DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49512#0074
42
TOMB TYPES OF DYNASTY I, FIRST PART (MENES TO ZET)
has about 21 sq. m., Mahasnah 2 has 11 sq. m., Tarkhan 2050, 24-3 sq. m., while the others average
about 5 sq. m. The noticeable fact is the large size of the Naqadah tomb and Giza V, both probably
the tombs of queens who were ladies of the families of provincial chiefs. It is clear that the palace-
facade mastaba was a type of construction which favoured size in the substructure where the depth
was only about 2 m. and permitted mastabas of almost any size. One of the most characteristic marks
of the palace-facade is the high figure of the relation between floor area and mastaba area, rising from
1/3-1/4 for the royal tombs and tombs of type I A to 1/9 (Naqadah tomb), 1/13 (QS 2185), 1/9 (Giza V),
1/25 (Tarkhan 1060), 1/24 (N 1506), and 1/22 (Tarkhan 2050) for types I B (1) and I B (2).
7. SECONDARY LINE OF DEVELOPMENT: SMALL TOMBS OF DYN. O TO ZET
I have described above the royal, the great provincial, and the large lined tombs of type I, con-
sisting of a c.b. substructure in an open pit entered from above, which are datable to Dyn. O and the
reigns of Menes to Zet or a little later. Parallel with these runs a line of graves (usually small) which
fall into three classes:
Type i. Continuation of the predynastic type of open pit (PD i) usually rectangular.
Type i a. Imitation of large type I A:
(1) with single chamber.
Type i b. With more than one chamber:
(1) imitation of type I B (1);
(2) imitation of type I B (2).
Type i c. Open pit with a recessed and sunk side chamber.
The essential difference between the large and the small tombs is based on the poverty of the
owners or builders of the small tombs. I have taken a floor area of 3 sq. m. as the dividing line between
large and small tombs, but this is of course an arbitrary line of division and I would not object to
a division either higher or lower. In district cemeteries the largest tombs as compared with the others
I have generally reckoned as large tombs. In the Predynastic period the whole series of tombs, both
primary and secondary lines, begins with an open pit which varied in size according to the means of
the owner. The use of wooden linings and more elaborate protection for the body marked the larger
graves, and they were of course much richer in their funerary equipment. After the introduction of
crude brickwork, in the large tombs, the unlined open pit continued in use and, like the similar pre-
dynastic type, was used both for large and small poor graves; but, after the reign of Zer, the use of the
small c.b. lined pit became more frequent. These are in fact imitative small forms. But during Dyn. O
(or perhaps a little earlier) a new type of small tomb came in for the poorest class of the population—the
side-chamber pit grave.
a. Small Tombs of Type i
The examples of the open-pit type of small grave which was a continuation in use of the predynastic
type i may be found in the publications of protodynastic cemeteries—ELKab, Naqadah and Ballas,
Naga-ed-Der, El-Amrah, Abydos, Tarkhan, Turah. The difference between these graves and the
predynastic graves of the same grave-forms lies in the funerary furniture which forms an archaeo-
logical group or series of groups.
TOMB TYPES OF DYNASTY I, FIRST PART (MENES TO ZET)
has about 21 sq. m., Mahasnah 2 has 11 sq. m., Tarkhan 2050, 24-3 sq. m., while the others average
about 5 sq. m. The noticeable fact is the large size of the Naqadah tomb and Giza V, both probably
the tombs of queens who were ladies of the families of provincial chiefs. It is clear that the palace-
facade mastaba was a type of construction which favoured size in the substructure where the depth
was only about 2 m. and permitted mastabas of almost any size. One of the most characteristic marks
of the palace-facade is the high figure of the relation between floor area and mastaba area, rising from
1/3-1/4 for the royal tombs and tombs of type I A to 1/9 (Naqadah tomb), 1/13 (QS 2185), 1/9 (Giza V),
1/25 (Tarkhan 1060), 1/24 (N 1506), and 1/22 (Tarkhan 2050) for types I B (1) and I B (2).
7. SECONDARY LINE OF DEVELOPMENT: SMALL TOMBS OF DYN. O TO ZET
I have described above the royal, the great provincial, and the large lined tombs of type I, con-
sisting of a c.b. substructure in an open pit entered from above, which are datable to Dyn. O and the
reigns of Menes to Zet or a little later. Parallel with these runs a line of graves (usually small) which
fall into three classes:
Type i. Continuation of the predynastic type of open pit (PD i) usually rectangular.
Type i a. Imitation of large type I A:
(1) with single chamber.
Type i b. With more than one chamber:
(1) imitation of type I B (1);
(2) imitation of type I B (2).
Type i c. Open pit with a recessed and sunk side chamber.
The essential difference between the large and the small tombs is based on the poverty of the
owners or builders of the small tombs. I have taken a floor area of 3 sq. m. as the dividing line between
large and small tombs, but this is of course an arbitrary line of division and I would not object to
a division either higher or lower. In district cemeteries the largest tombs as compared with the others
I have generally reckoned as large tombs. In the Predynastic period the whole series of tombs, both
primary and secondary lines, begins with an open pit which varied in size according to the means of
the owner. The use of wooden linings and more elaborate protection for the body marked the larger
graves, and they were of course much richer in their funerary equipment. After the introduction of
crude brickwork, in the large tombs, the unlined open pit continued in use and, like the similar pre-
dynastic type, was used both for large and small poor graves; but, after the reign of Zer, the use of the
small c.b. lined pit became more frequent. These are in fact imitative small forms. But during Dyn. O
(or perhaps a little earlier) a new type of small tomb came in for the poorest class of the population—the
side-chamber pit grave.
a. Small Tombs of Type i
The examples of the open-pit type of small grave which was a continuation in use of the predynastic
type i may be found in the publications of protodynastic cemeteries—ELKab, Naqadah and Ballas,
Naga-ed-Der, El-Amrah, Abydos, Tarkhan, Turah. The difference between these graves and the
predynastic graves of the same grave-forms lies in the funerary furniture which forms an archaeo-
logical group or series of groups.