Tristant & Smythe 2011 - Tristant, Y., Smythe, J., ‘New excavations for an old cemetery....

ORIENTALIA LOVANIENSIA

ANALECTA

————— 205 —————

UITGEVERIJ PEETERS en DEPARTEMENT OOSTERSE STUDIES

LEUVEN – PARIS – WALPOLE, MA

2011

EGYPT AT ITS ORIGINS 3

Proceedings of the Third International Conference

“Origin of the State. Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt”,

London, 27th July – 1st August 2008

edited by

RENÉE F. FRIEDMAN and PETER N. FISKE

94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd III94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd III 14/06/11 13:2914/06/11 13:29

CONTENTS

CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V

CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI

PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XVII

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XXIII

A. SETTLEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY

David A. ANDERSON, Evidence for early ritual activity in the Pre-

dynastic settlement at el-Mahâsna . . . . . . . . . 3

Nathalie BUCHEZ, Adaïma (Upper Egypt): The stages of state

development from the point of view of a ‘village community’ 31

Marek CH™ODNICKI, The Central Kom of Tell el-Farkha: 1000 years

of history (c. 3600–2600 BC) . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Grazia Antonella DI PIETRO, Miscellaneous artefacts from Zaway-

dah (Petrie’s South Town, Naqada) . . . . . . . . . 59

Thomas HIKADE, Origins of monumental architecture: Recent

excavations at Hierakonpolis HK29B and HK25 . . . . . 81

Jane A. HILL & Tomasz HERBICH, Life in the cemetery: Late Pre-

dynastic settlement at el-Amra . . . . . . . . . . 109

Yann TRISTANT, Morgan DE DAPPER, Sandra AUSSEL & Béatrix

MIDANT-REYNES, Cultural and natural environment in the east-

ern Nile Delta: A geoarchaeological project at Tell el-Iswid

(South) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

B. MORTUARY ARCHAEOLOGY

Renée F. FRIEDMAN, Wim VAN NEER & Veerle LINSEELE, The elite

Predynastic cemetery at Hierakonpolis: 2009–2010 update . 157

Micha¥ KOBUSIEWICZ, Jacek KABACINSKI, Romuald SCHILD, Joel

D. IRISH & Fred WENDORF, Burial practices of the Final Neo-

lithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt . 193

94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd V94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd V 14/06/11 13:2914/06/11 13:29

VI CONTENTS

Claudia M. LACHER, The tomb of King Ninetjer at Saqqara . . 213

Angela Sophia LA LOGGIA, Egyptian engineering in the Early

Dynastic period: The sites of Saqqara and Helwan . . . . 233

Joanna DºBOWSKA-LUDWIN, Sepulchral architecture in detail: New

data from Tell el-Farkha . . . . . . . . . . . . 257

Yasser MAHMOUD HOSSEIN, A new Archaic period cemetery at

Abydos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269

Ahmed MOHAMED GABR, The new Archaic period cemetery at

Abydos: Osteological report . . . . . . . . . . . 281

Ilona REGULSKI, Investigating a new necropolis of Dynasty 2 at

Saqqara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293

Yann TRISTANT & Jane SMYTHE, New excavations for an old

cemetery: Preliminary results of the Abu Rawash project on

the M Cemetery (Dynasty 1) . . . . . . . . . . . 313

Sonia R. ZAKRZEWSKI & Joseph POWELL, Cranial variability and

population diversity at Hierakonpolis . . . . . . . . 333

C. OBJECT STUDIES

Xavier DROUX, Twinned hippopotamus figurines of the Predynas-

tic period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349

Merel EYCKERMAN & Stan HENDRICKX, The Naqada I tombs H17

and H41 at el-Mahâsna: A visual reconstruction . . . . . 379

with Appendix: Andreas HAUPTMANN & Alex VON BOHLEN,

Aurian silver and silver beads from tombs at el-Mahâsna, Egypt 428

Gwenola GRAFF, Merel EYCKERMAN & Stan HENDRICKX, Architec-

tural elements on Decorated pottery and the ritual presentation

of desert animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437

Ulrich HARTUNG, Nile mud and clay objects from the Predynastic

Cemetery U at Abydos (Umm el-Qa‘ab) . . . . . . . 467

Stan HENDRICKX & Merel EYCKERMAN, Tusks and tags: Between

the hippopotamus and the Naqada plant . . . . . . . 497

Arthur H. MUIR, JR. & Renée F. FRIEDMAN, Analysis of Predynas-

tic ostrich eggshells from Hierakonpolis and beyond . . . 571

Vera MÜLLER, A peculiar pottery shape from Abydos . . . . 595

94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd VI94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd VI 14/06/11 13:2914/06/11 13:29

CONTENTS VII

G.J. TASSIE, What your hair says about you: Changes in hairstyles

as an indicator of state formation processes . . . . . . 605

D. TECHNOLOGY: POTTERY AND LITHIC PRODUCTION

Masahiro BABA, Pottery production at Hierakonpolis in the Naqada II

period: Towards a reconstruction of the firing technique . . 647

Emmanuelle COURBOIN, Raw materials supply and lithic technology:

A new look at de Morgan’s collection from Hierakonpolis

(Musée d’Archéologie nationale, France) . . . . . . . 671

Kit NELSON & Eman KHALIFA, Nabta Playa Black-topped pottery:

Technological innovation and social change . . . . . . 687

Heiko RIEMER, The lithic material from the Sheikh Muftah desert

camp site El Kharafish 02/5, Western Desert of Egypt . . . 705

Izumi H. TAKAMIYA & Hitoshi ENDO, Variations in lithic production

at Hierakonpolis: A preliminary report from the excavation

of HK11C Squares A6–A7 . . . . . . . . . . . . 727

E. EARLY TEMPLES

Richard BUSSMANN, Local traditions in early Egyptian temples . 747

Krzysztof M. CIA™OWICZ, The Early Dynastic administrative-cultic

centre at Tell el-Farkha . . . . . . . . . . . . . 763

Nozomu KAWAI, An early cult centre at Abusir-Saqqara? Recent

discoveries at a rocky outcrop in north-west Saqqara . . . 801

F. INTERACTIONS NORTH AND SOUTH

Nathalie BUCHEZ & Béatrix MIDANT-REYNES, A tale of two funer-

ary traditions: The Predynastic cemetery at Kom el-Khilgan

(eastern Delta) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831

Maria Carmela GATTO, Egypt and Nubia in the 5th–4th millennia BC:

A view from the First Cataract and its surroundings . . . 859

Agnieszka MªCZYNSKA, The Lower Egyptian-Naqada transition:

A view from Tell el-Farkha . . . . . . . . . . . 879

94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd VII94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd VII 14/06/11 13:2914/06/11 13:29

VIII CONTENTS

G. CHRONOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Stan HENDRICKX, The chronology workshop . . . . . . . 911

Rita HARTMANN, The chronology of Naqada I tombs in the Pre-

dynastic Cemetery U at Abydos . . . . . . . . . . 917

Nathalie BUCHEZ, A reconsideration of Predynastic chronology:

The contribution of Adaïma . . . . . . . . . . . 939

Mariusz A. JUCHA, The development of pottery production during

the Early Dynastic period and the beginning of the Old King-

dom: A view from Tell el-Farkha . . . . . . . . . 953

Eliot BRAUN, South Levantine Early Bronze Age chronological

correlations with Egypt in light of the Narmer serekhs from

Tel Erani and Arad: New interpretations . . . . . . . 975

H. POTMARK RESEARCH

Edwin C.M. VAN DEN BRINK, The international potmark workshop.

Progressing from Toulouse to London in the study of Predy-

nastic and Early Dynastic potmarks . . . . . . . . . 1005

Gaëlle BRÉAND, The corpus of pre-firing potmarks from Adaïma

(Upper Egypt) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015

Lisa MAWDSLEY, The corpus of potmarks from Tarkhan . . . . 1043

Anna WODZINSKA, Potmarks from Early Dynastic Buto and Old

Kingdom Giza: Their occurrence and economic significance . 1073

I. SCRIPT AS MATERIAL CULTURE

Alain ANSELIN, The phonetic intention: Ideograms and phono-

grams in potmarks of Dynasties 0–2 . . . . . . . . 1099

Josep CERVELLÓ-AUTUORI, The sun-religion in the Thinite age:

Evidence and political significance . . . . . . . . . 1125

John Coleman DARNELL, The Wadi of the Horus Qa-a: A tableau

of royal ritual power in the Theban Western Desert . . . 1151

Elise V. MACARTHUR, Hieroglyphic writing through the reign of

Aha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1195

94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd VIII94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd VIII 14/06/11 13:2914/06/11 13:29

CONTENTS IX

J. THEORETICAL APPROACHES

Branislav AN∑ELKOVIC, Factors of state formation in Protodynas-

tic Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1219

Marcelo CAMPAGNO, Kinship, concentration of population and the

emergence of the state in the Nile Valley . . . . . . . 1229

Juan José CASTILLOS, The development and nature of inequality in

early Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1243

Frédéric GUYOT, Primary and secondary social evolutions from

the Nile Valley to the northern Negev in the mid-4th millen-

nium BC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1255

Patricia PERRY, Sources of power in Predynastic Hierakonpolis:

Legacies for Egyptian kingship . . . . . . . . . . 1271

94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd IX94000_OLA205_Voorwerk.indd IX 14/06/11 13:2914/06/11 13:29

NEW EXCAVATIONS FOR AN OLD CEMETERY:

PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE ABU RAWASH PROJECT

ON THE M CEMETERY (DYNASTY 1)

YANN TRISTANT & JANE SMYTHE

Institut français d’archéologie orientale, Cairo, Egypt

Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

On the eve of World War I, work by P. Montet on the Abu Rawash plateau, east of Cairo, led to the discovery of an elite cemetery of Dynasty 1. After a hiatus of almost a century, this cemetery is today the subject of a new project by the Institut français d’archéologie orientale (IFAO), initiating a new phase in the study of this site. Following archaeological work on the Redjedef pyramid and subsequently on the Old Kingdom F Cemetery, we are currently addressing and resuming excavations in the M Cemetery with a view to expand upon the discov-eries of Montet and study the complete repertoire of objects resulting from his excavations. The aim of the project is to prepare a comprehensive publication of the graves and their goods. This article presents the results of the 2007 pre-liminary field season on the M Cemetery and the various thematic approaches that the authors intend to implement during future operations.

Situated on the west bank of the Nile, 8 km north-east of Giza, Abu

Rawash is the northern-most site of the Memphite necropolis region

(Fig. 1). The name by which we know the site today originates from the

nearby village of Abu Rawash. The most prominent monument in this

region is the mortuary complex of Redjedef, the third king of Dynasty 4.

Sited on an escarpment in the white limestone hills west of the river

Nile, the pyramid dominates a wide archaeological area bounded by the

Wadi Qaren to the north, the Cairo–Alexandria highway to the west,

the Wadi el-Hassana to the south and the Nile Valley to the east (Fig. 2).

The Abu Rawash area contains monuments and remains that originate

from a broad spectrum of periods, ranging from the Early Dynastic to

the Coptic. From the top of the Abu Rawash plateau, we can easily

imagine how impressive the mass of the king’s pyramid and the huge

mastabas of his sons would have been — clear reminders of who held

power. However, the elite of Dynasty 4 were only harkening back to an

already ancient tradition.

Several centuries before Redjedef decided to erect his pyramid on the

plateau, high-ranking individuals of mid-Dynasty 1 chose to make Abu

94000_Egypt3_OLA205_016.indd 31394000_Egypt3_OLA205_016.indd 313 14/06/11 15:0914/06/11 15:09

314 Y. TRISTANT & J. SMYTHE

1 For a complete overview of Abu Rawash during the Early Dynastic period, see Tris-tant 2008b.

Rawash their final resting place.1 On the eve of World War I, French

archaeologist Pierre Montet excavated a series of elite mastaba tombs

that he dated to the reign of King Den. Today, we ascribe these tombs to

the Naqada IIIC2 period. The M (for Montet) Cemetery is situated upon

a prominent plateau 1.5 km north-east of Radjedef’s monument (Figs. 2–3)

Fig. 1. Map of the Memphite region with the main Predynastic andEarly Dynastic sites (from Jones 1996: 252, fig. 1).


NEW EXCAVATIONS FOR AN OLD CEMETERY 315

and featured a group of mastaba tombs with mud-brick superstructures

ornamented with niched façades. The graves yielded abundant quantities

of pottery, stone vessels and small objects in ivory and copper. The dis-

covery of the M Cemetery was an important event in the history of Early

Dynastic research. Montet’s work predates W.B. Emery’s (1938, 1939,

1949, 1956, 1958) at North Saqqara by nearly a quarter century and was,

for its time, the first example in Lower Egypt of elite tombs that could

be in any way compared to those found at Abydos.

Despite numerous excavations during the 20th century, the Abu Rawash

plateau is still generally unknown. Documentation by the scholars who

worked at the site is still technically unpublished and articles dedicated

to their work constitute, at best, preliminary reports that certainly fall

short of what is required for a comprehensive understanding of the

necropolis. Accessible information is therefore limited and, as a result, the

M Cemetery has been generally overlooked in modern research. Adding

to this unfortunate situation is the threat of urban development, involving

the construction of modern villas near the palm groves in the vicinity.

The destruction of what remains of the Abu Rawash monuments increases

with every year. In short, the cemetery site of Abu Rawash has not been

fully investigated, it has been ignored in modern publications, and for

all intents and purposes it has been forgotten. This is an unacceptable

situation when we consider the archaeological potential of the site.

Fig. 2. Topographic map of Abu Rawash, scale 1:50,000 (1912).



2 See results of the Helwan Project led by E.C. Köhler (2005, 2008ab; Köhler & Jones 2009).

In 2007, the authors, on behalf of the Institut français d’archéologie

orientale (IFAO), undertook to re-investigate the M Cemetery with the

intention of re-excavating previously excavated tombs and of studying the

unpublished artefacts from these tombs, which are dispersed throughout

several museums. A re-investigation of this material is necessary to provide

important primary evidence for the development of funerary architecture.

Comparison of the Abu Rawash material with data provided by other

modern excavations within the Memphite region2 and the Nile Delta will

shed new light to the cultural dynamics of Early Dynastic communities

and the elite during the initial establishment of royal power in Egypt.

Fig. 3. Map of the M Cemetery (Montet’s plan corrected by M. Baud).



Previous research in the Abu Rawash area

Numerous travellers visited the site during the 19th century and left

descriptions of its archaeological features. J. Perring, for example, visited

the pyramid in 1837 (Perring 1842: 3–4, pl. 3). He made several draw-

ings of the pyramid but did not attempt to excavate it. R. Lepsius recorded

this pyramid in 1842–1843 along with a second one built of mud-brick

situated on the eastern-most promontory of the hill. He made note of the

Dynasty 1 mastabas in the M Cemetery, mentioning them on the map that

he drew as part of his Denkmäler (Lepsius 1847). W.M.F. Petrie dug a

trench inside the pyramid between 1880 and 1882. He reported that the

monument was already disappearing since it was being used as a quarry,

with caravans of camels descending down the causeway of the pyramid

laden with stone blocks to build modern Cairo (Petrie 1883: 53).

The French Institute was the first to undertake official excavations at the

site. The initial investigations were led by É. Chassinat (1901) from 1901

to 1903, followed by P. Lacau (1913) in 1912 and 1913. This work proved

that the monument belonged to Redjedef, son and successor of Khufu.

War in Europe brought an end to the work, but it was resumed 80 years

later. Under the direction of M. Valloggia, the joint expedition of the IFAO

and University of Geneva excavated around the enclosure wall as well as

within the pyramid itself (see Valloggia 2007 for full bibliography).

There has been much speculation about Redjedef’s motivation for

building his funerary monument at Abu Rawash and not next to his

father’s at Giza (see Lehner 1997: 120–121; Valloggia 2001: 53–54).

It is significant to note, however, that the pyramid was built by royalty

and therefore Abu Rawash is technically a royal necropolis, indicating

the importance of the site during the Old Kingdom. Since 1913, Lacau

was aware that the pyramid was not the only monument in the area and

that the remains in the vicinity could also be of interest. He entrusted

F. Bisson de la Roque with the excavation of an area located on the

eastern part of the plateau. This area, known as the F Cemetery, is located

1.5 km to the south-east of the pyramid and much closer to the floodplain

(Bisson de la Roque 1924, 1925). Concurrent with the project led by

Valloggia on the Redjedef pyramid, a second project was conducted by

M. Baud on the southern part of this cemetery. The main aim of Baud’s

excavations was the detailed investigation of the mastaba tombs that

were previously considered to belong to a provincial cemetery of the

late Old Kingdom. Reassessments of their exact construction date and

the layout of the necropolis in general are the principal concerns of this



current research. The results of the new excavations confirm that the

necropolis is indeed a royal one, with the presence of at least two ‘king’s

sons’ (Baud 2007; Baud et al. 2003; Baud & Moeller 2006).

Montet, who is best known as the excavator of Tanis, directed work

at Abu Rawash in 1913 and 1914. He conducted his excavations at

the western-most end of the Abu Rawash plateau. Now known as the

M Cemetery in his honour, the necropolis is situated on a small hill close

to the edge of the cultivation (Fig. 2). The M Cemetery at Abu Rawash

seems to have been used exclusively during the reign of Den (middle of

Dynasty 1, between 3350 and 2920 BC). During the two campaigns he

led on the site, Montet found 14 mud-brick mastabas with niched façades.

His work on this site was published in two short preliminary reports

(Montet 1938, 1946). The objects he found were sent to the Egyptian

Museum in Cairo, the Louvre Museum in Paris and to the collection of

Strasbourg University in France. Pottery and stone vessels were also stored

at the IFAO in Cairo for further study. Given a professorship in Strasbourg

in 1919, Montet left Abu Rawash to work in Tanis, where he discovered the

royal tombs of Osorkon II and Psusennes I on the eve of World War II.

A. Klasens, director of the Leiden Museum of Antiquities, continued

the excavation of the M Cemetery from 1957 to 1959, uncovering seven

more mastabas of Dynasty 1 date (Klasens 1960, 1961). Immediately below

the hill, at the edge of the cultivation, Klasens also revealed a sequence

of four Early Dynastic cemeteries, spanning the period from Dynasty 0

to late Dynasty 2 (Klasens 1957, 1958ab, 1959). The burials yielded

abundant quantities of stone and pottery vessels.

A short description of the elite mastabas in the M Cemetery

The Early Dynastic tombs discovered at the M Cemetery are elite mas-

taba tombs with mud-brick superstructures, their façades decorated

with recessed niches (see Tristant 2008a). They are massive structures

comparable to fortified walls. Possibly the largest and best-preserved

Dynasty 1 mastaba on the plateau, M07, was nearly 30 m long and

20 m wide. When Montet excavated it, the walls were partially pre-

served to nearly 1 m in height (Fig. 4). Niching on the mastabas is

similar to that of the earliest serekh panels or stylised representations of

the palace façade. The mud-brick walls were plastered with mud and

decorated with coloured paintings. The substructures of the tombs were

cut into the rock (Fig. 5) and consist of an open pit and side chambers.



Fig. 4. Eastern façade of Mastaba M07. When discovered, the mud-brick walls were preserved to a height of approximately 1 m

(Montet 1938: pl. 11; © Archives Montet Centre Wladimir Golenischeff, EPHE, section des Sciences religieuses, Paris).

Fig. 5. Plan and section of Mastaba M01 (Montet 1938: pl. 2) with the circular feature at the corner of the enclosure shown in the inset

(from Montet 1938: pl. 8).



The deceased may have been buried in one of the side chambers, with

the other chambers devoted to offerings. The tombs would have been

roofed with timber, matting and mud, and Montet found a great deal of

wood remains.

Around the largest mastabas were rows of secondary burials, some-

times with an enclosure wall surrounding the entire complex. In one of

the secondary burials associated with Mastaba M01, a stela (Cairo JE 44330)

was found in situ on top of the roof (Fig. 6). The location of the stela can

be compared with the empty niches found on secondary burials at Tarkhan

(Petrie 1914: pl. 15), where it is possible that they held the same kind of

epigraphic artefact. The enclosure wall of Mastaba M01 presented a cir-

cular feature at the corner (Fig. 5). Due to the state of preservation of the

walls at the time of discovery, the excavator was unable to determine if

similar features existed at the other three corners. However, a comparison

may be made with the royal funerary enclosures of Dynasty 1 at Abydos,

which also display circular features constructed of large unshaped lime-

stone rocks at their corners (Bestock 2008: 49).

Fig. 6. Secondary burial (no. 2) of Mastaba M01 with the stela in situ (© Archives Montet Centre Wladimir Golenischeff, EPHE,

section des Sciences religieuses, Paris).



The Abu Rawash mastabas are clearly among the most striking exam-

ples of early monumental architecture in Egypt, as a review of their

construction details illustrates. Mastaba M12 has a 25 m-long mud-brick

superstructure that was built over a large open pit cut into the rock.

A bench-like platform surrounds the pit, upon which were large con-

tainers made from limestone that resemble model granaries (Fig. 7).

They averaged 60 cm in height and 55 cm in diameter; they had no bases

and were sealed to the platform with mud. Montet recovered a small

piece of gold beside one of them and concluded that they probably con-

tained precious objects. The burial chamber of Mastaba M12 was closed

with a portcullis and the massive stone slab was slid into vertical grooves

on either side of the entrance (Fig. 7).

The burial chamber of Mastaba M02 was sealed with two limestone

slabs, 1.8 m high, 0.8 m wide and 0.2 m thick. One of these lime-

stone slabs was removed when Montet excavated the grave; the other is

still in place. This kind of portcullis, also known from Helwan, together

with the mud-brick mastaba and its characteristic decoration, constitute

Fig. 7. Mastaba M12 in June 2007, with a modern view of the remains of the portcullis (Photos by Y. Tristant), and an archival image of the limestone containers on the bench-like platform around the pit (© Archives Montet

Centre Wladimir Golenischeff, EPHE, section des Sciences religieuses, Paris).



an important stage in the development of monumental funeral architec-

ture.

In the chambers located within the mud-brick superstructures, Montet

discovered mainly storage jars; however, a wide range of stone vessels

and small objects in ivory or copper were still present inside the subter-

ranean chambers of the burials. The most exceptional objects were placed

within the burial chamber in close proximity to the owner. These included

small, carved ivory figurines representing lions, lionesses, dogs and

houses; a pink stone bowl in the shape of a papyrus boat; three calcite

jars decorated with a net pattern; copper chisels, razors and pins, and so

forth. (see Fig. 14). By the time Montet discovered the mastabas, they

had already been plundered undoubtedly on numerous occasions since

early antiquity. The presence of Old Kingdom tombs between the Early

Dynastic mastabas shows that the cemetery was reused at least during

Dynasty 4. Nevertheless, the objects found by Montet are numerous and

belong to the most precious examples of Early Dynastic craftsmanship.

Preliminary results of the work conducted by the IFAO

The discoveries made by Montet are quite exceptional. At the time he

excavated the niched mastabas, there were only two comparable sites in

Upper Egypt, namely Naqada and Abydos, where Petrie found the royal

tombs of Egypt’s first kings. The well-known niched mastabas of the

elite cemetery at Saqqara were not discovered until 1936 by Emery.

Therefore, Montet was the first to excavate this kind of mastaba in Lower

Egypt at a time when only a small number of comparisons were possible.

We must therefore acknowledge Montet’s important contribution and

express regret that most publications do not refer to this significant site.

However, Montet’s work at the M Cemetery has left several questions

unanswered.

• Who were the people buried in Abu Rawash?

• Where did they live? Where was their settlement?

• If this is an elite cemetery, why was it created?

• How should we consider the site within the Memphite context?

• What was the position of Abu Rawash in Lower Egypt during the Early

Dynastic period?

The IFAO Abu Rawash Project is focusing on several activities in order

to resolve these outstanding issues. Research conducted by the project



encompasses two very different activities. First, there are artefacts from

Montet’s initial investigation of the site, which are housed within various

institutes and museums throughout Egypt and Europe. These will be

recorded and published. Second, a systematic re-excavation of the

M Cemetery is being undertaken in order to provide insights into the

funerary architecture of Dynasty 1 at one of the most important elite

cemeteries of its time. The publication of the material from Montet’s

excavation as a single monograph (Tristant & Smythe in preparation),

together with a monograph dedicated to the new excavation work that the

project intends to carry out, will become the definitive sources for this

unique cemetery.

Our first season took place in the spring of 2007 under the auspices of

M. Baud, director of the fieldwork at the Old Kingdom F Cemetery. The

purpose of the first campaign was to assess the archaeological potential

of the M Cemetery (Fig. 8). The investigation began with a general survey

of the site in order to collect pottery sherds left by Montet. Collection of

this ceramic material allowed the investigators to make an initial dating

of the site. Pottery collected and saved by Montet tended to favour com-

plete or intact types only; sherds and broken pots were discarded. For an

exhaustive investigation to be conducted, it is of prime importance that

all sherds be collected and studied. Luckily for the current project, in

order to save time, Montet deposited the discards in the vicinity of each

Fig. 8. General view of the M Cemetery in June 2009 looking fromthe F Cemetery (Photo by Y. Tristant).



individual tomb structure and a systematic examination of the surface of

the cemetery allowed us to locate the spoil heaps from his excavations.

The re-excavation of the Montet tombs is justified in order to produce

a comprehensive study of the entire cemetery. Re-excavation of the tombs

cannot replace the initial work, although it will provide important new

primary evidence. The map produced by Baud in 2003 convincingly

shows that the topographic points set in the mid-20th century are largely

incorrect. For example, the orientation of Tombs M07 and M08 is wrong

(Baud 2005). It is unfortunate that Montet’s published map is too basic to

provide a clearer picture. The current survey, conducted in order to make

comparisons with Montet’s published photographs and plans, has allowed

the investigators to correct inconsistencies, such as the erroneous designa-

tions of Tombs M10 and M11, which should be transposed (cf. Fig. 3).

On completion of the general survey of the site, the second part of the

season involved a preliminary examination of Mastaba M13 and, in par-

ticular, the nearby spoil heap left by Montet. Mastaba M13 was reported

to be one of the most disturbed burials in the cemetery. The area around

this tomb provided the current investigators with a particularly interesting

starting point, as Montet stated that it yielded only a small number of

stone vessel fragments. The project set about sieving the spoil heap

from M13 using two sieves of medium mesh (Fig. 9). This spoil heap,

Fig. 9. Work in progress on the spoil heap from M13 in June 2007(Photo by M. Baud).



Fig. 10. Wine jars from the spoil heap associated with M13 (DEB01).

composed of sand, gravel, pebbles and artefacts, formed a mound meas-

uring about 7 m long, 5 m wide and 4 m high, making for an estimated

volume of 70 m3.

The spoil heap contained 1700 sherds of pottery, 120 fragments of stone

vessels and a large quantity of organic remains: human, animal and wood.

These artefacts were discarded by Montet most probably because they

were not complete. Of the pottery found, 90% derive from the so-called

‘wine’ jars, which are typical of Dynasty 1 and have been found in other

tombs in the cemetery (Fig. 10). Other pottery types consist of beer jars,

storage jars and bowls, all typical of the period (Figs. 11–12). A small

number of pottery types datable to the Old Kingdom and the modern

period were also recovered. The stone vessels included typical Predynastic

forms, such as calcite cylindrical vases and bowls of schist (Fig. 13).

The results of the first season’s work confirm that the M Cemetery

can be dated to the middle of Dynasty 1 and most probably to the reign

of King Den. This is supported not only by the inscriptional material,

which Montet relied upon, but also by the pottery evidence found by us

on the surface, in the spoil heap and in the basement of the IFAO.



Fig. 12. Sherds of imported ware from the spoil heap associated with M13 (DEB01).

Fig. 11. Typical Dynasty 1 pottery forms from the spoil heap associatedwith M13 (DEB01).



Fig. 13. Stone vessels typical of the Dynasty 1 from the spoil heap associated with M13 (DEB01).



In light of almost a century of new data now available, a fuller under-

standing of the cemetery itself is of major importance to the project.

Material recovered as a result of sieving the spoil heap associated with

Tomb M13 has provided new information about the site in general.

Future archaeological seasons will be dedicated to a full excavation of

Tomb M13 as well as the neighbouring Tomb M12, which is one of the

most important funerary structures on the site. Archaeological research

will continue methodically from west to east across the cemetery.

Artefact recording

Concurrent with the resumption of excavations at the M Cemetery, the

project is also studying the unpublished antiquities from the site. Objects

discovered by Montet are hosed within various institutions in France

(Louvre Museum in Paris; the Egyptian collection of the University of

Strasbourg) and Egypt (Egyptian Museum in Cairo). Following his two

seasons of work, Montet also deposited part of his finds at the French

Fig. 14. A selection of objects from the M Cemetery house in the Louvre Museum, Paris (Desroches-Noblecourt & Vercoutter 1981: 25).



3 This study was made possible through the courtesy of Dr. Guillemette Andreu-Lanoë of the Louvre Museum.

Institute, Cairo. The significant quantities of ceramic material and stone

vessels in the basement of the IFAO are currently being recorded and

analysed. This analysis is allowing the project to focus on some neglected

facets of Dynasty 1 stone vessels, such as typology issues, manufacturing

techniques and, to a lesser extent, chronology.

During September 2008, a study was made of the objects found by

Montet during his excavation at the M Cemetery now kept in Paris.3

The Early Dynastic collection from Abu Rawash includes 125 objects,

mostly stone vessels (68 specimens) and copper objects (45 specimens).

It also includes small ivory lion statuettes, ivory gaming pieces, a rectan-

gular greywacke palette, a set of flint tools and an ink-inscribed pottery

jar (Fig. 14).

In Egypt, a preliminary inventory has already been established of what

might be held within the Egyptian Museum thanks to Montet’s own

archives deposited in the Golenischeff Centre in Paris, which C. Zivie-

Coche very kindly allowed the author to consult. As the inventory is now

complete, work has begun at the museum in order to study, draw and

photograph all objects kept there.

Conclusions

Abu Rawash is clearly an important site. If we consider it within the

context of the Memphite area during the first half of Dynasty 1, the peo-

ple buried at the M Cemetery appear to have belonged to the highest class

of society. The closest comparable site is North Saqqara, which contained

tombs belonging to the very highest rank of people, possibly members of

the royal family. In design and arrangement, the palace façade mastabas

of Abu Rawash generally follow the better documented examples exca-

vated at Saqqara, although some features give the impression of a less

elevated status for those buried at Abu Rawash. The tombs are smaller

with comparatively fewer subsidiary graves, in marked contrast to the high

number of such burials at Saqqara. Helwan, the largest cemetery of the

Memphite region, also provides comparable material. During Z.Y. Saad’s

excavations at Helwan, large elite burials were found. Re-excavation

and publication of these tombs and their contents is providing fresh

data on the relationship between Saqqara, Helwan and Abu Rawash (see



overview in Köhler 2008a). In terms of architecture, another closely com-

parable cemetery is Tarkhan, c. 60 km south-west of Cairo, where Petrie

(1914) excavated large mastabas of Dynasty 1 date. It is possible that the

larger tombs in the Tarkhan Cemetery were reserved for the local gover-

nors of that region (see Mawdsley this volume).

At this point in our investigation and with the data available to us, we

suggest that the Abu Rawash elite were a group of people very closely

associated with the king and that the architecture of their tombs can be

read as a statement of that connection to royal power. Were they royal

administrators or local governors? Further investigations are necessary

to determine this; but whatever the case, Abu Rawash must be considered

within a regional and national context.

Bibliography

BAUD, M., 2005. La nécropole d’élite de la Ière dynastie à Abou Rawach: essai cartographique. Archéo-Nil 15: 11–16.

BAUD, M., 2007. Un décor de tombeau remis en contexte: le ‘scribe au travail’ du Louvre (E14321) et le mastaba M IX d’Abou Rawach. Revue d’Égyp-tologie 58: 1–28.

BAUD, M., FAROUT, D., GOURDON, Y., MOELLER, N. & SCHENK, A. 2003. Le cimetière F d’Abou Rawach, nécropole royale de Rêdjedef (IVe dynastie). Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 103: 17–65.

BAUD, M. & MOELLER, N., 2006. A Fourth Dynasty royal necropolis at Abu Rawash. Egyptian Archaeology 28: 16–18.

BESTOCK, L., 2008. The Early Dynastic funerary enclosures of Abydos. Archéo-Nil 18: 43–59.

BISSON DE LA ROQUE, F., 1924. Rapport sur les fouilles d’Abou-Roasch, 1922–1923. Fouilles de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 1.3. Cairo.

BISSON DE LA ROQUE, F., 1925. Rapport sur les fouilles d’Abou-Roasch, 1924. Fouilles de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 2.1. Cairo.

CHASSINAT, E., 1901. Note sur les fouilles d’Abou Roash (1900–1901). Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-lettres 1901: 616–619.

DESROCHES-NOBLECOURT, C. & VERCOUTTER, J. (eds.), 1981. Un siècle de fouilles françaises en Égypte, 1880–1980. Exposition au Palais de Tokyo, Paris, 21 mai–15 octobre 1981 à l’occasion du centenaire de l’École du Caire (IFAO). Cairo.

EMERY, W.B., 1938. Excavations at Saqqara: The tomb of Hemaka. Cairo.EMERY, W.B., 1939. Excavations at Saqqara 1937–1938: Hor-Aha. Cairo.EMERY, W.B., 1949. Great tombs of the First Dynasty Part I. CairoEMERY, W.B., 1954. Great tombs of the First Dynasty Part II. London.EMERY, W.B., 1958. Great tombs of the First Dynasty Part III. London.JONES, M., 1996. A Roman station at Abu Rawash. Mitteilungen des Deutschen

Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 52: 251–262.



KLASENS, A., 1957. The excavations of the Leiden Museum of Antiquities at Abu-Roash. Report of the first season: 1957. Part I. Oudheidkundige Mede-delingen uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden 38: 58–68.

KLASENS, A., 1958a. The excavations of the Leiden Museum of Antiquities at Abu-Roash: Report of the first season 1957. Part II. Oudheidkundige Mede-delingen uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden 39: 20–31.

KLASENS, A., 1958b. The excavations of the Leiden Museum of Antiquities at Abu-Roash: Report of the second season 1958. Part I. Oudheidkundige Mededelingen uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden 39: 32–55.

KLASENS, A., 1959. The excavations of the Leiden Museum of Antiquities at Abu-Roash: Report of the second season 1958. Part II. Cemetery 400. Oudheidkundige Mededelingen uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden 40: 41–61.

KLASENS, A., 1960. The excavations of the Leiden Museum of Antiquites at Abu-Roash: Report of the third season 1959. Part I. Oudheidkundige Mede-delingen uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden 41: 69–94.

KLASENS, A., 1961. The excavations of the Leiden Museum of Antiquities at Abu-Roach: Report of the third season 1959. Part II. Cemetery M. Oudheid kundige Mededelingen uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden 42: 108–128.

KÖHLER, E.C., 2005. Helwan I. Excavations in the Early Dynastic cemetery. Season 1997/98. Studien zur Archäologie und Geschichte Altägyptens 24. Heidelberg.

KÖHLER, E.C., 2008a. The Helwan cemetery. Archéo-Nil 18: 113–130.KÖHLER, E.C., 2008b. Early Dynastic society at Memphis [in:] ENGEL, E.-M.,

MÜLLER, V. & HARTUNG, U. (eds.), Zeichen aus dem Sand. Streiflichter aus Ägyptens Geschichte zu Ehren von Günter Dreyer. Menes 5. Wiesbaden: 381–399.

KÖHLER, E.C. & JONES, J., 2009. Helwan II. The Early Dynastic and Old King-dom funerary relief slabs. Studien zur Archäologie und Geschichte Alt-ägyptens 25. Heidelberg.

LACAU, P., 1913. Notes sur les travaux de l’IFAO (1912–1913). Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-lettres 1913: 519.

LEHNER, M., 1997. The complete pyramids. London.LEPSIUS, C.R., 1897. Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. Leipzig.MONTET, P., 1938. Tombeaux de la Ire et de la IVe dynasties à Abou-Roach. Kêmi

7: 11–69.MONTET, P., 1946. Tombeaux de la Ière et de la IVe dynasties à Abou-Roach,

deuxième partie: inventaire des objets. Kêmi 8: 157–227.PERRING, J.E., 1842. The pyramids of Gizeh III. The pyramids to the southward

of Gizeh and at Abou Roash. London.PETRIE, W.M.F., 1883. The pyramids and temples of Gizeh. London.PETRIE, W.M.F., 1914. Tarkhan II. Egyptian Research Account & British School

of Archaeology in Egypt 26. London.TRISTANT, Y., 2008a. Deux grands tombeaux du cimetière M d’Abou Rawach

(Ire dynastie). Archéo-Nil 18: 131–147.TRISTANT, Y., 2008b. Les tombes des premières dynasties à Abou Roach. Bul-

letin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 108: 325–370.



TRISTANT, Y. & SMYTHE, J., in preparation. Le cimetière M d’Abou Rawach(1re dynastie). Étude des tombes et du mobilier découverts par Pierre Montet (1913–1914), Fouilles de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Cairo.

VALLOGIA, M., 2001. Au cœur d’une pyramide. Une mission archéologique en Égypte. Lausanne.

VALLOGIA, M., 2007. Fouilles archéologiques à Abu Rawash (Égypte). Rapport préliminaire de la Campagne 2007. Genava n.s. 55: 177–182.


Tristant & Smythe 2011 - Tristant, Y., Smythe, J., ‘New excavations for an old cemetery....

Documents

Transcript of Tristant & Smythe 2011 - Tristant, Y., Smythe, J., ‘New excavations for an old cemetery....