DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.50107#0161
OBJECTS FOUND IN CEM. N 500-900 141
To sum up the facts, a considerable part of the amulets found in Cem. N 500—900 are of forms with
early prototypes or later derivatives and thus fit in completely in the development of the Egyptian
archaeological groups (see List I, 10 early forms, and List II, 23 later forms); and these are amulets of
animal forms or of anthropoid forms (gods?). The majority of the amulets of List III which appear
peculiar to this period and also a majority of List IV belong to the same classes as those of Lists I and II.
Naturally, although the correlation with preceding and succeeding periods is thus completely established,
the corpus of forms presented by the amulets of Cem. N 500-900 (or in other words, Dyn. V-VI),
omits some early forms and presents about 30 apparently new forms (12 in List II; 10 in List III; and
7 or more in List IV), of which about 20 seem to have no later derivatives. Of these new forms, the
scarab beetle (No. 22), the hippo head (No. 9), the vulture (No. 19), the lion head (No. 8), and the ibis
(No. 18), all of List II, are of the class of animal amulets and all have later derivatives. Even the use of
the animal head to represent the animal is as old as the predynastic period. The jackal (? dog) head
(No. 11), the standing ape(?) (No.4), the other beetles (No. 23), the animal head (No. 10), the wasp
(No. 21), the bivalve shell (No. 30), and the bird (chick ?) (No. 20), of List III, are all also of the animal
class. The new forms which take the attention are the five amulets which represent parts of the human
(or divine) body—the sacred eye (No. 16), the human hand (No. 14), and the human foot (No. 15) of
List II, and the human face (No. 12) and human fist (No. 13) of List III. Two of these are unknown or
extremely rare in later times (the face and the fist); two others (the hand and the foot) were common in
the M.K. but rare later; and one, the sacred eye, is one of the most common of amulets in the New
Kingdom and later. The sacred eye is the eye of Horus or of Ra, for we cannot be certain which is
intended in this period. The use of the sacred eye in amulets, and in magic formulas is familiar, and the
use of the sacred eye here as a protective amulet is in accordance with the later use. This fact suggests
at once that the face (which would be that of the anthropomorphous god), the hand, the fist, and the
foot are also parts of a divine body and acquire their protective power from that fact. This suggestion
does not prevent the acceptance of Prof. Garstang’s idea that each of these amulets protects the part
represented by the amulet. It hardly seems to me probable that these amulets are connected in any way
with the dismembered body of Osiris, an idea which would hardly have spread through Upper Egyptian
villages so early as Dyn. V.
The other apparently new class, the offerings, fruits, flowers, loaves (?), and cakes (?), if it was
certainly established presents nothing out of accord with Egyptian ideas of this and later times. The
use of hpiroglyphic signs on plaques and stamp-seals, which appears only to be just beginning in Vi f
our period, was probably brought in by the spread of hieroglyphic writing which took place during the
pyramid age.
From the whole examination, I draw the conclusion that the use of necklace amulets appears to have
taken a great development for the first time here in Dyn. V. Almost all the forms cited as prototypes
were either attached to objects (slate palettes, &c.), in the forms of which they coalesced, or they existed
as separate figures without pierced holes or ring-shanks for attachment. The necklaces of the pre-
dynastic period consist of beads, shells, and roughly made pendants; and the majority of the early
dynastic necklaces have similar elements, but a few exceptions occur, like the necklace of gold elements
from N 1532 (see Naga-d-Der, I, pl. 6) with gold shells, gold gazelle, gold bull, &c. A few pierced
amulets (?) are also known gathered singly from graves. But it is in the period of Dyn. V that great strings
of amulets or of amulets and beads appear as necklaces on the bodies of quite ordinary persons in
local cemeteries. When we examine the material from Naga-’d-Der itself the poverty of the corpus of
amulets from Dyn. I-IV (Cem. N 1500, N 3000, N 3500-4900, and the early part of Cem. N 500-900)
To sum up the facts, a considerable part of the amulets found in Cem. N 500—900 are of forms with
early prototypes or later derivatives and thus fit in completely in the development of the Egyptian
archaeological groups (see List I, 10 early forms, and List II, 23 later forms); and these are amulets of
animal forms or of anthropoid forms (gods?). The majority of the amulets of List III which appear
peculiar to this period and also a majority of List IV belong to the same classes as those of Lists I and II.
Naturally, although the correlation with preceding and succeeding periods is thus completely established,
the corpus of forms presented by the amulets of Cem. N 500-900 (or in other words, Dyn. V-VI),
omits some early forms and presents about 30 apparently new forms (12 in List II; 10 in List III; and
7 or more in List IV), of which about 20 seem to have no later derivatives. Of these new forms, the
scarab beetle (No. 22), the hippo head (No. 9), the vulture (No. 19), the lion head (No. 8), and the ibis
(No. 18), all of List II, are of the class of animal amulets and all have later derivatives. Even the use of
the animal head to represent the animal is as old as the predynastic period. The jackal (? dog) head
(No. 11), the standing ape(?) (No.4), the other beetles (No. 23), the animal head (No. 10), the wasp
(No. 21), the bivalve shell (No. 30), and the bird (chick ?) (No. 20), of List III, are all also of the animal
class. The new forms which take the attention are the five amulets which represent parts of the human
(or divine) body—the sacred eye (No. 16), the human hand (No. 14), and the human foot (No. 15) of
List II, and the human face (No. 12) and human fist (No. 13) of List III. Two of these are unknown or
extremely rare in later times (the face and the fist); two others (the hand and the foot) were common in
the M.K. but rare later; and one, the sacred eye, is one of the most common of amulets in the New
Kingdom and later. The sacred eye is the eye of Horus or of Ra, for we cannot be certain which is
intended in this period. The use of the sacred eye in amulets, and in magic formulas is familiar, and the
use of the sacred eye here as a protective amulet is in accordance with the later use. This fact suggests
at once that the face (which would be that of the anthropomorphous god), the hand, the fist, and the
foot are also parts of a divine body and acquire their protective power from that fact. This suggestion
does not prevent the acceptance of Prof. Garstang’s idea that each of these amulets protects the part
represented by the amulet. It hardly seems to me probable that these amulets are connected in any way
with the dismembered body of Osiris, an idea which would hardly have spread through Upper Egyptian
villages so early as Dyn. V.
The other apparently new class, the offerings, fruits, flowers, loaves (?), and cakes (?), if it was
certainly established presents nothing out of accord with Egyptian ideas of this and later times. The
use of hpiroglyphic signs on plaques and stamp-seals, which appears only to be just beginning in Vi f
our period, was probably brought in by the spread of hieroglyphic writing which took place during the
pyramid age.
From the whole examination, I draw the conclusion that the use of necklace amulets appears to have
taken a great development for the first time here in Dyn. V. Almost all the forms cited as prototypes
were either attached to objects (slate palettes, &c.), in the forms of which they coalesced, or they existed
as separate figures without pierced holes or ring-shanks for attachment. The necklaces of the pre-
dynastic period consist of beads, shells, and roughly made pendants; and the majority of the early
dynastic necklaces have similar elements, but a few exceptions occur, like the necklace of gold elements
from N 1532 (see Naga-d-Der, I, pl. 6) with gold shells, gold gazelle, gold bull, &c. A few pierced
amulets (?) are also known gathered singly from graves. But it is in the period of Dyn. V that great strings
of amulets or of amulets and beads appear as necklaces on the bodies of quite ordinary persons in
local cemeteries. When we examine the material from Naga-’d-Der itself the poverty of the corpus of
amulets from Dyn. I-IV (Cem. N 1500, N 3000, N 3500-4900, and the early part of Cem. N 500-900)