DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4664#0038
THE AGE OF THE REMAINS.
33
found behind them, may well really belong to this
series : they may have been buried at the same time,
and in the same circumstances ; but there was a
small empty space between them, while in the great
deposit itself there was hardly a foot of ground that
did not contain some monument.
To the polished syenite vase of Pe. XXXVII. the
same remarks apply, and the revetment must also
belong to the earliest period.
CHAPTER XII.
THE AGE OF THE REMAINS.
75. The bare facts of the relative positions of the
objects as found have been given : an attempt must
now be made to give a date to the making of the
monuments themselves, and to the time at which
they were buried.
The main objects to be considered are the revet-
ment, the brick walls, and the three deposits.
The revetment is undoubtedly very early. The
clean sand within it, containing nothing but archaic
potsherds and flints, the depth of its foundation, and
the fact that similar work of naturally cleft stones
was found in other parts of the temple site, but only
at the lowest level, all make this point clear.
j6. The brick walls offer more difficulty: they
are of one character and size of bricks, and appear to
be all of one period. Two pieces of evidence as to
this period were found, but they were contradictory.
The first was given by a pile of fragments of
Middle Kingdom water-jars, heaped against the outer
face of the town wall to the S.W. near the water-
channel. This would lead one to suppose that the
walls were built during, or before, the Middle Empire.
But between two of the walls there was a scat-
tered foundation-deposit of Thothmes III. And the
pylon, as it was covered with blocks bearing his
name, was probably an original construction of the
same king. The question which it is desirable to
answer is, to what extent Thothmes rebuilt the
temple, and especially whether it is to him, or to
another earlier king, that the walls over the archaic
finds are to be attributed.
The dark clay below the foundation of the walls
might have given the answer, but though it was often
searched for fragments of distinctive Xllth Dynasty
pottery, none were ever found. All the sherds were
of Old Kingdom types.
J1/. The golden-headed hawk is certainly con-
nected in some way with the chamber under which it
was found. It was buried in a carefully-bricked pit,
square with the chamber, the top of the pit being just
below the level of the foot of the walls. It is possible,
if not very likely, that the god was kept here for
safety, and dug up at intervals for special ceremonies ;
but the small objects with it, so much like those in
foundation deposits, suggest that the burial was
intended to be permanent, and that this hawk was
the actual idol of the temple, honourably buried when
it was superseded by a more magnificent successor.
If this be so, the hawk was buried at the time the
N. part of the temple was built.
As the body of the hawk and its stand are made
of thin copper plates attached by nails, a rare method
of construction, and as, a few yards away, under
another chamber of the same building, and buried at
the same level, a statue of Pepy of the same construc-
tion was found, it is attractive to assume that hawk
and statue are of the same date. There is, at any
rate, no difficulty in supposing that the hawk is as
early as the Vlth Dynasty or earlier.
In the second group two objects, the statues of
Pepy and Kha-sekhem, are dated by their inscrip-
tions, and the lion also is probably of Old Kingdom
work. All three were buried after the walls were
built, and at the same time. And this time must
have been long after the reign of Pepy.
78. Of the main deposit three statements may be
made ; it is not a tomb ; it consists of temple furni-
ture and nothing else ; and the objects are all of one
general period.
The suggestion that it was a royal tomb has been
made more than once, and with some plausibility.
The slate palettes, which are glorified examples of
the palettes of the Naqada tombs, the flint knives,
the ruder stone bowls, are all what we might expect
to find in a royal tomb. But the idea cannot be
maintained. The presence of monuments of at least
three different kings, the absence of the great stores
of pots usual in the Abydos graves, the almost total
absence of brick work, and the careless way in which
the different objects were heaped together, are surely
conclusive.
The objects, too, were buried intentionally, not
lost to sight by an accidental accumulation of dust.
This is shown by the vase filled with small objects,
by the large vases being covered with rough pottery
lids, and by the fact that the ivory was found in a
long heap, just as if it had been buried in a trench.
F
I
33
found behind them, may well really belong to this
series : they may have been buried at the same time,
and in the same circumstances ; but there was a
small empty space between them, while in the great
deposit itself there was hardly a foot of ground that
did not contain some monument.
To the polished syenite vase of Pe. XXXVII. the
same remarks apply, and the revetment must also
belong to the earliest period.
CHAPTER XII.
THE AGE OF THE REMAINS.
75. The bare facts of the relative positions of the
objects as found have been given : an attempt must
now be made to give a date to the making of the
monuments themselves, and to the time at which
they were buried.
The main objects to be considered are the revet-
ment, the brick walls, and the three deposits.
The revetment is undoubtedly very early. The
clean sand within it, containing nothing but archaic
potsherds and flints, the depth of its foundation, and
the fact that similar work of naturally cleft stones
was found in other parts of the temple site, but only
at the lowest level, all make this point clear.
j6. The brick walls offer more difficulty: they
are of one character and size of bricks, and appear to
be all of one period. Two pieces of evidence as to
this period were found, but they were contradictory.
The first was given by a pile of fragments of
Middle Kingdom water-jars, heaped against the outer
face of the town wall to the S.W. near the water-
channel. This would lead one to suppose that the
walls were built during, or before, the Middle Empire.
But between two of the walls there was a scat-
tered foundation-deposit of Thothmes III. And the
pylon, as it was covered with blocks bearing his
name, was probably an original construction of the
same king. The question which it is desirable to
answer is, to what extent Thothmes rebuilt the
temple, and especially whether it is to him, or to
another earlier king, that the walls over the archaic
finds are to be attributed.
The dark clay below the foundation of the walls
might have given the answer, but though it was often
searched for fragments of distinctive Xllth Dynasty
pottery, none were ever found. All the sherds were
of Old Kingdom types.
J1/. The golden-headed hawk is certainly con-
nected in some way with the chamber under which it
was found. It was buried in a carefully-bricked pit,
square with the chamber, the top of the pit being just
below the level of the foot of the walls. It is possible,
if not very likely, that the god was kept here for
safety, and dug up at intervals for special ceremonies ;
but the small objects with it, so much like those in
foundation deposits, suggest that the burial was
intended to be permanent, and that this hawk was
the actual idol of the temple, honourably buried when
it was superseded by a more magnificent successor.
If this be so, the hawk was buried at the time the
N. part of the temple was built.
As the body of the hawk and its stand are made
of thin copper plates attached by nails, a rare method
of construction, and as, a few yards away, under
another chamber of the same building, and buried at
the same level, a statue of Pepy of the same construc-
tion was found, it is attractive to assume that hawk
and statue are of the same date. There is, at any
rate, no difficulty in supposing that the hawk is as
early as the Vlth Dynasty or earlier.
In the second group two objects, the statues of
Pepy and Kha-sekhem, are dated by their inscrip-
tions, and the lion also is probably of Old Kingdom
work. All three were buried after the walls were
built, and at the same time. And this time must
have been long after the reign of Pepy.
78. Of the main deposit three statements may be
made ; it is not a tomb ; it consists of temple furni-
ture and nothing else ; and the objects are all of one
general period.
The suggestion that it was a royal tomb has been
made more than once, and with some plausibility.
The slate palettes, which are glorified examples of
the palettes of the Naqada tombs, the flint knives,
the ruder stone bowls, are all what we might expect
to find in a royal tomb. But the idea cannot be
maintained. The presence of monuments of at least
three different kings, the absence of the great stores
of pots usual in the Abydos graves, the almost total
absence of brick work, and the careless way in which
the different objects were heaped together, are surely
conclusive.
The objects, too, were buried intentionally, not
lost to sight by an accidental accumulation of dust.
This is shown by the vase filled with small objects,
by the large vases being covered with rough pottery
lids, and by the fact that the ivory was found in a
long heap, just as if it had been buried in a trench.
F
I