a bowl in the nubian museum, aswan

8/12/2019 A Bowl in the Nubian Museum, Aswan

1/5

gypt xploration Society

A Bowl in the Nubian Museum, AswanAuthor(s): S. A. M. SwainSource: The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, Vol. 77 (1991), pp. 165-167Published by: Egypt Exploration SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3821962.

Accessed: 25/07/2014 12:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Egypt Exploration Societyis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal

of Egyptian Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 140 144 90 22 on Fri 25 Jul 2014 12:48:51 PM
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=eeshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3821962?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3821962?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ees


2/5

165

BRIEFCOMMUNICATIONS

A

bowl

in the Nubian

Museum,

Aswan

A

bowl

in

the Nubian

Museum at Aswan

appears

o be

eclectic,

combining

elements from

early

Nubian

and

Predynastic

raditions.

The

bowl,

although

ound

in a

grave

of

terminal

A-group

date,

may

be an

heirloom,

having

been made as a directresult

of

contact

with

Egypt

during

he

Naqada

IIc

and Ildi

periods.

ON

display

in

the Nubian Museum at Aswan is an unusual bowl

(pl.

XVI,

2).

It first

came to

my

attention

in

the summer

of

i988,1

and in the

spring

of

I989

I

was fortunate

enough

to travel

to

Aswan to study this, and other vessels, at first hand. I am most grateful to Mr Alfy Hinari, the

Director of Museums

in

Upper Egypt,

for

allowing

me

to

see

the

vessels,

and for

the welcome

which

I

was accorded

in

Aswan.

My

thanks are also due to

Mr

Michael

Murphy

who

provided

photographs

of the vessel.

The

particular

bowl with

which

this article is

concerned

(Aswan 230,

E26)

was

excavated

by

the

Survey

of

Nubia

in

I910-I

I.2

It

comes

from

the east bank of the

river,

and was

found

in

grave

I,

cemetery

142,

about

half

a kilometre from the

village

of

Naga

Wadi,

at the

boundary

between the

Sayala

and

Mediq

districts. The

cemetery

was

only

one of a

number of

similar

burial sites

in

the

area.

The

grave

in

which

the

bowl was found3 was rich

and

contained

a

considerable

quantity

of

decorated and black

polished

pottery

of

non-Egyptian type,

a

number

of

copper implements,

grinding

stones,

and

quartz palettes.

The

grave

itself

was

rectangular

and

large, being 330

cm in

length, and I6o cm in width. It contained two burials, an adult skeleton lying in a contracted

position

on its left

side,

with the

head

facing

south-south-west,

and

the

arm

bones of a

child. The

bowl was found

lying apart

from

the

main

contents

of the

grave,

behind the

head

of

the

adult,

between

a

grinding

table

and a

quartz palette.

The

cemetery

has been

dated to the

Early

Dynastic

period,

and

the

majority

of the

goods

found

in

it

suggest

that

grave

I dates

from the terminal

A-group,

although

the

scanty

way

in

which

it

was

published

makes

it

very

difficult to be

certain

about the date of the

stone and

copper

artefacts.

The

pottery

is,

however,

especially

suggestive

of

a

terminal

A-group

date,

being

largely

of a

fine,

pale

yellow

ware,

burnished

over

geometrical

designs

painted

in

red.4

The

bowl,

which is

illustrated

in

the

Survey

of

Nubia

volume for

I9Io-I

I,5

is circular

and

shallow

sided,

with a

rounded

base,

slightly

flattened at the

bottom. It is thin

walled,

about

4

mm

in

thickness,

narrowing

to

2

mm

at the

rim.

The

bowl,

which

seems to

belong,

at

least

in

part,

to

a

Nubian tradition, was hand-made, the rim being cut to shape, and the surface carefully smoothed

to

make

it

uniform. The

vessel was well

made,

and is an

excellent,

regular shape,

with a

diameter

of

I8.4

cm. The

type

of

clay

is

uncertain,

since

it

was not

possible

to examine

a

fresh

fracture,

but

it

would

appear

to be a fine

marl,

containing

few

inclusions,

and with an

unmottled,

pale,

buff-pink

surface. It

is,

of

course,

possible

that the

fabric was of

a dark

colour,

treated with a

pale slip

to

make it look

like a marl

clay,

but there is no

sign

of

such a

slip

flaking

off,

as is usual in

cases

where it

has been used.

The vessel

has the

appearance

of

being

made from

a

homogeneous

fabric,

which

has been

self-slipped

but not colour

coated. The

surface was unburnished.

1When

t

was

pointed

out

to

me

by

Mr M.

Jones,

to

whom

I

am

most

grateful.

2

C.

M.

Firth,

The

Survey f

Nubia,

Report

or

igi0o-igii

(Cairo,1927).

3

Firth,

op.

cit.,

pl.

5b.

4J.

D.

Bourriau,

Umm

el-Ga'ab.

Pottery rom

the Nile

Valley

before

he

Arab

Conquest

Cambridge,

I981),

99- 00.

5

Firth,

op.

cit.,

pl.

20.b.

.

This content downloaded from 140.144.90.22 on Fri, 25 Jul 2014 12:48:51 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/5

I66

BRIEF

COMMUNICATIONS

JEA

77

What

makes

the bowl

especially

interesting

is the

decoration

of

the interior.

The

paint

used

for

the

design

was

applied

before

firing,

and on

firing,

it turned

a

red to maroon

colour. The

combination

of a

pale

surface,

contrasting

with a

design

in

deep

red to maroon

paint,

recalls the

Decorated

ware of the

Predynastic period

in

Egypt,6

which is further recalled

by

the

design

used,

which seems certain to have been based

upon

the

so

called

'Naqada plant'

motif.7

It

has,

however,

been executed

in

a free and imitative

form,

which

suggests acquaintance,

but not

familiarity,

with

the motif. The vessel

is

quite

different from

the

thin,

burnished material

of

the terminal

A-group,

which was

also

found

in

the

grave.

The

bowl is

significant

because

it

combines elements

which are

typical

of native Nubian

pottery

with a colour scheme

and

design

based on

Egyptian

traditions. The

unusual,

non-Egyptian shape

of

the

bowl,

its

thin

walls,

the total

coverage

of the interior

with a

design

which enhances and

exploits

the

vessel

shape,8

and,

to some

extent,

its find

spot,

all

point

to its Nubian

origin,

whilst

the use of marl

clay,

as well as the

painted

design, suggest

some

Egyptian

influence.

It

cannot,

however,

be claimed

to

have been

of

wholly

Egyptian

manufacture, because,

although

the

design

was

undoubtedly

of

Egyptian origin,

it

was executed

in a

way

which

strongly suggests

that

the

painter

was not an

Egyptian,

but

rather,

someone who had seen and liked

Egyptian

Decorated

ware,

and

was

attempting

to

copy

it.

The

presence

of full-blown

Egyptian

vessels in Nubian

graves9

shows that Nubian

potters

could

have

been

acquainted

with

Predynastic Egyptian

pottery,

and the

style

of this bowl

suggests

that

such an

acquaintance

had a certain influence

on at least one

potter,

resulting

in the

production

of

an eclectic

vessel,

which

combined

Nubian

and

Egyptian

characteristics.

The

'Naqada plant'

motif was characteristic

of the

pottery

of

Naqada

II,

and Kaiser's

study

of

the

relative

dating

of

Predynastic pottery suggests

that this

style

was introduced

in

Egypt

during

the

Naqada

IlIc

period, continuing

in

use

during Naqada

IIdi.10

This

vessel,

apparently

influenced

by

a

motif

popular

only

in

Naqada

IIc-IIdi,

was

probably

produced

at a date

only

slightly

later

than that

of the

Egyptian

prototypes,

as a

result

of

exposure

to

Egyptian

vessels which

were

painted

with the

new,

distinctive

motif. There is no reason

why

this

should not

have

been

so,

and

it

seems

to me

likely

that

if

Egyptian

pottery

did influence the decoration of this

vessel,

it would

have

done

so soon after

the

introduction

of the new

style

in

Egypt,

rather than after

a

long time-lag,

as

Reisner

has

suggested.11

The vessel

was

probably

made,

therefore,

during

the

Naqada

IIc-IIdi

periods,

and

not

during

the terminal

A-group

period, by

which time the motif had

passed

out

of

use

in

Egypt.

It

is

possible

that

such was the

case,

but

the

earlier

date seems more

plausible.

This would

appear

to

imply

a

long gap

between

the

proposed

Naqada

IIc-Ildi

date

(c.

3300

Bc)12

for the

production

of the

bowl,

and its inclusion

in a

grave

which also contained

pottery

of the

terminal

A-group, (c.

3000

Be).13

The most reasonable

explanation

for this would be that the vessel

was

an

heirloom,

a

piece

of much

greater

antiquity

than the

other

contents of

the

grave,

which

was

kept

in

circulation

over a

long period

of

time,

and then buried

at a date much later

than

that

of its

production.

However,

H.

S.

Smith has

recently suggested

that the

currently accepted

dating

of the

A-group

may

not

be

accurate,

and that the whole

period

may

start at

a

much

earlier date than

previously

believed.14 If

so,

the vessel

need

not

have been an

heirloom,

but rather

a

piece

which was

made

during

the

A-group period

as

a result of

contemporary

contact

with

Egypt.

This would also

mean

that the

style

of the vessel need

not have been due

to the continued use

in

Nubia

of a

style

which

6

W.

M. F.

Petrie,

Corpus f

Prehistoric

ottery

ndSlatePalettes

London,

1921),

pls.

xxxiii-xxxv.

7The

plant

has

been

variously

dentified

as an aloe and

a banana.

For the most recent

discussion

of

the

question,

see

L.

Manniche,

An

Ancient

Egyptian

Herbal

London,

1989),

I

01.

8Bourriau,

p.

cit.

23.

9

G.

A. Reisnerand C.

M.

Firth,

The

Survey

f

Nubia

Reportor

9o7-8

(Cairo,

1911

,

317-22.

l0W.

Kaiser,

Archaeologia

eographica

(1957),

69-77

and

especially

pl.

23.

Reisner

and

Firth,

op.

cit.

320.

12

M.

A.

Hoffman,

EgyptBefore

he

Pharaohs

New

York,

1979),

i6.

3

Bourriau,

p.

cit.

99-

oo100.

4Smith as communicated o me a paperon this subjectto be published n

991

underthe auspicesof

the British

Museum.



4/5

I99I99I

BRIEF

COMMUNICATIONS

RIEF

COMMUNICATIONS

I6767

had

long

gone

out of

use

in

Egypt.

Until

any

new

dating

of

the

A-group

is

accepted,

however,

the

vessel

must be seen as

an isolated

piece,

older than

the other

contents

of the

grave

in

which

it was

found,

and made

in

an eclectic

style

under

the

influence of

Egyptian

pottery

of

Naqada

IIc-IIdi

date.

S. A. M. SWAIN

An

ushabti

of the

Viceroy

of Kush

Amenhotep*

Publication

of

an ushabti

of the

little

known

Eighteenth

Dynasty

Viceroy

of Kush

Amenhotep

in the

BirminghamCity

Museum.

THE

piece

which

forms

the

subject

of

this

short

note

(pl.

XVII,

I-4)

was

formerly

in

the Wellcome

collection and is now in Birmingham City Museum, accession number g969Wi15o. Wellcome

purchased

it

at the

MacGregor

sale

and

it

appears

in

Sotheby's catalogue1

as the

first item

of lot

I366:

'The

upper part

of a

large

Ushabti,

in red

sandstone,

with

deeply

cut

inscription'.

It is not

known how

MacGregor

acquired

it

and no details

of its

original

provenance

are

given.

Although

several

Eighteenth

Dynasty

viceroys

were

buried

at Western

Thebes,

to

claim such

a

provenance

for this

piece

would be

pure

speculation.

It

is

made

from a

hard,

fine-grained

and

densely packed

red sandstone.

The extant

height

is

i8.5

cm

and the

maximum

width,

at the

shoulders,

is

8.6 cm.

The lower

part

has been

broken

off,

probably

in

antiquity

as it is

an old break.

There is some

damage,

again

probably

ancient,

to

the

tip

and

right

side

of the

nose

and

two

small

chips

have

been

knocked

out

of the

wig.

There are traces

of

a

slightly

glossy

black

substance

(varnish?)

on the

left-hand

side

of the

face,

the

forehead,

front

and

back

of the

wig

and

over

parts

of the

inscription

on the

body.

The scattered

positioning

of

this

suggests that it is unlikely to have been accidentally spilt on the object, and so it has to be assumed

that

it

originally

formed

an

all over

coating.

It was

not uncommon

for

funerary objects

to be coated

in

black

varnish

from

the end

of the

Eighteenth Dynasty

onwards,2

though

this would

be an

early

example.

The

colour

of

it,

black,

served

as a

magico-religious

identification

with the

body

of

Osiris.

Iconographically

the

piece belongs

to

Schneider's

class

VA.3 It

is mummiform

and

without

hands,

and

therefore

also

without

implements

and basket.

The

figure

wears

a

tripartite

lappet

wig,

slightly

longer

at the

front than

at the

back,

but no

beard.

There is

no indication

of hair detail

nor

of the

horizontal

retaining

bands.

This form

is

common

in

the

early

New

Kingdom

and the

'massiveness'

of the

piece

is

characteristic

of the first

half

of the

Eighteenth

Dynasty.

Although

red

sandstone

is

most

typical

of

Nineteenth

Dynasty

ushabtis,4

such softer

stones

were used

from

the

mid-Eighteenth

Dynasty.

Five

horizontal

lines of text

are

preserved

around

the

back,

sides and

front

of the

piece:

'The

shd,

he

King's

son

(of

Kush),a

Amenhotep,

ustifiedbhe

says,

0Oheseushabtis, f one details heKing's

son

(of

Kush)

and

Overseer

of

Southern

Lands

Amenhotep

for

any

of

the

works which

are donec

in

the

necropolis,

as a

man at

his

duty,

then obstacles

are

implanted

for him

there,

in

order

to

make the fields

grow,

in

order

to

irrigate

the

bankside

lands,... .'

aThe

two strokes

after

nsw

are

presumably

intended

to stand

for the

egg

and a

stroke,

hence

the

reading

s;-nsw.

The

title

imy-r

hiswt

rsyt

in

line

3

shows that

the owner

is a

Viceroy

(King's

son)

of

Kush

rather

than a

true

prince

of

royal

blood,

as

the earliest

Overseers

of Southern

Lands also

held

the title

s;-nsw

(King's

son).

There

is

no evidence

that these

early

Viceroys

were true

royal princes,

however,

and

it seems

likely

that

the

*I

am

grateful

to

Dr

K.

A.

Kitchen

for

comments

on an

earlier

draft

of this

note.

1

Sotheby's

catalogue

for

26-6-1922

and

following

days.

2H.

D.

Schneider,

Shabtis

(Leiden,

I977),

I,

239-40.

3

Schneider, op. cit. 185-7.

4

Schneider,

op.

cit.

234.

had

long

gone

out of

use

in

Egypt.

Until

any

new

dating

of

the

A-group

is

accepted,

however,

the

vessel

must be seen as

an isolated

piece,

older than

the other

contents

of the

grave

in

which

it was

found,

and made

in

an eclectic

style

under

the

influence of

Egyptian

pottery

of

Naqada

IIc-IIdi

date.

S. A. M. SWAIN

An

ushabti

of the

Viceroy

of Kush

Amenhotep*

Publication

of

an ushabti

of the

little

known

Eighteenth

Dynasty

Viceroy

of Kush

Amenhotep

in the

BirminghamCity

Museum.

THE

piece

which

forms

the

subject

of

this

short

note

(pl.

XVII,

I-4)

was

formerly

in

the Wellcome

collection and is now in Birmingham City Museum, accession number g969Wi15o. Wellcome

purchased

it

at the

MacGregor

sale

and

it

appears

in

Sotheby's catalogue1

as the

first item

of lot

I366:

'The

upper part

of a

large

Ushabti,

in red

sandstone,

with

deeply

cut

inscription'.

It is not

known how

MacGregor

acquired

it

and no details

of its

original

provenance

are

given.

Although

several

Eighteenth

Dynasty

viceroys

were

buried

at Western

Thebes,

to

claim such

a

provenance

for this

piece

would be

pure

speculation.

It

is

made

from a

hard,

fine-grained

and

densely packed

red sandstone.

The extant

height

is

i8.5

cm

and the

maximum

width,

at the

shoulders,

is

8.6 cm.

The lower

part

has been

broken

off,

probably

in

antiquity

as it is

an old break.

There is some

damage,

again

probably

ancient,

to

the

tip

and

right

side

of the

nose

and

two

small

chips

have

been

knocked

out

of the

wig.

There are traces

of

a

slightly

glossy

black

substance

(varnish?)

on the

left-hand

side

of the

face,

the

forehead,

front

and

back

of the

wig

and

over

parts

of the

inscription

on the

body.

The scattered

positioning

of

this

suggests that it is unlikely to have been accidentally spilt on the object, and so it has to be assumed

that

it

originally

formed

an

all over

coating.

It was

not uncommon

for

funerary objects

to be coated

in

black

varnish

from

the end

of the

Eighteenth Dynasty

onwards,2

though

this would

be an

early

example.

The

colour

of

it,

black,

served

as a

magico-religious

identification

with the

body

of

Osiris.

Iconographically

the

piece belongs

to

Schneider's

class

VA.3 It

is mummiform

and

without

hands,

and

therefore

also

without

implements

and basket.

The

figure

wears

a

tripartite

lappet

wig,

slightly

longer

at the

front than

at the

back,

but no

beard.

There is

no indication

of hair detail

nor

of the

horizontal

retaining

bands.

This form

is

common

in

the

early

New

Kingdom

and the

'massiveness'

of the

piece

is

characteristic

of the first

half

of the

Eighteenth

Dynasty.

Although

red

sandstone

is

most

typical

of

Nineteenth

Dynasty

ushabtis,4

such softer

stones

were used

from

the

mid-Eighteenth

Dynasty.

Five

horizontal

lines of text

are

preserved

around

the

back,

sides and

front

of the

piece:

'The

shd,

he

King's

son

(of

Kush),a

Amenhotep,

ustifiedbhe

says,

0Oheseushabtis, f one details heKing's

son

(of

Kush)

and

Overseer

of

Southern

Lands

Amenhotep

for

any

of

the

works which

are donec

in

the

necropolis,

as a

man at

his

duty,

then obstacles

are

implanted

for him

there,

in

order

to

make the fields

grow,

in

order

to

irrigate

the

bankside

lands,... .'

aThe

two strokes

after

nsw

are

presumably

intended

to stand

for the

egg

and a

stroke,

hence

the

reading

s;-nsw.

The

title

imy-r

hiswt

rsyt

in

line

3

shows that

the owner

is a

Viceroy

(King's

son)

of

Kush

rather

than a

true

prince

of

royal

blood,

as

the earliest

Overseers

of Southern

Lands also

held

the title

s;-nsw

(King's

son).

There

is

no evidence

that these

early

Viceroys

were true

royal princes,

however,

and

it seems

likely

that

the

*I

am

grateful

to

Dr

K.

A.

Kitchen

for

comments

on an

earlier

draft

of this

note.

1

Sotheby's

catalogue

for

26-6-1922

and

following

days.

2H.

D.

Schneider,

Shabtis

(Leiden,

I977),

I,

239-40.

3

Schneider, op. cit. 185-7.

4

Schneider,

op.

cit.

234.



5/5

PLATE

XVI

LATE

XVI

LATE

XVI

LATE

XVI

I

Green

glass

dish

in

shape

of

Tilapia-fish,

Ashmolean

I989.85

(no.

284)

MUSEUM

ACQUISITIONS,

I

989 (p.

I

6

i)

Green

glass

dish

in

shape

of

Tilapia-fish,

Ashmolean

I989.85

(no.

284)

MUSEUM

ACQUISITIONS,

I

989 (p.

I

6

i)

Green

glass

dish

in

shape

of

Tilapia-fish,

Ashmolean

I989.85

(no.

284)

MUSEUM

ACQUISITIONS,

I

989 (p.

I

6

i)

Green

glass

dish

in

shape

of

Tilapia-fish,

Ashmolean

I989.85

(no.

284)

MUSEUM

ACQUISITIONS,

I

989 (p.

I

6

i)

2.

Aswan

230,

E26

A

BOWL

IN THE

NUBIAN

MUSEUM

(pp. I65-7)

2.

Aswan

230,

E26

A

BOWL

IN THE

NUBIAN

MUSEUM

(pp. I65-7)

2.

Aswan

230,

E26

A

BOWL

IN THE

NUBIAN

MUSEUM

(pp. I65-7)

2.

Aswan

230,

E26

A

BOWL

IN THE

NUBIAN

MUSEUM

(pp. I65-7)

I*

I

s

t

tA

)'

i

si.

,

I*

I

s

t

tA

)'

i

si.

,

I*

I

s

t

tA

)'

i

si.

,

I*

I

s

t

tA

)'

i

si.

,

-

7 1

4

-

7 1

4

-

7 1

4

-

7 1

4

4.

Durham,

N.

I454

(courtesy

the

Oriental

Museum,

Universityof

Durham)

4.

Durham,

N.

I454

(courtesy

the

Oriental

Museum,

Universityof

Durham)

4.

Durham,

N.

I454

(courtesy

the

Oriental

Museum,

Universityof

Durham)

4.

Durham,

N.

I454

(courtesy

the

Oriental

Museum,

Universityof

Durham)

A

TWENTY-FIRST

DYNASTY REBURIAL

(pp. I80-2)

TWENTY-FIRST

DYNASTY REBURIAL

(pp. I80-2)

TWENTY-FIRST

DYNASTY REBURIAL

(pp. I80-2)

TWENTY-FIRST

DYNASTY REBURIAL

(pp. I80-2)

3. Girton College stela of Amenophis I. Girton College stela of Amenophis I. Girton College stela of Amenophis I. Girton College stela of Amenophis I

A

NEW

KINGDOM STELA

(pp.

169-75)

NEW

KINGDOM STELA

(pp.

169-75)

NEW

KINGDOM STELA

(pp.

169-75)

NEW

KINGDOM STELA

(pp.

169-75)

ji

F

..

.

I

ji

F

..

.

I

ji

F

..

.

I

ji

F

..

.

I

. B

^

..

H

*IN

I*+a

: X

. B

^

..

H

*IN

I*+a

: X

. B

^

..

H

*IN

I*+a

: X

. B

^

..

H

*IN

I*+a

: X

s

.

I

I

.

I

I

.

I

I

.

I

I


a bowl in the nubian museum, aswan

Documents