DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4635#0021
i^iMB^Bi
DESCRIPTION OF PLATES.
17
a small oblong block of iron 1^ inch long, and the
other a tablet of blue frit (like 37).
These last two deposits clearly do not belong to
the same builder as the rest.
The deposits of Amenhotep II contained alabaster
models, the inscriptions identical with those of Thoth-
mes III, excepting the change of cartouche.
26. The temple to the east of the central eastern
gate of the town was excavated, and a Xllth dynasty
tomb was found beneath it. The walls had been
carried away, but the floor of the temple was nearly
complete, and from the scratches made upon it by
the masons the plan was recovered. This will be
published by Mr. Clarke. No foundation deposits
were discovered, and the only scrap of inscription
was a part of the cartouche of Nectanebo.
27. No certain solution can be given of the ques-
tion of the date of the great wall. Reasons for
thinking it to be the work of Usertesen II have
been already given, but several attempts were made
to test this hypothesis. The base of the wall was
cleared at several points to search for any accumula-
tion of rubbish left by the builders, and all the gate-
ways were examined for foundation deposits. In the
east gate, at a height of 3 feet above the stone pave-
ment, there was a layer of potsherds, painted with a
rough decoration of comma-shaped dashes, and with
them were some fragments of an ostracon written in
late demotic. This would show that the gateway
was already partly ruined and blocked in Roman (?)
times. And between the row of mastabas to the
north and the great wall were found the foot of an
ushabti, perhaps of the XXVIth dynasty, and a pot
(PL. XX, 13), probably Roman. The first was on
the ground level, the second 5 feet above it. But the
position of these objects only shows that the sand-
heap had not reached its present level when they
were dropped, and I observed nothing quite incon-
sistent with the early date suggested. It should be
added, however, that the stonework of the gates and
the arch in the north wall seem, to Mr. Somers
Clarke's experienced eye, to show some features of a
much later style. These he will describe in his own
work on El Kab.
28. A group of late bronzes were found at one
point in the south of the great enclosure. They were
800 in number, each mounted on a little wooden base.
One (PL. V, 3) was a fine piece, representing Nekheb
adored by a kneeling figure. The rest were Osiris
figures, except one, which represented Imhetep.
About a hundred were 5 inches high, or upwards, of
fair workmanship, made in thin bronze cast on a core.
They were all piled together in a space l"l m. by
•6 m., not near to any tomb.
29. Near the south-east corner of the town (Pl.
XXIV) was a peculiar brick building, consisting of
four rows of brick pillars, six in each row, enclosed
in a surrounding wall. The pillars were about 2 m.
square, the passages between them only about • 80 m.
wide. The actual height of the brickwork was 1' 50 m.
or less, but the building may have been a high one,
for the base of a brick staircase remained between two
of the pillars. Throughout the building were great
numbers of pots, chiefly broken, of a long bottle-
shape with a wide mouth, and pierced at the bottom,
with a hole an inch wide (XX, 14); these pots exactly
fitted certain holes left at regular intervals in the
brickwork. Pots nearly of this shape, but shorter, are
still used in Egypt, being built into the walls of
pigeon-towers to serve as nesting-places for the birds.
So far as the pottery guides us, the building might
then be of Arab times, but the large size of the bricks
(34 cm. X 17*5 X 11), part of a stone window found
on the south side, and the smooth surface of the site
before we began to dig, make it unlikely that the
structure is recent.
CHAPTER V.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATES.
30. Pl. i.—Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are the plan, elevation,
and longitudinal section of one (264) of the sunk
arch tombs believed to belong to the early Xllth
dynasty.
No. 4 gives the plan of the chamber in the IVth
dynasty tomb of Ka-mena ; 5 and 6 are rough notes
of the stone walls on the east and south sides of the
same chamber.
No. 7 gives the plan of the important tomb in which
an inscribed cylinder was found in association with
Neolithic pots (No. 166, § 13).
No. 8 is a rough-sketch plan of the great temple of
El Kab, inserted to show the position of the founda-
tion deposits.
31. Pl. II.—1. The stone vessels of the Neolithic
period and the Old Kingdom, as they were shown at
University College. Only one was perfect; even
those that look most complete were picked out in
small pieces from the gravel or mud, and were put
together by the help of our friends in England. On
the right hand are five slate paint slabs of the later
D
DESCRIPTION OF PLATES.
17
a small oblong block of iron 1^ inch long, and the
other a tablet of blue frit (like 37).
These last two deposits clearly do not belong to
the same builder as the rest.
The deposits of Amenhotep II contained alabaster
models, the inscriptions identical with those of Thoth-
mes III, excepting the change of cartouche.
26. The temple to the east of the central eastern
gate of the town was excavated, and a Xllth dynasty
tomb was found beneath it. The walls had been
carried away, but the floor of the temple was nearly
complete, and from the scratches made upon it by
the masons the plan was recovered. This will be
published by Mr. Clarke. No foundation deposits
were discovered, and the only scrap of inscription
was a part of the cartouche of Nectanebo.
27. No certain solution can be given of the ques-
tion of the date of the great wall. Reasons for
thinking it to be the work of Usertesen II have
been already given, but several attempts were made
to test this hypothesis. The base of the wall was
cleared at several points to search for any accumula-
tion of rubbish left by the builders, and all the gate-
ways were examined for foundation deposits. In the
east gate, at a height of 3 feet above the stone pave-
ment, there was a layer of potsherds, painted with a
rough decoration of comma-shaped dashes, and with
them were some fragments of an ostracon written in
late demotic. This would show that the gateway
was already partly ruined and blocked in Roman (?)
times. And between the row of mastabas to the
north and the great wall were found the foot of an
ushabti, perhaps of the XXVIth dynasty, and a pot
(PL. XX, 13), probably Roman. The first was on
the ground level, the second 5 feet above it. But the
position of these objects only shows that the sand-
heap had not reached its present level when they
were dropped, and I observed nothing quite incon-
sistent with the early date suggested. It should be
added, however, that the stonework of the gates and
the arch in the north wall seem, to Mr. Somers
Clarke's experienced eye, to show some features of a
much later style. These he will describe in his own
work on El Kab.
28. A group of late bronzes were found at one
point in the south of the great enclosure. They were
800 in number, each mounted on a little wooden base.
One (PL. V, 3) was a fine piece, representing Nekheb
adored by a kneeling figure. The rest were Osiris
figures, except one, which represented Imhetep.
About a hundred were 5 inches high, or upwards, of
fair workmanship, made in thin bronze cast on a core.
They were all piled together in a space l"l m. by
•6 m., not near to any tomb.
29. Near the south-east corner of the town (Pl.
XXIV) was a peculiar brick building, consisting of
four rows of brick pillars, six in each row, enclosed
in a surrounding wall. The pillars were about 2 m.
square, the passages between them only about • 80 m.
wide. The actual height of the brickwork was 1' 50 m.
or less, but the building may have been a high one,
for the base of a brick staircase remained between two
of the pillars. Throughout the building were great
numbers of pots, chiefly broken, of a long bottle-
shape with a wide mouth, and pierced at the bottom,
with a hole an inch wide (XX, 14); these pots exactly
fitted certain holes left at regular intervals in the
brickwork. Pots nearly of this shape, but shorter, are
still used in Egypt, being built into the walls of
pigeon-towers to serve as nesting-places for the birds.
So far as the pottery guides us, the building might
then be of Arab times, but the large size of the bricks
(34 cm. X 17*5 X 11), part of a stone window found
on the south side, and the smooth surface of the site
before we began to dig, make it unlikely that the
structure is recent.
CHAPTER V.
DESCRIPTION OF PLATES.
30. Pl. i.—Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are the plan, elevation,
and longitudinal section of one (264) of the sunk
arch tombs believed to belong to the early Xllth
dynasty.
No. 4 gives the plan of the chamber in the IVth
dynasty tomb of Ka-mena ; 5 and 6 are rough notes
of the stone walls on the east and south sides of the
same chamber.
No. 7 gives the plan of the important tomb in which
an inscribed cylinder was found in association with
Neolithic pots (No. 166, § 13).
No. 8 is a rough-sketch plan of the great temple of
El Kab, inserted to show the position of the founda-
tion deposits.
31. Pl. II.—1. The stone vessels of the Neolithic
period and the Old Kingdom, as they were shown at
University College. Only one was perfect; even
those that look most complete were picked out in
small pieces from the gravel or mud, and were put
together by the help of our friends in England. On
the right hand are five slate paint slabs of the later
D