1

Report on the 2014 Season

of the

Regional Survey in the Governorate of Kafr esh-Sheikh

by

Robert Schiestl, Andreas Ginau and Daniela Rosenow

1. Introduction:

The 2014 season of the Regional Survey in the governorate of Kafr esh-Sheikh was

undertaken under the auspices of the German Archaeological Institute Cairo from April 8

until April 23 and from October 1 until October 28. We were kindly supported by the

authorities of the Ministry of Antiquities. In particular we wish to thank the Director of

Antiquities in Kafr esh-Sheikh Mr Gamal Salem and our inspectors Ms Noha Mohammed

Shokry Ali Mansour (spring 2014) and Mr Ali Sekhmaui (autumn 2014).

Members of the mission this year were Robert Schiestl (field director), Daniela Rosenow

and Thilo Rehren (glass specialists), Jürgen Wunderlich and Andreas Ginau (geographers),

and Stephanie Bruck (Egyptologist).

The spring season was dedicated to the study of pottery and in particular glass finds from

the surface of the site of Kom el-Gir. The autumn season was a field season focusing on the

reconstruction of the ancient landscape in the area north-east of Buto (Tell el-Farain).

R. Schiestl

2. Studies on pottery and glass:

The documentation and analysis of surface finds from previous seasons and from a

visit to the site in April 2014 was the focus of the season of spring 2014. A special emphasis

was laid on the analysis of glass finds from the surface of Kom el-Gir.

2

2.1. The pottery:

Small finds and pottery collected during the surface surveys of the past seasons at the

following sites were studied and drawn in the excavation house: Kom el-Asfar, Kom el-Gir,

Kom Saleh, Shabasia (Kom el-Ahmar) and Kom Abu Khubeza.i In earlier field surveying a

substantial group of pottery from the surface at Kom el-Gir had been collected and

documented.ii An assemblage of pottery shapes not previously documented for this site was

collected in this season and is shown on table 1 and figs. 1-2.

Inv. No. Shape Fabric Size Fig. No.

KG 14/19 Mortar Import, unknown source Medium to coarse, light reddish yellow (5 YR 7/6-6/6) Numerous particles of hard stone intentionally added to fabric

rd c. 40 cm; bd 24 cm; h 14.9 – 15 cm

Fig. 1.1-1.3

KG 14/20 Bowl with pinched rim Nile, medium - coarse, very hard; red coated outside, heavy sooting on inside-

rd 18 cm; h 5.7 cm + x

Fig. 2.1

KG 14/22 Jar, with two wide handles

Nile, fine - medium (body), medium-coarse (handle), hard; white cream coloured painted decoration on shoulder (2.5 YR 7/6 light red - 5 YR 8/4 pink)

rd 22 cm; h 11.5 cm + x

Fig. 1.4

KG 14/23 Terracotta head of Apis bull

Nile, fine-medium, hard; plain

h 7.7 cm + x, width (snout) 5.1 cm; neck width 3.6 cm

Fig. 2.4

KG 14/24 Jar Nile, fine-medium, very hard; plain

rd 14 cm; h 5 cm + x

Fig. 1.5

KG 14/25 Amphora, ‘AE 3’ Nile, fine - medium, hard; plain; Fabric: body: fine, limestone particles, some organic tempering; Handle: medium, larger and more organic particles

rd 11 cm; h 14.2 cm + x

Fig. 2.2

KG 14/26 Amphora, ‘Late Roman 1’

Import rd 10-10.7 cm; h 12.5 cm + x

Fig. 2.3

Table 1: List of Pottery from Kom el-Gir, shown on figures 1-2 (abbreviations: h - height; rd - rim diameter, bd - base diameter)

3

A large and heavy bowl with a broad rim and a wide flat base is a mortar (KG 14/19,

Fig. 1.1-3). This shape can be placed in the Roman to Late Roman period. Parallels, possibly

made of the same or similar fabric, were found at Mons Claudianus, dating to the late 1st c

AD iii and at Kellia, dating to the Late Roman period.iv The fabric is an import of unknown

source. Onto the vessel’s interior surface numerous large grains of sand and hard stone were

added in order to create a rough surface for grinding (Fig. 1.3). In the lower part of the vessel,

where grinding using the greatest force took place, these stones have been mostly lost due to

use. It is only on the upper part of the vessel’s interior that they still are extant.

The jar KG 14/22 (Fig. 1.4) has a short neck and a tall rim with three horizontal ribs.

Two wide strap-handles with three parallel ridges are placed on the wide shoulders. The

shoulder area is decorated with painted curved elements in a light red to pink color. Traces of

more decorations below are also visiblev. Jars with similar necks and rims can be cited for the

Late Roman Periodvi. A piece from Elephantine is dated to the second half of the 5th or 6th c

AD vii. A Late Roman date is suggested for this piece.

The jar KG 14/24 (Fig. 1.5) has a medium length wide neck, which bulges out in the

upper half before forming a rim slanted downwards towards the interior. The body below the

neck shows pronounced ribbing. A similarly shaped neck and rim is found on a Late Roman

piece from Elephantine.viii A Late Roman date is likely.

A bowl with an elaborately pinched rim (KG 14/20, Fig. 2.1) shows strong signs of burning

on the interior. Both Late Roman bowls and cooking pots display similar rimsix. The dark soot

on the interior might suggest the use as a lid.

The amphora KG 14/25 (Fig. 2.2) has a slightly flaring neck with a flanged rim. This type had

been found at Kom el-Gir beforex and represents the very common Roman Nile amphora

classified as “Amphore Egyptien 3” xi. The body of the vessel is made of fine Nile fabric,

whereas the handles are somewhat coarser, displaying more organic tempering. A recent

study has further subdivided this class and our piece would fall into group AE 3.4.xii The date

provided for this group is the late 1st c AD – 3rd c AD,xiii whereas it has also been suggested

that in some parts of Egypt a variant of this shape continues into the 5th c AD.xiv

The amphora KG 14/26 (fig. 2.3) belongs to the family of imported ‘Late Roman 1’

amphorae. This vessel is among the most common finds in the survey region and was widely

distributed in the delta in Late Roman times.xv Examples have been found at Belshasha, Kom

el-Haweid, Kom Abu el-Khobeza (el-Nahas), Mustagidda, Nashart, Kom el-Roka, Shabas

Umayyir, Shabasia (Kom el-Ahmar), Senhur el-Medina and Shinnu. This piece is, however,

4

the first example from the site of Kom el-Gir. The ‘Late Roman 1’ amphora was produced in

the Eastern Mediterranean, with production sites located on Cyprus, the southern Anatolian

coast and Rhodes. It dates from the late 4th c – 7th c AD, with imports to Egypt breaking off

abruptly.xvi

A fragment of a terracotta figurine (KG 14/23, Fig. 2.4) depicts the head of an Apis

bull with a sun disc between his horns. A very close parallel from Athribis is dated to the 1st c

AD.xvii The neck of the animal shows three parallel horizontally incised lines, which represent

bands or necklaces.

R. Schiestl

2.2. The glass:

Fragments of glass from the surface of Kom el-Gir (table 2, figs. 3-4), collected in this

and previous seasons, were analyzed at the excavation house in Buto (Tell el-Farain) by

Daniela Rosenowxviii and Thilo Rehren with a portable X-ray fluorescence device. This

method measures the chemical composition of the glass. Certain components are

chronologically diagnostic, which in combination with the typology of the vessel provide

information on the date and place of production.

Inv. No. Shape Material Size Fig. No.

12/14 Lamp Light olive green glass h 3 cm + x; Fig. 4.9 12/21 Bottle/Flask Green glass rd 4.1 cm; h 1.9

cm + x Fig. 3.10

12/22 Pad base, bowl or jar Green glass bd 4.1 cm; h 1.7 cm + x

Fig. 4.5

12/24 Ring base, bowl or jar Colorless light green glass

bd 4.4-4.5 cm; h 0.9 cm

Fig. 4.6

12/26 Bowl Olive green glass rd 20 cm, bis 24 cm; h 1,3 cm + x

Fig. 3.6

12/32 Base, bowl or jar Colorless glass bd 7 cm; h 2.2 cm + x

Fig. 4.7

13/2 Bottle/Flask Green glass rd 1.9 cm; h 1.2 cm + x

Fig. 3.9

13/3 Base, cup or flask Colorless glass bd 4.7 cm; h 0.45 cm + x;

Fig. 4.1

13/5 Dish/bowl Olive green glass rd 10 cm; h 0.7 cm + x

Fig. 3.2

13/10 Base, cup or flask Blue green glass bd 5.2-6.1 cm; h 2.3 cm + x

Fig. 4.3

13/17 Cast ribbed bowl Blue green glass h 5.1 cm + x Fig. 3.8

5

14/1 Dish/bowl Olive glass rd 11 cm; h 1.1 cm + x

Fig. 3.3

14/2 Dish/bowl Green glass rd 17 cm; h 1.1 cm + x

Fig. 3.5

14/3 Dish/bowl Light olive green glass rd c. 34 cm; h 1.4 cm + x

Fig. 3.7

14/5 Dish/bowl Light yellowish-brown glass

rd 13 cm; h 1.2 cm + x

Fig. 3.4

14/6 Dish/bowl Olive glass rd 6.5 cm; h 1.6 cm + x

Fig. 3.1

14/8 Pad base, bowl or jar Light brown glass bd 5.6 cm; h 1.1 cm + x

Fig. 4.4

14/13 Base, cup of flask Colorless glass bd 4-4.4 cm; h 0.9 cm + x

Fig. 4.2

14/17 Lamp Olive green glass, dark blue blobs

rd c. 9 cm; h 1 cm + x

Fig. 4.8

Table 2: List of glass from Kom el-Gir, shown on figures 3-4 (abbreviations: h - height; rd - rim diameter, bd - base diameter)

The types of vessels represented are dishes and bowls (Fig. 3, nos. 1-8), bottles and

flasks (Fig. 23, nos. 9-10), the bases of cups or flasks (Fig. 4, nos. 1-3) the bases of bowls or

jars (Fig. 4, nos. 4-7) and lamps (Fig. 4, nos. 8-9).

Most glass has a green color, occasionally with a blue green hue. Other colors are

yellowish-brown and brown. Blobs of dark-blue are found as decoration on a lamp (Fig. 4.8).

A few pieces are almost colorless (Fig. 4.1-2, 6-7). Based on a preliminary dating, all samples

of glass date to the 1st c AD to 6th c AD, that is the Roman and Late Roman periods.

The earliest piece is a wall fragment of a cast ribbed bowl, a vessel type dating

between the middle of the 1st c BC to the late 1st c AD (Fig. 3.8)xix. Some fragments have

been intentionally de-coloured by the addition of antimony. This compositional raw glass

group seems to have been favoured in Roman Egypt and has been discovered in late 1st to 3rd

c AD contexts elsewhere in the country. Most pieces can be placed in the Late Roman period

(4th-6th c AD). A large group is composed of the so-called HITM xx glass (Fig. 3.1, 3–7, 10;

fig. 4.2, 8 and possibly 5), which was not produced before the Late Roman period.

R. Schiestl, D. Rosenow

6

3. Investigation of the landscape northeast of Buto (Tell el-Farain):

The goal of the field season in autumn of 2014 was the investigation of the ancient

landscape in the region between Buto (Tell el-Farain) and Kom el-Gir by means of auger core

drilling. Two transects of auger cores were made in this areaxxi(tables 3-4, Figs. 5-9). Two

further drillings were made in the fields adjacent to the site of Kom el-Gir in order to see

whether the site continues buried under the current surface.

The first transect consisted of five auger cores G 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 (table 3, Fig. 9), in

a line running roughly southwest to northeast, starting in fields northeast of Buto (Tell el-

Farain) and reaching just southeast of Kom el-Gir.

Number of auger core

coordinates Description of placement depth

G 10 31 12 13.0 N 30 45 31.4 E

In field northeast of Buto, just west of Masraf Firawun

10 m

G 11 31 12 34.0 N 30 45 30.5 E

In field northeast of Buto, northeast of G 10 9 m

G 12 31 12 45.8 N 30 45 35.4 E

In field northeast of Buto, east of Masraf Firawun

10 m

G 13 31 13 09.9 N 30 45 45.1 E

In field northeast of Buto, between Masraf Firawun and Tirat Karadwa

9 m

G 14 31 13 18.6 N 30 46 15.1 E

In field southwest of Kom el-Gir, between Tirat Karadwa and Masraf Mandurah

7 m

Table 3: List of auger cores of transect running roughly north-south

The second transect (G 15 – G 20, table 4) ran approximately east-west and was placed across

the slight depression in which the modern Masraf Bahr Nashart and the Masraf Nashart flow

roughly parallel today (Fig. 9). The question is whether these two modern waterways reflect

an ancient branch of the Nile, possibly a minor branch of the Thermutic branch of the Nile.

Number of auger core

coordinates Description of placement depth

G 15 31 13 30.2 N 30 47 11.3 E

In field east of Kom el-Gir, between Tirat Shaba and Masraf el-Aguzein

11 m

G 16 31 13 30.4 N 30 47 22.0 E

East of G 15, in field, between Masraf el-Aguzein and Masraf Bahr Nashart

8 m

G 17 and G 17 cl

31 13 33.6 N 30 47 29.8 E

East of G 16, in field east of Masraf Nashart, south of Masraf Mukhtar

9 m (G 17) 8 m (G 17 cl)

G 18 31 13 30.0 N 30 47 49.7 E

East of G 17, in field south of Masraf Mukhtar and southwest of Ezbet Omda

9 m

G 19 31 13 31.7 N East of G 18, in field south of Ezbet Omda 10 m

7

30 48 03.2 E G 20 31 13 39.6 N

30 48 19.4 E Northeast of G 19, in field, north of Masraf Mukhtar and east of Ezbet Omda

12 m

Table 4: List of auger cores of transect running roughly east-west

The watercourse is suggested both by the contour lines of the modern surface and by

ancient settlement remains (tells) aligned left and right of the proposed branch. These

settlements were investigated in the past seasons by the Regional Survey in the governorate of

Kafr esh-Shaikh.xxii Based on collections of surface pottery and auger core drillings these

settlements predominantly date to the Roman and Late Roman periods (late 1st c BC – 7th c

AD).

Corings G 10 to G 12 show thick layers of Nile mud deposited over layers of fine sand

or medium sand that occurred in depths greater than 6 to 7 meters. The work of Jürgen

Wunderlichxxiii classified the underlying sandy layers as part of the former Pleistocene

surface. North of coring G 13 peat layers occurred above these Pleistocene sediments that

drastically increase in thickness with a movement to the east along the transect G 10 to G 18.

Fig. 8 shows the auger head probes of coring G 17. Between 500 and 900 cm a sequence

starting with organic rich clays, leading over thick peat layers and fine intercalations of peat

and clay layers has been revealed. This bears witness to a dynamically changing environment

situated at the boundary between aquatic and terrestrial environments showing long phases of

peat development under aquatic conditions. Coring G 18 on the other hand more or less lacks

the sequence of thick clayey layers and is composed of an intercalation (quick succession of

different layers) of fine to medium sands that start in a depth of about 2 m below the surface

and reach down to 8 m below the surface. Additionally, gravel layers and rounded stones

appear in sequences within the sand layers.

This provides evidence for the existence of a former Nile branch that incised itself in the

former sediment sequences and deposited coarser sediments in its channel revealing the

higher transport capacity of a river. Additionally, with increasing distance to a river branch

sediments tend to get finer. During the Nile flood coarser material was deposited closer to the

river branch whereas fine material was transported further away. The sediment profiles of the

different corings within the transect also revealed that with the movement to the northeast

more fine sandy material occurred especially in the upper 4 meters of the corings G 14 to G

17.

8

Finally, the area just north of Kom el-Gir was investigated by two corings. The

question was to see whether the tell continues under the current horizon of the fields and what

the immediate surroundings of the settlement looked like in antiquity. Coring G 21 (31 13

33.8 N/30 46 34.2 E) was placed in a field about 100 m north the northern edge of the tell of

Kom el-Gir. It was drilled to a depth of 11 m. Despite being close to the ancient settlement, no

intact settlement layers were preserved. At a depth of 4.25 m – 5.40 m below the surface

numerous pottery sherds were found, embedded in loamy fine sand. More sherds were found

at a depth of 7.30 m below the surface. This material had most likely been washed down from

the settlement and re-deposited by alluvial activity. Coring G 22 (31 13 33.8 N/30 46 31.3 E)

was placed closer to the tell, about 15 m to its north. Its depth was 8 m. While the layer with

settlement material was thicker than in coring G 21, reaching over 2 m thickness and

containing many remains of coarse pottery or burnt brick, it is unlikely that these layers are

undisturbed. Most likely they were also re-deposited from higher up on the tell. The layers of

fine sandy alluvial deposits were reached at a higher level than in G 22, indicating a slope

towards the north.

Preliminary Conclusions on the auger core drillings:

The first preliminary results from the field show the existence of different environmental

milieus and landscape units such as river arms and aquatic environments. Laboratory analyses

and geostatistical evaluation of the results obtained in the field and the laboratory are required

to further differentiate and characterize these former environmental units. For example, it is of

great interest to know under which conditions the peat layers developed and which processes

where responsible for the frequent changes in the deposition of the peat and clayey layers.

Also the dating of the former Pleistocene surface or the sandy sediments of coring G18 by

means of optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) would be of great importance to

understand the chronology of events incorporated in the sediments Buto and the transects G

10 to 14 and G 15 to 20.

A. Ginau

9

4. Documentation of fields for comparison with satellite images:

On October 20-22 a tour of fields in the region was taken to document them by photos. On

these days pre-ordered Rapid Eye satellite images were being taken of the region. The point is

to compare the satellite images with the information on the ground – on the same date or as

close to that date as possible – and see in what way ground features are represented on the

satellite images. For example, we are asking the question whether fields in areas of former

watercourses have particular characteristics which set them apart. All in all, 43 open fields,

mostly dry, were visited and documented. The first two days a representative group of fields

distributed over the region was visited. The third day a specific group of fields were visited

where formerly four tells had been. The question is whether the fields in the area of former

tells showed specific signatures reflecting the conversion of ancient tells to fields. The

comparative analysis of the data will be undertaken in Germany.

A. Ginau

5. Digital elevation model of Kom el-Gir:

Based on measurements taken with a differential GPS a digital elevation model for Kom

el-Gir was created. This map could be completed in one day and provides the first reliable

absolute elevations of the site and the first detailed elevation model (Fig. 10). Combining the

information on the relief of the site with the subsurface information gained by the

investigations by magnetometryxxiv and the auger core drillings, some further observations on

the structure and development of the site can be made. The low lying and flat area in the

northern part of the site represents the zone of the temple enclosure. This area is surrounded

on three sides by a roughly crescent shaped area forming the highest parts of the site. In the

west and the south, this is the settlement area of the site, which eventually reached a much

higher elevation than the temple area. In the southeast, the adjoining area is the site of the

Roman camp, which also rose to a higher level. The phenomenon of settlements layers

accreting to levels high above those of the adjacent temple enclosure can frequently be

observed in ancient Egyptian settlements. The site of Buto (Tell el-Farain) itself is a good

example, where the Roman settlement layers reached the crown of the temple enclosure walls,

towering over the area of the temple building below.

R. Schiestl, A. Ginau

10

11

12

13

14

Fig. 5: Drilling auger core G 10. Fig. 6: Extracting auger core G 10.

Fig. 7: Preparation of the core for analysis.

15

Fig. 8: Photograph of coring G 17 reaching a depth of 900 cm

16

Fig. 9: Map of area investigated with auger core drillings in autumn 2014

17

Fig. 10: Digital elevation model of Kom el-Gir

18

i For further information on these sites see previous reports; Kom el-Asfar: First Report Spring 2010; Kom el-Gir: First Report Spring 2010, Second Report Autumn 2010; Reports 2011, 2012, 2013; Kom Saleh: First Report Spring 2010; Shabasia (Kom el-Ahmar): Second Report 2010; Kom Abu Khobesa (Abu Nahas): Second Report 2010. ii See Kom el-Gir: First Report Spring 2010, Second Report Autumn 2010; Reports 2011, 2012, 2013; iii R. TOMBER, The Pottery, in: V. MAXFIELD and D.P.S. PEACOCK, Mons Claudianus III. Ceramic Vessels and Related Objects, FIFAO 54, Cairo 2006, 133, fig. 1.51, nos. 137-138. iv M. EGLOFF, Kellia. La poterie copte. Quatre siècles d’artisanat et d’échanges en Basse-Égypte, Recherches Suisses d’Archéologie Copte III, Genève 1977, vol. 1, 143-151, vol. 2, pl. 80, 1-3, 6. v For a painted cooking pots see M. EGLOFF 1977, vol. 2, pl. 48.3; R.D. GEMPELER, Elephantine X. Die Keramik römischer bis früharabischer Zeit, AV 43, Mainz 1992, Abb. 92.12-15, 93.10-11, 97.9-10, 108.7-10, 109.2, 4, 6-7, 13, 110.1, 111.3-5, 7. vi J. FAIERS, Late Roman pottery at Amarna and related studies, EES Excavation Memoir 72, London 2005, 125, fig. 2.34, no. 259. vii GEMPELER 1992, 172-173, Abb. 105, Nr. 1. viii GEMPELER 1992, 178, Abb. 110, Nr. 12, K 469. ix M. EGLOFF, Kellia. La poterie copte. Quatre siècles d’artisanat et d’échanges en Basse-Égypte, Recherches Suisses d’Archéologie Copte III, Genève 1977, vol. 2, pl. 54, no. 3, pl. 76, no. 4. x See SCHIESTL, Third Report, Autumn 2011, fig. 1.6. xi J.-Y. EMPEREUR and M. PICON, Les ateliers d’amphores du lac Mariout, in: J.-Y. EMPEREUR (ed.), Commerce et artisanat dans l’Alexandrie hellénistique et romaine. Actes du colloque d’Athènes, organisé par le CNRS, le Laboratoire de céramologie de Lyon et l’École française d’Athènes, 11-12 décembre 1988, BCEH Suppl. 33, Paris 1998, fig. 4. xii D. DIXNEUF, Amphores égyptiennes. Production, typologie, contenu et diffusion (IIIe siècle avant J.-C. – IXe siècle après J.-C.), Études Alexandrines 22, 2011, 120-121, fig. 103-105. xiii DXINEUF 2011, 121. xiv D.M. BAILEY , A Form of Amphores Égyptiennes 3 from the South-West Fayum, CCE 8, 2007, 228. xv Compare also the numerous examples in P. WILSON and D. GRIGOROPOULOS, The West Delta Regional Survey, Beheira and Kafr esh-Sheikh Provinces, EES EM 86, Oxford 2009, figs. 106, 110, 112, 117-118, 125, 132, 139-141, 148, 151, 153, 156, 163, 172, 174. xvi C. VOGT, Les céramiques ommeyades et abbassides d’Istabl Antar-Fostat: Traditions méditerranéennes et influences orientales, in: G.D. D’A RCHIMBAUD (ed.), La céramique medievale en Méditerranée. Actes du Vie congrès de l’AIECM, Aix en-Provence, 13-18 novembre 1995, Aix en-Provence 1997, 257. xvii H. SZYMANSKA , Terres cuites d’Athribis, Monographies Reine Élisabeth 12, Turnhout 2005, 245, pl. XXX, No. 250. xviii University College London. xix Cf. D.B. HARDEN, Roman Glass from Karanis. Found by the University of Michigan Archaeological Expedition in Egypt, 1924-1929. University of Michigan Humanistic Series vol. 41, Ann Arbor, Michigan 1936, pl. XIV, 310; D. BAILEY , The glass vessels. In D. PEACOCK and V. MAXFIELD (eds), The Roman imperial quarries. Survey and excavation at Mons Porphyrites 1994-1998. Volume 2: the excavations, EES Excavation Memoir 82, London 2007, 233-266, 235, fig. 8.1. xx HIMT=High in Iron, Manganese and Titanium. xxi The drillings were conducted with a Wacker-Neuson percussion hammer, using a drill probe of 8 cm diameter for the first meter, followed by probes with 6 cm diameter for the next meters. Alternatively, after a few meters a smaller probe with 5 cm diameter was used. xxii See Fig. 1 in R. Schiestl, Field Boundaries and Ancient Settlement Sites: Observations from the Regional Survey around Buto, Western Delta, in: MDAIK 68, 2012, 175-190. xxiii J. WUNDERLICH, Untersuchungen zur Entwicklung des westlichen Nildeltas im Holozän, Marburger Geographische Schriften 114, 1989. xxiv See Report Autumn 2011, Report 2012 and Report 2013.