Upload
carla-gallorini
View
48
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 1/11
ORIENTALIA LOVANIENSIA
ANALECTA
---150---
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
NINTH INTERNATIONAL
CONGRESS OF EGYPTOLOGISTS
ACTES DU NEUVIEME CONGRES
INTERNATIONAL DES EGYPTOLOGUES
Grenoble, 6-12 septembre 2004
Volume I& II
EDITED BY / EDITES PAR
Jean-Claude GOYON et Christine CARDIN
UITGEVERIJ PEETERS en DEPARTEMENT OOSTERSE STUDIES
LEUVEN - PARIS - DUDLEY, MA
2007
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 2/11
12.2
LATE PERIOD AND PTOLEMAIC POTTERY FROM THE WORK OF
THE SAQQARA GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY PROJECT
CARLA GALLORINI
University of Birmingham
Recent work of the Saqqara Geophysical Survey Project has focused on two dis-
tinct areas North and South of the Serapeum. In both areas magnetometer readings
had detected mud brick structures provisionally identified as platforms for temples and
associated buildings 1. To test the accuracy of the magnetometer readings and to clarify
the nature of these structures test excavations were carried out in 2001 in the area South
of the Serapeum (near the so called L-shaped enclosure) and in 2003 in the area North
of the Serapeum, at Temple Site 1.
The ceramic material recovered from these test squares is discussed below with
a particular emphasis on its chronological implications, in view of the fact that thepottery offers the only evidence for dating the structures, as no inscriptions and very
few objects were discovered from the excavation.
The LS structures to the South of the Serapeum appear on the gradiometer survey
map as large rectangular structures, closely packed together in a line, with indica-
tion of entrances on the north walls, facing toward an approach route to the Serapeum
from the East. Test excavations were carried out on the entrances and north walls of
three of these structures, namely LS1 and LS5 (the two larger buildings) and LS4, the
narrow one squeezed between LS3 and LS5.
The survey showed that for all three structures the entrance consisted of a staircase
giving access to a raised platform. In the case of LS4 the state of preservation was
excellent and a fine limestone staircase set into a mud brick ramp was uncovered, while
in LS1 and LS5 only the mud brick ramp was still in place. In both LS4 and LS1 a pair
of roughly symmetrically disposed pedestals stood on either side at the bottom of the
staircase. The platforms were not excavated, but from what could be seen they were cre-
ated by solid enclosure walls filled with sand and rubble. These structures are clearly
not funerary, and they were most probably used as bases for temples and associated
buildings as is the case for example in the Sacred Animal Necropolis at North Saqqara.
Of the three LS structures, LS5 is the least well preserved. The archaeology lay very
close to the surface and it had been extensively destroyed by robbers recycling building
I For a detailed description of the work undertaken by the Saqqara Geophysical Survey Project see
the contributions by Ian Matthieson and Dan Lines, p. 1137-1149 in this volume.
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 3/11
790 C. GALLORINI
material. Comparatively little pottery was recovered from this structure: the loose
sand surrounding the buildings was unusually clean, with only a few diagnostics among
the weathered body-sherds. However, at least in one case, the pottery came from a
context closely associated with the architectural remains.
The amphora rim 1084 (fig. la) was found in the foundation trench into which the
2 bottom courses of the platform enclosure wall were inserted (context n. 124). Thefabric is coarse, the surface fired a light greenish grey (2.5Y 7/2 light gray) and has
a wide very pale brown (10 YR 8/4) core framed by light reddish brown edges (5YR
6/4). The numerous inclusions comprise fine to coarse limestone, medium coarse sand
and fine to coarse red brown to black particles. Shells might also be present, but with
only a lOx hand lens the identification is not certain. Although the shape is similar
to the type of Levantine storage jars presented by Sagona in his group 62, the fabric
is different and can be identified with Aston's fabric K63• The best parallel I could
find for this vessel both in shape and fabric comes from Elephantine, from one of the
houses in Phase V. This phase, which corresponds to P. French's third phase of Late
Dynastic pottery, is dated by Aston to between ca. 550-ca. 400 BC, although this par-
ticular vessel was given a slightly wider range, between the 7th and the yh centuries BC4•
The rest ofthe diagnostics shown in Fig. la come from loose sand. Vessel n° 1085is a well known type in Late Period sites: it is a fairly large bowl with a folded rim
that has also been shaped to create a deep ridge under the true rim. It rarely survives
complete, but when it does it always shows an intentional pre-firing hole in the cen-
tre of the base. At Buto this type of vessel occurs in the two most recent phases in
the stratigraphical sequence, the so called Kiln Phase provisionally dated ca. to the
first half of the 6thcentury BC and the so called Cache Phase again provisionally
dated to the second half of the 6th century BC5. Parallels to the two small dishes
n° 1095 and 1066, can be found close by in the Sacred Animal Necropolis" and also
in the pottery excavated by the Egyptian Antiquities Organization at the south side
of the Unas causeway. This pottery was originally dated by P. French to the first half
of the 4thcentury BC on the basis of the supposed date of the demotic hand in an
inscription found with the pottery from Cache II in the tomb of Horemheb and also
of the dating of some shabtis found in the burial in Chamber C of the tomb of Paser".
2 A.G. Sagona, «Levantine Storage jars of the 13th to the 4thcentury Be», Opuscula Atheniensia 14
(1982), p. 80-82.
3 D.A. Aston, Elephantine XIX. Pottery from the Late New Kingdom to the Early Ptolemaic Period
(Mainz am Rhein, 1999), p. 8.
4 lbid., p. 232.
5 P. French, «Phase dating at Buto in the Third Intermediate and Late Dynastic Periods», MDAIK 59
(2003), p. 219-21.
6 P. French, personal communication.
7 P. French and H. Ghaly, «Pottery chiefly of the Late Dynastic Period, from Excavations by the
Egyptian Antiquities Organization at Saqqara, 1987», CCE 2 (1991), p. 93-123.
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 4/11
LATE PERIOD AND PTOLEMAIC POTTERY FROM THE SAQQARA SURVEY 791
1084
LSS: context 12 4
~ .. - ..". .
1046
108S
Fig. la. Selected diagnostics from LS5.
~1053
rl ~063
LS1:Ptolemaicpotlery
~1106
r=r-~"'Y043
1101
1071
~1017
1095
~1066
~1051
t~~ P["-1044 I
I ~ ~1047 1079
~~lOll 10~
1082
"n71062
1038
1093
1112
Fig. lb. Selected diagnostics from LSI.
~1065
~
~1072
Fig. lc. Selected diagnostics from LS4.
P. French has revised the date of this assemblage in two recent articles inMDAIK 49
and CCE 7 where, drawing from his own work on the pottery from Buto, the
work by Oren at Migdol (site T 21) in North Sinai and the pottery from the tomb of
Udjahorresnet at Abusir, he proposes a new date for the third phase of late dynastic
pottery in the second half of the 6th century Be.
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 5/11
792 C. GALLORINI
No Ptolemaic pottery was retrieved from LSS. So a late Saite-Persian date for the
pottery from LSS is called for and possibly for the foundation and main use of the
building.
LS 1 is the easternmost of the seven LS structures and the largest. Ptolemaic pot-
tery was found between the mud brick rubble from the collapse of the enclosure wall
of the platform. Parallels for the casserole n? 1063 in fig. l b (dense Nile clay,uncoated, surface fired reddish brown, 2.S YR 4/3, and the fracture is red, 2.S YR 4/6.
Fine to coarse sand is the dominant inclusion, but there is also a scattering of unde-
composed fine and coarse limestone) have been found at Naucratis where they are
dated to the 3rd century BC8 and Mendes, with a similar date". As for the bowl with
incurved rim and flat base n? 1046 (Nile B2, uncoated)!" a very good parallel can be
found in house D at Elephantine, dated by Aston to the late 3rd/early 2nd century BCII.
The rest of the material from LS1 comes from the loose sand and is constituted
mainly by open forms in Nile clays. Small plates and dishes are very frequent (fig. 1b
n? 10S3, 1017, 10S2 and lOS1) and many of them show black staining on the inte-
rior and on the rim. The staining is similar to the blackening found on torches and
suggests the possibility that these vessels were used either as lamps or for incense
offerings. Only one example (n? lOS2) shows traces of mummification material adher-ing to the exterior, as is often the case for this type of vessel in contemporary Late
Dynastic deposits at Saqqara, but no examples of jars containing such material were
found. Carinated dishes in Nile B2 with red slip are also common, both with round
and ring base. Two other very common types are the so-called «gold fish bowls» type
n° 1047 and the «barrel jar» type 1082. Lamps and torches are also very frequent and
fragments of them were found in almost every context. Closed forms are rare
and very fragmentary: we had the upper part and non-joining base of a shouldered,
slender jar (n° 1101) with short, direct rim in Nile clay (limestone tempered Nile B2,
uncoated), and two rims in Marl A4, one from a small jar or juglet (n° 10S4) and
one from a larger jar with flaring, modelled rim (n? 1081). The only import is the
rim of an Aegean amphora (type n° 1038)12 in a fine, light clay; the surface fired
pale yellow (2.SY 8/2), and the fracture is an uniform reddish yellow (SYR 6/6).
Inclusions consist of fine mica, fine quartz and fine to coarse decomposed limestone.
8 W.O.E. Coulson, Ancient Naukratis. Volume 1/, Part I: The Survey at Naukratis (Oxford, 1996),
p. 32-3.
9 R. Hummel and S.B. Shubert, «Ceramic analysis» in O.B. Redford, Excavations at Mendes. Vol-
ume I. The Royal Necropolis (Leiden and Boston, 2004), p. 143, pIs. 0 and E.
10 When possible pottery fabrics are classified according to the Vienna System as set out in O. Arnold
and J. Bourriau, An Introduction to Ancient Egyptian Pottery (Mainz am Rhein, 1993).
IIO.A. Aston, Elephantine XIX. Pottery from the Late New Kingdom to the Early Ptolemaic Period
(Mainz am Rhein, 1999), p. 340.
12 The example shown in fig. lb comes from a different location (LS4 South extension), but the fab-
ric and rim shape are identical to the piece discussed here.
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 6/11
LATE PERIOD AND PTOLEMAIC POTTERY FROM THE SAQQARA SURVEY 793
This type of amphorae with mushroom-shaped rim has been linked to various centres
of production (Rhodes, Samos, Naxos, Paros and more recently Knidos) but chrono-
logically it appears to be restricted to the late 5th- 4th century BCi3 .
As for the dating of the whole assemblage, again the best parallels for all the types
is to be found in the pottery excavated by the Egyptian Antiquities Organization at
the south side of the Unas causeway and also the ceramic material associated withLate Period burials found by the French mission working in the sector of the
Akhethetep mastaba at Saqqara. The bulk of this material, as said above, can be now
dated to the second half of the 6th century BC, although most of the open forms shown
here have a longer life span, well into the 5th century BC14• To sum up, the bulk of
pottery from LS 1 is datable to the late Saite and Persian period. Ptolemaic pottery is
rare, but its presence in the rubble from the collapse of the platform wall suggests that
by the late 3rd- 2nd century BC LS1 had been abandoned.
LS4 is the best preserved of the three structures, the fine limestone staircase was
still in place and shows very little sign of wear. It is also much narrower than the other
structures and it seems to have been squeezed between LS3 and LS5. These facts
prompted the excavators to suggest that the structure could be of a later date than the
others. If we tum to the pottery for confirmation, we see that the bulk of the mater-ial retrieved from the loose sand in LS4 is very similar to the material from the loose
sand in LSI, but with the addition of a few types (see fig. lc). Some of them are
clearly Ptolemaic, comprising a dish with rolled rim and ring base, a dish with incurved
rim and a small carinated bowl with flat base and direct rim, all datable to the 3rd cen-
tury BC on the basis of parallels from Athribis'", Balamun'" and Elephantine!", but
also shapes with a longer life span like small lids or bowls with incurved rim. A ves-
sel worth of special mention is n° 1071: a bowl with direct out-turned rim, tall flar-
ing neck and ring base. It is made of a sandy Nile clay, identical to the one used for
the Ptolemaic casserole (n? 1063). And in fact the vessel must have been used as a
cooking pot or exposed to fire because the exterior was completely blackened by
smoke. In term of shape the best parallel is to be found in a vessel found at Tell el-
Muqdam in a closed context dated by the presence of two Attic black-glazed lekythoi
13 V.R. Grace, «Sarnian Amphoras», Hesperia 40 (1971), 52-95; S.Iu. Monakhov, E.la. Rogov,
«Amphoras of the Panskoe I Necropolis [Amfory necropoli a Panskoe I]», AMA 9 (1990), p. 139-40,
pl. 6 n° 38-41; S. Iu. Monakhov, «Toward a Typology of Knidian amphoras of the 4th- 2nd century BC
[K tipologii knidskikh amfor IV-II vv. Do n.e.]», The Bosporan Phenomenon: Greek Culture on the
Periphery of the Ancient World [Bosporskii fenomenon: grecheskaia kul'tura na periferi antichnoglo
mira] (St. Petersburg, 1999) p. 171-72.
14 C. Defemez, La Ceramique d'Epoque Perse a Tell el-Herr, CRIPEL sup. 5 (Lille, 2001).
15 K. Mysliwiec, «Remains of a Ptolemaic villa at Athribis», MDAIK 44 (1988), p. 183-97.
16 A.J. Spencer, Excavations at Tell el-Balamun 1991-1994 (London, 1996), p. 67-74, pl. 51.
17 D.A. Aston, Elephantine XIX. Pottery from the Late New Kingdom to the Early Ptolemaic Period
(Mainz am Rhein, 1999), p. 331, pl. 111 n° 2928.
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 7/11
794 c.GALLOR1N1
to the second half of the 5th century BCI8. However the fabric of our vessel and the
very sharp edges of the rim and base, point to a later date for our example, possibly
in the early Ptolemaic.
On the geophysical plot of LS4 an anomaly appears in the southeast corner of the
structure and in 2001 a square was open to investigate its nature (LS4, South Extension).
It was discovered to be a shaft, 2.9 m deep, cut in to the bedrock and containinga large amount of damaged pottery: 8 complete vessels, another 12 damaged but the
complete profile could be reconstructed and then fragments of at least other 60 vessels.
The bulk is constituted again by open forms usually in Nile clay: small plates with
flat base (fig. 2, n? 1017 and 1018), carinated dishes with round base (n° 1002, 1008,
1036), bowls with incurved rim and flat or ring base (n° 1027+1037, 1023), «gold-
fish bowls» (n" 1030) and cooking pots with opposite handles (n° 1005). Closed
forms in marl clay are also well attested: symmetrical jars with direct, tall rim and
flat, short foot (n? 1004); ajar with two opposite vertical handles, folded rim, tall neck
and ring base (n" 1042), and jugs and juglets of various size (n? 1022); we also have
one large storage jar in Nile C with folded rim and applied «decoration» (n? 1073),
an Egyptian copy of a very well known type of Levantine amphora (n° 1041), the rim
of an Aegean amphora (no. 1038), and an endless number of torches (n? 1024)19. The dating of this material is crucial to the history of LS4 because it must have been
deposited in the shaft prior or during the construction of the platform, as the shaft was
sealed by the normal rubble fill of the platform itself. The open forms can be broadly
dated to Peter French's third phase of Late Dynastic pottery. Good parallels for the
cooking pot n? 1005 and the large jar 1073 were found at Migdol in North Sinai dated
to the second half of the 6th century. Jug 1022 has is best dated parallel at Tell el-
Muqdam in the context discussed above and dated to the second half of the 5thcen-
tury BC. Jar n? 1042 has parallels at Heboua and Tell el Herr in contexts dated to the
Persian period. The sherd that bears the latest date is the rim of Aegean amphora, that
bring us down to the late 5th- 4thcentury BC2o.Therefore LS4 must have been built
during or just after that date.
We shall move on now to the ceramic material from the sondage at Temple Site 1.
The structure belongs again to a series of mud brick buildings set in a line but this time
oriented southward, roughly toward the Serapeum. The test excavation revealed a mud
brick enclosure, up to 1.6 m in height, and filled with rubble to create a platform.
18 C.A. Redmount, R.F. Friedman, «Tales of a Delta Site: the 1995 Field Season at Tell el-Muqdam»,
fARCE 34 (1997), p. 64, fig. 9a.
19 During the discussion that followed the lecture a colleague pointed out the similarity in shape
between the torch illustrated here and the toe of an amphora. To avoid any misunderstanding I want to
point out that the example illustrated here has a true, folded rim, very well preserved, and that the fabric
is the local sandy variant of Nile B2.
20 See footnote 13.
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 8/11
LATE PERIOD AND PTOLEMAIC POTIERY FROM THE SAQQARA SURVEY 795
~1017
~1018
t:LJ. __ .
1002
~-I;Z;1008
~-
1036
(]J-
1004
1022
£: i~P1038
~1027+1037
~-kI023
~ . 1 - - - - - . - ~ - 91005
~1026
."1042
r,. - 1 - ~030
C D025
1024
) )1073 . .. .. .
I
-0I
1041
Fig. 2. Selected diagnostics from LS4 South Extension.
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 9/11
796 C. GALLORINI
The access ramp, part of the facade, including the south-east comer, and the entrance
on top of the platform were investigated.
In all c. 1600 sherds were unearthed, half of which were too small and eroded to be
positively identified. The majority of pottery comes from the clean sand ubiquitous
on site (context 500) and from context 502, a highly contaminated surface stratum of
sand mixed with decayed mud-brick. Overall the number of complete vessels recoveredwas minimal and the bulk of the material consists of fragmented sherds. Moreover
potentially interesting contexts, like the original fill of the temple platform, were
remarkably uninformative, with few, very small and eroded diagnostics and many
badly eroded sherds. It all contributes to a general feeling of residual debris rather than
one of association with the architectural structure.
Of the vessels found in the clean sand five deserve special mention. The small
bowl 2031 (Nile B2, traces of cream slip inside and outside, base cut with string) in
fig. 3 was found upside down in the sand, level with 2nd course of brickwork down
from top of the adjacent part of wall 503 and bowl 2032 (Nile B2, uncoated, base
cut with string and post-firing mark applied on the exterior, just below the rim) was
found in an almost identical position on the other side of the ramp, four courses of
brick down from the top of the wall 506. In this same comer but lower down in thesand, bowl n" 2033 and the small dish 2030 were found. The other dish, n" 2039, was
found close to the platform enclosure wall near to its foundation and it is the only one
to show traces of incense offerings. Of the five vessels, n° 2033 is the only one that
can be closely dated as an identical vessel was found at Tell el-Muqdam in a closed
context dated by the presence of two Attic black-glazed lekythoi to the second half
of the 5th century BC21.
The rest of the ceramic material from the sand is mainly utilitarian in nature. Open
forms are by far the most common, usually in a sandy Nile clay and with red slip.
There are small plates with thickened rim and flat base (fig. 3, n? 2094, 2052), small
and medium-size carinated dishes with round base (n° 2111), carinated bowls with
flat base and incurved bowls with ring base (2076). Most of these shapes have a
long life span, covering both Late and the Ptolemaic Period, but the sandiness of the
fabric and the use of red slip fit better a Ptolemaic date. Ptolemaic cooking pots and
casseroles are also common (n? 2010, 2091, 2077, 2104), and so are torches (n° 2113
and 2042). Small and medium-sized jars and jugs in marl clay are rare (2040), and
the bulk of the closed shapes is constituted by amphorae, both Egyptian and imports
(from the Levant, n° 2067, and the Aegean, n° 2093).
A clue on when the temple ceased to be used is offered by context 546, a cluster
of pottery just east of the main cross wall of the temple platform, The pottery was
damaged by the collapse of the wall, but it was possible to reconstruct the complete
21 See footnote 13.
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 10/11
LATE PERIOD AND PTOLEMAIC POTTERY FROM THE SAQQARA SURVEY 797
(J:2?2031
2033
w-
2032
~2030
~2039
Temp l e Si te 1 . c om ple te v es se ls fo un d u ps id e d ow n in c le ar s an d
2010
I2091
~ - . ~ C - I t2067
c::]2::J2094
~~20S2
2111
I . . •2104
2093
- 0 -
2055
t - I - . ~2068
2071 OJ)2070
Temple Sitel : selected diagnostics f rom content 546
w -
-
2113
TIl -_~
- . 3 ?" = l J
2042n · · _ I _ _
2061
I2096
2038
v····...} J. . : ~ '.._ _ .. -
.
2076
WFig. 3. Selected diagnostics from Temple Site 1.
2101
5/17/2018 Late Period and Ptolemaic Pottery From the Work of the SGSP - slidepdf.com
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/late-period-and-ptolemaic-pottery-from-the-work-of-the-sgsp 11/11
798 C. GALLORINI
profile of most vessels. The assemblage consists of at least 3 Egyptian amphorae, all
of the same type (2055), with folded rim, tall cylindrical neck and a set of two oppo-
site, vertical handles. Parallels from Buto (and I have to thank here Janine Bourriau
who has seen the amphorae and confirmed the identification) suggest a date between
the end of the 3rd and the middle of the 2nd century Be22• In the same context we also
found cups and bowls of various shapes, a cooking pot and two jars, all datable tothe same chronological phase.
Bearing in mind what has been said above on the fragmentary nature of the pot-
tery, and its lack of clear association with the structure, the datable, diagnostic ceramic
material suggests a life span for Temple Site 1 ranging from the late 5thcentury Be
to the middle of the Ptolemaic period.
To sum up: on the basis of the pottery evidence the LS structures south ofthe Ser-
apeum can be dated broadly to the period from the late 6th to the 4thcentury Be. They
were possibly built in different stages, LS5 being the oldest and LS4 the most recent.
It is not possible to establish when the structures ceased to be used, but by the end
of the 3rd century Be the supporting wall of at least one of the platforms was in ruin.
As we have just seen the pottery assemblage from Temple Site 1 suggests a slightly
later date with a much higher concentration of early to mid-Ptolemaic pottery. It is alsoworth mentioning that with the exclusion of a few Old Kingdom sherds, no recog-
nizable pottery from any other period of Egyptian history was found.
22 For a preliminary report on the amphorae from Buto see J. Bourriau, «Egyptian Amphorae of the
2nd - 1SI Century B.C. from the Excavations 1996-1999», MDAIK 59 (2003), p. 254-63.