any site. Finds in a secondary context of these tiles are quite rare; apart from the already mentioned Deposits from Elephantine, Hierakonpolis and Abydos, only one other is known: in dumps from removed settlement debris on the slope of the Giza Plateau (Kromer 1978: 77 / Plate 33).

6.2. Parallels from Other Sites (Figure 6.1 and Table 6.2) Parallels are known from Hierakonpolis and Abydos, but especially from Elephantine, where it was the largest category, like at Tell Ibrahim Awad (Dreyer 1986: 89-93). The only place where some of these tile types were ever found in situ (however, many of them had fallen down from the walls on which they were originally fitted), was in the subterranean parts of the Djoser Pyramid complex in Saqqara (Lauer 1936: 34-38 / 105-09).

Unfortunately, temples of the OK- let alone of even earlier periods – are exceedingly scarce, that is, with the exclusion of the Mortuary temples in Pyramid complexes, which form a completely separate category by themselves, just as the Sun temples. Almost all of the non-Mortuary 77

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Table 6.2. Comparison of the tile marks from Tell Ibrahim Awad with other sites (see for the numbers Figure 6.1 and the categories in section 6.1.1) Tell Ibrahim Awad Cat. 3 1

2

2

1

Cat. 4

Elephantine Cat. 5

Cat. 6

Cat. 5

Saqqara Cat. 6

Cat. 5

2

1 4

3

2

4

2

2

5

1

6

4

7

1

8

1

9

1

1

1

10

1

11

2

12

1

13

1

14

1

15

1

1

16

1

17

1

18

1

19

1

20

1

21

1

22

1

23

1

24

1

25

1

26

1

27

1

28

1

29

1

30

1

31

1

32

1

33

1

34

1

35

1

78

1

Tiles and Inlays Table 6.2 continued Tell Ibrahim Awad Cat. 3

Cat. 4

Elephantine Cat. 5

Cat. 6

Cat. 5

36 37

1

1

38

40

2

1

4

1

43

1

44

1

2

1

1

42

46

2

1

2

1

Cat. 5

1

41

45

Cat. 6

1 1

39

Saqqara

1

1

47

1

48

1

1

49

1

1

50

1

1

51

1

52

1

53

1

54

2

55

1

1

56

1

57

1

58

1

59

1

60

1

61

1

62

1

63

1

64

1

65

1

66

1

1

67

1

68

2

69

1

70

3

71

1

79

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Table 6.2 continued Tell Ibrahim Awad Cat. 3

Cat. 4

Elephantine Cat. 5

Cat. 6

Cat. 5

Saqqara Cat. 6

72

2

73

1

74

2

75

1

76

1

77

1

78

1

79

1

80

1

81

1

82

2

83

1

84

1

85

3

86

1

87

1

88

1

89

1

Figure 6.2. Different types of tiles from Tell Ibrahim Awad (see the Catalogue).

80

Cat. 5

Tiles and Inlays and non-Pyramid temples are constructed in brick, with a few exceptions in limestone: some fragments still exist of a temple of the Djoser period from the Heliopolis region (from where exactly is unknown), and a Hathor temple of approximately at the same period at Gebelein (Smith 1946: 132-39; Curto 1953; T.A.H. Wilkinson 1999: 31112). At this time, the repertoire can be narrowed down to just four sites: Tell Ibrahim Awad, Abydos, Hierakonpolis and Elephantine (Kemp 1991: 66-79). Each of them will be examined in turn, here for possible tile assemblages only; their wider architectural significance within the framework of the Tell Ibrahim Awad temple remains is discussed in chapter two. 6.2.1. Abydos Here, Petrie’s excavations have been reinterpreted by B.J. Kemp (Petrie 1903: 7-12 / Plate l-liii; Kemp 1968; Kemp 1991: 77-79). He identifies Petrie’s building A on Plate liii in his publication (Kemp’s Building H in Figure 3 of his own article – see Figure 4.12) as the Late OK temple. Under this structure, the Deposits (including tiles) were found. They must have belonged to an even older temple phase, of which only some small wall remains were found nearby without much correlation to each other. From this, it does not seem possible to reconstruct a sanctuary which might have been decorated with tiles. Contrary to

Figure 6.3. Tile decoration from the Djoser complex (from Lauer 1936).

Figure 6.4. Detail of a tile pattern from the Djoser complex.

81

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt this phase, most of the (votive) objects were deposited. Successive construction phases continued until Ptolemaic times. The most likely candidate for a structure which might have been adorned with tiles is the sanctuary of construction phases VIIy and VIIx of the 2nd to 4th Dynasties (arrow at Figure 6.6). This can be deduced from the fact that in the previous phases VIIIa-d and VIIz no tiles at all were found, in the phases VIIx-y only a few, and in later phases VIIu-w etc. many more. The sanctuary of the phases VIIy and x looks in plan like a modest structure of two thin brick walls of ca. 4 m. length, less than 2 m. apart and separated by two transverse walls, one half a brick wide and the other one brick, forming a back room bordered in the rear by irregular natural granite boulders. The front room forms a square of less than 2 x 2 m, and the third element consists of two protruding walls, less than 1 m. long (see Figure 6.6). Depending on which room housed the divine image- the back or the front room- this room may have been decorated with tiles (or perhaps both were?). Supposing that the brick wall space in the back room was about 4 m2 (two side walls of ca. 1 m. long and with a hypothetical height of 2 m., excluding the entrance), and that the rock walls were not decorated, about 1/8 of all the wall tiles necessary to cover this space

Figure 6.5. Reconstructed backside view (Pelizaeus Museum, Hildesheim).

Tell Ibrahim Awad, where most tiles were of the small, ‘cake’-shaped format (Type no. 3), most of the (few) tiles found here are of another type (4 and 5). However, an idea of what the alleged naos might have looked like is provided by a small faience naos with a cult statue inside found here (Kemp 1991: 93 / Figure 33). The vaulted form might correspond to the vaulted tiles (Cat. nos. 647-48, see section 6.3). 6.2.2. Hierakonpolis (Quibell and Petrie 1900; Quibell and Green 1902; Adams 1999) No temple remains earlier than the MK structures on the early temple mound have come to light so far, apart from the multiple deposits, including tile remains (most of Category 6; Quibell and Petrie 1900: Plate XVIII, 2; Adams 1974a: Plate 25). There are several interpretations about what an earlier temple may have looked like, varying from a reed-and-wood structure (Lehner 1997: 72-74) to a small mudbrick shrine. Neither hypothetical interpretation is of any help for the reconstruction of a structure (like a sanctuary), possibly involving the use of tiles for wall decoration. The tiles are too few in number to facilitate such a reconstruction anyway. 6.2.3. Elephantine (Dreyer 1986: 11-12) The different temple phases of the Satet temple are very well documented. On the original (Predynastic) site, it was not a free-standing structure, but wedged in a natural niche formed by some large granite boulders. The earliest preserved construction phases (VIIIc and VIII d, ED) consist of a thin wall, closing off the niche. A small room with an anteroom was built against the boulders in the next phase (VIIIa and VIIIb), dating from Dyn. 2. In successive stages, this principle of a room with an anteroom was expanded more and more. A fundamental change took place in Dynasty 5, when the existing structure was abandoned for a single-room sanctuary with an inner court and a corridor (Phase V; Dreyer 1986: Figure 3). During

Figure 6.6. The early Satet temple on Elephantine, Phase VIIx-y (from Dreyer 1986).

82

Tiles and Inlays has been preserved in the deposits (the total surface of all the wall tiles and fragments in the catalogue). If the Sanctuary was in the front room, the wall space to be decorated more than doubles to ca. 8.5 square meters. In that case, only 1/17 of the wall tiles have been preserved, based on the total surface of the tiles found (Dreyer 1986: 138-48). If both rooms were decorated, the overall picture changes accordingly (Dreyer 1986: 91). Furthermore, it is not known whether a sort of additional naos was placed in this Sanctuary, possibly of wood and perhaps adorned as well with tiles in imitation of earlier reed shrines (Badawy 1954: 34; however, see Bussmann 2006 and 2007). In miniature form, these were found in Tell Ibrahim Awad (see Cat. no. 287-96) and Abydos (Petrie 1903: Plate VII, 131-32 / Plate IX, 243). Only from a later phase, a sizeable granite naos from this Satet-temple is known, with the names of Pepi I and Merenre (see Figure 6.7; Ricke 1960: 54, n. 18 [Figure 15] and Bussmann 2007).

(the width of both side walls; the front was open, possibly originally closed by a wooden door or another form of screen). With an assumed height of 2.00 m (about 1 m. was still standing), this gives a total surface of {(2 x 1.00 m) + (2 x 0.75 m. + (2 x 0.75 m)} (=) 5.00 m2. Supposing that the inside of the original sanctuary was completely covered with tiles, about 22 per cent of these have been preserved in the Deposits; in case there was some kind of (possibly wooden) inner naos, covered with tiles as well as- or instead of – the rectangular outer sanctuary (=the niche), the picture changes accordingly. For a reconstruction of such an inner naos, the miniature naoi found in the Deposits may be taken in into consideration (section 4.6.10 / cat. nos. 293-96; van Haarlem 1998: 183-185). Their form is obviously derived from a prototype constructed in reed, with a vaulted roof, like the stone naos from Elephantine mentioned above and many other later naoi. The bundles of reeds forming the raised front and back openings are clearly indicated in these particular models. These naoi are only paralleled in Abydos, where one of them is even containing a miniature cult statue inside (Petrie 1903: Plate VIII, 131-32 / Plate XI, 243). The main iconographical features of the inner naos models are vertical grooves, possibly indicating thatched reeds (Cat. nos. 293 and 295), and knobs at the front and/or sides, possibly representing carrying poles (Cat. no. 294; van Haarlem 1998: 183-85).

6.3. Tentative Reconstruction of the Shrine at Tell Ibrahim Awad These constructional elements preserved in the deposits form a separate entity from the votive objects. The tiles from the Tell Ibrahim Awad deposits could cover a surface of ca. 1.1 m2 (with the original sizes of the incomplete pieces as much as possible reconstructed). The size of the possible 3rd Dynasty temple sanctuary niche (Phase 2; Figures 2.9-2.11), one of the candidates for adornment with faience tiles, is about 1.00 m (back wall width) by 0.75 m

It can be argued that the tiles were not used on the walls of the outer sanctuary, as we just assumed, but that they merely covered those of the separate inner naos. This assumption gains support from the find of the two vaulted tiles (Cat. no. 647- 648), assuming an inner naos to be vaulted and the outer niche room in which it was standing rectangular. If a third, hypothetical, similar tile is added, a complete hemispherical vault can be formed (see Figure 6.8) with a radius of 0.16 m. Taking into account the relative sizes of the Elephantine naos mentioned above (Ricke 1960: 54, n. 18 / Figure 15 and Figure 7), the sizes might be reconstructed as follows: total height including the vault 0.46 m.; height of the straight sides 0.30 cm; width 0.32 cm; depth 0.27 cm. The largest straight tiles found (Cat. nos. 593 and 594, with reed patterns) are ca. 0.22 x 0.9 m and would fit on the sides; the one narrow tile with a hemispherical section (Cat. no. 641, 0.15 x 0.044 m.) would fit either on the front or the sides, if we take the above-mentioned miniature naoi from the Deposits as reference (Kemp 1991: 93 / Fig.33). As these are not uniform, taking them as reference for a reconstruction would produce varying results. We do not know whether both inside and outside of this naos were covered with tiles. This reconstruction may seem relatively small, but if we take the terracotta baboon head (A 140/190/298, size 78 x 73 x 86 mm; see also section 4.4.3 / Figure 4.8) as possibly belonging to a cult statue, the proportions would be suitable. Whether the tiles were used for the walls of the rectangular outer sanctuary, for an assumed vaulted inner

Figure 6.7. Granite naos from the Satet temple in the Louvre.

83

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt Table 6.3. Iconographical features of the state shrine models Feature

287

288

289

290

291

292

Raised sides

x

x

x

x

x

x

Vertical and crossed lines

x

x

x

x

x

Doorways

x

x

x

x

x

Flagpoles

x

x

x

and this makes it less likely that that the shrine proper was constructed in reeds (Figure 6.9); a mudbrick construction is more according to expectations in that case, and we can just guess at what that may have looked like. We can only assume that mud brick architecture had superseded woodand-reed structures already by the time of the foundation of the first shrine at Tell Ibrahim Awad. Traces of reed screens and postholes, however, indicating possible temporary constructions, were found at this lowest level, but outside the walls (shaded in Figure 6.10). To conclude, the tiles in combination with the architecture to which they may have been related, together with the miniature naoi, and compared to the situation of the Elephantine temple, could give us an idea of what the Dyn. 3 cult niche and its possible contents at Tell Ibrahim Awad may have looked like. There is no further evidence that the state shrine models can provide us with an insight of the appearance of the earlier shrines.

Figure 6.8. Reconstruction of the tiled naos in the Tell Ibrahim Awad temple.

naos or perhaps for both, must remain undecided. Judging by the available evidence, both interpretations are just as speculative. Not to be confused with the above mentioned models as a separate group are the shrine models from Tell Ibrahim Awad (Cat. nos 287-292; Table 6.3). They represent the Lower Egyptian state shrine at Buto, the pr-nw / pr-nsr (see section 4.6.10.).Whether we can assume that this must have been the model for the earliest life-size shrine at Tell Ibrahim Awad is not certain, and perhaps not likely. As already stated in chapter one, the earliest shrine of Phase 6/7 must have been located just outside the excavated area. Only remains of what appeared to be mud brick walls probably belonging to a temenos were found,

Figure 6.9. Reconstruction of a reed-and-wood shrine after a seal impression (below) (from Badawy 1954; copyright untraceable).

84

Tiles and Inlays

Figure 6.10. The gezira level at Tell Ibrahim Awad.

85

7 Temple Deposits: Synthesis and Conclusions 7.1. Research Questions

5: 1st Dynasty (ca. 3000-2800 B.C.). Rectangular shrine with annexes; shallow grave just outside. The tiles from the Deposits may have belonged to the decoration of the shrine of this phase.

In the foregoing chapters, the five main research questions put forward in section 1.1 have been treated in extenso. To summarize:

4: 2nd Dynasty (ca. 2800-2650 B.C.). Gap in the temple sequence; some settlement remains.

1. What is the physical context of the deposits? 2. What was the function of the objects found in the deposits? 3. Was there an impact of these objects on the temple ritual? 4. What was the wider context of the temple and its contents? 5. Is it possible to identify the main divinity or divinities associated with the temple?

3: 3rd Dynasty (ca. 2650-2550 B.C.). Temple almost completely demolished; settlement still functional. 2: FIP/4th Dynasty (ca. 2550-2100 B.C.). Much smaller temple than in Phase 1, with a different orientation; sealing of the deposits. Majority of the tombs in the cemetery, in an abandoned part of the settlement.

The central hypothesis that the deposits at Tell Ibrahim Awad belong to a phase of popular (non-official) worship, preceding and coexisting with a formalized state cult, is put forward here.

1: 11th/early 12th Dynasty (ca. 2100-1950 B.C.). Latest and largest temple; latest tombs in the cemetery. Closely, or even remotely, contemporary or earlier parallels to the early phases of the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad are unknown so far. Even the architecture of the Satet complex on Elephantine, related in several other respects like the continuous sequence of temple phases and the votive objects, is offering no clues with respect to the architecture of the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad; nor do the Pyramid-temples of the OK, an entirely different category (Badawy 1954: 93-121). It appears that as a whole the idea of a rectangular oblong shrine with a cult niche remained remarkably consistent during the long Pre-MK existence of the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad (Phases 2-7; Bietak 2004: 13-38; Kemp 2006: 128), although Phases 5a-b diverge. This might reflect continuity in the religious atmosphere. In this respect a Levantine connection is not to be excluded (see also section 7.4.2).

In this final chapter, an attempt will be made to come to a synthesis incorporating the answers to these questions. 7.1.1. The physical context of the deposits: the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad (chapter two) There are convincing arguments for the identification of the construction, which is the context of the deposits, as a temple (section 2.3.2): 1. The Phase 1 construction has the characteristic layout of a TIA-temple; 2. The layout of more than one phase is based on the royal cubit, a standard for temples; 3. The presence of a layer of clean sand for reasons of purity; 4. The presence of many cultic and votive objects; 5. These are found in more buildings, undoubtedly identified as temples; 6. The layout of Phases 2-6 is related to broadroom shrines in Syria / Palestine; 7. New temples are often built on top of older examples.

Unfortunately, where the gezira had been reached, the alleged earliest temple (Phase 7) to all appearances seems to be situated just outside the excavated area. The only brick walls found at this level seem to be temenos walls not belonging to the temple proper. The fact that at this gezira level brick walls seem to be the oldest walls indicates that the shrine itself may have been a brick-built one as well, and not a reed and/or wooden construction, as might be expected, judging from pictorial evidence (Badawy 1954: 33-36).

To resume the phases of the temple site once more (section 2.3.1): 7: Naqada IId (somewhat before 3200 B.C.). Temenos walls; outside, shed with fireplaces.

It seems that the temple area was situated in a depression vis-à-vis the settlement. This was due to the fact that temple buildings used to be more durable than houses and had to be replaced less frequently, producing less debris to act as a new building platform. Another reason was that, if a temple was replaced, the debris was cleared more carefully

6: Dynasty 0-Naqada IIIa-b (ca. 3200-3000 B.C.). Several successive rectangular shrines with cult niches; temenos wall. 86

Temple Deposits: Synthesis and Conclusions for the sake of ritual cleanliness than in a settlement situation, thus causing a slower rise in the surface level than in the settlement. The exception seems to be the MK temple (Phase 1), as this construction was built on a higher than usual artificial level, on top of its predecessor, and was thus raised to approximately the same level as the cemetery and settlement adjacent to it. This may have been caused by the longer interval in the rebuilding of the shrine than before, and consequently more accumulation of debris in the meantime, as the stratigraphic evidence shows (see section 7.2.2.2 and Figure 2.14-2.15a-b).

Elephantine is also attested for S’ankh-ka-Re’ Mentuhotep (Kaiser / Bommas 1993: 148-52; Kaiser / Bommas 1999: 91, 94 & Plate 20b). Apparently, the Satet temple (and other ones at Medamud, Armant and Tôd for Mentuhotep II) was by that time at least partly appropriated for the royal cult (Seidlmayer 1996: 125-26), and no longer reserved only for the original deity (see above and Bussmann 2010, 512-13). 7.1.2. The deposits: formation process and spatial distribution (chapter three)

As for the latest temple phase 1 of the MK, the completely different layout (now with clear parallels, see section 7.2.2.2) and orientation compared to the temples of the earlier phases (roughly east-west instead of north-south) may have had to do with the different function it probably had acquired now, judging from the architecture. It had become a temple devoted to the cult of a divinity, with a secondary royal cult (section 7.2.2.2; Eigner 1992: 76; Seidlmayer 1996: 125-26). The abandonment of earlier cult equipment and storing it in deposits may have been a result of this change as well, replacing it with more appropriate objects. It was no longer the mortuary, ancestor or divinity cult temple (or a combination of all these) of the earlier phases (see sections 7.4.2 and 7.3.2).

The location of all deposits shows quite plausibly that those with non-ceramic objects were situated in the inner building, divided among brick chambers (see Figure 3.2). Two phases in the formation of the latter deposits (nos. 10,12 and 13) can be distinguished; a first layer of objects, placed in an as yet undivided large brick chamber, and a second one, after two divisional walls were placed on the first layer, creating three chambers instead of one (section 3.5.1 and Figure 3.11a-c). Another deposit (no. 4) was different from the other deposits, because it consisted of a cover layer of faience tiles from the naos in its last functional period (as postulated in section 6.3); they were added to the previously donated votive objects below it as remains of the dismantled naos, originally situated in front of it.

A mortuary cult is defined here as connected with rites de passage (van Gennep 1960): to facilitate the transition of the deceased from the realm of the living to the realm of the dead, and restore the disrupted social and emotional relations with the bereaved next of kin, and thus essentially a temporary and individual affair (with royalty as the exception; Fitzenreiter 1994: 56; Harrington 2013, 28-33). This is well documented in writing in Egypt (Gardiner 1928).

The ceramic deposits (nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9) seem to have been distributed in a more improvised way, in dysfunctional corridors and corners of the temple. They may have been placed there immediately before the abandonment of the penultimate shrine, to be buried and sealed together with the temple remains. It is also possible that some of these deposits (notably 2 and 6) were simply left in their original storage location. Deposit 1 may be different, because the offering stands in it (as such also different from the other ceramic deposits) were lined up for use beside a wall when this wall collapsed on top of them, as the stratigraphic evidence shows. For convenience sake, it is considered to be a deposit anyway. The stands were never cleared away, although some were still intact (see Figure 3.4).

An ancestor cult, however, is concerned with continuing the relations of the living with the dead, and thus more of a communal and perpetual nature, as opposed to a mortuary cult. Again with the exception of the royal ancestor cult (which is an entirely different matter), the evidence for ancestor cults is much more restricted than is the case with mortuary cults (Fitzenreiter 1994: 56)1. It is probably needless to say that a strict separation between the two cult forms is sometimes artificial and thus not always possible or even desirable. Additionally, at least for the NK, it seems that the cult of the local deities took place side by side with the cult of the ancestors (Fitzenreiter 1994: 63).

As a conclusion, it seems that the rooms behind the alleged cult niche may have been the original storage rooms for the votive objects when the temple was still functional, and that the rooms in front of it and outside corridors were used to store abandoned cult equipment when the temple was closed and replaced with the temple of the latest phase (no. 1, of the MK).

It is significant that a change in the MK is attested at more sites, notably in the Satet-temple at Elephantine, where the modest pre-MK temple was transformed by Mentuhotep II in a more impressive building (Kaiser 1998: 21; Bussmann 2010: 480). The same development can be seen concerning the adjacent Khnum-temple. Similar building activity at

1 

As the pottery associated with the Satet Temple at Elephantine still awaits a final publication (Kaiser 1977: 79), no real comparisons for the pottery are possible for the moment. The set of ceramic and non-ceramic objects at Tell Ibrahim Awad could thus definitely be regarded as a complete and standard reference set for the other deposit

For the royal ancestor cult: Wildung 1969.

87

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt The presence of begging figures and figures holding vessels might point to the function of at least some of the votive objects: to act as a representative or intermediary for the donor, continually present in the temple for the desired favours, and taking part in the funerary feasts (Dreyer 1986: 64).

objects of Elephantine, Abydos, Hierakonpolis, Tell elFarkha and future discoveries as well. The non-ceramic deposits (see section 3.5.1) show not much variety among each other, apart from an overrepresentation of beads in Deposit 5, and of human figures in Deposit 10 (see Figure 3.11a-c). As for material, most of the ivory objects were found in Deposit 13, and a concentration of stone mace heads in the northwest corner of the same deposit. No specific conclusions, chronological or otherwise, seem to offer themselves here. Not much more than a certain need for a separation according to category among the different deposits may be the sole reason here for the distribution as such.

A comparison can be made with NK (and later) votive statues: every temple statue (except royal or divine statues) can be considered as a votive statue. They are supposed to be in the divine presence forever and take part in the sacrifices (LÄ VI: 412-13). These statues were only permitted in the forecourts of the temples, not in the temples proper, just as real-life private persons. Naophorous and block-statues are particularly preferred for this role. In time, the statues grew so enormously in numbers, that they had to be stored in cachettes, like the famous Karnak one (Porter / Moss 1972: 136-67).

7.2. The deposit objects: functions 7.2.1. Votive objects (section 4.6)

Figurines of children should have to do with a wish for them. Together with the human figures found at Tell Ibrahim Awad, probably representing the donors themselves, the interpretation of baboons as representing ancestor figures, their traditional and well-documented role, seems plausible (see sections 4.3.1.1-4.3.1.2; Dreyer 1986: 69-70).

A clear relation between the objects from Tell Ibrahim Awad, Elephantine, Abydos, Hierakonpolis and Tell elFarkha can be established without much doubt, because of their physical similarity. Tell Ibrahim Awad holds one of the most extensive assemblages of votive and votiverelated objects (706 non-ceramic and 249 ceramic objects, together more than 950). This total number is not the largest of the collections mentioned, but it does show the largest variety of all of them, especially in tile forms. This is probably an indication of the importance and the attraction of the temple.

The other animal figures can be explained in various ways. Hippopotami, antelopes and crocodiles can be seen as protective and apotropaic against their real-life counterparts, while some are also representatives of chaotic powers. However, their presence may indicate control over chaos as well. Hedgehog (-ships) are probably apotropaic as well; lions may embody divine and / or royal powers (see sections 4.6.1-4.6.9 for numerous references).

A detailed analysis of the individual categories (see sections 4.6.1-4.6.14) has shown that their real meaning can only be a matter of some speculation (Dreyer 1986: 59-79). Semantics can be approached along several analytical lines: biological (physical aspects), cultural (religious implications), the connection between votive object and request, and the connection between votive object and recipient. Both latter strategies are not selfevident: present-day logical reasoning is probably not fully applicable here. In rare cases, when the request has been recorded in connection with the votive object, it sometimes seems to have nothing to do with the nature and appearance of the votive object itself-at least in our view: such as a phallus with the inscription ‘Let me have the income of your temple, my lady!’ (Pinch 1993: 24145). Similarly, the connection between votive object and divine recipient seems sometimes only an indirect one, for example in the case of the mace-heads, which are for Hierakonpolis connected with the warrior aspect of Horus, but for Elephantine with the peaceful goddess Satet. For the present state of research, all these approaches must remain inconclusive, as long as not all the votive deposit sites and their contexts are comprehensively analyzed (Bussmann 2010: 215-17). Attempts according to the several analytical methods outlined above have been made in this study anyway2.

2 

At the same time, baboons, hippopotami, crocodiles and frogs can have regenerative and fertility bringing powers, whereas antelopes and birds can serve as substitute sacrifices. However, the impact of these animal votives may have changed over time and/or locality, so we cannot be certain of their meaning in Early Dynastic times as an extrapolation of later times. The similarities between these figures and figurative amulets (especially in human form), including button seals, of the OK and MK, and mostly found in a funerary context, are sometimes striking (Dubiel 2004: 173-75 / Figure 3-4; Dubiel 2008: 199-221; Brunton 1928: Plate 93; Bussmann 2010: 421-25). They obviously belong to one and the same artistic tradition. For a proper impact assessment of this, the iconography of other object categories like jewellery and palettes will have to be included in the analysis, which is beyond the scope of this study (Bussmann 2010: 423; Reisner 1932: 119-20). Multiple explanations are possible for the other deposit objects as well. The reasons why these heterogeneous items such as mace heads and faience tiles have been added can sometimes only be guessed at. They may

Details about the different groups of objects in section 4.6.

88

Temple Deposits: Synthesis and Conclusions 7.2.2. Objects specifically used in the ritual (as a separate category, see chapter five and section 7.7.3)

have been just added as part of the cultic inventory (like gaming pieces and vessels, see below), and could not be discarded. However, they are not votive offerings in the strict sense (section 3.3), because they cannot be regarded as accompanying a request, but more as building debris and abandoned cultic objects.

There are not many features in other early temples, which may help us to understand the ritual here. It should, moreover, be remembered, that many aspects of the ritual (like movements and spoken words) hardly left any physical traces. However, the daily temple ritual in later times is well attested (Cauville 2012, 271-274), consisting mainly of providing for the divinity in the form of the cult statue.

Jewellery (section 4.6.13) may have been donated as treasured personal possessions: cf. the personalized figurines (see section 3.4.2). Natural stones (section 4.6.12), in shapes associated with human or animal figures, must have been regarded as a sort of fetish3, and as such donated to the deity. They have often been often found in similar contexts (Dreyer 1986: 96-97).

It is not certain that the inclusion of mace heads in the ritual objects category is justified, because the evidence for ritual use is ambiguous (section 5.1.1; see, however, Bussmann 2010: 404-07).

The variety in votive objects, partly as items of personal expression, like the child figurines for an alleged wish for children, is an indication for the popular and local character of this feature.

The large vessel impressions found near the entrance of the temple point to the presence of vessels, which were in all probability filled with water for ritual purification purposes before entering the temple.

The hypothesis mentioned above and in section 1.1 (also section 4.1) on the difference (not the contrast) between the ‘official’ religion and ‘popular’ religion seems to find corroboration in the interpretation of the objects and their presence in the deposits as an expression of the ‘Little Tradition’ (Bussmann 2016), in their varied appearance and large numbers. The latter is prevailing at Tell Ibrahim Awad and the other sites mentioned, and its distinction to the emerging official religion is apparent, featuring votive objects of a different character, clearly linked (by name) to the pertaining deity, like in the case of votives for Hathor (Pinch 1993: 81-160), and as such different from the practice in popular religion as the evidence at Tell Ibrahim Awad shows (section 4.8). While the state cults were meant to preserve the stability of the Egyptian universe and maintained (in later time) by professionals, individuals had their own religious practices that related more directly to daily life (Sadek 1987: 1-2). These popular concepts probably preceded the official religion and were instrumental in the emergence of it (Sadek 1987: 5-10; Kemp 1995), but were not replaced by it. Both concepts are not diametrically opposed to each other or mutually exclusive, but partly co-existing and interacting (Sadek 1987: 2-3 / 294-95).

Especially the cultic pottery like the offering stands and libation vases may give clues about the offering and purification rituals in the temple (Cauville 2012), such as the offering stands covered by the debris from a collapsed wall (Deposit 1). Apparently, they were lined up for immediate ritual service in front of the cult niche with its platform or bench when the wall came down. There is ample pictorial and textual evidence for that (Figure 7.1). Many smaller vessels (Cat. nos. 452-545 / 792-834) may have been filled with oils, perfumes, incense and unguents as used in the temple ritual, for libations, accompanying prayers etc., as is known from textual and pictorial evidence (Figure7.2). The fireplaces with upright vessels just outside the temple compound may have had something to do with the production of these liquids, as evaporation is one of the techniques to obtain them (van Haarlem 2010). The animal bones (section 5.1.4) produce information about the sacrifices made in the temple, both about the species of animals (fish, pigs, ovicaprids and cattle) and about the specific body parts (mostly the non-meat bearing bones) involved. This probably indicates that the meatbearing parts were taken away and consumed elsewhere by temple staff, leaving the remainder as a pars pro toto sacrifice to the deity. There might have been ritual feasts in the temple (see below), funerary in character or not.

It seems hardly possible to draw any chronological conclusions from the individual objects, even in comparison with other sites in Egypt and abroad, as their date is problematic: a terminus post quem cannot be established (section 4.7). They were probably assembled over a long time, and rearranged over and over as often as their number, the available storage space and renovation of the temple necessitated. The date of the final sealing of the deposits (Dynasty 4, ca. 2550 BC) can be reconstructed, but not the production date of the objects or the date of entering them in the deposits.

The temple architecture provides some insights in the ritual as well. A basic feature of early temples can be distinguished at Tell Ibrahim Awad: the separate spaces for the hidden image of the deity in the inner sanctum and its revealed image (on festive occasions) in the forecourt (section 5.2)4, with large open spaces immediately outside the temple. There is ample evidence for these occasions (Schott 1950). Based upon the layout of the Satet temple at Elephantine, see Kemp 1991: 70 / Figure 23.

4  3 

Defined as an object believed to have supernatural powers.

89

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 7.1. Offering stands in front of Amun (Hatshepsut temple at Deir el Bahari).

90

Temple Deposits: Synthesis and Conclusions

Figure 7.2. Pharaoh Sethi I offers a jar with ointment to Amun (Temple of Sethi I at Abydos-from Cauville 2012).

7.2.3. Tiles and Inlays (chapter six)

not likely. The earliest shrine there must have been located just outside the excavated area, and was, in any case, surrounded by mud brick walls. This makes it quite unlikely that the shrine itself was constructed in reeds, but probably in mud brick as well. Thus, we may assume that mud brick architecture had superseded wood-and-reed structures already by the time of the foundation of the first shrine. We can only guess how that must have looked like.

As non-ex-votos, the constructional elements (tiles) preserved in the Deposits form a separate entity. It can be argued that the tiles were not used on the walls of the sanctuary, but that they merely covered those of the naos. What a naos may have looked like can be inferred from tent-shrine models and many temple reliefs (section 4.6.10).

7.3. The deposit objects in connection with ritual(s)

A separate group is formed by the large shrine models (Cat. nos. 287-92). They originally represented the Lower Egyptian state shrine at, presumably, Buto, and were constructed in wood and reeds. Later, they were regarded as generally Lower Egyptian shrines. Whether we can assume that this must have been the model for the earliest shrine at Tell Ibrahim Awad is not certain, and perhaps

A ritual (see also above and Insoll 2004: 1-33) is a set of actions, performed mainly for their symbolic value. It is commonly prescribed by the traditions of a community. The term usually refers to actions which are stylized. A ritual may be performed on specific occasions, by a single individual, by a group, in arbitrary places, or in 91

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt places especially reserved for it, either in public, or in private. The purposes of rituals are varied; connected with religious obligations or ideals, satisfaction of spiritual or emotional needs of the practitioners, strengthening of social bonds, etc. It strengthens the role of the action per se in the overall battle against chaotic influences. It is recorded in pictures and writing, accompanied by spoken words, and connected with religious myths, generally with conflicts as theme, like the battle between Horus and Seth (LÄ V, 271-272).

(te Velde 1967: 138-51), and fish was only acceptable in places with a fish cult, and otherwise taboo in the religious atmosphere (cf. the Victory Stela of Piye at Gebel Barkal). 7.3.3. Constructional elements (mainly tiles) A ritual may have accompanied the act of deconstructing the structures fitted with these elements. The other ritual involved with these items was probably the ceremony (if any) with which they may have been disposed of within the temple compound. There is not any indication of that. Probably, mutatis mutandis, these observations are equally valid for Elephantine, Abydos and Hierakonpolis (Pinch 1993: 333-48).

7.3.1. Votive objects Only some general observations can be made about ritual at Tell Ibrahim Awad. The objects must have been handed over to authorized temple staff to bring them in the presence of the deity as laymen had no access there, to enable the transfer of votives from the secular into the sacred area, consequently ‘loading’ them with powers for the desired effect. In addition, personalisation and/or consecration rituals may have been performed. Whatever form these took can only be guessed at (section 3.4.2).

7.4. Wider context of the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad 7.4.1. In Egypt The architecture of comparable temple sites in Egypt, like Tell el-Farkha (the only other one in the Delta), Abydos, Hierakonpolis and Elephantine does not share many features with Tell Ibrahim Awad (section 4.9). This is probably due to the difference in local religious characteristics and traditions, just as the different selection of objects in the respective deposits testifies to a different set of priorities (Bussmann 2010: 493-94).

Disposal of the objects in the temple grounds when their life cycle was completed (section 4.5.2) may have required a ritual of its own, but there is no evidence for that (Meskell 2004: 108). 7.3.2. Ritual objects The more specific cultic vessels like offering stands and libation vases (Cat. nos. 707-47 and 835-930) provide some insight in the ritual, at least of Phase 2 (section 5.2). The line of offering stands in front of the cult niche (Figures 2.10 and 3.4), apparently ready for service to bear offerings, is most instructive as an illustration of ritual5. The large number of libation vases is emphasizing the importance of constant purifications and libations in Egyptian temples (Teeter 2011: 32-34). Pictorial and textual evidence for the use of these stands and libation vases in purification and offering rituals is abundant (Cauville 2012; Figure 7.3). The presence of some large flint knives may indicate their traditional use for the slaughter of sacrificial animals (section 5.1.2). Slaughter rituals are well attested (Ikram 1995). The animal remains proper, probably testifying to cultic practices, consist mainly of pig and fish bones and shells for the earlier periods; later, the relative and absolute number of goat and / or sheep and cow bones increases (sections 5.1.4 and 5.2). This might indicate a change in the cult, when fish and pigs became no longer acceptable in the religious atmosphere because of their increasing abomination. Pigs were associated with the god Seth, who became more and more vilified over the ages

Figure 7.3. Pharaoh offering incense and making a libation, from the Deir el Medina temple (from Cauville 2012).

5  Similar groups of stands were discovered in a funerary cult chapel at Saqqara (Rzeuska 2006: 350 / Plate 154).

92

Temple Deposits: Synthesis and Conclusions Elephantine is showing considerable royal connections both in architecture (inscriptions) and objects with royal names, features that are almost completely absent at Tell Ibrahim Awad, far away from any of the royal residences. The latter temple is showing a significant absence of royal connections before the MK compared with Elephantine, an important and strategic locality at the southern border of the realm, at least in later times (since Dynasty 6, ca. 2400 BC). The other difference is that this was not a freestanding temple, but essentially a rock sanctuary.

position of Tell el-Farkha is not yet clear in this respect because of the state of the (published) research there. The implication of these local differences is not yet clear. A chronological aspect of the differences is not impossible, but difficult to assess. Perhaps more promising is an approach considering the different local characteristics and traditions of the sites to explain the varying physical aspects (see above). The current state of research does not enable this as yet to the full extent. 7.4.2. Outside Egypt

In contrast to both aforementioned temples, the temple and objects from Hierakonpolis, one of the earliest royal residences, testifies to a much more royal (monumental) and elitist environment. The significance of Abydos, finally, was similar to Elephantine and Tell Ibrahim Awad in the early periods. However, after Dynasty 5 (ca. 2400 BC), as sacred centre of the Osiris cult, it turned into one of the most important pilgrimage sites in Egypt, with a material culture to match (Bussmann 2010: 493-99).

Comparable votive objects (like animal and human figures) and deposits in temple contexts have been encountered in the Levant and Mesopotamia (section 4.10). The architecture of several temples in the Near East, like in Ras Shamra/Ugarit (Dussaud 1941: 32-36 / Figure 6; von Reden 1992: 197 / Figure 23)6, Tell Halawa B (Orthmann / Meyer 1983: 109; Orthmann 1989: 92-93)7 and especially Tell Mardikh / Ebla (Bomann 1991: 87-89; Matthiae 1977: 128-31 / Figure 29)8 and the Acropolis temple at Ai (Figure 7.6; see also section 7.4.2 and Bietak 2003: 20-38) shows affinities with some aspects of the temple of Phase 2 at Tell Ibrahim Awad: with a bent axis approach and the so-called benches (section 7.2.2.2; Eigner 2000: 18-22 / Figure 2 & Plate Ia; 2007: 86-87 / Figure 7; Bietak 2003: 13-38); the latter feature is also present in the later Mortuary Temple I at Tell el-Dab’a (Bietak 1991: 108-11)9.

Several differences are clear in comparison with the object corpus from Elephantine, the only really well comparable collection because of its excellent documentation (see also section 4.9.1): 1. A (much) smaller proportion of baboons and mace heads occurs there than at Tell Ibrahim Awad; 2. A larger proportion of human figures, fetish stones (possibly because of the proximity of the stone-strewn desert as opposed to the alluvial Delta) and hedgehogships occurs there than at Tell Ibrahim Awad (probably because of their connection to the 1st Cataract); 3. The corpus of tile forms is different (a smaller selection than at Tell Ibrahim Awad); 4. The virtual absence of ivory objects there (conspicuous because of the very name of the site); 5. The complete absence of shrine models at Elephantine; 6. The complete absence of inscribed plaques at Tell Ibrahim Awad, so important for dating the Elephantine deposits.

However, the cult place in the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad was not situated at the short S.-wall, as is normally the case with bent axis temples, but centrally at the long W.-wall (Figures 2.9-2.11; Bietak 2003: 20). This may be an Egyptian element introduced in a basically Near Eastern architectural (and religious? See Bietak 2010b: 157-159) concept, possibly corresponding to different or changed (i.e. more Egyptianised) cult practices – but this is speculative. There are some other material connections concerning the votive objects as well (see section 4.11.2; Bietak, 2004: 37-38). Although Levantine imports are not uncommon in Early Dynastic Egypt (Boehmer 1974a), pottery or other finds with connections to the Levant are very rare at Tell Ibrahim Awad (van den Brink 1986: 80 / Fig.19; van Haarlem 1996a: 59 / Pl.11 & Pl 20, 3-4).

As for Hierakonpolis, although less well documented than Elephantine, the comparable share of mace heads and ivory objects is a significant parallel to the number of mace heads and ivories in Tell Ibrahim Awad, but as such quite different from the share of these categories of objects at Elephantine and in Abydos.

It is quite possible that the Phase 2-temple was a broadroom-temple at an early stage, as there seems to be a bricked-up doorway in the middle of the long wall (see Figure 2.11; Bietak 2004: 37; 2006: 289-91; 2009: 220-

The statistical analysis on the basis of the available data suggests an overall division (Figure 7.4): on the one hand Hierakonpolis and Tell Ibrahim Awad, and on the other hand Elephantine and Abydos (Bussmann 2010: 343-51; section 4.6). However, focused solely on an individual category, like the baboons, the Tell Ibrahim Awad seriation is closer to Abydos, rather than Hierakonpolis or Elephantine (Figure 7.5; Bussmann 2010: 353-55). Then again, regarding ivory objects (human figures and otherwise), Hierakonpolis is closer to Abydos. The

6  A temple with an offering altar in the forecourt, dated in Middle Bronze II. 7  The temple designated as Bau II, Schicht 2 and dated in EB I. 8  About Temple B2 from Middle Bronze II as a cult building with benches and a possible mortuary function: Pettinato 1991: 27-28. 9  Temple II fits in this picture as well: see plans, Bietak 1979: Figure 8-9; 2004: 16-20.

93

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Figure 7.4. Graph with the relative numbers of significant object groups from the sites under view.

Figure 7.5. Graph comparing faience baboon types (see Bussmann 2010: 354).

21). The same is applicable to the earlier phases (Eigner 2000: 32-33 / Figure 8-9). The position of the cult place opposite the doorway at Tell Ibrahim Awad is consistent with the practice in broadroom-temples (Bietak 2003: 20). It might point to a Levantine connection. A problem though is the contemporary L-shaped wall shading the cult place from the alleged middle entrance (Figure 2.11). This would be fine for the other entrance (forming a bent axis) but not for a broadroom interpretation, unless it is to be regarded as a sort of protective screen (Bietak 2003: 37).

forms for funerary meals. Kitchenware like bowls (Cat. nos. 748-67) does show some traces of use. Architectural evidence from Ugarit / Ras Shamra seems to suggest that the forecourts of temples could present opportunities for feasts (Dussaud 1941: 32-36 [Figure 6]; Von Reden 1992: 197 / Figure 23)10. This is much clearer in the case of the so-called Fosse Temple at Lachish (see section 4.10.6), with benches (in Phases II and III), a lot of functional pottery like cooking vessels and a variety of animal bones (Bietak 2002: 60 & 75-79; Figure 3-4). Whether the Semitic notion of marzeah, occurring in Ugaritic texts, could be used for the notion ‘funerary feast’ is debatable; it might originally stand for something like a ‘drinking club’11, sometimes associated with a funerary banquet. Apparently, Levantine tombs could be provided with features to supply the deceased with liquids12. Ugaritic textual evidence thus seems to be ambiguous. In Tell elDab’a, certain funerary installations could be interpreted as evidence for funerary feasts, in the form of funerary chapels with an over-representation of beer-bottles and drinking cups (Bietak 1994: 8; Schiestl / Seiler 2012: vol. 2, 73-87; Müller 2008a: vol. 1, 292-93) among the pottery found on the spot.

It has been argued that people with Levantine roots were already acculturated a long time ago (as an argumentum ex silentio), with only their temple architecture (partly) remaining as a testimony of their origin (Bietak 2006: 291; 2010a: 67; 2010b: 142-44). Architectural traditions, especially in the religious sphere, can persist for a long time, simply because the builders continued to work just as their ancestors did (Cameron 1998: 191-92). More investigation of the settlement at Tell Ibrahim Awad, one of the priorities for future fieldwork, may shed additional light on possible Levantine connections (Bietak 2006: 291). Related with the function of the temple benches mentioned above is the issue of the possible architectural and ceramic evidence for (mortuary) feasts in the temple (Eyre 2002: 191-201). The pottery corpus (see the 2nd part of the Catalogue) might give a clue about the use of specific

A temple with an offering altar in the forecourt, dated in Middle Bronze II. 11  See, however, for Egypt: Fitzenreiter 1994: 64 12  Lewis 1989: 80-94 (especially Note 1) 10 

94

Temple Deposits: Synthesis and Conclusions

Figure 7.6. The Acropolis Temple at Ai (from Marquet-Krause 1949).

7.5. The Nature and Function of the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad

There is ample archaeological evidence for ancestor worship in the NK in the form of special shrines and ancestor busts, especially from Amarna and Deir elMedina (Demarée 1983: 279-90; Fitzenreiter 1994: 57-68; Müller 2008a: vol. 1, 343-44; Harrington 2013: 28-64). This could originate from earlier practices.

As mentioned above (section 2.3.3.1), because of missing stratigraphic evidence, there is no direct evidence linking the temples of Phases 1 and 2a / b to the brick tombs in the cemetery (contemporary to Phase 1) and the earlier reed mat tombs (contemporary to phase 2a and earlier). Another single tomb was found directly beside the temple of Phase 5, but the cemetery proper has not been excavated sufficiently deep or extensively enough yet to determine whether the intervening temple phases (3 and 4) also have contemporaneous tombs in the cemetery13. This is one of the priorities for future research. If that is the case, a function as mortuary temple-or perhaps an ancestor cult temple14 (related to the Hedj-wer, sections 4.6.2, 4.8 and 4.11.1.1) in connection with the adjoining (alleged) cemetery might be postulated (Harrington 2013: 97-102). The alleged cult statue of the baboon as ancestor symbol might have something to do with that (Dreyer 1986: 68-70; LÄ II, 1078-080)15. There is a nearby, albeit later parallel for a mortuary or ancestor function in the Mortuary Temple I at Tell el-Dab’a (Bietak 1991; Bietak, 2004: 13-38; Müller 2008a). A dedication to Thot in connection with the large number of baboon votives is highly unlikely for this period (see also section 4.6.2)16.

There is evidence on specific occasions for funerary feasts as one of the major expressions of a mortuary and/or ancestor cult in Egypt (not only in Levantine contexts), not only on fixed intervals after the death of an individual (LÄ VI, 645-47; Bleeker 1967: 131-33; Müller 1996: 303-04; Nord 1981; Harrington 2013: 113-22), like during the w3gfestival (LÄ VI, 1135-139) and the well-known ‘Beautiful Feast of the Valley’(Schott 1952: 64-69; LÄ VI, 187-88; Roth 1988: 59). The latter is attested much later, but the former goes back to at least the OK. Regular funerary feasts are still common in modern Egypt (Fakhouri: 1972: 89-90; el-Shohoumi 2004: 58-59), testifying to a strong tradition. This early Delta tradition of ancestor temples or chapels in the immediate vicinity of ancestor tombs has its parallels, although mostly somewhat later, in Upper Egypt (Bomann 1991; Polz 1995; Kaiser / Bommas 1993: 170-72, Figure 13-14; Fitzenreiter 1994: 65; Harrington 2013: 86-97), and had thus become a nationwide feature.

For now, there seems to be at least a gap in the 3rd or 4th Dynasty. Like the Ka-house, see therefore LÄ III: 284-87. 15  How this cult may have been positioned vis-à-vis the cult of Wadjet of Imet (LÄ III: 140-41; Goedicke 1977), the official goddess of the region, is not clear. 16  Contrary to Belova / Sherkova. 2001: 165-77. 13  14 

As a final conclusion, it may not be possible to determine exactly what the function of the temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad was before the MK (see also section 7.1): 95

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt 1. A mortuary function: the benches and pottery may point to mortuary feasts; 2. A function in the ancestor cult: the baboons as ancestor figures may point to that; 3. A divinity temple: the remains of a possible cult statue (see section 4.8).

structure at locality Hk 29A in Hierakonpolis (see section 2.3.1), is open to doubt (Adams 1999). Furthermore, the corpus of deposit finds is the largest (in diversity) discovered in Egypt so far for the Early Dynastic period, and can be considered as a reference and/or exemplary case for existing and new collections in this field. This is putting the Delta chronologically and culturally at the same footing, at least, as Upper Egypt.

As stated in section 7.1.1, it may not be possible to make a clear distinction between any of the three functions. Such a strict separation may be a modern concept, and not applicable for ancient Egypt – at least not in the early phases of the temple. In the latest phase, a temple attributed to a specific deity17, and with a secondary royal cult, seems more plausible in view of the architecture (section 7.2.2).

This feature is testified as well by the so-called Decorated Ware, one of the most striking expressions of the Naqada II period, when Upper Egyptian material culture allegedly superseded local Delta cultures (Kemp 1991: 43-44). This class of pottery is still quite rare in the Delta, just as Naqada II manifestations in general (other kinds of pottery and stone vases; see section 2.3.1, Phase 7a-b). So far, Decorated Ware is attested from Buto (Köhler 1998: 35 / Plate 63), Minshat Abu Omar (Kroeper / Wildung 1994, 47 / 92), Tell el-Farkha (Jucha 2007: 37 / Figure 7), Tell el-Iswid (van den Brink 1989: 77 / Figure 14) and Tell Ibrahim Awad (Figure 7.7), providing further evidence for the trend mentioned.

The other contemporaneous temple sites (Elephantine, Hierakonpolis, Abydos and Tell el-Farkha) are producing mixed prospects in this respect. The stratigraphic situation at Abydos is not at all clear (section 4.9.2; Dreyer 1986: 48 / Figure 21) and at Tell el-Farkha apparently not applicable here. At Hierakonpolis, the situation is a bit clearer than in Abydos; no. 3 from the options list above, a divinity temple, seems most appropriate in this case (section 4.9.4; Dreyer 1986: 37-46; Kemp 1991: 74-77).

The relations between Upper and Lower Egypt in and around Naqada II remain a complex issue, without simple answers. Does the existence of Upper Egyptian cultural influence in the Delta signify a military occupation, a gradual trend towards cultural and political unification, trade relations, or is it a more complex picture (Köhler 2008: 522-25)?

At Elephantine, the temple situation seems to be more closely related to the case at Tell Ibrahim Awad than at the other sites. The name of Satet is not mentioned here earlier than on the naos of Pepi I at the end of the OK (section 4.7; Ricke 1960: 54 / n. 18; Seidlmayer 2006: 224-28), but at least for the later stages her role as the pertaining divinity of the temple is clear, so option no. 3 is the most likely one here as well, with the possibility of an ancestor cult role (secondary or not) for earlier times still open (option no. 2). Dreyer 1986: 69-70).

By the 1st Dynasty, as shown by the large tombs in Area B at Tell Ibrahim Awad (section 2.3.4.2), a rather high degree of unification was reached. The results of the investigations at Tell Ibrahim Awad have produced better insights in the distribution of early temples with votive deposits, not only in Upper Egypt, but also for the first time in the Delta. This is partly confirmed by the research at Tell el-Farkha, which produced a deposit

The function of a mortuary temple (option no. 1) seems thus, with the limited evidence we have at our disposal, to be limited to the Delta, and possibly an influence from the Levant (section 7.4.2). Divine worship as such may not have been the main function of the temple in its early phases (section 4.7), perhaps with the exception of the latest (early MK) phase, when even a (secondary?) royal cult may have been practiced here, as in other contemporaneous temples (section 2.3.1). Any further going conclusions on the religious and/or political importance of Tell Ibrahim Awad must remain speculative, owing to the scarcity of settlement remains and any written records (Belova / Sherkova 2001: 156-62). 7.6. Further implications of the results of this study The Phase 7 temple at Tell Ibrahim Awad is one of the oldest temples so far discovered in Egypt, with unparalleled (at least in Egypt) architectural features. The interpretation as a temple of the other candidate, the oval 17  A royal aspect may be indistinguishable from this as well: McNamara 2008: 141-145.

Figure 7.7. Decorated Ware fragment from Area B.

96

Temple Deposits: Synthesis and Conclusions throughout the country. Especially the Nile valley south of Cairo and north of Abydos needs to be investigated further for Early Dynastic sites. Pre- and Early Dynastic cemeteries have been found a.o. in Sidmant el-Gebel near the Fayum (Petrie 1924), and temple sites may be associated with these. Perhaps an even more promising site, albeit south of Abydos, is Ombos near Naqada, where a temple dating back to at least Dynasty 4 has been discovered (Petrie / Quibell 1896: 65-70 / Plate 85), and requires further research, situated as it is near one of the Upper Egyptian bases of the nascent national state (T.A.H. Wilkinson 1999: 36-37). Prospective sites in cultivated areas will certainly present more difficulties than sites in or at the edge of the desert, due to the accumulated sediment from Nile floods.

of similar votive objects in a construction interpreted as an administrative and cultic centre (Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2006: 128; Chłodnicki / Ciałowicz 2012: 171-180 / Figure 26; Kurzyk 2016). It is now established as a nationwide phenomenon, and not just a regional matter. As such, it can clarify the interregional developments as mentioned above. The fact that the early religious culture (section 4.1) appears to show such physical homogeneity throughout the country is a striking example of the nationwide impact of the centralized state administration on many levels at such an early date (Midant-Reynes 2007: 65-66; Bussmann 2010: 369). Tell Ibrahim Awad showed this nationwide phenomenon in the case of the temple deposits for the first time. A possible central and nationwide production facility for faience tiles (cf. section 6.1.1; Dreyer 1986: 91-92; Bussmann 2010, 350-69) may be an interesting feature of this phenomenon, testifying to the centralizing trend. However, political unification in one centralized kingdom probably did not take place before Dynasty ‘0’. There may be a physical similarity concerning the objects from sites throughout the country, but probably no complete assimilation -as yet- of the underlying local cults and traditions. This was realized only after the OK (since 2550 BC). Earlier differences in popular religion apparently played no longer a significant role since the OK. While the state cults were meant to preserve the stability of the Egyptian universe and maintained by (parttime) professionals, individuals had their own religious practices that related more directly to daily life. These popular concepts preceded the state religion, but were not replaced by it, albeit more or less tightly controlled. Both concepts are not diametrically opposed to each other or mutually exclusive, but partly co-existing (see section 7.2.1).

In view of the difficulties in dating many of the individual objects (see section 4.7), further iconographical studies might deliver more results beside the ones obtained already for amulets and seals vis-à-vis votive objects (section 3.7; Capart 1905; Dubiel 2004 & 2008). These should take into account the complete repertoire of the period between Naqada II and the OK: representations on reliefs, sculpture in wood, ivory and stone, palettes, cosmetic jars, etcetera, in a holistic approach. Apart from more grip on the dating of individual objects, it will in all probability shed more light on how all these separate iconographies relate to each other. Comparing the sites with Early Dynastic votive deposits may produce a wider view: the implication of the local differences as established is not yet clear. A chronological aspect is not impossible, but difficult to assess. Perhaps more promising is an approach considering the different local religious characteristics and traditions of the sites to explain the diverging physical aspects. The current state of research does not enable this as yet to the full extent, as it requires a completely new evaluation of especially the so far inadequately published results of especially Abydos and Hierakonpolis (see section 7.4.1 and Bussmann 2010: 493-94).

7.7. Future Research: an Outlook It is very likely, that there are more sites with Early Dynastic temples and temple deposits to be discovered

97

The Catalogue The following divisions can be made (see the following table):

Notes to individual Catalogue numbers: #2: Cf. Adams 1974a: 70 / Plate 44-45 (no. 360)

A. The Non-Ceramic Deposit Objects: 1. Human Figures (1-85)

#8: Cf. Baumgartel 1968: 13 / Plate VII-IX (Figure 13-1518), dated before the end of the Old Kingdom

(standing, sitting, kneeling, crawling, holding objects)

#26: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 105 / Plate 19 (no. 46)

2. Baboons (86-202)

#32: Cf. Ashmolean E.341 and CGC 32178

(standing, sitting, holding objects)

#33: All instances of this special form of bipartite wig may be considered as a prototype of the so-called Hathor-wig: Sourouzian 1981: 445-63; Baumgartel 1968: Plate VI/11; Smith 1958: Plate 12a-b

3. Other Mammals (203-231) (hippopotami, lions, antelopes)

#88: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 113 / Plate 30 (no. 158)

4. Birds (232-241)

#89:Cf. Dreyer 1986: 68

5. Crocodiles (242-277)

#197: Cf. Vandier d’Abbadie 1972: 60 (no. 187)

(frogs, fish)

#219: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 73-74, 116 / Plate 35 (no. 190)

6. Boats (278-286)

#221: Cf. Emery / James 1954: 58 / Plate XXIX (233[c])

7. Shrines (287-296)

#227: Cf. Ashmolean E.1

8. Gaming Pieces (297-322) 9. Miscellaneous (323-348)

#228: Hickmann 1954: 116-125; see also especially CGC 69201-69852, 74 / Plate XLI-XLII (69723)

10. Mace Heads (349-393)

#230: Cf. Vandier d‘Abbadie 1972: 45 (no. 120)

11. Miscellaneous Stones (394-419)

#232: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 75

12. Jewellery (420-451)

#233: Cf. Crowfoot Payne 1993: 15 / Figure 4 (no. 14)

13. Vessels (452-545)

#277: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 76

(-imitations of-stone vessels, model vessels on stands, hesvase models, basket models, miscellaneous)

#288: Very similar to the Sais Gate from the tomb of Rekhmire at Thebes: see Junker 1940: Abb. 7-8

14. Tiles (546-706). The mark numbers in the description field of the Table refer to Figure 6.1

#293: Cf. Petrie 1903: Plate VII, 132; also Ashmolean E.144

(decorated, inlays, cake tiles, reed tiles, rectangular tiles with back projections, miscellaneous)

#296: Cf. Adams 1974a: 30 / Plate 22 (no. 148) #297: Cf. van den Brink 1988: 102 (no. 55)

Designations:

#314: Cf. van den Brink 1988: 102 (no. 57)

Running Number (bold face: line drawing present) – Object Designation – Findnumber – Height – Width – Depth – Diameter – Material – Description – Condition

#323: van Walsem 1978: 193-249; Dreyer 1986: 81 & 122/Plate 40 (no. 250) 98

The Catalogue #327: Westendorf 1966: 44-154

#456: Cf. el-Khouli 1978: Vol. 2, 477-478 / Vol. 3, Plate 101 (no. 3585-3590); Aston 1994: 108 (no. 45)

#328: Cf. Petrie, Prehistoric Egypt 1920: Plate XLIV, 96c

#460: Cf. el-Khouli 1978: Vol. 1, 155 / Vol. 3, Plate 46 (no. 1136)

#333: Cf. Whitehouse 1992: 77-82 #335: Cf. CGC 32176

#465: Cf. el-Khouli 1978: Vol. 1, 217 / Vol. 3, Plate 59 (no. 1512); Aston 1994: 91 (no. 3)

#346: Cf. Hassan 1976: Plate V, 3

#466: Cf. Adams 1974: 33 / Plate 24 & 31 (no. 163)

#349: Cf. Adams 1974a: 5-6 / Plate 5 (no. 10) #352: Cf. Adams 1974a: Plate 5 passim

#487: Cf. Adams 1974a: 42-43 / Plate 32 & 37 (no. 217): here definitely a basket model

#371: Cf. Adams 1974a: 9-10 / Plate 6 (no. 47)

#488: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 125 / Figure 41 & Plate 41 (no. 273)

#379: Cf. Adams 1974a: 11 / Plate 6 (no. 66)

#547: Cf. UC 35586: Petrie 1902: XI/229

#387: Cf. Adams 1974a: 11 / Plate 6 (no. 60)

#555: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 148 / Plate 54 (no. 425)

#394: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 96

#558: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 93 & 147 / Figure 54 & Plate 54 (no. 417-18)

#424: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 133 / Plate 43 (no. 334) #434: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 84

#560-592: UC 35560 is a somewhat larger type (ca. 6 x 4 cm)

#435: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 131 / Plate 42 (no. 315)

#593: Cf. Petrie 1903: Plate VIII, 179

#437: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 131 / Plate 42 (no. 310a)

#607: Cf. Dreyer 1986: Plate 47

#454; Cf. el-Khouli 1978: Vol. 1, 355 / Vol. 3, Plate 88 (no. 2474)

#621: Cf. Dreyer 1986: 91-92 #640: Cf. Dreyer 1986: Plate 62g

#455: Cf. el-Khouli 1978: Vol. 1, 148 / Vol. 3, Plate 44 (no. 1082)

#690: Cf. Adams 1974a: 35 / Plate 25 (no. 167)

99

designation

1. human figures

standing man

standing woman

standing woman

human figure

human figure

human figure

human figure

dwarf figure

human figure

human figure

human figure

dwarf figure

human figure

standing man

dwarf figure

dwarf figure

human figure

standing woman

standing man

human figure

pedestal

pedestal

pedestal

#

 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

100

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

A130/190/83/2F

A130/190/70/85

A130/190/70/72

A130/190/82/23

A130/190/70/287

A130/190/83/38

A130/190/83/19

A130/190/83/49B

A130/190/70/1

A130/190/790/196

A130/190/83/42

A130/190/70/265

A130/190/70/105

A130/190/70/170B

A130/190/70/260

A130/190/83/21

A130/190/70/157

A130/190/70/272

A130/190/83/1D

A130/190/83/2J

A130/190/83/2B

A140/190/131/16

A130/190/70/120

standing

findnumber

4.5

3.2

1.7

5.1

2.6

8.4

3.9

4.5

2.5

11.1

4.4

3.8

4.4

5.1

6.1

10.7

8.2

12.9

6.5

4.0

15.3

16.1

6.6

H

4.8

4.3

1.9

2.1

1.3

5.1

3.6

1.6

6.5

6.5

3.8

1.7

1.2

4.0

3.2

1.0

1.1

2.5

4.4 1.4

2.0

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.0

2.9

2.7

4.0

2.0

2.7

4.2

2.8

2.9

D

2.4

1.8

2.7

2.0

1.1

4.0

4.0

3.8

2.2

3.1

4.8

3.8

3.0

W

ivory

diorite?

   

diorite?

ivory

   

ivory

ivory

   

ivory

ivory

   

carnelian

basalt

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ivory

ivory

   

ivory

ivory

   

ivory

ivory

ivory

faience

material

 

 

 

 

Ø

with remains of feet beside each other, hole under the base

with remains of feet beside each other

with remains of feet, left foot in front of the other

lower legs fragment with a plug for attachment

bearded figure, body only cylinder, pierced as bead

naked female figure with long wig, hands holding breasts; fine details

head with bipartite wig, detailed execution; youth lock?

at, with wig and bent knees, on pedestal, cf #13

fat, with deformed arms and flat head

long wig, right arm on breast, left arm hanging; superficial execution

broad face, bipartite wig on a pedestal, cf #10

with long wig, superficial face and arms and bent knees on a pedestal

stylized, with broad face, wig and bent knees, on a pedestal

flat figure with broad face and curled wig; superficial execution

elongated figure with rudimentary arms and bent knees and flat hat

fat, naked dwarf with big ears

naked child figurine with right hand at mouth

long wig, folded arms and angular lower body

short wig

sitting (?) human figure or baboon

long wig, right arm on breast, left arm hanging

naked woman with short wig

irregular; large head with a bipartite wig

description

crusts, cracks

damaged

damaged

eroded, part missing

eroded, part missing

legs missing

part of the head

 

crusts

eroded, part missing

eroded, part missing

 

 

eroded, part missing

 

eroded, part missing

 

eroded and crusted

legs missing

head missing

eroded, part missing

eroded, feet missing

worn, feet missing

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

A130/190/70/267

A130/190/83/31

dwarf figure

standing boy

standing boy

standing boy

standing boy

standing boy

standing woman

standing woman

dwarf figure

standing figure

standing figure

standing figure

standing woman

human figure

standing woman

standing woman

human figure

male figure

human figure

human figure

human figure

dwarf figure

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

101

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

A130/90/83/2D

A130/190/83/26A

A130/190/70/39

A130/190/83/2O

A130/190/83/2T

A130/190/83/26C

A130/190/83/2S

A130/190/83/2P

A130/190/70/34

A140/190/85C

A130/190/83/104

6.6

1.0

4.9

2.8

3.4

4.1

6.5

8.3

10.5

3.9

9.5

5.9

8.8

A130/190/83/54A

A130/190/83/30A

6.3

8.9

6.1

4.6

6.7

6.9

7.6

6.4

8.8

1.9

H

A130/190/83/47

A140/190/136

A140/190/85B

A140/190/167

A140/190/253/12

A140/190/253/13

A130/190/82/43

A130/190/83/2E

pedestal

24

findnumber

designation

#

3.2

1.8

1.8

1.9

2.3

2.7

4.4

3.2

3.0

3.9

4.1

1.9

3.7

4.0

5.8

4.1

2.9

2.0

2.8

2.7

2.0

4.5

2.8

W

3.4

1.1

0.9

2.1

1.5

1.0

2.2

2.2

2.2

2.3

1.7

1.1

2.7

1.9

2.6

2.8

1.5

1.3

2.8

1.8

2.2

5.6

5.2

D

 

 

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

   

ivory

ivory

   

ivory

ivory

 

 

ivory

faience

   

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

 

 

 

 

 

ivory

faience

   

faience

 

faience

faience

   

faience

pebblestone

ivory

material

 

 

 

Ø

figure on a pedestal, with bent knees

probably a head, strands of hair visible on the back (?)

flat figure, no feet, head between shoulders; knotted dress with belt?

legs only, right foot preserved

upper part with short curled wig

legs only

naked figure with long wig, left hand holding right breast, upper part

naked female with arms folded

standing on a pedestal with plug; upper part missing

upper part with long wig

lower legs only, possible of a female figure

mummy-like, with bi[partite wig, leaving the ears free; detailed execution

with long bipartite wig

female with large head and bipartite wig and bent knees on pedestal

upper part only, with complicated wig

upper part only, with short wig

torso with right finger in mouth

right finger in mouth? black hair, superficial execution

right finger in mouth, bald; careful execution

figure on a pedestal, right finger in mouth; black hair, superficial

figure on a pedestal, right finger in mouth; black hair

with large, bald head, top knot with plait, rudimentary limbs

with remains of feet beside each other

description

crusts, part missing

crusts

 

heavy crusts

part missing

heavy crusts

heavy crusts

crusts, part missing

eroded, crusted

damaged

heavy crusts

damaged

crusts, part missing

crusts, part missing

heavy crusts

crusts, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

eroded, part missing

worn

some damage

eroded, crusts

condition

The Catalogue

designation

human figure

human figure

 

sitting dwarf

sitting figure

sitting figure

sitting figure

sitting figure

sitting figure

sitting boy

sitting figure

sitting figure

sitting figure

 

kneeling woman

kneeling woman

kneeling woman

kneeling woman

kneeling woman

 

crawling figure

crawling figure

crawling figure

crawling figure

#

47

48

 

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

102

 

59

60

61

62

63

 

64

65

66

67

A130/190/70/81

A130/190/70/29

A140/190/75

A140/190/79

crawling

A130/190/70/54

A130/190/70/162

A130/190/70/228

A130/190/70/279

A130/190/83/18

kneeling

A140/190/253/1

A140/190/131/37

A130/190/70/35

A130/190/78

A130/190/56

A130/190/70/112

A140/190/107

A140/190/128

A130/190/70/13

A130/190/70/73

sitting

A130/190/83/1F

A130/190/83/26B

findnumber

6.1

3.8

5.0

3.6

8.8

10.4

6.4

7.2

5.2

5.8

4.4

2.7

6.0

4.9

4.2

5.0

2.8

2.9

4.3

4.7

2.8

H

3.5

2.3

2.5

2.7

2.7

3.8

2.0

2.3

3.2

3.3

2.4

1.6

2.9

2.3

2.3

2.8

1.4

1.3

2.2

2.5

1.5

W

5.6

4.9

6.2

6.1

4.9

2.1

3.3

2.7

3.2

2.2

2.1

1.4

1.9

1.8

2.5

2.1

1.1

1.2

1.4

1.3

1.1

D

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

carnelian

carnelian

ivory

ivory

material

 

 

 

 

 

Ø

figure on hands and knees with large head and black wig

with very large head and beard; rudimentary

naked figure on hands and knees, with beard and wig

with wig and beard; arms and legs superficial; cross on base

long legs and short, crossed arms; long wig and big nose

long wig; disproportional large head-small limbs; left arm under breasts

superficial execution

with long wig and arms crossed

without head, left arm and right hand; genitals marked in red

on pedestal with short wig, right finger in mouth, left knee drawn up

bald boy with right finger in mouth, left hand on knee

male figure with flat head and right hand under chin

boy with dark hair, right finger in mouth, left hand on knee; detailed

bald dwarf-figure, hand under chin, left hand on knee

male or baboon, superficial execution

male with black wig and beard

male with bulbous wig or headdress, folded arms and legs crossed

male, rudimentary form; pierced head to be worn as pendant

bald and naked dwarf with big ears, well executed

legs fragment

legs fragment

description

worn

 

worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

 

worn, stains

worn, parts missing

 

worn

worn, stains

worn

 

worn

damaged, worn

worn

worn

 

damaged, part missing

crusts

crusts

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

103

A130/190/70/65

A130/190/70/262

arm

human figure

2. baboons

standing baboon

standing baboon

standing baboon

85

 

86

87

88

A130/190/70/62G

A130/190/83/2I

A130/190/131/61A

A130/190/83/1A

A130/190/82/45

A130/190/83/50

A130/190/83/80

A130/190/70/89

84

A130/190/83/107

A130/190/83/23+43

arms with vessel

woman with vessel

77

holding objects

83

 

 

A130/190/70/92

man with vessel

crawling figure

76

9.9

10.5

6.4

14.0

2.2

4.7

11.7

6.0

5.5

4.0

6.8

25.5

2.4

5.8

A130/190/83/9A

82

crawling figure

75

3.4

2.8

6.7

3.3

3.9

3.6

5.1

H

A130/190/82/12

man with vessel

crawling figure

74

A130/190/82/12

81

crawling figure

73

A130/190/70/269

man with vessel

crawling figure

72

A130/190/70/240

80

crawling figure?

71

A130/190/70/193

dwarf with vessel

crawling figure

70

A130/190/70/122

79

crawling figure

69

A130/190/70/92

woman with vessel

crawling figure

68

findnumber

78

designation

#

5.2

4.3

2.4

3.7

2.5

4.0

3.7

2.7

2.5

2.4

2.0

5.0

1.8

3.4

2.2

2.1

3.2

1.4

2.3

1.7

2.9

W

6.1

4.7

3.7

2.9

7.3

18.0

2.9

3.8

5.0

2.5

1.9

3.7

2.7

5.5

5.3

4.9

5.6

4.4

4.3

6.7

7.7

D

 

 

limestone

calcite

ivory

ivory

 

 

ivory

ivory

   

ivory

faience

   

faience

faience

ivory

ivory

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

material

 

 

 

Ø

squat, with large head, arms folded; superficial execution

left hand at ear, right hand on chest; superficial execution

disproportionally large head; detailed execution; with a peg

standing, bald figure holding something in right hand; left arm hanging

arm with hand for holding stave

two arms beside each other holding a vessel (thumbs up)

standing bald male (?) figure, holding vessel

sitting, with large head, short wig and beard in red, wearing belt

crawling figure with wig and beard, holding vessel

sitting, with big, bald head, vessel under chin

bipartite wig, long dress, with biconical vessel and plug; left foot front

standing, with arm missing, vessel preserved; possibly with headdress

head with beard only

crawling or sitting; beard and wig in red and black

disproportionally large head with beard; line on the base

superficial execution

figure on hand and knees, detailed execution; wig, naked except for belt

crawling figure or reclining animal

figure with beard, superficial execution

detailed execution

very superficial execution, no limbs indicated, with wig, beard missing

description

damaged

parts missing

 

crusts, parts missing

crusts

damaged, crusts

crusts, parts missing

damaged, part missing

damaged, worn

damaged

 

 

worn

damaged, worn

worn, stains

worn, damaged

damaged, worn

worn, parts missing

worn

worn, stains

worn

condition

The Catalogue

A130/190/70/34A

A130/190/83/12

sitting Vervet

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

104

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

A140/190/131/31

A140/190/131/15

A140/190/70

A140/190/194

A140/190/180

A130/190/83/17

A130/190/82/55

A130/190/82/54

A130/190/82/7

A130/190/70/282

A130/190/70/235

A130/190/70/222

A130/190/70/195

A130/190/70/180

A130/190/70/100

A130/190/70/97

A130/190/70/71

A130/190/70/245

A130/190/83/7

A130/190/70/69

A130/190/70/63

A140/190/179

A140/190/131/11

sitting Vervet

89

findnumber

designation

#

7.2

6.5

5.1

5.6

4.5

7.5

3.2

4.6

4.8

4.0

5.2

5.5

4.1

5.0

4.4

4.1

4.0

2.9

10.0

8.8

8.6

9.1

4.5

5.2

4.6

H

3.0

2.7

2.5

2.3

2.6

3.8

2.5

1.2

2.6

2.8

2.7

3.9

1.0

0.8

1.1

1.2

1.0

1.9

3.7

4.1

3.2

4.1

1.7

2.7

2.5

W

5.4

3.9

2.4

3.0

2.4

5.5

1.1

2.8

0.7

0.8

1.2

1.1

2.4

2.2

3.3

2.9

2.3

1.0

5.3

5.1

4.4

5.3

2.9

3.3

2.7

D

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

quartzite

ivory

ivory

schist (?)

material

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ø

hands on knees, disproportionally large head

hands on knees, no details

rodent? Arms hanging down, snout missing

hands on knees, superficial execution

right finger in mouth; child?

hands on knees, angular, superficial execution; snout missing

hands on knees, flat, superficial execution

hands on knees, angular, superficial execution

with 83/98; hands on knees, superficial features on left side only

hands on knees, superficial features on left side only

hands on knees, angular, superficial execution

hands on knees, flat and thin, features incised only, not modelled

hands on knees, angular, superficial execution

hands on knees, flat and thin, features incised only, not modelled

hands on knees, flat and thin, features incised only, not modelled

hands on knees, angular forms, features incised on one side only

hands on knees, angular forms

hands on knees, no details; vertical piercing as bead

hands on knees, detailed execution (especially the ears)

hands on knees, detailed execution

hands on knees, detailed execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, disproportionally large snout

hands on knees

hands on knees, sitting on pedestal; detailed

description

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

eroded, stains

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

 

worn

worn

worn

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

worn, part missing

damaged, part missing

part missing

damaged

eroded

damaged

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

A130/190/70/106

A130/190/70/114

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

105

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

A130/190/70/160

A130/190/70/151

A130/190/70/139

A130/190/70/138

A130/190/70/129

A130/190/70/125

A130/190/70/121

A130/190/70/118

A130/190/70/103

A130/190/70/102

A130/190/70/101

A130/190/70/78

A130/190/70/77

A130/190/70/74

A130/190/70/67

A130/190/70/44

A130/190/70/38

A130/190/70/19

A130/190/70/18

A130/190/70/15

A130/190/70/14

A130/190/70/2

A140/190/131/44

sitting baboon

114

findnumber

designation

#

5.0

4.6

6.0

5.0

4.9

3.7

6.3

4.3

5.8

4.9

7.4

5.1

8.3

6.9

5.3

4.7

4.6

6.0

5.6

4.3

5.5

4.3

4.9

4.4

6.6

H

2.6

2.8

3.3

2.1

1.7

1.5

2.6

1.6

3.1

1.8

2.9

1.9

3.4

2.8

2.1

2.0

2.0

3.1

2.6

2.2

3.2

2.1

4.3

2.8

2.9

2.3

4.2

2.4

4.2

2.1

5.1

2.9

4.9

4.9

3.4

2.6

3.3

2.9

3.5

2.9

2.9

2.7

1.5 2.1

3.1

2.9

2.0 1.9

4.5

D

3.9

W

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

material

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ø

hands on knees

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, superficial execution, snout missing

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, careful execution; cross incised on base

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, large head, detailed execution; air bubble in front

hands on knees, angular, superficial execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, detailed execution; air bubbles visible

hands on knees, angular, detailed execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, careful execution; cross incised on base

hands on knees, snout missing

hands on knees, superficial execution

thick shoulder fur

superficial execution

superficial execution

superficial execution

 

hands on knees, human? Head missing

description

eroded, part missing

damaged

worn, part missing

damaged

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged

worn

worn, part missing

worn

eroded

damaged, worn

 

damaged, part missing

damaged

worn, part missing

worn

damaged, worn

worn

damaged, worn

 

 

 

 

damaged, worn

condition

The Catalogue

A130/190/70/214

A130/190/70/217

A130/190/82/14

A130/190/82/28

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon (?)

sitting baboon

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

106

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

A130/190/83/64

A130/190/83/80

A130/190/82/47A

A130/190/82/38

A130/190/82/32

A130/190/82/31

A130/190/82/29

A130/190/82/11

A130/190/82/4

A130/190/70/285

A130/190/70/275

A130/190/70/246

A130/190/70/226

A130/190/70/219

A130/190/70/213

A130/190/70/210

A130/190/70/209

A130/190/70/207

A130/190/70/200

A130/190/70/186

A130/190/70/163

sitting baboon

139

findnumber

designation

#

3.7

6.6

5.1

8.0

3.8

5.0

3.8

4.8

4.6

4.2

3.9

6.3

5.7

4.7

4.1

4.7

4.3

6.0

6.5

3.2

6.5

4.5

5.3

5.1

4.7

H

1.9

4.2

2.5

2.8

1.4

2.4

1.8

2.3

1.9

1.1

3.4

2.3

2.5

2.2

1.8

2.1

2.8

2.2

2.2

2.2

3.2

1.5

3.2

2.9

1.3

W

2.2

3.4

3.2

4.0

2.6

3.1

2.4

3.1

3.0

1.7

3.8

4.2

3.7

3.4

3.0

2.7

1.3

4.1

4.4

1.7

4.1

3.1

3.5

3.6

4.4

D

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

material

 

 

 

Ø

hands on knees, snout missing

crawling man? Wig indicated

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, small snout

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

hands on knees, superficial execution

disproportionally large head

hands on knees, angular, superficial execution

upper part missing

hands on knees, detailed execution, feet missing

hands on knees, angular, superficial execution

hands on knees

hands on knees

hands on knees, rounded forms

hands on knees, angular, superficial execution

hands on knees, angular, superficial execution

 

hands on knees

kneeling woman?

angular, superficial execution

superficial execution

human? Hands on knees

no details

description

worn, stains

eroded, part missing

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

 

damaged, worn

damaged

worn, stains

worn

eroded

damaged, worn

damaged, crusts

damaged

damaged, worn

worn, part missing

worn

damaged, stains

worn

damaged, worn

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

eroded, parts missing

worn, part missing

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

designation

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

#

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

107

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

A130/190/83/65

A140/190/45

A130/190/70/55

A130/190/70/50

A130/190/70/93

A130/190/70/116

A130/190/70/124

A130/190/70/127

A130/190/70/137

A130/190/70/168

A130/190/70/185

A130/190/70/249

A130/190/70/283

A130/190/82/56

A130/190/83/9B

A130/190/83/11

A140/190/76

A140/190/222A

A130/190/83/77

A130/190/83/75

A130/190/83/102

A130/190/83/89

A130/190/83/81

A130/190/83/74

A130/190/83/73

findnumber

10.8

5.8

6.2

8.8

5.5

6.3

5.7

7.8

5.1

6.5

5.6

2.2

7.1

5.0

5.1

7.0

10.2

5.4

8.9

8.8

4.9

5.4

7.2

5.4

5.7

H

3.7

3.3

3.1

3.5

2.0

2.5

2.2

3.7

2.0

2.4

2.5

1.1

3.4

2.4

2.6

3.3

3.9

4.0

4.7

3.8

3.7

1.8

3.4

3.8

2.8

W

6.0

2.2

4.6

3.7

3.5

4.0

3.4

6.2

2.9

3.3

3.2

1.0

4.6

3.5

3.1

4.9

5.3

4.6

3.6

3.5

3.6

3.2

4.0

4.0

3.7

D

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

material

Ø

female, arms between legs, detailed execution

arms between legs, on pedestal

arms between legs, large head

arms between legs

arms between legs, detailed execution

arms between legs, detailed execution

arms between legs, detailed execution, head missing

arms between legs, detailed execution

arms between legs

arms between legs, detailed execution

arms between legs, detailed execution, snout missing

arms between legs, detailed execution

arms between legs, superficial execution

arms between legs, superficial execution

arms between legs, detailed execution

arms between legs, detailed execution

arms between legs, ithyphallic, detailed execution

arms between legs, ithyphallic, head missing; remains of red pigment

disproportionally small head; ithyphallic

disproportionally small head; ithyphallic

hands on knees, lower part missing

hands on knees, superficial execution, cross incised on base

superficial execution, feet missing

hands on knees, lower part missing

hands on knees, detailed execution

description

damaged, stains

damaged, part missing

damaged, worn

damaged, stains

 

damaged, worn

worn, stains

damaged

worn

damaged, worn

worn, stains

worn

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

stains

worn, stains

worn

damaged, worn

worn, part missing

worn, stains

damaged, worn

worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged

condition

The Catalogue

designation

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

baboon’s head

baboon’s head

baboon’s head

 

baboon with vessel

baboon with vessel

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

sitting baboon

baboon with young

3. other mammals

hippopotamus

hippopotamus

hippopotamus

hippopotamus

hippopotamus

hippopotamus

hippopotamus

hippopotamus

hippopotamus

#

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

 

197

198

199

200

201

108

202

 

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

A130/190/70/156

A130/190/70/123

A130/190/70/113

A130/190/70/111

A130/190/70/99

A130/190/70/60

A130/190/70/33

A130/190/70/25

A130/190/70/16

hippopotami

A140/190/253/5

A140/190/131/42

A130/190/70/51

A130/190/70/57

A130/190/83/52

A130/190/70/49

holding objects

A130/190/70/203

A130/190/70/133

A130/190/70/20

A130/190/70/257

A130/190/70/148

A130/190/70/90

A130/190/70/247

A130/190/83/16

findnumber

3.0

3.4

4.1

6.8

2.9

7.7

3.6

2.6

4.0

4.8

4.1

7.1

5.8

11.3

5.7

 2.5

2.9

3.9

4.6

5.0

9.2

7.3

10.1

H

2.4

2.1

3.1

1.5

2.5

13.3

6.4

2.3

2.8

2.9

2.6

2.7

6.3

6.3

7.1

2.0

6.2

5.8

2.8

3.6

6.9

3.0

2.6

4.2

3.5

5.6

4.8 2.6

4.7

 4.5

4.3

4.2

3.8

3.4

5.6

4.1

5.2

D

2.6

2.7 

3.0

2.0

2.4

2.9

4.1

3.4

5.1

W

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

 

faience

faience

   

faience

 

faience

quartzite

   

faience

faience

faience

material

 

 

 

Ø

superficial execution

superficial execution

detailed execution

superficial execution, loose snout

superficial execution

detailed execution

superficial execution

 

superficial execution

top half of a female with young on the back

with hands clasped

with outstretched arms, originally holding something?

holding vessel

sitting baboon, holding a biconical vessel

sitting baboon (human?) holding vessel or drum

 Detailed execution

detailed execution

right side flat

right arm hanging down, left hand on knee; detailed execution

arms between legs, superficial execution

arms between legs, detailed execution

arms between legs

arms between legs, detailed execution

description

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

damaged, stains

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged

worn, parts missing

worn

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

part missing

damaged

crusted

 worn

worn

worn

damaged, crusts

damaged

damaged

damaged

 

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

antelope

bull

ram

rodent?

4. birds

falcon

falcon

228

229

230

231

 

232

233

reclining lion

222

antelope

reclining lion

221

227

reclining lion

220

 

reclining lion

219

 

 

 

reclining lion

hippopotamus

218

226

hippopotamus

217

reclining lion

hippopotamus

216

225

hippopotamus

215

reclining lion

hippopotamus

214

224

hippopotamus

213

reclining lion

hippopotamus

212

223

designation

#

109

A130/190/83/41

A140/190/131/38

A140/190/131/41

A130/190/70/170

A140/190/282

A140/190/253/6

A130/190/70/208

antelopes, i.a.

A130/190/70/149C

A130/190/83/46A

A140/190/70/149B

A130/190/83/53

A130/190/83/2K

A130/190/83/2C

A130/190/70/250

A130/190/70/130

lions

A130/190/83/87

A134/190/83/36

A130/190/83/20

A130/190/83/3

A130/190/82/51

A130/190/70/229

A130/190/70/174

findnumber

4.2

3.5

2.8

4.8

2.8

2.7

3.7

3.2

4.5

3.4

4.4

4.2

3.0

5.4

5.4

2.7

4.1

8.2

3.7

4.1

2.4

3.0

H

2.0

1.5

1.1

7.7

2.0

2.6

2.6

2.2

3.0

2.7

2.6

3.2

3.4

3.2

3.6

2.2

2.5

4.7

2.4

2.4

2.2

2.5

W

5.7

4.2

1.2

1.2

5.4

5.6

7.6

5.2

8.8

6.7

6.6

8.0

8.2

9.4

9.8

5.0

6.3

9.0

6.4

6.9

6.0

5.2

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

faience

basalt

faience

ivory

faience

faience

faience

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

   

calcite

 

ivory

faience

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

material

Ø

stylized form, polished; hole in the base for attachment

stylized form, polished; hole in the base for attachment

sitting rodent or mongoose, arms hanging down; superficial execution

reclining ram as lid for a box

reclining

reclining oryx, one leg under body, red dots; rattler

ibex with short legs

 

 

detailed execution

disproportionally large head; superficial execution

 

 

careful execution

with pedestal; angular forms

superficial execution, snout missing

superficial execution; disproportionally large head

head missing

superficial execution

detailed execution, leg missing

detailed execution

superficial execution

description

damaged

 

worn, hole

cracks

worn, parts missing

worn

damaged, stains

worn, crusts

damaged, crusts

damaged

 

damaged, crusts

crusts

eroded, part missing

damaged, cracks

damaged, worn

stains

damaged, worn

damaged, stains

worn, stains

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

condition

The Catalogue

designation

designation

falcon

falcon

falcon

falcon

duck

bird

bird

lapwing?

5. crocodiles, i.a.

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

#

#

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

 

242

243

244

245

110

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

A130/190/70/94

A130/190/70/109

A130/190/70/126

A130/190/70/131

A130/190/70/167

A130/190/83/27

A130/190/70/140

A130/190/70/270

A130/190/70/10+254

A130/190/70/181

A130/190/70/155

A130/190/70/108

A130/190/70/59

A130/190/83/25

A130/190/70/5

 

A130/190/83/6

A130/190/83/105

A130/190/70/292

A130/190/70/104

A130/190/70/62E

A130/190/70/188

A130/190/83/30B

A130/190/70/164A

findnumber

findnumber

2.0

2.6

3.1

2.3

2.8

2.4

3.4

3.7

1.7

4.0

2.2

3.5

7.7

3.3

4.0

8.3

4.3

2.5

4.8

5.1

4.2

1.9

4.0

H

H

3.0

4.4

3.8

3.5

3.5

3.1

4.4

4.1

3.0

4.7

2.5

4.9

1.2

4.3

5.0

13.1

2.5

1.9

2.1

12.1

3.4

1.5

3.3

W

W

12.8

15.2

14.2

12.7

10.5

12.2

16.2

13.2

7.3

10.8

7.2

8.9

2.0

16.0

12.8

2.6

5.8

5.2

6.1

3.8

8.6

3.6

9.4

D

D

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

ivory

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

material

material

 

 

 

 

 

Ø

Ø

detailed execution

detailed execution, triangle incised on the base

squat form, detailed execution

squat form, detailed execution

squat form, detailed execution

detailed execution

detailed execution

superficial execution

scale armour indicated, no further details

middle part, detailed execution; line incised on base

middle part, superficial execution

middle part

tail missing

with twisted tail, detailed execution

superficial execution

goose? with knob on the head; several red stripes

hole in the base

hole in the base

 

with large beak, superficial execution

hole in the base

hole in the base

falcon on rectangular pedestal with hole in the back

description

description

part missing

worn

parts missing

worn

worn

damaged

stains, parts missing

worn

worn, part missing

worn, parts missing

worn

worn, parts missing

damaged, worn

crusts, cracks

worn, part missing

worn

worn

worn, parts missing

damaged, stains

crusts

damaged

 

damaged, crusts

condition

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

designation

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile

crocodile?

crocodile’s head

crocodile’s snout

crocodile’s tail

crocodile’s tail

crocodile’s tail

crocodile’s tail

crocodile’s tail

crocodile’s tail (?)

crocodile fragment

 

frog

frog

 

fish

6. boats

boat with baboons

#

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

111

271

272

273

274

 

275

276

 

277

 

278

A130/190/70/98

A130/190/82/17

fish

A130/190/70/239

A130/190/70/107

frogs

A130/190/70/146

A130/190/70/187

A130/190/70/215

A130/190/70/232

A130/190/70/86

A130/190/82/22

A130/190/70/32

A140/190/131/24A

A130/190/70/152

A130/190/83/49A

A130/190/82/53

A130/190/82/72

A130/190/70/229

A140/190/131/53

A140/190/131/40

A130/190/70/53

A130/190/83/4

A140/190/131/17

findnumber

4.2

2.8

1.1

2.4

1.7

1.5

2.4

1.8

2.7

1.9

2.0

1.9

2.3

1.8

1.8

1.1

1.1

1.3

2.7

2.3

3.8

2.4

H

1.4

2.4

15.7

5.2

1.6

2.1

2.0

1.5

2.1

1.7

2.9

2.0

2.8

1.3

4.1

7.5

3.0

1.9

5.0

5.0

2.3

5.0

10.6

6.8

3.2

3.9

3.6

7.0

9.6

13.6

10.9

D

2.4

2.5

2.0

2.9

1.4

2.1

1.4

1.1

2.3

2.6

2.5

5.1

2.8

W

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

ivory

   

faience

faience

   

faience

bone

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

material

Ø

with 186B; four sitting baboons on a boat, three others missing

probably Tilapia Nilotica; tail missing

detailed execution, horizontally pierced

detailed execution, twice vertically pierced; irregular red pattern

middle part

scale pattern: crocodile or bead (pierced)

detailed execution

 

back part of a crocodile

detailed execution

 

detailed execution

with 82/73; detailed execution

boat, scorpion?

detailed execution, head missing

detailed execution, back part missing

vertically pierced

hole pierced through the front paws

detailed execution

superficial execution

detailed execution

detailed execution

description

damaged

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

worn

worn

damaged, worn

worn

worn

worn

worn

worn

worn, stains

part missing

worn, cracks, crusts

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, faded to red

damaged, worn

worn

condition

The Catalogue

designation

hedgehog-ship

ship fragment

cargo boat

cargo boat

cargo boat

ship

ship fragment?

ship?

7. shrines

Delta shrine

Delta shrine

Delta shrine

Delta shrine

Delta shrine

Delta shrine

naos

naos

naos

naos

8. gaming pieces

gaming piece

designation

gaming piece

#

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

 

287

288

289

290

112

291

292

293

294

295

296

 

297

#

298

A130/190/83/2H

findnumber

A130/190/83/2G

A130/190/70/135

A130/190/83/55

A130/190/70/91

A140/190/131/23

A130/190/70/95

A130/190/82/27

A130/190/70/295

A130/190/70/119

A130/190/83/5

A130/190/70/199

A130/190/70/26A

A130/190/82/21

A130/190/70/149A

A130/190/70/150

A130/190/131/6

A140/190/97/7

A140/190/253/7

A140/190/80

findnumber

5.2

H

4.9

4.8

8.5

6.5

8.0

7.8

4.4

8.7

6.6

10.3

14.7

1.8

1.7

3.7

2.3

1.6

4.2

1.8

3.6

H

 

W

 

3.2

4.1

2.8

3.7

5.9

7.5

11.3

10.6

8.7

7.5

2.2

6.2

2.5

1.2

0.9

14.2

3.8

9.8

W

 

D

 

2.2

6.1

4.5

4.7

2.6

2.2

2.6

3.4

3.0

3.5

6.1

1.5

11.9

5.3

6.2

1.9

9.0

3.6

D

3.8

Ø

2.6

 

 

faience

 

ivory

material

ivory

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

ivory

ivory

ivory

faience

faience

faience

faience

I A clay

material

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ø

cylindrical, with a knob on top

description

cylindrical, with a knob on top

massive

vaulted, both sides closed; lower part with vertical incisions

vaulted, one side open; lower part with vertical indents

vaulted, one side open; lower part with vertical incisions

cross-hatched, vaulted roof, extended sides with vertical incisions

cross-hatched roof, door to the right, sides missing

hollow; vaulted, cross-hatched roof, extended sides, door with flagpoles

vaulted, cross-hatched roof, extended sides, vaulted door with flagpoles

extended sides, doorway on the left, flanked by flagpoles

extended sides, vaulted roof, incised walls, doorway

crocodile? long fragment

ship’s fragment or crocodile tail

slim, with traces of a cabin; one end twisted; papyrus-like decoration

square boat with cabin

boat with cabin

stylized boat with cabin and railing without details

part of a (hedgehog?) ship, railing with indents

ship with hedgehog head at the stern, looking back; with crossbeams

description

eroded, cracks, crusts

condition

eroded, cracks, crusts

worn, stained

worn

worn

damaged, worn

worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged

worn, part missing

crusts

part missing

damaged, part missing

damaged, worn

worn

worn

worn, stains

part missing

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

gaming piece

gaming piece

gaming piece (?)

gaming piece

gaming piece

gaming piece

gaming piece

gaming piece

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

gaming piece

309

315

gaming piece

308

gaming piece

gaming piece

307

314

gaming piece

306

gaming piece

gaming piece

305

313

gaming piece

304

gaming piece (?)

gaming piece

303

312

gaming piece

302

gaming piece

gaming piece

301

311

gaming piece

300

gaming piece

gaming piece

299

310

designation

#

113

A130/190/70/62B

A130/190/83/2M

A130/190/83/30C

A130/190/183/116

A130/190/83/2L

A130/190/83/1E

A130/190/83/1C

A130/190/83/86

A130/190/83/103

A130/190/70/48

A130/190/83/76

A130/190/70/268

A130/190/70/241

A130/190/70/221

A130/190/70/236

A130/190/82/26

A140/190/131/57B

A140/190/131/31

A130/190/70/294

A130/190/83/101

A130/190/83/84

A130/190/83/28

A130/190/83/44

A130/190/83/33

findnumber

8.0

5.8

3.7

5.9

5.8

3.7

3.8

1.5

1.7

4.1

6.3

2.9

3.4

2.1

2.9

3.6

7.6

3.9

2.9

4.0

4.7

4.0

4.5

2.1

H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

D

W

4.4

2.9

1.9

2.7

3.0

3.5

2.4

3.5

3.4

2.5

3.8

2.4

3.3

1.6

2.3

3.2

3.5

3.2

2.3

2.0

8.3

2.1

2.3

2.3

Ø

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

ivory

diorite

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

ivory

ivory

faience

ivory

ivory

ivory

carnelian

ivory

material

cylindrical, with round top and knob

cylindrical, with round top and knob

cylindrical, with round top and knob

cylindrical, with round top and knob

cylindrical, with round top and knob

cylindrical piece, cracked

cylindrical, with a knob on top, cracked

hemispherical piece

hemispherical piece

cylindrical, with round top

cylindrical, with round top, stains

conical piece with production faults

conical piece, cross incised on base

conical piece

conical piece, circle incised on base, top missing

conical piece

cylindrical, with a knob on top (granary?), some damage

cylindrical, with a knob on top

convex piece or model vessel with lid, some damage

cylindrical, with a knob on top

cylindrical, with a knob on top

cylindrical, with a knob on top

cylindrical, with a knob on top

squat, convex piece or model vessel with lid

description

eroded, crusts

crusts, part missing

damaged

damaged

damaged, crusts

eroded, crusts

eroded, crusts

damaged

damaged, worn

 

worn, stains

damaged, part missing

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

worn, part missing

worn, crusts

damaged

worn, stains

damaged

damaged

damaged

damaged

 

condition

The Catalogue

designation

9. miscellaneous

funerary tool

leg of a box

leg of a box

leg of a box

Isis ‘blood’

palette

palette

handle (?)

box

phallus?

lid?

cylinder

cylinder

lid?

clapper

clapper

clapper

clapper

clapper

object

egg?

egg?

offering Plate

top of stave

#

 

323

324

325

326

327

328

329

330

331

332

333

334

335

114

336

337

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

346

A130/190/70/204

A130/190/70/96

A140/190/70C

A130/190/83/95

A130/190/83/24A

A130/190/83/2N

A130/190/83/46B

A130/190/83/1G

A130/190/70/202

A130/190/82/16

A130/190/70/43B

A130/190/83/39

A130/190/83/24B

A130/190/83/72

A140/190/131/62

A130/190/70/4

A140/190/267

A140/190/226

A130/190/70/136

A130/190/82/24

A130/190/70/259

A130/190/70/225

A140/190/131/20

A140/190/131/18

findnumber

8.2

7.2

4.5

8.7

5.4

2.6

3.4

8.2

11.6

10.9

5.3

9.9

3.9

10.0

0.8

6.8

9.1

8.2

8.0

 

2.7

3.5

6.9

5.4

H

 

6.6

 

4.6

3.6

2.4

2.3

2.5

2.3

2.6

3.4

 

2.0

 

1.5

 

2.1

2.4

0.7

0.8

0.6

0.7

0.7

0.5

 

1.1

0.7

0.5

2.1 4.1

4.5

1.4

1.2

1.4

 

1.7

1.6

2.0

0.7

D

4.3

4.4

8.1

5.5

 

3.1

3.5

3.5

3.4

W

6.5

 

3.1

 

ivory

faience

faience

ivory

ivory

ivory

   

ivory

ivory

   

ivory

ivory

   

faience

ivory

ivory

 

2.7

 

ivory

faience

   

faience

schist

   

schist

diorite

   

ivory

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

material

 

 

Ø

mushroom-like top or vessel stop

irregular corner fragment with depressions

ovoid object

ovoid object

leg fragment or crocodile’s head

 

rectangular fragment

 

part only

two parts

distorted fragment

mace handle cover?

cylinder-shaped object

squashed cylinder / mace handle cover? with horizontal lines

fragment

rectangular, without lid

sort of handle for a mirror?

irregular edge fragment, polished

square, with rounded corners; convex in section, polished

form slightly distorted

leg with twoholes for attachment, upper part

leg with two holes for attachment, upper part

leg with two holes for attachment

peshes-kef with hole for attachment, slightly bent

description

worn, stained

damaged, worn

eroded

part missing

crusts

damaged

damaged

damaged, crusts

crusts

crusts

fragile

crusts, part missing

crusts

cracks

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

part missing

part missing

small chips

crusts, cracks

damaged, worn

worn, stains

worn

worn

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

designation

uraeus?

stick

10. mace heads

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

#

347

348

 

349

350

351

352

353

354

355

356

357

358

359

115

360

361

362

363

364

365

366

367

368

369

370

A130/190/70/142

A130/190/70/110

A130/190/70/83

A140/190/131/58

A140/190/131/52

A140/190/131/45

A140/190/131/35

A140/190/131/33

A140/190/131/29

A140/190/131/26

A140/190/131/25

A140/190/131/21

A140/190/131/5

A140/190/131/2

A140/190/98/15

A140/190/139

A140/190/77

A140/190/67

A140/190/68

A130/190/82/58

A140/190/131/36

A140/190/178

A130/190/70/256

A130/190/70/62F

findnumber

6.5

6.3

6.0

6.1

5.7

7.2

6.0

7.0

6.4

6.0

4.1

5.9

6.6

4.2

6.0

6.0

5.5

7.0

5.2

7.0

5.2

2.4

10.2

9.7

H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.3

D

4.1

W

5.7

5.8

5.2

5.1

5.3

6.9

5.5

6.6

5.9

5.7

5.0

5.5

6.1

5.9

6.0

5.4

5.6

6.2

5.0

6.3

5.8

7.9

1.5

 

Ø

quartzite

quartzite

quartzite

calcite

calcite

calcite

calcite

limestone

calcite

limestone

calcite

limestone

calcite

calcite

calcite

limestone

limestone

limestone

limestone

quartzite

limestone

diorite

ivory

ivory

material

ovoid

almost round

pear-shaped

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid, slightly irregular

ovoid

ovoid

squat, irregular

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid, with ridge on top

almost biconical

disk-shaped, hole off centre

 

flat, with ridges at the sides

description

worn

worn

 

worn

worn

worn

worn

worn

worn, crusts

worn

worn

worn, crusts

worn, crusts

damaged, won

worn

worn, stains

eroded

worn

eroded

crusts

eroded

chipped

eroded, crusts, cracks

crusts, part missing

condition

The Catalogue

A130/190/82/13

A130/190/82/35

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

mace head

11. miscellaneous

scorpion?

372

373

374

375

376

377

378

379

380

381

382

383

384

116

385

386

387

388

389

390

391

392

393

 

394

A130/190/82/18

stones

A130/190/83/113

A130/190/83/112

A130/190/83/111

A130/190/83/110

A130/190/83/99

A130/190/83/93

A130/190/83/92

A130/190/83/91

A130/190/83/79

A130/190/83/78

A130/190/83/60

A130/190/83/59

A130/190/82/65

A130/190/82/64

A130/190/82/60

A130/190/82/59

A130/190/82/42

A130/190/82/40

A130/190/82/36

A130/190/70/281

A130/190/70/143

mace head

371

findnumber

designation

#

2.8

5.9

6.0

7.0

5.2

6.7

6.7

5.3

7.0

5.9

6.8

6.8

5.8

6.6

6.7

4.4

7.4

5.1

5.3

6.5

6.5

5.5

5.3

6.1

H

2.2

 

 

10.0

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

W

 

6.0

5.9

6.2

5.4

6.5

6.0

5.6

6.0

5.5

6.2

6.1

5.3

6.3

6.0

5.7

6.3

5.0

5.2

6.0

6.0

5.0

4.7

5.8

Ø

calcite

quartzite

quartzite

quartzite

quartzite

calcite

calcite

calcite

calcite

quartzite

calcite

calcite

quartzite

quartzite

calcite

quartzite

quartzite

quartzite

calcite

quartzite

quartzite

quartzite

quartzite

quartzite

material

stylized scorpion, flat base

squat

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid, with narrow piercing

apple-shaped with flat top

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

squat, with flat top

ovoid, almost pointed at the base

ovoid with flat top

ovoid

ovoid

ovoid

pear-shaped

ovoid

ovoid with flat top

description

crusts, stains

crusts, crack

crusts

crusts

crusts

crusts

crusts

crusts

crusts

crusts

crusts

damaged, crusts

crusts

crusts

damaged

crusts

worn

crusts

damaged, crusts

 

 

eroded, crusts

 

 

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

designation

scorpion

scorpion

scorpion

scorpion

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

natural stone

#

395

396

397

398

399

400

401

402

403

404

405

406

407

408

117

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419

A140/190/281B

A130/190/70/164B

A130/190/70/62C

A130/190/82/48

A130/190/70/164

A130/190/70/58B

A130/190/70/58A

A130/190/82/3

A130/190/70/293

A130/190/70/242

A130/190/82/5

A130/190/70/175

A130/190/70/145

A130/190/70/158

A310/190/70/70

A130/190/70/229

A1540/190/220

A140/190/141/15

A130/190/70/206

A130/190/70/141

A130/190/70/47

A140/190/141/9

A140/190/131/50

A140/190/131/49

A140/190/131/43

findnumber

3.5

3.7

4.4

4.8

3.7

2.1

3.6

6.3

3.2

3.6

3.1

6.6

4.4

4.6

4.3

3.1

5.2

9.6

4.3

6.6

6.0

7.0

2.1

3.2

2.6

H

3.9

2.2

7.6

5.8

2.2

3.3

3.5

5.5

2.7

2.3

4.5

2.9

1.6

4.5

2.2

1.2

3.6

10.2

2.4

6.3

4.6

3.5

3.1

3.1

3.8

W

2.2

1.2

3.3

0.8

1.2

4.8

5.0

2.8

2.2

2.9

7.2

2.1

2.3

11.3

2.3

2.1

2.2

7.5

2.3

5.0

8.5

8.8

11,2

12.1

11.5

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

pebblestone

pebblestone

pebblestone

stone?

pebblestone

pebblestone

pebblestone

pebblestone

pebblestone

pebblestone

pebblestone

flint

pebblestone

limestone?

schist

pyrrhotite

   

pyrrhotite

 

pyrrhotite

pyrrhotite

   

pyrrhotite

pyrrhotite

   

limestone

limestone

 

 

calcite

calcite

   

material

Ø

smooth stone

roughly conical stone

 

flat, irregular piece

 

piece of irregular shape, rounded and smooth

roughly triangular, rounded smooth stone, marked with a cross

smooth, roughly rectangular piece with rounded corners

almost round stone with a sort of ‘nipple’

smooth stone in the shape of a crouching figure

roughly bird-shaped piece, rounded and smooth

oblong piece

bizarre shape

roughly fish-shaped stone

smooth, conical piece

black stone of bizarre shape

black stone of bizarre shape

black stone of bizarre shape, pebbles sticking on

black stone of bizarre shape

black stone of bizarre shape

black stone of bizarre shape

stylized scorpion, flat base

stylized scorpion, flat base

stylized scorpion, flat base

stylized scorpion, flat base

description

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

stains

 

crusts

 

oxydized

oxydized

oxydized

oxydized

oxydized

oxydized

damaged, crusts

damaged

damaged

 

condition

The Catalogue

designation

12. jewellery

ring

ring

bracelet?

bracelet?

bracelet

bracelet

bracelet

bead

bracelet

bracelet

bracelet

bracelet

bracelet

bead

bead

bead

bead

bead

bead

fruit model?

bead

bead

beads

beads

#

 

420

421

422

423

424

425

426

427

428

429

430

431

432

118

433

434

435

436

437

438

439

440

441

442

443

A140/190/131/39B

A140/190/131/39A

A130/190/82/63

A140/190/121

A130/190/70/192

A130/190/83/29

A130/190/82/19

A130/190/70/251

A130/190/70/117

A130/190/70/288

A130/190/70/88

A130/190/83/14

A140/190/245

A130/190/70/255

A130/190/70/11

A130/190/83/49C

A140/190/131/61B

A140/190/131/24B

A140/190/172

A130/190/70/17

A140/190/131/55

A130/190/70/3

A130/190/70/286

A140/190/131/51

findnumber

1.6

1.6

1.5

0.2

6.4

4.0

3.1

4.2

3.6

3.2

8.9

5.1

 

3.9

4.9

4.9

1.6

4.0

5.7

2.0

8.9

5.1

0.6

0.6

H

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

1.8

 

 

2.5

 

1.8

1.6

1.9 1.9

1.5

 

  1.8

0.8

1.0

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.4

3.8

2.3

2.2

2.2

2.6

2.4

2.5

6.0

 

9.0

6.0

6.0

0.5

7.0

7.0

6.0

10.3

6.0

   

3.5

3.1

Ø

 

 

D

2.0

1.4

0.8

1.0

1.2

 

 

W

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

ivory

ivory

material

one tubular bead, 13 fragments

five tubular beads

tubular

disk-shaped

ovoid, quartered by four vertical incisions; not pierced

ovoid, with irregular pattern in red, brown and green as stone imitation

biconical, with flat endings

biconical, with four vertical decorative lines in red

biconical, with four vertical decorative lines

conical, with decorative lines

with 70/187, cylindrical ‘corn cob’

 

with 70/261; marked with an incised square

parts missing

parts missing

worn

worn

 

damaged, worn

damaged, stains

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

 

worn

part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

   

worn, part missing

eroded, part missing

 

conical fragment

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

   

part missing

damaged, stains

stains

damaged

damaged

condition

 

broad piece

broad, but narrow

 

 

description

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

vessel

bowl

model vessel

imitations of stone

model vessel

model vessel

model vessel

model vessel

459

460

 

461

462

463

464

 

 

458

bowl

452

vessel

13. vessels

 

457

bead

451

bowl

beads

450

456

beads

449

jar

beads

448

455

bead

447

bowl

beads

446

454

bead

445

door socket (?)

beads

444

453

designation

#

119

A140/190/223

A140/190/131/10

A130/190/131/60

A130/190/790/253

vessels

A130/190/70/183

A130/190/70/274

A130/190/45B

A130/190/45A

A140/190/61/1

A140/190/216

A140/190/97/6

A140/190/138/33

stone vessels

A140/190/97/8

 

A140/190/131/3B

A140/190/141/2C

A140/190/141/2B

A140/190/141/2A

A140/190/124C

A140/190/124B

A140/190/124A

A140/190/131/1

findnumber

4.2

2.9

4.5

3.7

 

4.3

5.7

2.8

3.7

5.7

4.4

2.0

6.2

 

5.0

1.4

0.2

1.0

1.5

0.3

0.9

0.9

1.8

H

   

 

 

 

 

 

0.9

0.2

0.2

 

 

 

 

 

7.8

1.9

2.2

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

D

 

W

5.4

6.8

3.3

3.6

 

2.7

25.0

 

 

12.0

4.3

4.6

11.0

 

13.0

0.4

0.5

0.4

0.5

0.5

0.2

0.5

0.4

Ø

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

limestone

calcite

calcite

calcite

calcite

calcite

diorite

limestone

 

silver

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

material

carinated bowl dark irregular pattern to imitate stone

carinated bowl dark irregular pattern to imitate stone

cylindrical vessel with dark irregular pattern to imitate stone

cylindrical rim fragment with dark irregular pattern to imitate stone

 

almost cylindrical and almost massive jar

rim fragment

irregular body fragment

irregular body fragment

deep bowl with flat bottom; irregular; Ø base 4.0; wall 1.4

squat jar

bowl with flat base

irregular mortar-like object

 

separate base; holes in wall for decorative bronze balls, one present

tubular

49 complete disk-shaped beads and 24 incomplete, part sticking together

five tubular beads

three tubular beads

disk-shaped

eight tubular beads

tubular

five tubular beads

description

damaged

damaged

damaged, crusts

worn

 

damaged, crusts

damaged, crusts

 

 

damaged

damaged, part missing

parts missing

parts missing

 

damaged, part missing

part missing

 

 

parts missing

 

parts missing

 

parts missing

condition

The Catalogue

designation

model vessel

model vessels on 

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

vessel on stand

 

model vase

model vase

model vase

model vase

model vase

 

basket model lid

basket model lid

basket model lid

basket model lid

#

465

 

466

467

468

469

470

471

472

473

474

475

476

120

477

 

478

479

480

481

482

 

483

484

485

486

A130/190/70/176

A130/190/70/68

A130/190/70/7

A140/190/141/8

basket models

A140/190/141/1

A140/190/131/7

A140/190/131/48

A140/190/82/33

A140/190/85A

libation vase models

A130/190/70/144

A140/190/221

A140/190/127

A140/190/69

A140/190/131/14

A130/190/70/82

A130/190/70/132

A130/190/70/172

A130/190/70/218

A130/190/83/34

A130/190/83/2A

A130/190/83/106

stands

A140/190/131/19

findnumber

3.4

4.0

3.4

4.7

4.2

11.1

10.8

5.6

7.1

8.8

3.4

5.0

5.2

6.1

4.6

6.2

7.7

5.8

7.7

4.6

7.1

2.2

H

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

W

4.3

4.7

4.3

5.1

1.7

5.0

3.8

2.6

3.6

2.6

1.7

2.1

2.6

7.2

2.2

2.2

3.1

2.8

7.7

2.5

3.6

2.4

Ø

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

material

conical lid, base pierced, with horizontal ridges (‘beehive’)

conical lid, base pierced, with horizontal ridges (‘beehive’)

conical lid, base pierced, with horizontal ridges (‘beehive’)

conical lid, base pierced, with horizontal ridges (‘beehive’)

libation vase with shallow cavity

libation vase, Ø rim 4.0, Ø base 2.3

libation vase with shallow cavity; Ø rim 2.4, Ø base 2.0

libation vase

almost massive libation vase; black-topped

cylindrical dummy vessel; transition to stand only incised

Ø rim 4.0, Ø base 2.3

 

squat nodel

 

crack on one side, due to production fault

slim model

 

 

 

 

model on stand with three triangular holes

squat vessel with handles, flat base and small mouth, stone imitation

description

worn

damaged

worn

worn

damaged, worn

stains

damaged, crust, stains

damaged, worn

worn, part mossing

damaged, worn

worn, part missing

damaged

damaged, worn

damaged, worn, stains

 

damaged

damaged, worn, stains

damaged, worn, stains

damaged, worn, stains

 

damaged, worn

worn, stains

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

designation

vessel

vessel lid

 

vessel

vessel

vessel

dummy vessel

dummy vessel

dummy vessel

dummy vessel

dummy vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

model bowl

model bowl

model vessel

model vessel

vessel

#

487

488

 

489

490

491

492

493

494

495

496

497

498

499

121

500

501

502

503

504

505

506

507

508

A130/190/70/258

A140/190/182

A140/190/141/7

A130/190/83/22

A140/190/131/8

A140/190/131/56

A140/190/131/59

A130/190/70/52

A130/190/70/75

A130/190/70/161

A130/190/70/169

A130/190/83/62

A130/190/83/54B

A130/190/83/1B

A130/190/83/85

A130/190/70/79

A130/190/70/290

A140/190/298

A140/190/281A

A130/190/70/280B

miscellaneous

A130/190/70/128

A140/190/131/22

findnumber

3.0

4.8

5.4

1.7

2.7

8.0

5.4

6.0

3.2

8.0

6.7

2.0

1.3

1.2

3.2

4.1

2.8

3.2

2.8

9.5

3.9

 

H

 

  0.8

 

 

2.9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

3.0

 

4.8

 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

1.1

0.9

2.5

 

 

D

 

4.0

3.6

3.4

 

 

W

 

3.9

5.0

6.9

4.7

5.0

3.7

3.7

2.7

6.9

 

3.2

4.5

3.0

2.4

3.0

2.5

4.0

8.0

4.0

4.9

 

Ø

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

material

body fragment

ovoid with flat base and rolling rim; Ø base 2.3; wall 0.5

ovoid with flat base and rolling rim; Ø rim 3.4, Ø base 2.2; wall 0.7

oval dish

squat bowl, flat base (Ø 2.4), shallow opening, hand-formed

ovoid with flat base and rolling rim; shallow mouth; Ø rim 3.8, Ø base 2.8

ovoid with flat base and rolling rim; Ø rim 3.3, Ø base 2.1

cylindrical vessel with round base; oval in cross-section

cylindrical vessel, rim missing; wall 0.3

convex bowl, flat base; horizontal and wavy line decoration; wall 1.0

vessel or naos fragment with vertical incisions; rectangular in section

bowl rim; wall 0.8

rim with shallow mouth

rim or base

cylindrical vessel with shallow mouth

cylindrical vessel with shallow mouth

cylindrical vessel with round top; gaming piece?

rim fragment

wall fragment of a vessel with horizontal ridges: basket model?

 

dome-like lid with a knob as handle

with #129; ovoid, with horizontal lines; wall 0.9; basket model?

description

worn, parts missing

damaged, part missing

damaged

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

worn, stains, crusts

damaged, worn

worn, crumbling

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

damaged, part missing

damaged, part missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

damaged, stains

damaged, stains

damaged, worn

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

damaged, worn

worn, part missing

condition

The Catalogue

designation

vessel

vessel

vessel

model vase

model vase

model vase

dummy vase

dummy vessel

model vessel?

model vessel?

model vessel

model vessel

model vessel

model vessel

dummy vase

dummy vessel

dummy vessel

dummy vessel

dummy vessel

dummy vase

dummy vase

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

#

509

510

511

512

513

514

515

516

517

518

519

520

521

522

122

523

524

525

526

527

528

529

530

531

532

533

A130/190/82/49

A130/190/82/57

A130/190/83/66

A130/190/83/68

A140/190/131/57A

A130/190/70/80

A130/190/83/61

A130/190/70/278

A130/190/70/220

A130/190/70/31

A130/190/83/83

A130/190/82/30

A130/190/70/266

A130/190/70/184

A130/190/70/238

A130/190/70/45

A130/190/70/284

A140/190/253/4

A130/190/83/48

A130/190/83/45

A140/190/131/34

A130/190/83/58

A140/190/66

A130/190/70/24

A130/190/70/41

findnumber

2.5

3.3

2.3

3.9

10.6

9.0

3.7

2.7

3.6

3.9

4.8

5.7

7.1

5.3

3.7

5.7

5.4

4.9

6.8

10.6

9.0

4.8

3.6

3.3

3.2

H

3.8

3.1

4.0

2.4

1.4

2.1

2.8

1.8

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

   

0.5

0.3

0.6

D

3.5

3.4

2.7

W

5.0

5.0

8.0

4.0

7.5

5.7

5.7

2.0

3.0

2.9

4.7

2.9

2.4

3.1

3.0

2.5

2.0

3.0

3.8

3.7

5.4

2.5

8.0

6.0

0.6

Ø

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

material

carinated body fragment

irregular body fragment

with rolled rim

carinated body fragment

massive vessel with lid

massive vessel with lid

conical vessel, rim missing

vessel with pointed base or bullet-like gaming piece

biconical or carinated vessel

pointed base and lid

conical lower part of vessel or gaming piece

convex piece, with shallow cavity; rim missing

lower part of a cylindrical vessel or gaming piece

lower part of a cylindrical vessel or gaming piece

lower part of a cylindrical vessel or gaming piece

conical vessel or gaming piece

with marked rim and base

pointed base and rolling rim

base and part of rim missing

with narrow base

base missing

base fragment

rim fragment

rim fragment

two irregular rim fragments and one body fragment

description

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

parts missing

damaged, stains, worn

damaged, stains, worn

worn, stains

 

damaged, stains

 

part missing, worn

damaged, worn

part missing, stains

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn

 

worn, parts missing

worn

worn, crusts

worn, parts missing

part missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

designation

vessel?

vessel

dummy vessel

vessel?

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

vessel

14. tiles

inlay piece?

inlay piece?

inlay fragment?

inscribed tile

decorated tile

decorated tile

decorated tile

decorated tile

 

disk inlay

triangular inlay

#

534

535

536

537

538

539

540

541

542

543

544

545

 

546

123

547

548

549

550

551

552

553

 

554

555

A130/190/70/27

A140/190/253/8

inlays

A130/190/70/6

A130/190/70/147

A130/190/70/223

A130/190/82/61

A130/190/83/63

A140/190/62

A140/190/96/5

A140/190/253/3

decorated pieces

A130/190/70/64

A130/190/83/71

A130/190/83/51

A130/190/83/56

A130/190/70/264

A130/190/70/211

A130/190/70/230

A130/190/70/66

A130/190/82/2

A130/190/82/41

A130/190/70/271

A130/190/70/291

findnumber

5.0

 

3.0

3.3

3.4

1.9

2.3

5.5

3.6

4.7

7.0

5.2

6.8

7.8

5.0

4.5

4.6

7.4

2.7

4.1

4.0

2.8

H

4.5

 

1.56

3.2

2.7

2.0

2.2

3.3

3.5

0.9

0.6

0.7

1.1

0.9

1.4

1.1

0.7

1.3

0.8

 

 

5.8

2.5

2.6

3.2

2.4

2.7

2.1

2.7

2.9

3.2

2.2

1.4

D

2.3

6.8

6.7

5.7

6.3

5.7

5.3

5.6

5.9

3.9

2.1

W

faience faience

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

5.0

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

4.3

12.0

9.0

8.0

9.0

8.0

9.0

faience

faience

  14.0

faience

faience

faience

material

6.0

6.0

 

Ø

flat piece with a groove at the apex

disk with hole in the centre, probably inlay

rectangular, decorated with broad horizontal lines

decorated with red dots and lines, pierced (tubular bead stuck in)

decorated with red dots and lines, pierced

triangles decoration, some with inlaid red pigment

tile with double piercing; inlaid red signs G29 and N20(?); damaged

irregular fragment with feather-like pattern

triangular fragment with parallel vertical lines

fragment of a nbty-sign: only the talons of the vulture and the basket

with 82/67; jar with handles, crack due to production fault

wall fragment

base fragment, damaged

base fragment; wall 2.2

wall fragment

base fragment

wall fragment

wall fragment

body fragment

body fragment of a massive vessel

fragment with horizontal incision (rim?)

hemispherical fragment

description

worn

worn

worn

worn

worn

worn

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, crusts

parts missing

condition

The Catalogue

A140/190/131/47

A140/190/213

triangular inlay

inlay fragment

inlay piece

 

corner tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

557

558

559

 

560

561

562

563

564

565

566

567

568

124

569

570

571

572

573

574

575

576

577

578

579

A130/190/70/252

A130/190/70/227

A130/190/70/182

A130/190/70/194

A130/190/70/56

A130/190/70/178

A140/190/141/6

A140/190/72B

A130/190/70/21

A130/190/70/153

A130/190/70/154

A130/190/70/191

A130/190/82/25

A130/190/82/66

A130/190/83/15

A130/190/83/69

A130/190/83/70

A130/190/70/28

A130/190/82/39

A130/190/83/35

cake-shaped tiles

A130/190/82/46

A130/190/70/76

triangular inlay

556

findnumber

designation

#

4.4

3.7

4.0

3.9

3.9

4.0

3.7

3.9

3.9

3.3

3.7

3.6

3.8

3.9

3.6

3.8

4.1

3.7

3.5

4.0

4.4

5.2

3.0

5.1

H

3.1

2.8

2.8

2.8

2.9

2.9

2.9

2.7

2.9

2.5

3.2

2.6

3.2

2.9

1.8

3.0

3.9

1.8

1.7

3.5

2.2

6.3

5.2

5.2

W

2.0

1.7

2.0

1.7

1.8

2.1

2.0

1.9

2.1

2.0

1.4

2.1

2.1

2.0

1.6

3.0

2.3

1.8

2.1

3.1

0.7

1.1

1.3

1.1

D

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

material

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ø

pierced for attachment, marks on back and one side

pierced for attachment, marks on back and one side (no. 54)

pierced for attachment, marks on back and one side (no. 54)

pierced for attachment, marks on back and one side (no. 54)

pierced for attachment, three indents on the back

pierced for attachment, two horizontal lines on the back

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment

with rounded edges, L-shaped in section, twice pierced

rectangular fragment with vertical lines

roughly triangular, plant motive?

flat piece

flat piece, corners damaged

description

damaged

damaged

 

damaged

 

damaged

damaged

damaged

damaged

damaged, stains

damaged

damaged

damaged

damaged

damaged, part missing

damaged, stains

damaged, stains

 

 

 

 

worn

 

worn, stains

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

designation

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

cake tile

 

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

#

580

581

582

583

584

585

586

587

588

589

590

591

592

 

125

593

594

595

596

597

598

599

600

601

602

603

A130/190/83/37

A130/190/70/165

A130/190/70/212B

A140/190/253/2

A140/190/72A

A140/190/201

A140/190/131/54

A140/190/131/28

A130/190/70/201A

A140/190/141/11

A140/190/131/13+30

reed tiles

A130/190/83/97

A130/190/96B

A130/190/83/96A

A130/190/70/280A

A130/190/82/15

A130/190/70/30

A130/190/70/23

A130/190/70/159

A130/190/82/52+71

A130/190/82/44

A130/190/70/234

A130/190/82/62

A130/190/70/189

findnumber

6.9

9.2

4.0

7.2

13.0

12.5

7.3

10.7

4.1

22.5

22.3

2.3

2.0

2.1

3.8

3.8

3.9

4.0

3.6

3.4

4.1

3.9

3.2

4.0

H

4.3

7.0

1.6

2.9

8.5

8.7

6.3

9.4

6.4

9.2

8.9

3.0

2.9

3.0

3.3

3.2

3.1

2.5

2.7

2.9

3.2

2.8

2.7

2.7

W

2.1

1.6

0.7

0.8

2.0

2.5

2.4

2.2

2.1

1.8

1.9

2.0

1.9

2.3

2.4

2.0

2.5

2.5

1.8

1.7

2.4

2.2

1.8

2.2

D

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

 

 

faience

faience

   

material

Ø

triangular fragment with reed pattern

with reed pattern on both sides

with reed pattern; diagonal hole for attachment

with reed pattern; crack due to production fault

with reed pattern, in six separate square sections

with reed pattern, diagonal hole for attachment; damaged

corner fragment, with diagonal hole for attachment

irregular fragment with reed pattern

with reed pattern

with reed pattern; mark no. 39 on back

with reed pattern; mark no. 40 on back

pierced for attachment; mark no. 4 on back

pierced for attachment; part of cross on back visible

pierced for attachment

pierced for attachment, cross on the back

pierced for attachment, cross on the back, marks on one side

pierced for attachment; mark no. 40 on back

pierced for attachment; curved arrow on back

pierced for attachment, marks on short sides (no. 40)

pierced for attachment, marks on short sides

pierced for attachment, marks on short sides

pierced for attachment, marks on short sides (no. 5)

pierced for attachment; on the back mark no. 9

pierced for attachment, marks on back and one side

description

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

worn

worn

worn

worn, crusts

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

part missing

worn, stains

worn

damaged, part missing

worn, part missing

part missing

damaged

damaged

damaged

 

damaged

damaged

worn

damaged

damaged, crusts

damaged

condition

The Catalogue

126

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

reed tile

617

618

619

620

A130/190/70/198

A130/190/70/166

A130/190/83/67

A140/190/225

A130/190/70/84

11.5

8.7

8.4

7.0

2.9

4.7

6.8

8.1

8.7

6.2

7.0

7.1

5.7

1.9

1.8

2.0

1.7

1.7

1.6

2.0

1.1

 

 

A140/190/192

A140/190/111A

A140/190/81C

5.8

5.8

5.8

5.8

5.8

3.7

3.5

3.5

3.5

3.6

0.9

1.4

1.2

0.9

1.4

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

faience

 

wall tile

reed tile

616

A130/190/83/57

10.2

4.8

1.1

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

material

 

625

reed tile

615

A130/190/83/13

5.2

4.0

1.3

 

wall tile

reed tile

614

A130/190/70/231

6.5

5.1

1.3

 

624

reed tile

613

A130/190/92

4.9

3.3

1.5

 

wall tile

reed tile

612

A140/190/96/40

2.4

2.7

1.8

 

623

reed tile

611

A130/190/70/12

4.7

3.8

1.7

 

A140/190/81B

reed tile

610

A130/190/70/197

2.8

5.2

3.5

 

wall tile

reed tile

609

A140/190/122

6.7

9.7

1.9

 

622

reed tile

608

A130/190/70/46

4.5

6.3

2.0

Ø

A140/190/81A

reed tile

607

A140/190/222A

8.1

4.0

D

wall tile

reed tile

606

A140/190/123

8.2

W

621

reed tile

605

A130/190/70/205

H

rectangular wall tiles with pierced back projections

reed tile

604

findnumber

 

designation

#

rectangular, with pierced back projection

rectangular, with pierced back projection, triangle on back, part missing

rectangular, with pierced back projection

rectangular, with pierced back projection

rectangular, with pierced back projection; parts missing; triangle on back

rectangular edge fragment with reed pattern; pierced, damaged

rectangular corner fragment with reed pattern; diagonally pierced

rectangular corner fragment with reed pattern; diagonally pierced

rectangular corner fragment with reed pattern; diagonally pierced

rectangular corner fragment with reed pattern; cross on the back

rectangular fragment with reed pattern

irregular fragment with reed pattern

square fragment with reed pattern

rectangular side fragment with reed pattern

triangular fragment with reed pattern

part of a narrow tile with reed mat pattern

irregular corner fragment with reed pattern, convex backside

irregular side fragment with reed pattern

irregular side fragment with reed pattern

triangular fragment with reed pattern on both sides;two holes in one side

irregular fragment with reed pattern

with reed pattern, indents in one side; two holes in the back for attachment

description

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged

damaged, worn

worn, stains

worn

worn

worn

crusts

worn

damaged, worn

 

 

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

 

damaged, worn

worn, part missing

damaged, worn

worn, stains

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

tile

tile

tile

tile

vaulted tile

vaulted tile

tile

643

644

645

646

647

648

649

tile?

636

tile

tile

635

642

tile

634

tile

tile

633

641

tile

632

tile

tile

631

640

tile

630

tile

 

 

639

wall tile

629

tile?

wall tile

628

638

wall tile

627

tile?

wall tile

626

637

designation

#

127

A140/190/97/12

A140/190/97/2

A140/190/97/17

A140/190/97/16

A140/190/97/15

A140/190/97/14

A140/190/97/3

A140/190/97/19

A140/190/97/18

A130/190/70/248

A130/190/70/201B

A130/190/83/100

130/190/83/20

A130/190/70/277

A140/190/70/71

A130/190/70/37

A130/190/78

A140/190/169B

A140/190/169A

A140/190/111B

miscellaneous

A140/190/117

A140/190/110

A140/190/71

A140/190/48

findnumber

15.4

16.9

16.9

12.7

12.9

9.9

9.9

10.0

14.2

3.9

10.3

3.6

2.1

2.3

5.2

5.1

2.5

1.3

5.4

3.8

5.8

5.8

5.8

4.7

H

11.9

10.1

10.0

6.2

12.6

9.0

8.8

8.9

4.4

3.5

5.8

2.5

1.7

1.4

4.5

3.0

2.2

0.7

2.3

2.8

3.7

3.5

3.3

3.7

W

1.8

2.5

2.3

1.6

1.9

2.0

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.0

2.9

1.2

1.0

1.5

1.4

1.9

0.4

0.3

0.4

2.4

0.9

1.2

1.3

1.4

D

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

material

Ø

rectangular thee

diagonal holes in the back for attachment, with mark no. 43

diagonal holes in the back for attachment, with four incisions

narrow tile; cross with arrow on one side, finger marks

flat tile, hole in the back for attachment

square tile with convex front; triangle on back

square tile with convex front; mark no. 37 on the back

square tile with convex front

narrow tile, hemispherical in section; two holes, mark no. 4 on back

irregular side fragment of the back projection of a tile

corner fragment with remains of a back projection

irregular fragment

irregular fragment

fragments of a cake tile? Remains of a hole

irregular fragment

tile with a frame

One corner and six other fragments of a plain tile

fragment of the back projection of a tile with three incised lines

rectangular, flat tile

edge fragment

rectangular, with pierced back projection

rectangular, with pierced back projection, parts missing

rectangular, with pierced back projection, parts missing

rectangular, with pierced back projection, part missing

description

worn, damaged

worn

worn

worn, parts missing

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

worn

worn

 

parts missing

worn

worn, parts missing

eroded, part missing

worn, part missing

worn

worn

worn

part missing

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

damaged, worn

condition

The Catalogue

A140/190/253/9

A140/190/97/10

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

651

652

653

654

655

656

657

658

659

660

661

662

128

663

664

665

666

667

668

669

670

671

672

673

674

A130/190/70/8

A140/190/219

A130/190/82/37

A130/190/83/108

A130/190/82/9

A140/190/171

A140/190/168

A130/190/83/33

A130/190/83/10

A130/190/70/244

A130/190/70/177

A130/190/70/42

A130/200/44

A130/190/70/190

A140/190/27

A140/190/233

A140/190/97/4

A130/190/70/173

A130/190/70/134

A140/190/202

A140/190/131/9

A140/190/97/9+11

A140/190/97/1+5

tile

650

findnumber

designation

#

3.2

5.2

7.9

3.8

6.7

6.1

8.6

4.9

5.9

4.5

6.4

3.7

11.9

4.9

12.5

8.7

14.0

13.1

7.8

8.3

13.1

12.4

8.1

14.7

22.8

H

1.9

2.7

5.7

3.4

6.2

4.3

5.6

4.9

3.6

3.8

4.0

2.0

8.7

6.0

12.7

7.9

8.1

6.2

4.6

6.1

5.2

5.0

5.9

7.0

6.0

W

0.7

1.5

2.6

2.7

2.5

1.8

1.8

0.9

1.1

1.0

1.3

1.6

2.3

1.5

1.6

1.8

1.8

2.1

1.6

2.3

1.9

1.9

1.7

1.4

1.8

D

faience

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

 

 

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

material

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ø

irregular side fragment

corner fragment of a rectangular tile

side fragment of a rectangular tile

corner fragment of a rectangular tile

corner fragment of a rectangular tile

corner fragment of a rectangular tile, with diagonal hole

corner fragment of a rectangular tile

square tile

rectangular tile

square wall tile

rectangular tile

rectangular tile, V-mark on one side

corner fragment of a square wall tile

fragment of a rectangular tile

square tile

rectangular tile

square tile, backside with finger impressions

rectangular tile, hole in the back for attachment

rectangular tile, hole in the back for attachment

rectangular tile

rectangular tile; mark no. 44 on one side

narrow, rectangular tile; hole for attachment; mark no. 52 on one side

narrow, rectangular tile; hole for attachment

narrow, rectangular tile

rectangular tile with diagonal holes; mark no. 42 on one side

description

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

damaged, part missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

worn, eroded

damaged, worn

damaged

damaged

damaged

damaged, part missing

worn

worn, stains, crusts

worn, stains

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

eroded, part missing

worn, parts missing

damaged, worn

worn, parts missing

parts missing

worn

worn

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile?

693

694

695

696

697

698

699

tile

686

tile

tile

685

692

tile

684

vessel fragment(?)

tile

683

691

tile

682

tile

tile

681

690

tile

680

tile

tile?

679

689

tile

678

tile

tile

677

688

tile

676

tile

tile

675

687

designation

#

129

A140/190/96/43

A130/190/83/94

A130/190/83/32

A130/190/70/87

A130/190/70/276

A140/190/253/10

A130/190/82/74

A130/190/70/115

A130/190/82/2B

A130/190/83/40

AA140/190/82/2A

A140/190/131/27

A130/190/82/34

A130/190/70/36

A130/190/70/233

A130/190/70/243

A130/190/82/6

A130/190/83/109

A130/190/70/179

A130/190/70/216

A130/190/82/47B

A140/190/96/7

A140/190/96/19

A130/190/82/1

A130/190/91

findnumber

4.6

4.9

5.2

4.6

4.8

3.9

8.1

10.5

2.7

8.9

13.2

10.2

2.6

4.8

3.1

2.1

2.5

4.5

5.2

4.3

2.3

2.9

5.0

4.0

3.2

H

3.8

5.0

4.9

3.6

6.3

11.8

4.1

7.3

5.6

5.2

9.7

7.0

3.2

2.9

3.0

2.0

2.3

2.9

2.2

3.2

2.5

3.5

2.6

3.6

2.2

W

3.5

3.0

2.6

2.2

3.1

9.0

2.1

4.9

2.9

4.5

5.5

5.0

2.1

1.9

1.7

0.9

2.1

2.0

0.5

9.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.6

D

faience faience

 

faience

   

faience

faience

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

faience

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

faience

faience

   

faience

 

faience

 

faience

  faience

faience

 

 

material

Ø

flat part continuing as concave in section

rectangular side part of a tile; traces of back projection

rectangular side part of a tile; traces of back projection

part of the back projection of a tile?

part of the back projection of a tile

part of tile with remains of piercing in back projection

part of tile with pierced back projection

part of tile with pierced back projection

irregular vessel fragment?

tile with pierced back projection

triangular side fragment with frame on front and part of back projection

irregular fragment of a tile

rectangular side fragment of a tile

irregular side fragment of a tile

fragment of the back projection of a tile

irregular side fragment of a rectangular tile

corner fragment of a rectangular tile

irregular side fragment of a tile

six fragments of a tile, of which three side fragments

corner fragment of a rectangular tile

round fragment of a tile?

corner fragment of a rectangular wall tile

rectangular wall tile

corner fragment of a rectangular tile

corner fragment of a rectangular tile

description

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

eroded, worn

worn, parts missing

parts missing

damaged, worn

worn, parts missing

eroded, damaged

worn, stains

damaged, worn, stains

damaged, worn

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

parts missing

damaged, part missing

worn, part missing

parts missing

part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

worn, part missing

condition

The Catalogue

designation

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

tile

#

700

701

702

703

704

705

706

A130/190/70/58b

A130/190/70/26B

A140/190/85D

A130/190/790/237

A130/190/70/04

A140/190/212A

A130/190/70/212A

findnumber

5.1

6.1

2.5

2.9

4.1

2.7

3.9

H

2.1

3.1

1.7

2.4

2.8

3.8

2.5

W

0.5

0.5

1.4

1.2

1.4

2.8

1.5

D

faience faience

   

faience

faience

   

faience

faience

faience

material

 

 

 

Ø

plain tile

plain tile

irregular piece of back projection (?)

irregular piece of back projection (?)

irregular piece of back projection (?)

irregular piece of back projection (?)

irregular piece of back projection (sharp angle in section)

description

parts missing

parts missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

worn, parts missing

damaged, worn

parts missing

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

130

The Catalogue

Plate 1. Human figures I.

131

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 2. Human figures II.

132

The Catalogue

Plate 3. Human figures III: kneeling, crawling and holding objects.

133

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 4. Baboons I.

134

The Catalogue

Plate 5. Baboons II.

135

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 6. Baboons III.

136

The Catalogue

Plate 7. Hippopotami.

137

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 8. Lions and Antelopes.

138

The Catalogue

Plate 9. Miscellaneous animals.

139

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 10. Crocodiles.

140

The Catalogue

Plate 11. Boats.

141

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 12. Shrines I.

142

The Catalogue

Plate 13. Shrines II.

143

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 14. Gaming pieces.

144

The Catalogue

Plate 15. Miscellaneous objects.

145

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 16. Mace heads I.

146

The Catalogue

Plate 17. Mace heads II.

147

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 18. Stone objects.

148

The Catalogue

Plate 19. Jewellery.

149

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 20. Vessels I.

150

The Catalogue

Plate 21. Vessels II.

151

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 22. Tiles I.

152

The Catalogue

Plate 23. Tiles II: with back projections.

153

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 24. Tiles III: with reed pattern.

154

The Catalogue

Plate 25. Tiles IV: plain.

155

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

Plate 26. Tiles V: plain.

156

The Catalogue

Plate 27. Tiles VI: plain.

157

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt B. The Deposit Pottery (707-955) The following divisions can be made (see the following table): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Offering Stands(707-747) Bowls (748-767) Beer Jars (768-791) Model Vessels (792-834) Libation Vases (835-930) Miscellaneous (931-955)

Designations: Running Number (bold face: line drawing present) – Object Designation – Findnumber – Height – Diameter of rim – Diameter of base – Wall thickness – Clay material1 – Technique2 – Base3 – Hardness – Surface colour4 – Surface type – Form description – Condition Notes to individual Catalogue numbers: #708. Cf. Cairo JdE 44246 #726. Cf. Williams 1986: 76-78 & 102/103 (Figure 46-47) / Plate 23-24 and Bourriau 1981: 62 (no. 112) #831. Cf. Quibell / Green 1902: Plate XXXV, 12a-b #923. Cf. UC 17351; Petrie 1902: Plate VI, 10 (Tomb of Djer) and Sowada 1999 #943. Index 187 (Bietak 1992: 29-37)

1  The clays are described according to the Vienna System, see Arnold/ Bourriau 1993: 168-186 2  H 1=entirely handmade; H 2=handmade except the rim, which is made on the wheel; W 1= made on the slow wheel 3  H=Handmade, W=wheelmade 4  According to the Munsell Soil Color Charts

158

object

 

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

#

 

707

708

709

710

711

712

713

714

715

716

159

717

718

719

720

721

722

723

724

A140/190/60/7

A140/190/60/6

A140/190/60/5

A140/190/60/4

A140/190/60/3

A140/190/60/2

A140/190/60/14

A140/190/60/13

A140/190/60/12

A140/190/60/11

A140/190/60/10

A140/190/60/1

A140/190/151

A140/190/13/24

A130/190/61/12

A130/190/61/11

A130/190/61/1

A140/190/96/1

1. Offering Stands

findnumber

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

>1/2

>1/2

>1/2

>1/2

1/2

1/2

complete

complete

>1/2

complete

complete

preserved

25.5

24.4

17.5

64.5

14.4

28.0

14.5

43.7

23.3

25.7

21.5

40.5

34.9

38.7

52.0

51.0

H

13.1

42.0

40.0

 

 

 

24.0

25.5

13.4

22.0

15.5

22.7

26.0

25.0

14.5

17.0

Ø rim

1.4

2.0

   

1.6

2.6

2.3

1.3

1.2

1.6

1.0

1.3

1.0

1.2

 

29.0

12.5

22.0

18.0

13.7

10.0

14.5

11.7

13.8

1.6

1.6

  20.5

0.35

0.4

wall

18.0

21.5

Ø base

IB2

IC

IB2

IC

IB2

IB2

IC

IB1

IB1

IB2

IB1

IB2

IB1

IB2

IB1

IC

material

H2

H2

H1

H1

H2

H2

H2

H2

H2

W1

W1

H2

H2

H2

H1

W1

technique

 

 

 

 

 

 

hard

soft

hard

soft

medium

hard

medium

medium

 

 

medium

 

medium

medium

   

medium

medium

hard

medium

medium

hardness

 

 

 

 

 

base

10 YR 6/3

7.5 YR 6/3

2.5 YR 6/4

2.5 YR 5/6

2.5 YR 6/8

2.5 YR 6/8

5 YR 5/6

10 YR 7/3

7.5 YR 6/4

5 YR 7/4

5 YR 6/6

10 YR 7/3

7.5 YR 6/4

7.5 YR 8/2

5 YR 6/6

10 R 6/6

surface

slip

wash

slip

slip

natural

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

type

two holes

 

 

several rectangular holes

two oval holes

three triangular holes, painted eye

outcurving base

two triangular holes, outcurving

irregular

irregular

ringstand, outcurving rims

two rectangular holes, flat rim

two trapezoid holes

two trapezoid holes

two crocodiles as applications

two oval holes

form

flaking

 

crusts

 

stains

scratches

worn, crusts

eroded

crusts, stains

crusts

eroded

crusts

crusts, cracks

 

crusts, cracks

 

condition

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

object

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

stand

 

bowl

bowl

bowl

bowl

bowl

bowl

bowl

bowl

bowl

bowl

#

741

742

743

744

745

746

747

 

748

749

161

750

751

752

753

754

755

756

757

A130/190/82/69

A130/190/82/68

A130/190/70/296

A130/190/61/5

A130/190/61/4

A130/190/61/3

A130/190/18

A130/190/61/2

A130/190/41

A130/190/1

2. Bowls

A140/1190/101

A140/190/98/5B

A140/190/98/3

A140/190/96/35

A140/190/175A

A140/190/100/1

A140/190/138/20

findnumber

>1/2

complete

1/2

 

rim

>1/2

complete

rim

>1/2

>1/2

complete

preserved

16.2

15.8

15.9

6.8

6.4

9.3

6.1

11.8

6.3

7.6

 

4.3

10.9

44.0

9.3

48.9

40.4

30.0

H

20.0

 

25.0

8.5

7.5

5.6

  24.4

6.0

5.6

6.0

0.8

0.9

1.4

0.9

0.7

0.8

0.3

1.1

  3.8

0.8

0.7

 

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.4

1.5

2.2

1.1

wall

9.5

 

20.0

24.0

25.0

11.7

33.3

22.8

24.2

 

18.7

   

14.5

15.2

14.0

22.0

 

25.3

24.0

16.4

Ø base

 

11.3

Ø rim

IB2

IB2

IB1

IA

IB1

IA

IA

IB1

IB1

IB1

 

IB2

IB2

IB2

IB1

IB2

IC

IB2

material

H1

H2

W1

W1

W1

H2

W1

W1

W1

W1

 

H2

H2

H2

H2

H2

H2

H2

technique

scraped

H

W

W

scraped

H

H

 

scraped

W

 

 

 

 

 

 

medium

medium

hard

hard

medium

hard

medium

hard

medium

soft

 

medium

medium

medium

medium

medium

hard

medium

   

hardness

base

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

5 YR 6/3

10 R 5/6

5 YR 5/6

10 R 5/6

5 YR 6/4

10 R 5/2

2.5 YR 5/6

2.5/YR 5/6

 

10 R 5/6

7.5 YR 5/4

7.5 YR 8/2

2.5 YR 6/6

2.5 YR 6/6

7.5 YR 6/4

5 YR 6/6

surface

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

natural

slip

slip

slip

 

natural

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

slip

type

see #756

sloping rim, flat base (see #757)

outcurving rim

 

flat base

outcurving rim, flat bottom

 

irregular rim

flaring rim, round base

round base

 

 

outcurving rims

two triangular holes, flat rim

 

three holes above four others

irregular, scraped

two triangular holes

form

stains

crusts, stains

 

crusts, stains

crusts, stains

crusts, stains

 

stains

stains

salt crystals

 

 

stains

crusts, cracks

worn, stains

eroded

stains

eroded

condition

The Catalogue

beer jar

beer jar

beer jar

beer jar

beer jar

beer jar

771

772

773

774

775

bowl

766

770

bowl

765

beer jar

bowl

764

769

bowl

763

beer jar

bowl

762

768

bowl

761

 

bowl

760

 

bowl

759

bowl

bowl

758

767

object

#

162

A140/190/132/3

A140/190/132/2

A140/190/132/1

A130/190/61/9

A130/`90/61/8

A130/190/61/7

A130/190/61/6

A130/190/53

3. Beer jars

A140/190/98/20

A140/190/96/4

A140/190/96/39

A140/190/96/26

A140/190/96/18

A140/190/96/12

A140/190/61/22

A140/190/61/17

A140/190/232

A140/190/83/115B

findnumber

>1/2

base

rim & base

base

1/2

complete

>1/2

>1/2

>1/2

>1/2

complete

complete

complete

1/2

>1/2

preserved

32.1

36.0

31.8

18.4

22.9

16.2

24.0

26.5

27.9

27.0

28.0

21.4

15.7

29.7

23.7

27.6

22.5

19.2

H

 

7.1

8.0

7.3

 

 

 

 

5.2

5.1

 

5.2

5.3

5.5

 

 

4.7

5.6

 

3.9

7.5

 

  5.8

 

7.4

   

5.0

6.7

4.7

4.7

Ø base

 

 

 

 

Ø rim

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.7

1.1

0.8

0.7

0.8

1.1

0.5

0.8

3.0

1.1

0.8

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.0

wall

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB2

IB1

IB2

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

material

W1

W1

H2

H2

W1

W1

H2

W1

W1

W1

H2

W1

W1

W1

W1

H2

W1

W1

technique

 

H

H

H

 

 

H

H

H

H

H

H

 

 

H

H

H

H

base

hard

hard

hard

medium

hard

hard

hard

hard

hard

hard

hard

medium

hard

hard

hard

medium

hard

medium

hardness

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

2.5 YR 5/2

5 YR 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/8

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/8

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

surface

polish

polish

polish

slip

polish

slip

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

slip

slip

polish

polish

slip

polish

slip

type

carinated with marks

slim, carinated

carinated

irregular, carinated, wide rim/base

round shoulder

high shoulder, scrape marks

high shoulder, scrape marks

wide base

carinated, wide base

high, carinated shoulder

carinated, convex base, scraped

low, carinated shoulder

carinated

carinated

 

 

wide mouth

 

form

eroded, stains

worn, stains

eroded, stains

eroded

worn

eroded

eroded

eroded

eroded, stains

worn, stains

eroded, stains

eroded

eroded

eroded

eroded

 

worn

eroded

condition

The Catalogue

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

877

878

879

880

881

vase

871

876

vase

870

vase

vase

869

875

vase

868

vase

vase

867

874

vase

866

vase

vase

865

873

vase

864

vase

vase

863

872

object

#

168

A140/190/189

A140/190/147

A140/190/141/17

A140/190/175B

A140/190/161

A140/190/141/14

A140/190/138/9

A140/190/138/8

A140/190/138/7

A140/190/138/6

A140/190/138/5

A140/190/138/38

A140/190/138/44

A140/190/138/43

A140/190/138/42

A140/190/138/41

A140/190/138/4

A140/190/138/36

A140/190/138/35

findnumber

base

>1/2

complete

1/2

complete

complete

complete

complete

>1/2

complete

>1/2

body

>1/2

>1/2

1/2

complete

complete

preserved

9.4

30.3

26.5

15.0

22.5

26.7

26.4

30.3

24.0

20.5

27.9

22.9

13.4

29.8

29.2

13.8

27.9

24.6

30.2

H

 

6.2

6.0

 

0.8

1.1

2.0

0.5

  4.6

0.7

0.9

1.0

0.7

0.7

0.8

0.5

 

5.3

3.3

4.7

4.7

 

6.1

6.4

4.9

6.6

 

7.0

6.1

5.0

4.0

5.1

  6.2

1.2

 

6.9 0.9

0.9

1.2

  5.5

5.5

7.8

0.8

1.0

0.5

0.6

wall

 

5.2

   

3.5

4.0

Ø base

6.0

7.6

Ø rim

IA

IB1

IB1

IA

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IA

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

material

W1

W1

W2

W1

W1

W1

W1

W1

H2

W1

H2

W1

W1

W1

W1

H2

W1

W1

W1

technique

H

H

H

 

 

H

H

H

H

 

cut off

H

 

H

 

 

H

H

H

base

very hard

very hard

hard

hard

hard

hard

medium

hard

hard

hard

hard

hard

hard

hard

hard

medium

hard

medium

hard

hardness

5 YR 3/1

7.5 YR 5/6

2.5 YR 4/4

10 R 5/4

2.5 YR 5/6

2.5 YR 6/8

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 4/8

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

2.5 YR 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

surface

polish

polish

polish

slip

polish

polish

slip

polish

polish

polish

slip

polish

polish

polish

polish

slip

polish

polish

polish

type

 

 

 

round shoulder

 

crusts, stains

stains

worn

crusts, stains

stains

   

eroded, stains

worn

worn, stains

 

eroded, stains

eroded

stains

worn

eroded

eroded

eroded, stains

eroded, stains

worn, stains

condition

 

round shoulder

irregular, blacktopped

round shoulder

irregular, carinated

round shoulder

 

 

carinated; large rim

carinated

 

carinated

carinated

form

Temple Deposits in Early Dynastic Egypt

object

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

#

882

883

884

885

886

887

888

889

890

891

892

169

893

894

895

896

897

898

899

A140/190/96/14

A140/190/61/7

A140/190/61/5

A140/190/61/4

A140/190/61/3

A140/190/61/26

A140/190/61/24

A140/190/61/23

A140/190/61/21A

A140/190/61/19

A140/190/61/18

A140/190/61/16A

A140/190/61/15

A140/190/61/14A

A140/190/61/12

A140/190/61/11

A140/190/61/10

A140/190/193

findnumber

1/2

>1/2

>1/2

complete

>1/2

complete

base

>1/2

>1/2

1/2

1/2

complete

preserved

16.6

22.9

29.4

22.8

20.3

25.5

21.7

21.1

31.2

11.4

21.6

23.4

21.7

15.0

24.2

23.2

20.2

22.0

H

3.2

 

 

 

 

3.8

3.9

4.3

4.8

5.1

   

5.2

4.2

4.0

3.9

 

7.0

5.5

7.0

4.7

5.3

 

 

 

13.2

  3.3

4.0

4.5

 

4.3

Ø base

 

8.0

6.2

4.9

Ø rim

0.9

0.6

0.5

1.0

1.5

0.8

0.7

0.9

1.2

1.4

0.6

0.9

1.3

0.5

0.9

1.0

1.2

0.7

wall

IA

IB1

IB1

IB2

IB1

IB2

IB1

IB2

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB1

IB2

IB1

IB2

IB1

IB1

IB1

material

W1

W1

H2

W1

W1

H2

H2

H2

W1

H2

H2

H2

W1

W1

H2

W1

W1

H2

technique

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

 

H

H

H

 

H

base

hard

hard

hard

hard

medium

medium

hard

10 R 5/4

2.5 YR 5/6

10 R 4/6

10 R 5/8

2.5 YR 6/6

2.5 YR 6/4

10 R 5/6

2.5 YR 5/6

10 R 5/8

hard medium

10 R 4/6

10 R 5/8

2.5 YR 5/6

5 YR 6/4

2.5 YR 4/6

10 R 5/6

2.5 YR 5/6

2.5 YR 5/6

7.5 YR 6/2

surface

hard

hard

hard

medium

hard

hard

hard

hard

medium

hardness

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

slip

polish

polish

polish

polish

slip

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

slip

type

carinated

round shoulder

carinated, outcurving rim

 

round shoulder

 

wide mouth

wide mouth

 

 

carinated

round shoulder

round shoulder

low shoulder

 

outcurving rim, round shoulder

wide mouth

 

form

 

stains

 

eroded, stains

eroded

worn, crusts

eroded, stains

eroded

worn, stains

worn

worn

eroded

eroded

worn

worn

 

eroded

 

condition

The Catalogue

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

vase

914

915

916

917

918

vase

908

913

vase

907

vase

vase

906

912

vase

905

vase

vase

904

911

vase

903

vase

vase

902

910

vase

901

vase

vase

900

909

object

#

170

A140/190/96/42

A140/190/96/41

A140/190/96/38

A140/190/96/37

A140/190/96/36

A140/190/96/34

A 140/190/96/32

A140/190/96/31

A140/190/96/3

A140/190/96/29

A140/190/96/28

A140/190/96/27

A140/190/96/25

A140/190/96/24

A140/190/96/22

A140/190/96/21

A140/190/96/20

A140/190/96/2

A140/190/96/15

findnumber

>1/2

complete

>1/2

1/2

complete

>1/2

1/2

complete

complete

base

complete

complete

1/2

>1/2

 

complete

base

base

1/2

base

>1/2

complete

complete

>1/2

complete

preserved

25.5

61.5

10.4

44.4

 

20.7

14.1

20.1

20.4

31.3

21.9

9.8

18.0

24.0

23.9

30.4

24.4

H

8.1

22.5

7.9

 

 

0.8 1.1 1.0

   

2.2

 

1.0

1.1

0.9

1.2

1.0

1.0

 

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.6

wall

 

5.7

 

5.0

3.5

  5.6

5.6

4.5

 

 

6.5

8.0

  6.8

2.8

 

4.7

4.6

4.8

5.0

Ø base

 

7.2

7.5

7.0

7.4

5.2

Ø rim

IB2

II A 1

IB1

IC

 

IA

IB1

IA

IB1

IB1

IA

IB2

IA

IB2

IA

IB1

IA

material

H2

W1

W1

H1

 

W1

W1

W1

W1

W1

W1

W1

W1

W1

W1

W1

W1

technique

 

H

 

H

 

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

 

H

H

H

H

base

hard

very hard

medium

soft

 

hard

medium

hard

hard

hard

hard

medium

hard

hard

hard

hard

hard

hardness

2.5 YR 6/4

5 YR 5/3

2.5 YR 5/4

10 R6/6

 

10 R 5/6

10 R 5/6

2.5 YR 5/6

10 R 5/6

2.5 YR 5/6

10 R 5/6

2.5 YR 6/6

10 R 5/6

2.5 YR 6/6

10 R 5/8

10 R 5/8

10 R 5/6

surface

slip

slip

slip

slip

 

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

polish

type

beer jar? Scrape marks

large ovoid, outcurving rim

drop-shaped

tall jar, flat bottom, scrape marks

 

slightly carinated

 

narrow base

carinated

high shoulder, carinated

wide mouth

narrow, massive base

outcurving rim; black-topped

ovoid, wide mouth

wide mouth, low neck

carinated

outcurving rim

form

crusts

crusts, stains

worn

 

 

worn, stains

worn, stains

worn

 

worn, stains

worn

worn

 

 

stains

eroded, stains

worn

condition

The Catalogue

lid

lamp

bucket

vessel

949

950

951

cup

943

948

cup

942

mould

Plate

941

947

Plate

940

basin

jar

939

946

jar

938

juglet

jar

937

945

jar

936

vase

jar

935

944

object

#

172

A140/190/300

A140/190/98/23

A140/190/5

A140/190/29

A 140/190/260

A130/190/70/297

A130/190/61/14

A140/190/138/15

A130/190/2

A130/190/8

A140/190/138/3

A130/190/70/298

A140/190/59

A140/190/58

A140/190/34/1

A140/190/269

A140/190/154

findnumber

>1/2

1/2

>1/2

>1/2

>1/2

1/2

>1/2

>1/2