la pioche et la plume • pups • 2011

237

B 600: A Temple of ThuTmose IV AT JeBel BArkAl

Timothy Kendall and Pawel WolfNcam mission at Jebel Barkal

It was with very heavy heart that we arrived in Khartoum February 20 for the beginning of our 2007 excavating season. Our beloved friend and colleague Patrice Lenoble lay dying of cancer in France. Patrice and I lived on opposite shores of the atlantic (he in Nantes and I in Boston). We could rarely meet face to face, but we had for some years found common entertainment in sharing our thoughts on life via e-mail. We laughed online about many things while lamenting the deplorable state of the world, the absurdities of american and French politics, and of the general decline of our respective civilizations. We sent each other our favorite books on various topics – all unrelated to archaeology. Despite my protests, Patrice preferred to write me in English, but his English expressions were so uniquely funny and precious that I dared not stop him. His writing was literary ‘gourmet.’ He had an enormous heart, a sweeping intellect, and a monumental sense of humor, seasoned with delicious irony, and I weep at the loss. Patrice’s letters will always be a treasure to me. He kept sending me e-mails almost until his last breath. at the hospital he scrawled his messages to me on paper and gave them to Brigitte, his wife, to type and send. His last note came the day before he died : “Dear Tim : Don’t feel bad. I am dying happy, satisfied ! I just received SudNub 10 from Derek ! He is great in timing! ato mlo [i.e. the meroitic funerary wish for “good water”] is my final solution, ankh-based upon morphine. Better than merissa & arraghi. Don’t worry. I did not suffer. my best to Pawel & Ulli & alex [my son]. Place to youth in the Sudan! Patrice.” Within days of receipt of this last communication, Pawel Wolf, Ulrike Nowotnick, alex Kendall and other members of our team commenced the excavation of B 600, and it is with great pleasure that Pawel and I dedicate this work and paper to Patrice’s memory. (T. k.)

The earliest known standing structure at Jebel Barkal is the small temple B 600, whose kushite superstructure stands atop foundations securely dated to the reign of Thutmose IV by a foundation deposit containing name plaques of that king. 1

1 ReisnerfielddiaryforJebelBarkal,March28,1916(inlibraryofDept.ofArtoftheAncient

238

like other egyptian buildings on the site, this temple was restored and put back into service by the kushites, and it remained in use probably until late meroitic times. This paper presents an overview of the field observations of this structure made in 2007 and 2008 by the NcAm Jebel Barkal mission and offers our current thoughts on its possible function and historical implications. 2

surviving statues and stelae from Jebel Barkal indicate that the site was occupied by the egyptians at least as early as Thutmose III, but no architectural remains in situ are yet known from this king’s reign. 3 probably the earliest egyptian structures on the site, like those recently discovered at pnubs/Doukki Gel by ch. Bonnet, were predominantly of mud brick and have disappeared or have not yet been recognized. 4 If they were built by Thutmose I, they were

World,MuseumofFineArts[MFA],Boston);G.A.Reisner,“TheBarkalTemplesin1916,pt.I”,JEA4,1917,p.213-227,pl.XLV,1;id.,“TheBarkalTemplesin1916,pt.II”,JEA 5,1918,p.99-112. Wepreferthespelling“JebelBarkal”ratherthanthetraditional“GebelBarkal”becausetheformerbringsthenameintoconformitywiththenamesofallothermountainsintheSudan.Therendering“gebel”isbasedonanEgyptianratherthanSudaneseArabicpronunciationandthus,asarelicofthe19thcentury,shouldprobablybediscarded.

2 OntheNcAMJebelBarkalMission,see<www.jebelbarkal.org>.WearedeeplygratefultoHassanHusseinIdriss,DirectorGeneralofNcAM,toProf.RobertHallandtheAfrican-AmericanStudiesDept.,NortheasternUniversity,Boston,toThomasandJamesWoodruffoftheJ.A.andH.G.WoodruffcharitableTrust,andtoProf.WilliamKellySimpsonoftheMarilynSimpsonFoundationformakingthisresearchpossible.

3 SeeG.A.Reisner,“InscribedMonumentsfromGebelBarkal,Part.3:TheSteleofSetyI”,ZÄS 69,1933,p.73-78,80-81;G.A.ReisnerandM.N.Reisner,“InscribedMonumentsfromGebelBarkal,Part.2:TheGraniteSteleofThutmosisIII”,ZÄS 69,1933,p.24-39;andD.Dunham,The Barkal Temples,p.17,25,pl.47H(aprobablesecondsteleofThutmoseIII).Forevidencethatthesitemightalreadyhavebeenvisitedanditsreligiousmeaning“discovered”byThutmoseI,seeT.Kendall,“HatshepsutinKush?”,SSEA Newsletter,Winter2007,p.1-5.WhattheKushitesmighthavethoughtaboutJebelBarkalpriortothearrivaloftheEgyptiansremainsobscure,butthatthey,too,imbueditwithreligioussignificanceseemslikely.Forethnographicparallels,seeT.Kendall,“TheMonumentofTaharqaonGebelBarkal”,inSt.Wenig(ed.),NeuesteFeldforschungen im Sudan und in Eritrea,p.1-45andn.21withquotationofG.Bell,“Notes:NubaFertilityStones”,SNRec19,1936,p.314-316andA.R.c.Bolton,“TheDubabandNubaofJebelDaier”,SNRec19,1936,p.92-108.

4 ch.Bonnetet al.,“Kerma,Soudan2005-2006,2006-2007”,Genava55,2007,p.183-246andp.I-XXXVfortheEnglishversion,p.194,217-218.TheJebelBarkalsteleofThutmoseIII,nowintheMFA,Boston,recordsthatthekingmadethismonument“forhisfather[Amun],LordoftheThronesoftheTwoLands,inthefortressSlaughteroftheForeigners,makingforhimaresthouse(ḫnw)ofeternity…”(G.A.ReisnerandM.N.Reisner,ZÄS 69,1933,p.24-39).Wemayimaginethatthisfortresswouldhavebeenofmudbrickwithasmallstonetemple(ḫnw)initsmidst,ratherlikethesanctuaryfoundbych.BonnetatDoukkiGel,whichwassurroundedbymassivemudbrickfortificationwalls(ch.Bonnetet al.,Genava55,2007,p.187-188).BythereignofAmenhotepII,ifnotearlier,thetownofJebelBarkalhadacquiredthenameofNapata,onwhose“walls”thekingwassaidtohavehungthebodyofaslainSyrianprince(P.DerManuelian, Studies in the Reign of Amenophis II,HÄB26,1987,p.50).Thesewallswereperhapsthesameastheprevious,ortheymayhaveformedthetemenosofthesmallsanctuary.

239

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

likely destroyed by the Nubians themselves in the revolt at the beginning of the reign of Thutmose II. 5 If they were built by hatshepsut, they were likely destroyed by Thutmose III. 6 If they were built by Thutmose III, Amenhotep II, or Thutmose IV, they were likely destroyed by Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten. 7 There is some evidence to suggest that B 600 was at least marred by Akhenaten’s followers.

reused elements of a dismantled Amun temple of Thutmose III or IV can be seen forming a pavement in front of B 200. The present position of these stones, possibly as a pylon foundation of the 25th Dynasty temple, may suggest a secondary use by Taharqa. These heavy blocks are set so closely together that their plastered and painted surfaces have become fused, which is why, fearing to damage them, we have not yet tried to move them. one loose block from this assemblage preserves faint traces of a typical mid-18th Dynasty painted “block pattern” border. It was also from among these stones that reisner found one bearing the fragmentary throne name (mn-[ḫpr(w?)]-rʿ) and another preserving the phrase : … ỉr n.f m mnw n ỉt.f Ỉmn… (“he has made as a monument for his father Amun…”). 8 since this latter text, as drawn by reisner in his diary, shows that the name “Amun” was not mutilated, we suspect that whatever temple these blocks came from had been dismantled by Akhenaten probably not later than his Year 5 (when the erasures of Amun’s name were initiated 9) – offering the first of much evidence from Jebel Barkal that its architectural history probably very closely parallels that of pnubs/Doukki Gel. 10 unfortunately, our attempts to find confirmation of a Thutmosid phase of B 500, underlying the visible Amarna period talatat nucleus of that temple 11, have not yet met with success, but we suspect that the blocks in front of B 200 are probably its remnants. still more Thutmosid blocks can be seen reused in the walls of the nearby christian (and earlier?) fort at merowe sheriq, about four kilometers downstream. The above evidence suggests that when B 600 was built, it and the dismantled Amun temple (perhaps the “rest house [ḫnw]” mentioned by Thutmose III 12) were the only stone structures standing at Jebel Barkal.

5  ch.Bonnet,inW.GodlewskiandA.Łaitar(eds.),Between the Cataracts,p.75-76.6  D.Valbelle,“HatchepsoutenNubie”,BSFE 167,2006,p.33-50.7  ch.BonnetandD.Valbelle,Des pharaons venus d’Afrique,p.48-54.8  Reisnerfielddiary,Jan.13,1919;G.A.Reisner,ZÄS66,1931,p.76-77.9  D. B. Redford, Akhenaten,  The  heretic  king, cairo, 1984;W. J. Murnane, Texts  from  the 

Amarna Period in Egypt,Atlanta,1995,p.6.10  Seenotes5-7.11  T.Kendall,“TalatatArchitectureatJebelBarkal:ReportoftheNcAMMission2008-2009”,

SudNub 13,2009,p.2-16.12  Seenote4.

240

B 600 is situated high up on the base of the ridge behind and between the two large Amun temples B 500 and B 800/900; it also stands directly beside and to the right (Ne) of B 700 (Fig. 1). Its floor is 3 m higher than the latter, meaning that it must once have had a stairway or ramp, all traces of which have now disappeared. It consists of an inner chamber with a low podium built against the back wall (603), an outer chamber with bases for four columns (602), and an entrance portico (601) (Fig. 2). Its inside dimensions are 10.2 x 7.5 m. 13 following a catastrophic cliff collapse, probably in the early meroitic period, in which its walls were shattered, B 600 was rebuilt to its original egyptian plan and on its original foundations. how many times prior to that it may have been damaged and restored cannot be known. The only obvious modification

13  Dimensionsofroom603:3.865 7.5m;ofroom602:6.325 7.5m.

1. Map of the Jebel Barkal sanctuary showing B 600 in relation to the Amun temples B 500, 

B 700, and B 800/900, and the palace B 1200

241

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

it acquired was a more elaborate entrance: a portico of eight (i.e. a double row of four) columns, which may have replaced an original Thutmosid portico of four columns or, indeed, a mud-brick pylon, both of which features appear in the contemporary temple of Amada. 14 With the added late portico, the length of the temple increased about 6 m and its frontal width about 3.25 m. Another

14  H.El-Achiery,P.BarguetandM.Dewachter, Le Temple d’Amada I.Architecture,cairo,1967.Seenote22.

2. Survey plan of B 600, by Robert C. Rosa, 2008

242

cliff collapse in later antiquity shattered the temple again, after which it was never rebuilt. It was in this ruined condition, filled with huge fallen stones and rubble, that reisner found it when he commenced work there. 15 he carried out excavations on B 600 from march 12 to April 1, 1916 but published his results in one short report of only two pages. 16

At the start of our season in march 2007, our planned work program was delayed due to a malfunctioning piece of survey equipment and to the late arrival of some members of our team. It thus seemed opportune to use the extra days to commence a new study of B 600, since it had not been examined since reisner’s day. kendall first set a small crew to work clearing the inner chamber 603, since it was less cluttered with heavy stones and debris than 602. on march 3, p. Wolf, u. Nowotnick and our two archaeological assistants, J. Neumann and J. heymach arrived, and between march 4 and 6, they completed cleaning and recording this room, by which time we had to interrupt the work to proceed with our other scheduled projects. 17

The 2007 finds from B 600 proved to be so interesting that we made it a priority in 2008 to complete the excavations. This meant clearing and recording the outer court 602 and portico area 601. since 602 was strewn with large loose blocks and column drums, we first had to number and map these objects and move them out of the way before we could begin digging (Fig. 3). The recording work, undertaken between march 6 and 15, was again directed by p. Wolf, now assisted by m. Wetendorf-lavall. During this period, we were able to complete a drawn ground plan of the temple, and r. rosa completed the survey map (Fig. 2), which had been started in 2007 by m. farrar.

The egyptian builders of B 600 sited the temple on a high embankment, directly in front of the cliff. removing the surface rubble, they dug down to the natural jebel and founded their walls on this layer. Neither we nor reisner exposed much of this foundation, but reisner noted that the soil underneath the floor in 603 fell away “from a level about 50 cm below the floor to a level about 200 cm below” in front of the portico. 18 In other words, from the rear of the temple to the front, the jebel surface sloped 1.5 m. We exposed this surface only in the forward part of 602 (where most of the incline occurred) and saw

15  Inhisfielddiaryof1916Reisner speaksof“attackingblocks[inB600]from[the]fallencliff”(March18),of“breakingandcarryingoutfallencliff”(March19)andevenof“blasting”thestonestoclearthem(March22).PhotosofReisner’sexcavationsinB600(inMFABoston)arenumberedA2741,B733-34,andc7159,7178,and8369.

16  Reisner,fielddiary,March12-April1,1916;G.A.Reisner,JEA 5,1918,p.99-100.17  T.KendallandP.Wolf,“ExcavationsinthePalaceofAspeltaatJebelBarkal,March2007”,

SudNub11,2007,p.82-88,pl.XXXV-XXXVIII,and<www.jebelbarkal.org>.18  G.A.Reisner,JEA 5,1918,p.99.

243

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

that the temple had been founded on a stratum of white sandstone. The temple foundation walls must have been laid within level trenches cut in this layer. These walls, when they emerged above ground level, consisted of a double row of large grey sandstone blocks, cemented together. 19 Judging by the forward

19  Theseblockshavestandardheightsof39and46cm,withlengthsrangingfrom44,52,62,to126cm.

3. Room 602 prior to excavation, March 2008

4. Excavation in 602 of model vessels from the Thutmose IV foundation deposit  

by Manja Wetendorf-Lavall, March 2008

244

foundation wall of 602, which we did expose, the cemented blocks rested on a lower course of more massive blocks laid together without cement. 20 The construction was extremely solid; it was obviously meant to last.

The four columns in 602 were set on bases 1.30-1.40 m sq., made of blocks of soft yellow sandstone, now, much eroded. These bases had been set into leveled, squared niches, cut into the white sandstone bedrock. When the bases were freshly laid and the columns erected, the temple interior was filled with construction debris mixed with mud mortar to create a level floor surface. In 603 this surface was paved with large flagstones, cemented together. 21 In 602 all the paving stones had disappeared, revealing an underlying construction stratum consisting of varicolored areas of sandstone fragments and chips.

Dividing 603 from 602 was a wall in which there had been a wide central door, which in kushite times had opened onto a stepped podium. What had existed in place of the podium during the New kingdom, there was no evidence. fragments of the niched jambs of the door connecting 602 and 603 were found lying on the floor of 602. The original egyptian screen wall had been approximately 80 cm wide, but in kushite times it had been reduced to about 40 cm. fragments of the wall still project from the side walls and floor. The side walls of B 600, incidentally, still stand to a height of about 1.8 m, which was probably about half the original height of the temple interior. 22

While digging the sub-floor soil in the rear left (W) corner of 602, reisner found a disturbed foundation deposit of Thutmose IV, including two small faience plaques, each inscribed with the king’s throne name on one face and birth name on the other. 23 These were accompanied by “many small faience ring beads and scraps of gold foil, plus 12 or more small model pots of ordinary red-brown ware.” 24 In march, 2008, while digging in the same room, we recovered 27 more model vessels of the same types from three different locations: between

20  Thefoundationblocksweobservedhadthedimensionsof615 985 83cm,615 1085 83cm,605 1075 83cm,605 1115 83cm,etc.

21  Thesizesofthesestonesare:585 60cm,52-595 95cm,84-875 94cm,94-965 185cm.22  B600 isverysimilar insizeand interiorspace to the templeofAmada,whichwasbuilt

anddecoratedbyThutmoseIII,AmenhotepII,andThutmoseIV.TheinteriorceilingheightofAmadatemplerangesfrom3.5minthesanctuaryto4.2mintheouterchamber,H.El-Achiery,P.BarguetandM.Dewachter,Le Temple d’Amada I,op. cit.

23  Reisnerfielddiary,March28, 1916andobjectphotoc 10719;G.A.Reisner, JEA 4, 1917,pl.XLV,1;id.,JEA 5,1918,p.99-100;D.Dunham,The Barkal Temples,p.63,pl.LVI(16-3-40).Theplaquesappeartobeidenticaltothosefoundbych.BonnetinthecentralAmuntempleatDoukkiGel/Pnubs,ch.BonnetandD.Valbelle,Des pharaons venus d’Afrique,p.49-50.OnthefoundationdepositsofThutmoseIV,J.M.Weinstein, Foundation Deposits in Ancient Egypt, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania, Doctoral Dissertation (Oriental Studies,GraduateSchoolofArtsandSciences),1973,p.212-213.

24  G.A.Reisner,JEA 5,1918,p.100;id.,JEA 4,1917,p.221,pl.XLV.

245

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

the right and left side walls and columns, and between the two forward columns (Fig. 4, 5). This revealed that such vessels had been scattered throughout the earth fill under the floor. probably, if the floor were to be completely excavated, well over a hundred could be retrieved. Another object of interest, found in 2008 in debris between the right (Ne) wall and forward column of 602 was a nearly perfectly preserved mid-18th Dynasty bread mold, which was apparently also part of the foundation deposit (Fig. 6). 25

25  H. Jacquet-Gordon, “ATentativeTypologyof EgyptianBreadMoulds”, inD.Arnold (ed.),Studien zur altägyptischen Keramik,Mainz,1981,p.11-24,fig.5,TypeD,7-10.

5. Model vessels from the Thutmose IV foundation deposit in 602, March 2008

6. 18th Dynasty bread mold from the Thutmose IV foundation deposit in 602, March 2008

246

When reisner excavated B 600, he wrote of finding several egyptian blocks on the site, which are now no longer visible. In front of the temple, for example, he reported a grey sandstone fragment with a partial cartouche inscribed [Ḏḥwty]-ms-{s}, and at the right rear corner of 603, he found a block inscribed mn-ḫpr-rʿ (Thutmose III) - although he cautioned that this block could also refer to piankhy, who used the same throne name. 26 In 2008, in the narrow space between B 600 and 700, we found another block with a fragmentary cartouche. The preserved traces suggest either m[n-{n}-ḫpr]-rʿ (Thutmose III) or m[n-{n}-ḫpr(w)]-rʿ (Thutmose IV) (Fig. 7).

several egyptian blocks can still be seen reused in the later kushite walls. one, built into the sW wall in 602, is inscribed …st.k r nṯrw “… your seat among[?] the gods…” (Fig. 8a, b). here the word nṯrw “gods” has been defaced by the Atenists to read only nṯr “god”. A second fragment of inscription appears in the rear wall; a third appears at floor level, rebuilt into the screen wall separating 603 from 602. This block once bore the king’s names, now lost, prefaced by the title nsw-bỉty, with a bird (vulture?) overhead, flying left, carrying a šn in its talons – obviously details from the standard egyptian composition appearing over a king’s figure, standing, facing left, before a god, facing right. A fourth loose fragment, observed and photographed by us in 1989 in the debris in 602, has now disappeared. This was an egyptian relief showing a small figure, arms raised in adoration, facing left. finally, incorporated into the screen wall between B 700 and 600 is a square red sandstone block carved in raised relief on one side with a row of five ḥs jars and a block-patterned border.

An intriguing object recovered by reisner from 602 is a large fragmentary blue-green faience inlay, showing the god Amun (human-headed) enthroned with a goddess embracing him from behind. 27 The plaque is unusual in that its left edge, which the deities face, is not vertical (like the right edge) but slightly diagonal. The motif seems to be a variant of the image of Jebel Barkal appearing on the south wall of the great hall of the temple of ramses II at Abu simbel, where Amun appears seated inside the mountain, facing left, toward the cliff, which is rendered as a similar diagonal (Fig. 16). 28 The faience plaque

26  G.A.Reisner,JEA 5,1918,p.100;fielddiaryMarch24-25,1916.27  NowintheMuseumofFineArts,Boston,D.Dunham,The Barkal Temples,p.63(16-4-34),

fig.43,pl.LVI.“Fragmentofgreenglazedplaque,whitebodied.H.0.108,W0.140m.FromB602debris.”Theobjectmaybe viewed in colouronlineat<www.mfa.org/collections/search_art.asp>bytypinginthefieldnumber16-4-34.

28  T.Kendall,“WhydidTaharqabuildhistombatNuri?”,inW.GodlewskiandA.Łaitar(eds.),Between  the Cataracts,p. 128,fig.8 fordrawing; forphoto, seeOriental InstitutephotoP2428onlineat<oi.uchicago.edu/gallery/pa_egypt_bees_abu_simbel/>.Aphotoof thecompletewall is inK.H.Martini,“HowAbuSimbelwillbeSaved”,The UNESCO Courier,December1964,p.14-15.

247

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

7. Fragmentary cartouche, probably of Thutmose IV, found in debris between B 600 and B 700, 

March 2008

8a-b. Egyptian block reused in SW wall of 602, inscribed …st.k r nṯrw  “ …your seat among [?] the gods”

a b

248

lacks the large uraeus representing the Barkal pinnacle, but it may have been a separate inlay, now lost. If this object is contemporary with the Thutmosid phase of B 600, the motif of the mountain with a uraeus can be traced back to the mid-18th Dynasty. 29

The existing fragments of relief suggest that the inside walls of egyptian B 600, like all temples of that period, must have been extensively carved with relief and texts. following the temple’s restoration in kushite times, its walls were entirely rebuilt above the first and second masonry courses apparently with the original egyptian blocks, which were now re-cut and whose carved surfaces were either turned inward to conceal them or ground off.

It would appear that no drums of the original Thutmosid columns have survived. This may be because they were not round but square pillars, comparable to those used in the hypostyle hall of the Amada temple. 30 Nine of the later kushite column drums still lay scattered on the floor in 602 prior to excavation. These drums, all perfectly round and uncarved, had variable diameters, suggesting that the kushite columns measured about 83 cm at their bases and 70 cm at their tops. The two drums still in situ reveal that in rebuilding B 600 the kushites placed the columns sharply off center on the old egyptian piers. 31 There was no surviving evidence for capitals.

The complete absence of carved decoration on any of the later kushite wall surfaces or columns is notable. surely these later walls would have been painted – a practice well-known from other cult places of the meroitic period. 32 Good parallels to B 600 in this detail are the late kushite temples IA 100-300 inside

29  This motif is discussed further below. The scene apparently provided iconographicrealizationoftheverbalaccountoftheuraeusonthemountain,describedbyThutmoseIIIinhisJebelBarkalstele:B.cumming,Egyptian Historical Records of the Later Eighteenth Dynasty,fasc.1,Warminster,1982,p.4;A.Klug,Königliche Stelen in der Zeit von Ahmose bis Amenophis III, MonAeg VIII,2002,p.201-202;G.A.ReisnerandM.N.Reisner,ZÄS 69,1933,p.35 (ll.33-35),andT.Kendall, inW.GodlewskiandA.Łaitar (eds.),Between  the Cataracts,p.126-134;<www.jebelbarkal.org>.

30  Seenote22.31  Thecolumnsin602wereerectedabout1.65mfromeachsidewallandendwallandabout

1.6mfromeachotherineachsiderow.Thewidthofthecentralaislebetweenthecolumnswasabout2.8m.

32  Exceptfortheirstonedoorways,thewallsofmanyMeroiticsacredbuildingswereerectedinbrickwork,coatedwithplasterandpainted.AmongthesearethelateKushitetemplesatMeroecity,Hamadab,Naqa,el-Hassa,andDangeiletc.Foranoverviewoftheliteratureonthetemplesinthesouth,P.Wolf,inI.canevaandA.Roccati(eds.),Acta Nubica,p.239-262.ForexamplesofpaintedwallsintemplesatMeroecity,R.J.Bradley,“WallPaintingsfromMeroeTownsite”,inFr.Hintze(ed.),Meroitistische Forschungen 1980,p.421-423;id.,“PaintedPlasterMurals fromMeroeTownsite”,SudNub 7,2003,p.66-70. Incontrast toB600,however,thestonepartsofthesetemplesweresometimesextensivelycarvedwithreliefs,asintheAmuntempleatNaqa.

249

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

the Great enclosure of musawwarat es sufra, where not a single piece of carved relief occurs on the walls. 33 only the columns in front of the main sanctuary of IA 101, on top of the elevated central terrace of the Great enclosure, bear relief – the only formally carved surfaces in the entire cult complex. 34

our 2007 excavations in the Aspelta palace (B 1200 Asp-1), revealed that an identical practice existed also in Napatan times. To the smooth, uncarved surfaces of the columns a very thin layer of plaster wash was applied to the stone, which was then brightly painted. Where these surfaces had been exposed to the elements, no trace of the paint or plaster survived, but when they had been buried and undisturbed, we found their decoration well preserved. 35

The central focus of B 600, at least in kushite times, was the stepped podium in 603. This object, 2.02 m wide by 2.30 m long and 32 cm high, was built over the egyptian pavement and was entirely plastered with white plaster, 2-3 mm thick. A forward extension with two steps is 93 cm wide and 57 cm long, and the steps are flanked by ramp-like railings, 10 cm wide. During our cleaning of the room, we observed on the floor, near each of the rear corners of this podium, the outlines of a pair of round holes for the insertion of wooden columns. The left hole, 28 cm in diameter, was 18 cm from both the podium and the rear wall. The rear right hole, 25 cm in diameter, was 18 cm from the back wall and 21 cm from the podium. The discovery of these holes led us to search for a third and fourth hole in front of the podium, which we quickly found on the inside edge of the wall separating 603 from 602. These holes, having about the same diameters, completed a rectangle having a floor area 2.7 m wide by 3.5 m long. They had obviously supported columns for a large baldachin overarching the podium.

After cleaning the podium surface, we found it to be so uneven and carelessly paved that it seemed unlikely to have supported a cult statue. We then discovered on its surface two more sets of four holes, indicating that two pieces of furniture, each with four legs, had been erected on its top, one inside the other (Fig. 9). The holes indicated that the outer piece of apparatus had round legs and enclosed an area 1.23 m by 1.72 m, while the inner piece had square legs and enclosed an area 1.13 by 1.48 m. on the right forward (e) corner of the podium, one of these outer holes still contained a tubular bronze socket, 7 cm deep and 6.7 cm

33  For literature on these temples, P.Wolf, in I. caneva andA. Roccati (eds.),  Acta Nubica,p.256.

34  LDV,Bl.72a;Fr.Hintzeet al.,Musawwarat es Sufra, 1993,Abb.179,187,192.35  T.KendallandP.Wolf,“ExcavationsinthePalaceofAspeltaatJebelBarkal,March2007”,

SudNub11,2007,p.85.ThesametechniqueswerealsofoundatMusawwarat,wherereusedorfallenstoneblocksburiedandprotectedbyconstructiondebrisstillpreservedtracesofpainteddecorationoverathinundercoating.

250

9. The podium in 603, showing the holes on its surface for the legs of a throne dais  

and baldachin. Visible on the floor beside the rear corner of the podium is the round outline  

of one of four holes for the legs of larger baldachin which roofed the podium

10. Bronze tubular socket set in mortar, still surviving on podium surface (603).  

This and the other round holes contained fragments of gold foil, revealing that the baldachin 

erected on the podium had been heavily gilded

251

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

in diameter, embedded in cement (Fig. 10). As we cleaned around this and the other round holes, we found that each of them contained fragments of gold foil, and one even contained a tiny inlay of feldspar or amazonite.

Because the paving stones on the podium surface were so poorly laid and fitted, it seemed to us that the inner piece of furniture (with legs that had been inserted into to the square holes) must have been intended to conceal this surface and to create another. since the dimensions of this object were human scale (1.13 by 1.48 m), and since the steps in front of the podium indicated human access, we guessed that the object in question was a low wooden platform or dais for a throne. The outer round holes suggested supports for a gilded and inlaid baldachin with round legs that had overarched the dais. The four large holes in the floor around the podium indicated that a much larger baldachin had roofed the whole.

Because we were able to record only the podium chamber in 2007, we had to wait until 2008 to complete the rest of the temple. After removing the loose blocks and column drums from 602, we found four more sockets for a third baldachin, which had been set up in front of the podium (Fig. 11). These were embedded in the floor between the rear columns and the screen wall. The socket holes, 10-12 cm in diameter, were cut in the centers of four white sandstone cylindrical blocks, 46-53 cm in diameter and 9-12 cm deep. Although these were sunk into the original egyptian floor level, they clearly had belonged to the temple’s later phase, since the forward stones pierced the rear egyptian column bases and were set in holes cutting through the egyptian construction debris.

We have noted above that the temple floor and entrance were about three meters higher than ground level and the floor of B 700. This meant that B 600 must have been fronted by a stairway or ramp. This sloping access would have been built on the earth embankment in front of the temple, which today has largely disappeared. reisner dug through this embankment in march 1916, which, as he reported, had already been seriously disturbed by earlier diggers. he characterized the soil of the embankment as a “mass of dirty debris mixed with mud and broken mud bricks, stones, etc.” which ran “under 601”. While cutting away this earth, he found two Nubian graves (which he numbered “601 and 602”). These were dug below the level of the egyptian temple construction and obviously predated it. 36 reisner’s discovery of these two graves reveals that he passed from

36  Reisner fielddiary,March25,1916:“clearingfrontof600.Massofdirtydebrismixedwithmudandbrokenmudbricks,stones,etc.Thisdisturbedstratumrunsunder601.Underthisstratumanddirectlyinfrontof601,intheredsandbank,wasashallowburial,contractedonrightside,headGD[i.e.toward‘gebel’,looking‘downstream’](dueWest)(WestislocallycalledEast,[on]acc[oun]tofriver).Ifc-Grouppeoplewerealsoconfusedbyflowofriver,thisburialhasc-Grouporientationaswellasposition.Thegravewasfilledwithcleanredsandandwasthereforemadeprevioustotheexistenceofthedisturbeddirtylayerandtherefore

252

the disturbed egyptian level, where the temple stair or ramp would have been, to an undisturbed pre-egyptian level. This means that his reference to loose “mud bricks…continuing under 601” suggests that, without realizing it, he had indeed encountered fragments of the B 600 stair or ramp, which was of mud brick. some of these bricks may even have been part of an original Thutmosid pylon. 37 reisner’s excavations here, unfortunately, accelerated the erosion of the temple front, so that all elements of the first row of portico columns have now fallen down the slope. Ten drums are visible, all of them undecorated like those in 602 and, again, there was no trace of capitals. from the surviving drums, it appears that the portico columns measured 77 cm at the base and 67 cm at the top.

The visible internal features of B 600 in kushite times - the stepped podium, the sockets for three baldachins and a throne dais, and the bits of gold foil and stone inlay found around or within some of the socket holes - all suggest that it was used by a king rather than a god - a king seated on his throne (Fig. 12). related throne emplacements are found elsewhere at Jebel Barkal. Two are known from the Napatan palace B 1200. one of the latter, in rooms datable by inscription to Anlamani, can be seen in room 1233, where the floor contains four stone sockets, identical to those in 602, set against the sW side of the room. 38 This suggests a throne emplacement in which the king sat, facing Ne or upstream (= “south”) in the direction of the entrance to B 800/900. 39 A second, datable to Aspelta, can be seen at the Ne end of the audience hall 1200 Asp-1, where the floor preserves four stone sockets of the same type, suggesting a throne emplacement in which the king faced sW or downstream (= “north”). 40 In each of these cases there are no stone or brick

previoustothebuildingoftemple600.”March26:“Infrontof600,agreatirregularholeofrecentorigin.OntheR[=river]sideofthis,asecondburialonrightside,headW(localE).Thissecondburial(602)hasastonearmlet(c-Grouptype).ThustheevidencegrowsthattheseburialsareM.E.[=MiddleEmpire]orN.E.[=NewEmpire](say1500-1900B.c.).Owingtothechangeinthedirectionoftheriver,burialdirectionWisthesameburialdirection[as]atKermaandinLowerNubia.”SeealsoD.Dunham,The Barkal Temples,pl.LIX,FandG.

37  TheAmadatemplehadbotharampandpylonoffiredbrick(H.El-Achiery,P.BarguetandM.Dewachter, Le Temple d’Amada I,op. cit.,p.1-2);theThutmoseIVtemple(centraltemple)at Pnubs/Doukki Gel had amud-brick pylon (ch. Bonnet andD.Valbelle,Des  pharaons venus d’Afrique,p.54).

38  For aphotograph,D.Dunham,The Barkal Temples, pl. LXB; for adescriptionandmap,T.Kendall,“TheNapatanPalaceatGebelBarkal:AFirstLookatB1200”, inW.V.Davies(ed.),Egypt and Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam, London,1991,p.302-313,fig.2(andnotealsoroom“1255”).Forevidencethattheroomwasusedincoronationceremoniesheldinthepalace,T.Kendall, inW.GodlewskiandA.Łaitar(eds.),Between the Cataracts,p.125,n.21andreferences.

39  T.Kendall,“ExcavationsatGebelBarkal.1996.ReportoftheMuseumofFineArts,Boston,SudanMission”,Kush17,1997,p.321-322,n.7.

40  T.KendallandP.Wolf,SudNub11,p.84,fig.2,pl.3.

253

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

11. Stone sockets for a third baldachin visible on the cleared floor of 602, March 2008

12. Reconstruction of the interior of B 600, showing the emplacements for the presumed 

throne dais and three baldachins

254

podia or secondary holes, but since the palace floors were unpaved, wooden throne platforms may have been set directly on the floor, spaced between the baldachin columns. A more imposing throne emplacement appears in room 520 of B 500, on top of the great black granite platform of piankhy 41 (now broken into two pieces). like the podium in 603, the surface of this stone bears two sets of four holes, suggesting sockets for the legs of two pieces of inner-fitting furniture. Just as the inner holes on the podium in 603 are square, those on the granite base are l-shaped, and its outer holes are round. one suspects that here again the inner holes anchored a wooden throne dais, while the outer supported a baldachin. 42

B 600 in its kushite state brings to mind the kind of royal pavilion that first appears in art on the Narmer macehead (Fig. 13) and which earliest survives archaeologically in the Djoser complex at saqqara.  43 This is a stepped platform, sometimes of considerable height, on which the king appears, crowned and seated on his throne under a baldachin. In later illustrations, the height of the platform is reduced to give greater emphasis to the king’s figure, and occasionally he sits beneath multiple baldachins. 44 sometimes the steps are shown as a ramp, which may suggest that, like the podium in 603, the stairway had ramp-like sides. The combination of the stepped platform, throne and baldachin (or baldachins) was called a ṯnṯȝt 45, and it appears repeatedly in scenes of enthronement, especially those picturing the Heb-Sed, where a pair of them is often shown back to back (Fig. 14). 46 These

41  Onthere-revisedreadingofthisking’snamefromPiyetoPiankhy,cl.Rilly, “UnenouvelleinterprétationdunomroyalPiankhy”,BIFAO 101,2001,p.351-368;D.Kahn,“Tefnakhte’s‘LetterofSubmission’toPiankhy”,BzS9,2006,p.45-61,n.1.

42  Fortheidentificationofthisroom(andsimilarroomsinotherNubianAmuntemples)variouslyas a Re-Horakhty chapel or as aWabet  (in which the New Year Festival was celebrated),L.Török,The Kingdom of Kush,p.309; id.,The  Image of  the Ordered World,p.55,n.56-57;P.Wolf,inI.canevaandA.Roccati(eds.), Acta Nubica,p.242-243andtheirreferences.GiventhefrequencywithwhichRe-Horakhtyisshowncrowningthekings,orisstatedtohaveauthorityover thekingshipandcrowns,or the frequencyof coronationceremonies takingplaceonNewYear’sDay,itseemstousthattheseidentificationsdonot excludetheuseof520asaroyalthroneroom.Inconnectionwiththeserooms,itisimportanttokeepinmindNastasen’sreferencesto“goldenthrones”withineachoftheAmuntemplesofNapata,KawaandPnubs,FHNII,p.480(l.20-21),p.481(l.25-26),p.482(l.31),p.483(l.32).

43  Forexample,J.E.Quibell,Hierakonpolis I,London,1900,pl.26B(Narmer);F.W.vonBissing,Das Re-Heiligtum des Königs Ne-Woser-Re (Rathurses)II,Berlin,1923,pl.4,6,10-12,16,17(Neuserre);LDIII,Bl.36(ThutmoseIII),etc.FortheSaqqarastructure,J.-Ph.Lauer,Fouilles à Saqqara: La pyramide à degrés. L’architecture,cairo,1936,pl.57-58.

44  As inA.Fakhry,“ANoteontheTombofKheruefatThebes”,ASAE43,1942,p.439-505,pl.39-40(AmenhotepIII).

45  J.Gohary,Akhenaten’s Sed-Festival at Karnak,London/NewYork,1992,p.19-20.46  P.Tallet, Sésostris III et la fin de la XIIe dynastie,Paris,2005,p.94,fig.22(SesostrisIII);

J.Gohary,Akhenaten’s Sed-Festival at Karnak, op. cit.,p.5,n.164.

255

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

twin Heb-Sed pavilions, which in reality may have been side by side, were the structures in which the king claimed and reclaimed the dual kingship of the country. When the king took his seat within each one in turn, he was thought to take the throne and crown of upper and lower egypt respectively. 47 piankhy had himself depicted within a ṯnṯȝt in his fragmentary

47  Ibid.,p.12and19.

13. Heb-Sed scene with Narmer seated in a ṯnṯȝt, from the king’s votive mace head, 

Hierakonpolis (after G. Robins, The Art of Ancient Egypt, London, 1997, p. 35, fig. 28)

14. Sesostris III in Heb-Sed, seated in the double ṯnṯȝt (after Sésostris III

et la fin de la XIIe dynastie, Paris, 2005, p. 94, fig. 22)

256

Heb-Sed scenes on the Ne (“south”) wall of court 501 in B 500 (Fig. 15), and, given that this ceremony took place at Napata, one could suspect that it represented B 600. 48

That B 600 had a highly important function when it was first built is suggested by the fact that, when completed, it was probably one of only two stone structures standing at Jebel Barkal - the other being a small Amun temple (B 500-sub = the reused blocks in front of B 200?). In its plan, B 600 differed from other New kingdom temples in that its sanctuary was not divided into three longitudinal cult rooms. 49 It had only one lateral “sanctuary” (603), which is unusual for the period. This same plan seems to have been retained by the kushites, suggesting a continuity of function. since the kushites usually had a quite good understanding of the original meanings and uses of the egyptian buildings on the site and tried to revive them, one would be inclined to believe that its later use essentially mirrored its original use. The reused inscribed egyptian block, visible in the sW wall of 602, which speaks of “your seat among(?) the gods” (Fig. 8a, b), also seems to connect the original structure with enthronement.

since other New kingdom temples often paired the gods Amun and re-horakhty (combining the cults of Thebes and heliopolis) 50, it is of course possible that B 600 was built as a sanctuary for re-horakhty at Jebel Barkal, just as nearby B 500 was built for Amun. But this still brings us back to enthronement, for just as Amun was merged with re by the beginning of the New kingdom 51, re-horakhty was conceived as a solar form of horus, the son of re - that is, he was the divine personification of the living king at his

48  Piankhy’s not yet fully published (or revealed) fragmentary Heb-Sed panorama in B 500wouldsurelyhaveinfluencedtheceremonialactivitiesoffuturegenerationsofKushiterulers.However,thesubsequentevidenceforHeb-SedsinKushisratherrare.AfragmentaryivoryfromShabaqo’stombatel-KurrudepictsthekinginHeb-Sed,seatedinaṯnṯȝt(D.Dunham, El-Kurru,p.58,figs.20f);aHeb-SedofTaharqa ismentioned(J.Gohary,Akhenaten’s Sed-Festival at Karnak, op.  cit.,p.8);bothAnlamaniand Irikeamanotearewished“millionsofHeb-Seds”(FHN I,p.221;II,p.417),andastatueofAramatelqodepictsthekinginHeb-Sedattire(L.Török,The Kingdom of Kush,p.313).ForanothersectionofthePiankhyHeb-Sedtableau,T.Kendall,“TheOriginoftheNapatanState:ElKurruandtheEvidencefortheRoyalAncestors”,inSt.Wenig(ed.),Studien zum antiken Sudan,p.17,fig.20.OtherwiseinKushthe ṯnṯȝt appearsmost commonly in tombchapel reliefs (S.E.chapmanandD.Dunham,Decorated Chapels,passim),symbolizingtheenthronementofthedeceasedrulerasOsiris.

49  c.M.Rocheleau,Amun Temples in Nubia. A Typological Study of New Kingdom, Napatan, and Meroitic Temples,BAR Intern. Ser. 1850,2008,p.71,76,80,82,84,86,93,105.

50  R.H.Wilkinson,The Complete Temples of Ancient Egypt,cairo,2005,p.147(Abydos),198(MedinetHabu),220(Wadies-Sebua),221(Amada),222(ed-Derr),225(AbuSimbel),andseenote51.

51  T.Kendall, inW.GodlewskiandA.Łaitar(eds.),Between the Cataracts,p.125-139.

257

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

own “rising” (i.e. coronation) and was likened to the sun at dawn (Fig. 16). 52 If B 600 was not built as a ṯnṯȝt for the actual use of Thutmose IV, it may have been built as a symbolic substitute for his statue, posed as if in permanent coronation or Heb-Sed - possibly paired with an image of his divine alter-ego re-horakhty (or simply horus, whose throne the king was said to occupy).

52  OntherelationshipbetweenRe-Horakhty,thekingandtheroyalka,seeE.P.Walker,Aspects of the Primeval Nature of Egyptian Kingship: Pharaoh as Atum, Universityofchicagodoctoraldissertation,AnnArbor,1991,p.40-60andreferences;G.Haeny,“NewKingdom‘MortuaryTemple’and‘MansionsofMillionsofYears’”,inB.E.Shafer(ed.),Temples of Ancient Egypt,London/NewYork,1997,p.115-118.

15. Piankhy seated within a ṯnṯȝt (B 600?) during his Heb-Sed at Napata.  From the NE 

(=“south”) wall of the first court 501 of the Great Amun Temple (B 500)

16. Detail from relief on S wall of the great hall of the Great Temple of Ramses II at Abu Simbel, 

showing, at right, Ramses II offering to Amun “of Karnak” seated within Jebel Barkal,  

and at left, the king being crowned by Re-Horakhty – presumably also at Jebel Barkal  

(after “How Abu Simbel will be Saved.”, The Unesco Courier, Dec. 1964, p. 15)

258

It is a pity that we have so little information about New kingdom royal visits to Nubia. looking at the distance between Thebes and Napata, it seems unlikely that most rulers would ever have made the arduous trek to Jebel Barkal. certainly Thutmose I and III visited the site, since each left inscriptions at the hagar el-merwa. 53 hatshepsut may have visited Jebel Barkal as a princess traveling with her father. 54 If the existence of inscribed architectural monuments at Jebel Barkal is an indication of royal presence there, then it is likely that Thutmose IV, horemheb, seti I, and ramses II may also have visited. 55 That ramses II visited the site for a coronation is further suggested by a relief on the south wall of the great hall of his temple at Abu simbel, in which the king not only appears making offerings to Amun seated within Jebel Barkal but also kneeling before re-horakhty, who is shown crowning the king beneath an ished tree (Fig. 16).

As we know from Napatan texts, Jebel Barkal, during and after the eighth century Bc, was the primary coronation center of kush. The kushites believed that Amun of Jebel Barkal was the grantor of their kingship, and that this kingship was synonymous with egyptian kingship - especially upper egyptian kingship. 56 This tradition, which allowed the kushites to assume easy hegemony over upper egypt and karnak, would probably never have been accepted by the Theban priesthood unless it already had the authority of great age. In fact, this tradition seems to have originated over seven centuries earlier during the Nubian campaign of Thutmose I. 57 It was this king who, accompanied by a high priest of Amun, probably first set eyes on Jebel Barkal and recognized in its natural pinnacle the shape of a royal uraeus wearing the white crown. 58 This “recognition”, later pictured in the relief from Abu simbel (Fig. 16), would have “proven” to the king’s satisfaction that this mountain at the upper limit of Nubia was an original source of his kingship and thus an important residence – the

53  W.V.Davies,“NewFieldworkatKurgus:ThePharaonicInscriptions”,SudNub 2,1998,p.26-30;id.,“Kurgus2000:TheEgyptianInscriptions”,SudNub 5,2001,p.46-58.

54  W.V.Davies,SudNub 2,1998,p.29,pl.XXXVII;id.,SudNub5,2001,p.57;id.,“EgyptandNubia:conflictwiththeKingdomofKush”,inc.H.Roehriget al. (eds.),Hatshepsut, from Queen to Pharaoh,NewYork,2005,p.52;T.Kendall,SSEA Newsletter,Winter2007,p.1-5.

55  AsidefromB600ofThutmoseIV,partsofB500wereconstructedbyAkhenaten,Horemheb,SetiIandRamsesII;HoremhebseemsalsotohaveconstructedorrestoredB1100(T.Kendall, inW.GodlewskiandA.Łaitar(eds.),Between the Cataracts,p.126,n.22),andRamsesIIalsoconstructedB300-sub.RamsesII(orsomeoneclosetohim)inscribedhisnameattheHagarel-Merwa(W.V.Davies,SudNub 2,1998,p.29;id.,SudNub5,2001,figs.3-4).AstudyoftheNewKingdomarchitectureatJebelBarkaliscurrentlyinpreparation.

56  L.Török,The Kingdom of Kush,p.154-156,215-234,263-264.57  T.Kendall,SSEA Newsletter,Winter2007,p.1-5.58  W.V.Davies,SudNub 5,2001,p.53;T.Kendall, inW.GodlewskiandA.Łaitar(eds.),Between 

the Cataracts,p.126-128.

259

timothy kendall and paw

el wolf A

TempleofThutm

oseIV

“original” residence – of the Theban Amun. Approximately seventy years later, Thutmose III erected a stele at Jebel Barkal, which identified the mountain as a primeval “karnak” and its resident deity as the ka of Amun of karnak. 59 In the lunette of the stele the god of Jebel Barkal was said to have given Thutmose “the kingship of the Two Lands” while Amun of karnak was said to have given him “all foreign lands”. 60 The same idea – that Amun of Jebel Barkal granted the crowns of egypt – is repeated (and pictured) in the sandstone stele of piankhy, which was erected in B 501 directly beside the stele of Thutmose III, which was clearly its inspiration. 61 our excavation of B 600, combined with other important New kingdom data from Jebel Barkal, soon to be published, indicates more forcefully than ever that the kingship traditions surrounding Jebel Barkal, which we have come to associate so completely with the kushites, were in fact part of a grand conception of the Nile cosmos inherited from their egyptian predecessors.

59  G.A.ReisnerandM.B.Reisner,ZÄS 69,1933,p.25-26,37andseenote28.60  Ibid.,p.25.61  G.A.Reisner,ZÄS66,1931,p.89-94;L.Török,The Kingdom of Kush,p.154-156;id.,The 

Image of the Ordered World,pl.1.