Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean (12.2000(2001))

NAQLUN

EGYPT

REMARKS ON THE CHRONOLOGY

What is important for the chronology of
this assemblage is the fact that despite
meticulous exploration of the section of the
passage E.9 containing the deposit not one
of the vessels could be restored completely.
This could suggest that the vessels were
discarded sometime after they had gone
out of use and only the broken potsherds
were then thrown in to level the street.
Such a putatively two-phased deposition of
the sherds could have bearing on the
dating, as it is viable then that an 8th-
century deposit could have been re-
deposited and consequently could turn up
on one level with later pottery of the 9th
century. Additional probes and discerning
study of passage E.9 in the coming seasons

should provide evidence to either disprove
or confirm this theory.
Overall, taking into consideration
parallels from other sites, as well as from
room D. 1 (lowest layer) and Area B
(leveling layers) on the kom in Naqlun, it
seems that the deposit fits the general
chronological horizon of the mid-8th to
mid-9th century. Significantly, but
perhaps merely due to the randomness of
discovery, there are no glazed ceramics in
this deposit (as also in D. 1 and Area B).
This fact could be considered as an
additional argument in favor of our pottery
coming from a time before the introduction
of glazed ceramics in the region, that is, in
the late 9th or 10th century.

167