Statues and a Canopic Jar of the Late Period in Swansea

This blog post is written by Carolyn Harries and Shirley Jones, two Egypt Centre volunteers.

We seem to have arrived at the ninth week of our course on The History of Egypt very rapidly. Each week has been more interesting and more enjoyable than the last. The opportunity to handle and examine the artefacts and to relate them to the various eras of ancient Egypt and to the historical evidence supplied by Ken has been quite extraordinary. Shirley Jones and I have combined forces and are writing this blog together.

This week Ken presented us with five artefacts for the handling session all from the Late Period (c. 664–332 BC). The first object we examined was a lovely copper alloy standing statue (W85) of the god Osiris (fig. 1). The statue dates from the Twenty-sixth Dynasty and was purchased from the Robert de Rustafjaell 1906 collection (lot 309). As to provenance, there is no information regarding where it was originally found. In the Egypt Centre the statue has pride of place in our Gods case in the House of Life gallery. Both Shirley and I have admired this piece in situ in the gallery, but it was a real pleasure to hold the object and to examine it closely. It is very well moulded with some attention to detail, the beard is particularly fine and one can see the plaiting quite clearly. It may originally had glass or crystal eyes. His traditional pose wearing the Atef-crown and carrying the crook and flail make it easy for the children from the school parties to identify this statue as Osiris when they are taking part in the ’Hunting the Gods of Egypt’ activity.

Fig. 1: Statue of Osiris (W85)

This was a votive statue given as an offering to the god. The cult of Osiris gained strength in the Twenty-sixth Dynasty and many such offerings were made at this time (Coulon 2010). The inscription on the base of the statue identifies the giver as Ankh-khonsu, an official in the temple of Amun. The inscription is quite difficult to read, but it would appear that this official was associated with the storehouse of gold in the temple of Amun, most likely at Karnak (fig. 2).

Fig. 2: Inscription on the statue of Osiris (W85)

The second seemed unprepossessing at first glance but turned out to be really interesting. It is a fragment of a shabti (W161) made from steatite, with an inscription telling us that it belonged to the Chief Lector Priest, Padiamenope (fig. 3). It was purchased by Sir Henry Wellcome at auction in 1924 (lot 224). There are many shabti fragments belonging to this man in various museums throughout the world, which date to the turn of the Twenty-fifth–Twenty-sixth Dynasty (Gundlach 2013). Padiamenope’s tomb (TT 33), where the shabti would have originated from, has the distinction of being the largest non-royal tomb in Egypt, yet no one really knows why he was able to have such an amazing monument. Don’t you just love a mystery? Unfortunately, the tomb is not open to the public as yet. It has been known for over two hundred years but was home to a large colony of bats and the build-up of ammonia has made it difficult to excavate. Permission was given to a French Epigraphic Mission to reopen the tomb in 2005 and work has concentrated on cleaning, restoration, and conservation.

Fig. 3: Shabti of Padiamenope (W161)

We moved on to examine an artefact that is well-known to all volunteers; the lovely alabaster canopic jar (W498) in the Mummification case in the House of Death (fig. 4). Although we thought we knew it so well, it had a surprise for us. This canopic jar can be dated to the Twenty-sixth Dynasty. This jar has the human head commonly associated with Imsety, one of the four sons of Horus who were the protectors of the body’s internal organs and who aided the deceased to travel into the afterlife (Dodson 1994; Reisner 1967). However, despite having the head of Imsety the inscription on the jar actually refers to Qebehsenuef who would normally have had the head of a falcon. Does this mean that the wrong two pieces may have been put together, perhaps to sell to a collector? We do know that during this period in Egypt’s history all four canopic jars quite often had human heads. However, as the inscription refers specifically to Qebehsenuef, it does look like the head and the jar are two separate pieces. Nevertheless, this does not detract from the enjoyment of seeing such a beautiful specimen and indeed the school parties always find this artefact one of the most appealing. Of course, they are usually hoping that it is full of some poor ancient Egyptians’ innards!

Fig. 4: Canopic jar of Psamtek (W498)

The canopic jar was purchased by Sir Henry Wellcome at Sotheby’s on 13 November 1928 (lot 221), from the collection of Charles James Tabor (1849–1928). We were able, with Ken’s help, to read a small part of the two lines of inscription on the jar and this led to yet another mystery (fig. 5). The jar was owned by Psamtek son of Iahweben and is a very important piece. We know something of Psamtek from several stelae but no burial equipment, other than this jar, has come to light so far (Gohary 2009; Jurman 2010). The stelae identify the day and year of his birth (19th Nov 610 BC), the day and year of his death (31st Aug 544 BC), and his burial date (1st Oct 544 BC). This means that Psamtek was buried very quickly after he died and indeed the stelae even record the length of time he spent in the embalming tent as thirty-two days. Why was so little time given to his embalming? We are generally advised that the full embalming process took up to seventy days so why would this be different for poor Psamtek? It would be extremely interesting to find out!

Fig. 5: Inscription on the canopic jar (W498)

Our fourth artefact, also from the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, was the limestone statue of a seated priest (W921), which resides in the House of Life gallery (fig. 6). The inscription identifies the owner as Iba, a priest of Sopdu who was a solar god associated the sun rising in the east. The inscription goes on to link Sopdu with the god Horus, describing the owner Iba as ‘priest of the Horus of the East’, which was an epithet of Sopdu (Leahy 1990). This statue is important because it is one of the few pieces from Saft el-Henna in the Nile Delta, which was the primary cult centre for the worship of Sopdu. The statue was purchased in 1922 from the collection of the Reverend William MacGregor (lot 1627). It is very beautiful piece and we admired the calm and contemplative expression on the priest’s face as he gazes into eternity. One always wonders whether such statues were genuine likenesses of their owners. Whether or not this is the case, clearly the sculptors had given them a lifelike quality. Did they have life models as artists do today, or did they copy them from other statues? Who knows!

Fig. 6: Statue of Iba (W921)

The final object was another statue (W1163), much smaller this time but quite charming (fig. 7). It is made of faience and depicts Sekhmet and her son Nefertum, possibly dating to the Twenty-sixth Dynasty. The statue normally resides in the Gods case in the House of Death gallery. The female figure appears slightly taller than the male figure and as the female’s head is damaged it was difficult for us to identify the pair. In fact, we were rather surprised that the female figure appeared taller than the male. However, the back support contains a beautifully carved inscription with prayers to Sekhmet and her son Nefertum. Everything becomes clear when you can read the hieroglyphs. The inscribed prayers are for wellbeing, for “all life, health, and joy”. When in place in its cabinet, the rear of the statue is reflected in a mirror to allow the viewer to see the inscription and to read it if they are able to do so. One can imagine the members of an ancient Egyptian household kneeling before this lovely little shrine and seeking the blessings of these gods and goddesses. Ptah, Sekhmet, and Nefertum are associated with the ancient capital Memphis and are commonly known as the Memphis Triad.

Fig. 7: Faience statue of Sekhmet and Nefertum (W1163)

One of the best things about the course has been discovering the significance and importance of the objects in the care of the Museum. We volunteers are now better able to help visitors to appreciate the culture and history of ancient Egypt. Many thanks to Ken for giving us this opportunity!

Bibliography:

Anonymous (1924) A catalogue of curios consisting of old savage ceremonial masks, fetishes, idols, witch-doctors’ rattles, stone axes, etc., from all parts of the world. Unique Elizabethan medical charm stone. Weapons, grandfather clocks, embroideries and hangings, oil paintings, prints, china, models of boats, old medical works. Collection of ancient carved stone heads from Central India. ancient Roman and Egyptian curiosities. Which will be sold at Stevens’s auction rooms Ltd. At their great rooms, ... on Tuesday, July 22nd 1924. London: Riddle, Smith, & Duffus.

Coulon, L. ed. (2010) Le culte d’Osiris au 1er millénaire av. J.-C.: découvertes et travaux récents. Actes de la table ronde internationale tenue à Lyon, Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée (Université Lumière-Lyon 2) les 8 et 9 juillet 2005. Bibliothèque d’étude 153. Institut français d’archéologie orientale.

Dodson, A. (1994) The canopic equipment of kings of Egypt. Studies in Egyptology. London: Kegan Paul International.

Gohary, S. (2009) ‘New evidence on the duration of mummification’. In Die ihr vorbeigehen werdet … Wenn Gräber, Tempel und Statuen sprechen: Gedenkschrift für Prof. Dr. Sayed Tawfik Ahmed, ed. U. Rössler-Köhler and T. Tawfik. Sonderschrift, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Abteilung Kairo 16. Berlin; New York: de Gruyter. 103–104.

Gundlach, M. (2013) Typology and artisanship in Twenty-fifth Dynasty Theban shabtis: The chief lector priest Pedamenope. PhD thesis, Swansea University.

Jurman, C. (2010) ‘Running with Apis: the Memphite Apis cult as a point of reference for social and religious practice in Late Period elite culture’. In Egypt in transition: social and religious development of Egypt in the first millennium BCE. Proceedings of an international conference, Prague, September 1–4, 2009, ed. L. Bareš, F. Coppens and K. Smoláriková. Prague: Czech Institute of Egyptology, Charles University in Prague. 224–267.

Leahy, A. (1990) ‘A Late Period block statuette from Saft el-Henna’. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 76: 194–196.

Reisner, G. A. (1967) Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du musée du Caire, Nos 4001–4740 and 4977–5033: Canopics. Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale.

Sotheby, Wilkinson, & Hodge. (1906) Catalogue of the collection of Egyptian antiquities, formed in Egypt by R. De Rustafjaell, which will be sold by auction by Messrs. Sotheby, Wilkinson and Hodge...19th December, 1906 and two following days... London: Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge.

Sotheby, Wilkinson, & Hodge. (1922) Catalogue of the MacGregor Collection of Egyptian Antiquities. London: Davy.

Sotheby & Co. (1928) Catalogue of antiquities, etc., comprising the collection of Prehistoric implements, the property of Miss Carey, Egyptian, Greek and Roman antiquities, etc., comprising the collection of the late C.J. Tabor, the property of Princess Ghika, the property of Mrs O. Gregory, the property of Mrs A. Belcher, the property of Mrs de Burley Wood, the property of W. Kennett, and other properties, including Indian and South American objects; which will be sold by auction by Sotheby and Co. ... on Monday, the 12th of November, 1928, and following day. London: Sotheby & Co.

The Third Intermediate Period in Swansea

The blog post for this week is written by Dr. Krys Williams, a former student at Swansea University, Egypt Centre volunteer, and director of Tehuti Knowledge Services Ltd.

The Third Intermediate Period saw competing dynasties, two being of Libyan origin, priests becoming pharaohs, significant power vested in women (God’s Wife of Amun, Divine Adoratrice) and numerous local potentates. The Kushite kings emerged from Nubia to conquer and rule Egypt as the Twenty-fifth Dynasty. Ken selected six fabulous objects from this confusing yet fascinating period for us to examine.

My favourite, EC2018, is a fragment of a symbolic faience palette from the Twenty-fourth Dynasty, which bears the sole known image of Djehuty-em-hat (Thoth-em-hat) of Hermopolis (fig. 1). He is named on only three other objects (Moje, 2013, 402–404). His cartouche and clothing show that he took the status of pharaoh. He worships ibis-headed Thoth on behalf of his scribe, Pay-ef-tjaw-ꜥawy-Iset, who stands behind. I like the triple coincidence of Thoth addressed here as patron of Hermopolis, while also being patron of Pay-ef-tjaw-ꜥawy-Iset and all scribes and patron of Djehuty-em-hat, whose name means “Thoth is in front”. Shen rings surround the two inkwells, for black and red ink. The shen is often explained as protecting the scribe, but it also symbolises eternity, so could be interpreted as conferring eternity on the ink, and thus on the writings of the scribe and the names therein. Troy Sagrillo, Senior Lecturer in Egyptology at Swansea University, discussed EC2018 at the Egypt Centre’s Wonderful Things conference and has published a detailed exposition of the palette and its historical context (Sagrillo, 2017). 

Fig. 1: Model scribal palette (EC2018)

We examined two shabtis from the Twenty-second Dynasty. W1315 (fig. 2) is female and the uraeus shows the owner was a royal woman of the highest rank. It was initially identified as belonging to Divine Adoratrice Karomama. However, while still an undergraduate in 2002, Ken, who is able to distinguish hieroglyphs where us lesser mortals can only see blobs and smudges, recognised a mr sign in the name. Consequently, the shabti must have belonged to Divine Adoratrice Qedmerut, who is known only from her shabtis (Griffin 2017). The shabtis of Qednerut were featured in a previous blog post by Ken.

Fig. 2: Shabti of Qedmerut (W1315)

Shabti W660 (fig. 3) comes from Tehneh (Akoris) and is male. Despite having been broken and repaired, its decoration remains clear. The owner was Ankhwennefer, Priest of Amun, Overseer of the City, and Vizier. Of his 380 shabtis (Aston, 2009, p. 112; Gauthier 1926), this is possibly the only one in a collection outside Egypt. Aston (2009) notes that the use of the 𓊩 hieroglyph for Osiris is rarely seen after about 750 BC, while the green glaze of Ankhwennefer’s shabtis is unknown before about 850 BC, which enables a reasonably accurate dating.

Fig. 3: Shabti of Ankhwenefer (W660)

A cartonnage piece (W944) from the Twenty-second Dynasty shows what Kákosy (1976) called a pair of cryptographic daemons, identified as Wadjet and Nekhbet (fig. 4). The cryptographic element comes from them jointly forming the epithet nb.tj (Two Ladies), which forms part of the royal titulary. Kákosy suggested this could represent the average Egyptian’s aspiration to be a king in the hereafter. His identification is supported by the fact that the red dress of Wadjet is the colour of her territory of Lower Egypt and Nekhbet’s white dress is that of Upper Egypt, her domain. The image of Wadjet with lion head surmounted by a snake emphasises the close identification made by Egyptians between lion-headed goddesses with the epithet Daughter of Re, the uraeus and Wadjet.

Fig. 4: Cartonnage depicting Wadjet and Nekhbet (W944)

The provenance of coffin fragment W1052 (fig. 5), from the Twenty-first Dynasty, is unknown, but the yellow background is typical of Thebes. The text refers to a “lady of the house and Chantress of Amun”, yet the deceased is depicted as a man. The low quality, but naïvely charming, cartoon-like artwork suggests it was produced late in the dynasty (Niwiński, 1988, 87). Coffins were frequently mass produced then, with blanks for the name, and many were re-used due to wood being expensive (Niwiński, 1988, 54–55). Perhaps the chantress’ image was erased and replaced by a male usurper but her name was overlooked, or perhaps her titles were copied onto a mass-produced coffin of incorrect gender by a workshop assistant, who lacked the literacy to recognise they were female. In this period, the title of chantress was not confined to highest-ranking women, but was also given to many wives of minor officials (Onstine, 2005, 36). The low quality artwork would indicate the deceased came from this lesser elite.

Fig. 5: Coffin fragment (W1052)

Finally, another “lady of the house” appears on wooden stela W354 from the Twenty-fifth/Twenty-sixth Dynasties (fig. 6). The worn text defeated me, but Ken said it names Djed-(Khon)su-(iwes)-ankh, daughter of Djedmontuiwefankh, Prophet of Montu. The falcon-headed god with solar disk and uraeus is presumably Re. Ken suggested he is followed by Imsety, Hapi and Qebehsenuef, since the latter two have heads of a baboon and hawk, respectively. If so, the absence of Duamutef, the fourth Son of Horus, is intriguing.

Fig. 6: Wooden stela (W354)

Many thanks to Ken for sacrificing his evenings to give us this amazing opportunity to learn so much through handling objects from the Egypt Centre!

Bibliography:

Aston, D. (2009). Burial assemblages of dynasty 21–25: Chronology - typology – developments (Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 14; Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern Mediterranean 21). Vienna; Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Gauthier, H. (1926). Note sur les statuettes funéraires trouvées dans les tombes de Tehneh. Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 26, pp. 41–43.

Griffin, K. (2017). The ushabtis of the Divine Adoratrice Qedmerut. In De la mère du roi à l’épouse du dieu. Première synthèse des résultats de la fouille du temple de Touy et de la tombe de Karomama – Von der Königsmutter zur Gottesgemahlin. Erste Synthese der Ausgrabungsergebnisse des Tempels von Tuja und des Grabes von Karomama, ed. B. Lurson. Connaissance de l’Egypte Ancienne 18. Brussels: Safran. Pp. 145–155.

Kákosy, L. (1976). Un couple des démons cryptographique. Studia Aegyptiaca 2, pp. 177–180.

Moje, J. (2013). Herrschaftsräume und Herrschaftswissen ägyptischer Lokalregenten: Soziokulturelle Interaktionen zur Machtkonsolidierung vom 8. bis zum 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr (Berlin Studies of the Ancient World 21). Berlin; de Gruyter.

Niwiński, A. (1988). 21st dynasty coffins from Thebes. Chronological and typological studies (Theben 5). Mainz am Rhein; von Zabern.

Onstine, S.L. (2005). The role of the chantress (šm^cyt) in ancient Egypt. (BAR International Series 1401). Oxford; Archaeopress.

Sagrillo, T. (2017). King Djeḥuty-em-ḥat in Swansea: Three model scribal palettes in the collection of the Egypt Centre of Swansea University in C. Jurman, B. Bader, & D. A. Aston (eds) A true scribe of Abydos: Essays on first millennium Egypt in honour of Anthony Leahy (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 265), pp. 385–414 Leuven; Peeters.

Amarna in Swansea: A Statue, Stela, Broad Collar, and Ring Bezels

The blog post for this week is written by Dr Dulcie Engel, former French university lecturer, regular volunteer with an interest in collecting and collectors, and a previous contributor to this blog.

The Amarna Period covers a period in the Eighteenth Dynasty of the New Kingdom from the reign of Amenhotep IV, who became Akhenaten (1353–36 BCE), to that of his son Tutankhaten/Tutankhamun (d.1324 BCE). Akhenaten famously rejected the old religion and the power of the priests of Amun, transferring the capital to Akhetaten (Tell el-Amarna), and worship to the Aten (sun disc). Some suggest this was the first manifestation of monotheism (Hoffmeier 2015). The old religion was later restored by Tutankhamun. This break with the past is also evident in the art of the period. We find depictions of busy scenes and figures with exaggerated features: elongated faces, fingers, and toes, almond-shaped eyes, large hips, rounded breasts and bellies. However, the most famous surviving artwork from Amarna does not show such extreme exaggeration: the Nefertiti bust, now in Berlin.

Fig. 1: Statue of Akhenaten carrying an offering tray (W154)

The five objects we handled this evening are just a few of the 300 plus items from Amarna in the Egypt Centre. W154 is a fragment from a sandstone statue of Akhenaten carrying an offering tray (fig. 1). Such statues are relatively common. Our fragment shows three of his fingers, and on the other side, part of the offering tray (Bosse-Griffiths 2001, 131–134). According to the Egypt Exploration Society (EES) object card, it was excavated at Amarna on 23 December 1931 and later given to Sir Henry Wellcome as part of the distribution of finds (Pendlebury 1951, 102).

Fig. 2: Ring bezel with the name of Akhenaten (VAD29)

VAD29 is a turquoise blue faience ring bezel with the name of Akhenaten (fig. 2). The shoulder of the ring is also preserved on one side. It seems that such rings were distributed by the pharaohs, possibly as a sign of royal protection, or on special occasions such as coronations. They have been found in royal tombs, the houses of commoners, and the workmen’s village (Shannon 1987; Shaw 1984). Ring bezels with cartouches were introduced by Akhenaten’s father Amenhotep III and remained popular until the end of the New Kingdom.

Fig. 3: Lute player bezel (W1150)

We also handled W1150, a part of a dark blue faience ring bezel depicting a female lute player with a monkey (fig. 3). The detail is exquisite, given its tiny size, and can only be appreciated with a magnifying glass. That is one reason why having the opportunity to see such objects outside the case is so valuable! The figure has a rounded belly, typical of Amarna style. The lute player is naked and has a cone on her head. It is a youthful and sexualised depiction. Furthermore, the monkey is a symbol of female sexuality as well as of music and dance (Bosse-Griffiths 2001 165–173; Graves-Brown 2014). In this period, the lute had only recently been introduced to Egypt. This particular bezel was found in a house in the Northern City area of Amarna.

Fig. 4: Small fragment of an Amarna stela (W242)

W242 is a small fragment of a private devotional stela carved from sandstone, depicting three columns of the Aten’s titulary, the cartouches of the Aten, and, in one corner, the rays of the Aten (fig. 4). It was purchased at auction in 1930 (lot 77), but the exact provenance is unknown. It may have come from the excavations directed by Petrie in the 1890s, or perhaps even the EES excavations in the 1920s. What is most exciting is that W242 appears to fit together with a larger fragment of a stela in Berlin (ÄM 14511). The Berlin piece depicts Akhenaten and Nefertiti worshipping the Aten (fig. 5). Further research on this object is currently ongoing by Ken, who is preparing it for publication!

Possible joining fragments (ÄM 14511 & W242)

Despite that, my favourite object remains W10, one of four collars said to have come from the royal tombs at Amarna (fig. 6). We know they were acquired by Lady Berens in the 1880s, shortly after a rich tomb was pillaged in Amarna. They were later purchased by Sir Henry Wellcome in 1924 (lots 66–69). This provenance is, however, questionable. The collars, which show great workmanship, appear to have had wealthy owners, and feature amulets and beads associated more with females (such as the fish, the female deities, and the nasturtium seeds on W10). The terminals are missing on all four collars: possibly cut off to be sold separately? Many of the beads and amulets are in the style of the Eighteenth Dynasty, and in particular, linked with Amarna.

Fig. 6: Amarna collar (W10)

Furthermore, the thread is of linen, rather than the cotton more commonly used by forgers. We will probably never know whether they are genuine or not, although it may be possible to test and date the thread. The collars remain some of our most popular exhibits: and indeed W9 was voted as one of the Highlights of the collection. It was therefore a great privilege for me to get up so close to one of these iconic pieces. The beads on this necklace are mainly made from faience, with faience amulets/pendants. The central one is a heart amulet, flanked in sequence on each side by a squatting child (probably the Pharaoh); a female deity holding a lotus staff; a light green bulla (a drop-shaped amulet; missing on one side); and a fish carved from lapis lazuli. The rest of the pendants on the outer layer are alternating yellow and brown rosettes; at each end is a green thistle head/cornflower (one is quite damaged). There is a partial row of blue nasturtium seed beads in the middle row, ending with a red glass bead. Tiny beads woven together in alternating colours make up the inner and outer rows, known as bead bands, with a net-like pattern of tubular beads joining each row together (Bosse-Griffiths 2001, 27–30).

You will be pleased to hear that Ken’s next course starting in the New Year will be on the Amarna Period!

Bibliography:

Bosse-Griffiths, K. (2001) ‘Baboon and maid’. In Amarna studies and other selected papers, ed. J. G. Griffiths. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 182. Freiburg; Göttingen: Universitätsverlag; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. 165–173.

Bosse-Griffiths, K. (2001) ‘Bead collars with Amarna amulets in the Wellcome Collection of the University College, Swansea’. In Amarna Studies and other Selected Papers, ed. J. G. Griffiths. Freiburg (Schweiz); Göttingen: Universitätsverlag; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. 27–30.

Bosse-Griffiths, K. (2001) ‘Incense for the Aten’. In Amarna Studies and other Selected Papers, ed. J. G. Griffiths. Freiburg (Schweiz); Göttingen: Universitätsverlag; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. 131–134.

Graves-Brown, C. (2014) ‘A gazelle, a lute player and Bes: three ring bezels from Amarna’. In A good scribe and an exceedingly wise man: studies in honour of W. J. Tait, ed. A. M. Dodson, J. J. Johnston and W. Monkhouse. GHP Egyptology 21. London: Golden House Publications. 113–126.

Hoffmeier, J. K. (2015) Akhenaten and the origins of monotheism. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

Kemp, B. J. (2013) The City of Akhenaten and Nefertiti: Amarna and Its People. London: Thames & Hudson.

Pendlebury, J. D. S. (1951) The City of Akhenaten. Part III: The Central City and the Official Quarters. The Excavations at Tell el-Amarna during the Season 1926–1927 and 1931–1936. 2 vols. Excavation Memoirs 44. London: Egypt Exploration Society.

Shannon, E. (1987) ‘Bezels with royal names from the Workmen’s Village 1979–1986’. In Amarna reports IV, ed. B. J. Kemp. Egypt Exploration Society, Occasional Publications 5. London: Egypt Exploration Society. 154–159.

Shaw, I. (1984) ‘Ring bezels at el-Amarna’. In Amarna reports I, ed. B. J. Kemp. Egypt Exploration Society, Occasional Publications 1. London: Egypt Exploration Society. 124–132.

Sotheby and Co. (1930) Catalogue of antiquities, etc., comprising early bronze implements, the property of Edward Dent and the property of Monsieur de la Grancière, Babylonian inscribed bricks, the property of Colonel W.J.P. Rodd, Egyptian and classical antiquities and fine Roman glass, the property of the late G.E. Smyth, and the property of C. Milman Mainwaring, an important Roman couch, the property of Signor Massimo Colozzi ...; which will be sold by auction by Sotheby and Co. ... on Wednesday, the 23rd day of July, 1930. London: Sotheby and Co.

Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge. (1924) Catalogue of Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek & Roman antiquities, &c.: comprising the collection formed by H. Griebert, Esq. of Berkeley House, Finchley Road, N.W.; including Egyptian amulets, and figures in pottery, silver and bronze; Greek vases, etc.; the property of Mrs. J. Waugh; the property of Sir Henry Paul Harvey, K.C.M.G.; the Berens collection of Babylonian tablets, the property of Mrs. Randolph Berens, of 14, Princes Gardens, S.W.; a fine Græco-Roman marble head of Heracles from the collection of the late Carl Brownlow at Ashbridge, and other properties, including Roman bronze work, Peruvians and Græco-Phœnician gold ornaments, etc.; which will be sold by auction by Messrs. Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge ... on Thursday, the 28th of February, 1924. London: Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge.

A Princess, a Vizier, and a Criminal: New Kingdom Objects in Swansea

The blog post for this week is written by Teresa Davison, a retired teacher and Egypt Centre volunteer. Like Peter Black who wrote the blog post of the First Intermediate Period, she is one of the last students to benefit from the DACE Higher Level Certificate in Education in Egyptology, taught by Dr. Amr Gaber.

I have really enjoyed the course so far. The weekly lectures have given an interesting context to the handling sessions. Being able to examine objects of great antiquity has not only been a huge privilege, but also helps us to focus on the societal themes and changes covered each week (fig. 1). This week we studied the New Kingdom, where we looked at empowered strong women like Hatshepsut who reigned during a time of great prosperity. However, as will be seen later, an element of drama, almost “soap-opera like”, crept in to our studies. Hatshepsut claimed royal birth in order to legitimise her role as Pharaoh. Was she then assassinated by Thutmose III? From this time period we examined a limestone relief depicting Neferure (W1376) and a sandstone fragment from the Henqet-ankh temple of Thutmose III (W1371), both of which have previously featured on this blog.

Fig. 1: Peter Black, Keith Shoebridge, and Teresa Davison examining W1371

We looked at W1326, which is a limestone stela dated to the Ramesside Period. It is possibly from Deir el-Medina and forms part of the 1906 Robert de Rustafjaell collection (lot 75). It is a stela depicting a chantress playing a sistrum before an image of Thoth as a baboon (fig. 2). This was a lovely piece and they were often kept in domestic shrines (Weiss 2015). I particularly liked the way the folds on her dress were depicted with simple but elegant lines (Bosse-Griffiths 2001). The skilled workmen may have practised on such pieces.

Fig. 2: Stela depicting a sistrum player before Thoth (W1326)

W957 is a Nineteenth Dynasty limestone offering stand from Deir el-Medina, which was purchased in 1907 from the Robert de Rustafjaell collection (lot 79). It contains the name and titles of Paneb, who was a chief workman at Deir el-Medina (Lucas 1998; fig. 3). Back to the soap opera, Paneb was a notorious character. He was accused of many bad deeds, including sexual assault and adultery (Bierbrier 1977–1978; Bierbrier 2000; Černý 1929). He was also accused of bribery, embezzlement, and misuse of labour. He is alleged to have stolen many items. He ordered his workers to steal stone from the worksite of Seti II to build his own personal tomb! Perhaps W957 was part of that stolen stone? His workers had to make him a bed and his wives were told to weave clothing for him. He was also a tomb raider e.g., he stole a mummified or model goose from the tomb of one of the daughters of Ramesses II. His character was described as angry, emotional, and unstable. An example of this was when he beat up his workmen and threw bricks at people from the top of a wall! He was also accused of drunkenness and murder. Not a pleasant man!

Fig. 3: Offering stand of Paneb (W957)

W232 is a faience statue base also dating to the Nineteenth Dynasty. Its provenance is unknown, although we do know that it was purchased in 1922 from the Reverend William MacGregor collection (lot 1550). The statue base (fig. 4) provides the names and titles of Paser, who was a vizier during the reigns of Seti I and Ramesses I (Donohue 1988). Paser, by contrast to Paneb, seems most respectable with one of his roles as the chief chamberlain, a role of great authority and status. The small piece that we looked at was stained, maybe oil had been poured over it for purification. The small statue that accompanied it has not yet been identified.

Fig. 4: Statue base of the vizier Paser (W232)

Bibliography:

Bierbrier, M. L. (1977–1978) ‘Notes on Deir el-Medina, II: the career of Paneb’. Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 8, 4: 138–140.

——— (2000) ‘Paneb rehabilitated?’. In Deir el-Medina in the third millennium AD: a tribute to Jac. J. Janssen, ed. R. J. Demarée and A. Egberts. Egyptologische Uitgaven 14. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten. 51–54.

Bosse-Griffiths, K. (2001) ‘Baboon and maid’. In Amarna studies and other selected papers, ed. J. G. Griffiths. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 182. Freiburg; Göttingen: Universitätsverlag; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. 165–173.

Černý, J. (1929) ‘Papyrus Salt 124 (Brit. Mus. 10055)’. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 15: 243–258.

Donohue, V. A. (1988) ‘The vizier Paser’. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 74: 103–123.

Lucas, G. (1998) ‘Four Egyptian pieces in the Wellcome Collection at Swansea, I’. Göttinger Miszellen 167: 83–87.

Sotheby, Wilkinson, & Hodge. (1906) Catalogue of the collection of Egyptian antiquities, formed in Egypt by R. De Rustafjaell, which will be sold by auction by Messrs. Sotheby, Wilkinson and Hodge...19th December, 1906 and two following days... London: Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge.

——— (1907) Catalogue of a collection of antiquities from Egypt, ... being the second portion of the collection of Robert de Rustafjaell, esq. F.R.G.S, which will be sold by auction, ... on Monday, the 9th of December, 1907, and the following day. London: Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge.

——— (1922) Catalogue of the MacGregor Collection of Egyptian Antiquities. London: Davy.

Weiss, L. (2015) Religious practice at Deir el-Medina. Egyptologische Uitgaven 29. Leuven: Peeters. 

Socked Axes, Sphinxes, and Tell el-Yahudiyeh Ware: The Second Intermediate Period in Swansea

The blog post for this week is written by Sarah Farooque, a first year undergraduate student of Egyptology at Swansea University.

As an undergraduate student of Egyptology at Swansea, I was really excited when presented with the chance to attend this Egypt Centre course. It’s amazing to handle artefacts and learn about them in detail, especially as I start my studies. This week we looked at the Second Intermediate Period, which came about after the collapse of the Middle Kingdom (Marée 2010).

My favourite object from this week was the copper alloy socked axe (W505). The axe was introduced by the Hyksos, a group of foreign rulers in Egypt during the Fifteenth Dynasty. This axe was used for piercing armour, yet for something so small it had a lot of weight (fig. 1)! We even discussed how the cranium damage on the mummy of Seqenenre Tao matches the axe and one just like this could’ve been used against him (Shaw 2009).

Fig. 1: Socked axe (W505)

One of my favourite things to look at is pottery and this week Ken introduced us to a type of vessel from the Second Intermediate Period called Tell el-Yahudiyeh Ware (Aston & Bietak 2012). This type of pottery is characterised by its distinctive decoration created by repeatedly “pricking” the surface of the vessel. W1289 was really intricate and beautiful (fig. 2). This type of pottery was introduced to Egypt during the Hyksos Period. It has been suggested that the decoration on these vessels resembles the poppy flower. We learned that there are tomb scenes illustrating servant girls pouring liquid from similar looking jars into drinks—there is debate on whether this was opium (Aston & Bietak 2012, 557–8, 621–4; Koschel 1996; Merrillees 1962; )! It is fascinating how much we can learn about Egyptian culture from such a small piece.

Fig. 2: Tell el-Yahudiyeh juglet (W1289)

The objects handled so far were quite common to this period. However, this changed when we examined two resin casts of sphinxes (EC299a & EC299b). An unidentified king, in the form of the sphinx, is depicted holding the head of a captive (fig. 3). It turns out these casts are of a very famous and popular piece, which can be seen at the British Museum (BM EA 54678). The original was found in tomb 477 at Abydos by John Garstang in 1908 (Garstang 1928). As it was so unusual, many collectors and museums wanted a copy of it for themselves, which is why the Egypt Centre ended up with two. Therefore, our sphinxes are only around 100 years old. Its popularity was also down to the piece being dated to the Fifteenth Dynasty and believed to be depicting a Hyksos ruler. However, recent research identifies this object as a belonging to the early Twelfth Dynasty, perhaps to the reign of Senwosret I!

Fig. 3: Resin sphinx (EC299a)

Back to the Second Intermediate Period, our next object was a limestone stela (EC7). While we don’t know exactly where it was found, it seems to belong to the owner of another stela formerly in Liverpool (13.12.05.25) that was excavated at Esna (Donohue 2009). The stela depicts a deceased couple and family members, with an offering formula above (fig. 4). The images are crammed together, which is typical of Second Intermediate Period art where the quality declines again, much like in the First Intermediate Period (Franke & Marée 2013).

Fig. 4: Stela of Ibi-ia (EC7)

Our last object was a headless statue depicting an unknown deity (identified as such due to the ankh she is holding) made of siltstone (fig. 5). W848 could be a modern fake due to the holes at the bottom and at the top where a head may have been stuck back on. The most fascinating part of this statue is the symbol on the side of the throne. This imagery is of the papyrus and lotus entwined, the so-called sema-tawy scene, which was symbolic of the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt.

Fig. 5: Statue (W484)

I would like to thank both Ken and the Egypt Centre for running this course. I have been fortunate enough to learn so much and I can’t wait for next week!

Bibliography:

Aston, D. and M. Bietak (2012) Tell el-Dabʻa VIII: the classification and chronology of Tell el-Yahudiya ware. Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 66; Untersuchungen der Zweigstelle Kairo des Österreichischen Archäologischen Institutes 12. Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Donohue, V. A. (2009) ‘A Latopolitan family of the Late Middle Kingdom’. In Sitting beside Lepsius: Studies in honour of Jaromir Malek at the Griffith Institute, ed. D. Magee, J. Bourriau and S. Quirke. Orientalia Lovaniensia analecta 185. Leuven: Peeters. 115–128.

Franke, D. and M. Marée (2013) Egyptian stelae in the British Museum from the 13th–17th Dynasties. Volume I, Fascicule 1: Descriptions. London: British Museum.

Garstang, J. (1928) ‘An ivory sphinx from Abydos (British Museum, no. 54678)’. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 14: 46–47.

Koschel, K. (1996) ‘Opium alkaloids in a Cypriote base ring I vessel (Bilbil) of the Middle Bronze Age from Egypt’. Ägypten und Levante: Internationale Zeitschrift für ägyptische Archäologie und deren Nachbargebiete 6: 159–166.

Marée, M. ed. (2010) The Second intermediate period (thirteenth-seventeenth dynasties): current research, future prospects. Orientalia Lovaniensia analecta 192. Leuven; Walpole, MA: Peeters.

Merrillees, R. S. (1962) ‘Opium trade in the Bronze Age Levant’. Antiquity: Quarterly Review of Archaeology 36: 287–292.

Shaw, G. J. (2009) ‘The death of king Seqenenre Tao’. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 45: 159–176.

Statues and Tomb Models of the Middle Kingdom

The blog post for this week is written by Molly Osborne, a previous contributor who is an Undergraduate student and Egypt Centre volunteer.

My first handling session was during a module in my second year, where I wrote a research project about an object in the House of Life. Ever since, I have loved learning about the stories of the artefacts in the Egypt Centre. This week, we were learning about the history and civilisation of the Middle Kingdom, with six objects from that time period selected. During the session I found out that almost all the objects were stone statues or statuettes. The Middle Kingdom was known to be one of the great glory periods of Egyptian history, a classical period of literature and art, as can be seen from the objects chosen this week. We could see that there was a standardised style of artwork on most of the objects we handled.

Fig. 1: Statue of a man (W845)

The first objects I handled were two broken heads from statuettes, which are made of steatite. One of them (W845) depicts a figure of a man with his hand underneath his cloak, who may have originally been seated or standing (fig. 1). As this figure may have been seated, I think this man was most probably a high official or worked as a scribe. The other (W842) is identified as a female figure because of the “Hathor wig”, which is a typical style of the period (fig. 2).

W.842: Statue of a woman (W845)

The heaviest object was a huge plaster cast replica of a statue in the British Museum (BM EA 24385), which depicts the Royal Scribe and Chancellor, Senebtyty (W1012). He is shown (fig. 3) wearing a piece of clothing that looks a bit like a towel, a dress which is typical of the Middle Kingdom (Robins 1997, fig 128). There are hieroglyphs on the base and on the back pillar, which were also common on many Egyptian statues. An interesting thing I learnt was that if Henry Wellcome was not able to buy an object, he bought or commissioned replicas like this one.

Fig. 3: Cast of a statue of Senebtyfy (W1012)

W847 is a siltstone, funerary statue of an unknown couple (fig. 4), which perhaps comes from the tombs at Aswan. This statue may depict and belong to the person who was buried, with the deceased being either the man or the woman. Unfortunately, there is no inscription on the object, so we do not know who this object depicts. The standardised artwork mentioned previously is noticeable on all the objects I have mentioned so far. They all have big ears and a slight smile, which was typical of the late Middle Kingdom. The wide eyes look like the archaic style of ancient Greece, which was copied from the Egyptians. W847 and W1012 also have huge hands and feet, which are not in proportion with the rest of the body.

Fig. 4: Pair statue (W847)

There were two objects which were not made of stone. One was a wooden tomb model (W434) and the other was a wooden goose (W588), which are normally on display in the House of Death gallery. The wooden tomb figure (fig. 5) was used in a funerary context and has a moveable arm, just like a modern-day doll. It is possible that this figure represents the tomb owner, although another suggestion is that it was part of a large group and it would have been the overseer or someone else of authority. This idea came from the positioning of the feet (the left foot is in front of the right foot) and the fact that it would have held a staff in his hand.

Fig. 5: Tomb model (W434)

The wooden goose (fig. 6) was by far my favourite object from this week. It has long been suggested that W588 is a fake, mainly because its base is modern. However, the object was purchased from the collection of William MacGregor (lot 576), with the catalogue stating that it came from Arab el-Birk, near Asyut. There are the remains of a possible dowel on the top of the goose, which suggests that it may have been hung and held by a big servant figure.

Fig. 6: Model goose (W588)

This course has been very interesting and I would like to thank Ken Griffin and the Egypt Centre for offering them. It’s been an awesome experience!

Bibliography:

Bourriau, J. (1988) Pharaohs and mortals: Egyptian art in the Middle Kingdom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Grajetzki, W. (2006) The Middle Kingdom of ancient Egypt: history, archaeology and society. Duckworth Egyptology. London: Duckworth.

Oppenheim, A., D. Arnold, D. Arnold, and K. Yamamoto eds. (2015) Ancient Egypt Transformed: The Middle Kingdom. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.

Robins, G. (1997) The art of ancient Egypt. London: The British Museum Press.

Sotheby, W. H. (1922) Catalogue of the MacGregor Collection of Egyptian Antiquities. London: Davy.

Tooley, A. (1995) Egyptian models and scenes. Shire Egyptology 22. Risborough: Shire Publications.