(PDF) Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report. Giza Occasional Papers 2 (GOP2)

We report on the results of archaeological work during season 2005 in the 4th Dynasty (c. 2500 BC) settlement sites at the Heit el-Ghurab and in the Khentkawes Town.

http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Giza Occasional Papers 2 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report Mark Lehner, Mohsen Kamel, and Ana Tavares With contributions by Ashraf abd el-Aziz, Banu Aydinoglugil, Tove Björk, Lauren Bruning, Justine Gesell, Anies M. Hassan, Günter Heindl, Dan Hounsell, Ed Johnson, Yukinori Kawae, Jessica Kaiser, Freya Sadarangani, Tim Stevens, James Taylor, Derek Watson, Tom Westlin, and Ali Witsell Ancient Egypt Research Associates, Inc. http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Published by Ancient Egypt Research Associates, Inc. 26 Lincoln Street Suite 5, Boston, MA 02135 USA Ancient Egypt Research Associates (AERA) is a 501(c) (3), tax-exempt, nonproit organization dedicated to research on ancient Egypt at the Giza Plateau. © 2006 by Ancient Egypt Research Associates Printed in Cairo, Egypt, by Virgin Graphics All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior consent of the publisher. ISBN: 0-9779370-0-3 Cover photo: Field School Unit 3 excavating Enclosure 1. From right to left: Rabea Eissa Mohammed, Mohammed Hatem Aly, James Taylor, Ahmed Mohammed el-Lathiy, Amira Fawzy Ahmed. http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Contents Acknowledgements 7 1. Introduction 9 2. Area Clearing and Mapping 11 he Khentkawes Town (KKT) 11 General Description of the KKT Town 11 he Menkaure Valley Temple Town and Ante-town Roads Running East 11 Period of Occupation of the KKT 12 he Environmental Setting of KKT 12 Aims of the Fieldwork in the KKT 13 Fieldwork in the KKT 13 Area Clearing and Mapping in SFW (he Western Town) Upper Town? 17 Fieldstone Wall of the Pedestal Building 17 11 16 Area Clearing and Mapping at Wall of the Crow North (WCN) 17 Two Old Kingdom Horizons 17 Trench (DDT) Clearing in 2005 19 he Sand Sandwich: An Interruption in Crow Wall Building? 20 3. Excavations in 2005 21 Excavations North of the Wall of the Crow (WCN) 21 Trench 2 Excavations 21 BP Excavation 24 Summary and Comments on the WCN Sequence 25 he Reasons for Masons Mound and the Wall of the Crow West Dump (WD) – Osteo Field School Training Burial 398 32 Burial 399 32 Burial 401 32 Burial 402 32 Burial 405 33 Burial 404 34 Burial 406 34 Burial 407 34 Burial 408 34 Burial 409 34 Burial 410 34 30 32 Giza Occasional Papers 2 3 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Burials in the Settlement Area 35 East of the Galleries (EOG) 35 Bread Mold Gravel, Pits, Troughs and Pedestals 36 Pink Stuf, Faience, and Other Older Phase Deposits 37 North of the Royal Administrative Building (BBN) and Field School Unit 4 40 RAB Street Excavations 40 Big Pits in BBN 40 Pedestal Installations: FS4 42 Royal Administrative Building (RAB) northwest corner (Area BB) 43 History of GPMP Excavations and Names of the RAB 43 Dismantling and Recording Walls of Structural Complex 1 44 Summary of 15 Phases 44 Structural Complex 1 44 Structural Complex 2 54 he Enclosures E1 and E5 (Field School Units 2 and 3) 61 FS3 Excavations in Enclosure 1 61 FS2 Excavations in Enclosure 5 62 Transect A and the Western Roadway (WRW) 63 Western Town Structures in Transect A 63 Stratigraphic Sequence in Transect A 67 Separations and Control 68 East of the Pedestal Building (Area AA) – Field School Unit 1 69 Pottery Mound (PM) in the Western Town (SFW) 69 Hints of Roofs and Decorated Walls: he Corridor and House Unit 1 70 More Pedestals: PM Quadrant in Square 6.G2 71 he Stuf of the Pottery Mound: Material Culture 71 Jars and Pedestals 72 Sealings from Pottery Mound 2005 72 House Unit 3 in the Western Town (SFW) 74 4. Mapping Late Period Burials 77 he 2005 Burial Survey by Jessica Kaiser 77 Burial Survey Methods 77 Burial Density and Survey Limitations 78 Burial Survey: Observations 78 5. Conservation 81 Eastern Town House Pilot Study, 2005 81 Ground Water Rise and Separation Layer 82 he Reconstructed ETH 82 What We Did and What We Proposed 82 Conservation Pilot Season: Conclusion 82 References 85 The 2005 Team 4 88 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf List of Figures 1. Map of the site, showing areas worked during the 2005 ield season 8 2. Map of the Giza Plateau showing the Khentkawes Town, Main Wadi, and Area A Worker’s Settlement 10 3. he WCN 2005 and related Wall of the Crow operations 18 4. Mud/rubble in-illed and dry stone walls in Trench 2, schematic 22 5. he Wall of the Crow schematic composite section. WCN 2005 Trench 2 and WCS 2001 “Deep Sondage” 23 6. Schematic map of Masons’ Mound, Trench 2, and the Wall of the Crow 31 7. Location of 2005 Field School burial excavations 33 8. Burials excavated during the 2005 Field School 33 9. Reconstruction of compartments over slots formed by pedestals 43 10. Structural Complex 1 in northwest corner of RAB. Maps of Phase 8 and Phases 10-11 46 11. Structural Complex 2 in Area BB (RAB) 56 12. Transect A1, with north-south Trench A1, east-west Trenches A2 and A3, FS2 excavations 64 13. SFW House Unit 3 ater 2005 excavations. Lehner ield drawing, reduced from 1:100 74 14. Digitized map of the surveyed burials north of Main Street 78 List of Tables 1. WCN 2005 excavation units 21 2. Summary of stratigraphic phases identiied in Area WCN 2005 27 3. List of phases for Area BB 2005 45 4. Objects and materials on or near Structural Complex 2 loors 58 Giza Occasional Papers 2 5 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 6 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Acknowledgements For a very successful 2005 season we are grateful to Dr. Zahi Hawass, Undersecretary of State and Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA). We thank Sabry Abd al-Aziz, General Director of Pharaonic Monuments; Atef Abu Dahab, Director of Giza and Saqqara; and Adel Hussein, Director of Giza. We enjoyed working in close collaboration with Mansour Bureik, Chief Inspector of Giza, and Inspector Mohammed Shiha. We thank Magdi Ghandour, Director of the Foreign Missions Department, and Shaaban Abdel Gaad for their help and assistance. We thank Osama Hamid for being our SCA inspector during the Winter and Spring 2005, Esmat Abd El-Ghani for acting as the SCA inspector during the last part of the Spring 2005 season. We thank Abeer Abdallah Bakri for being the inspector for the Field School. We thank Gaber Abd El-Dayem Ali Omar who was our main inspector during the fall 2005 season, assisted by Sherif Mohammed Abd al-Moneem and Ahmed Eiz in the storeroom. In the last half of the season, Hanan Mahmoud Soliman took over as our main inspector. We are especially grateful to Eng. Abd al-Hamid Kotb for assistance with mechanized equipment for clearing modern overburden from our site so that we could carry out the archaeology. Once again this season we are grateful for the services of loader operator, Mohammed Musilhi, who performed this task with skill and determination. Without this help we could not have done the work summarized above. Reis Ahmed Abd al-Basat did a remarkable job supervising our specialist workers and skilled excavators from Luxor. Deep gratitude goes to all of our benefactors for supporting our excavations, ield school, and other programs. For major support of our 2005 season we thank Ann Lurie, Charles Simonyi, David Koch, Peter Norton, Nathan Myrhvold, and Ted Waitt. Our work would not have been possible without the support of Jon Jerde, Bruce Ludwig, Robert Lowdermilk, Glen Dash, Matthew McCauley, Ann hompson, Michael Fourticq, Fred and Suzanne Rheinstein, Sandford and Betty Sigolof, Victor and Nancy Moss, David Goodman, Marjorie Fisher, Alice Hyman, George Sherman, Don Kunz, Bonnie Sampsell, Lora Lehner, Craig Smith, Michael K. MacDonald, Donna L. Dinardo, Robin Young, Ann Jain, Bonnie McClure, Charles Rigano, George Bunn, Bill and Kathy Dahlman, Ed and Kathy Fries, Ray and Mary Arce, Dennis Pinion, Barbara Radd, and Rick and Kandy Holley. Financial support for the ield school was provided by a USAID Egyptian Antiquities Conservation grant, the American Research Center in Egypt (ARCE), and the Charles Simonyi Fund for Arts and Sciences. We are grateful to Dr. Gerry Scott, ARCE Director; Michael Jones, Egyptian Antiquities Conservation Fund Director; Dr. Shari Saunders, Assistant to the Director; Chip Vincent, Egyptian Antiquities Project Director; Mme Amira Katub; Janie Abd al-Aziz; and Hussein Raouf for ARCE’s inancial and institutional sponsorship of the ield school. We would like to thank Charles Simonyi and Susan Hutchison, Executive Director of the Charles Simonyi Fund for Arts and Sciences, for their support of AERA’s portion of the ield school budget. Giza Occasional Papers 2 7 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 K WCN N99,250 J I DDT H G BP Trench 2 F E N99,230 Great Gate D C e Crow Wa ll o f t h Bakery N99,190 Eastern Compound Western Compound B A Z Gallery Set I 1 2 3 4 N99,210 X LNE Gallery Complex W V U Flood Layers T North Street Gate House N99,170 Y North Street S R Q Workers’ Cemetery Wa I H G BHT/ EOG Gallery IV.11 BB Rab Street E3 E4 FS Unit 1 E5 Pedestal Bldg E FS Unit 4 BBN Magazines Trench A3 F Eastern Town House South Street ll Trench A2 House Unit 1 D C B A Z Y X W V U T S Silos E2 Royal Administrative Building (RAB) E1 s Enclosure R Q P O N SFE FS Unit 3 FS Unit 2 House Unit 3 Area AA N98,990 J BBHT-2 Trench A1 N99,010 L K Town e Transect A M Flood Layers Hypostyle Hall Gallery Set IV Gallery Set III osur 3 4 5 6 N Eastern Encl N99,070 N99,030 Western Extension South Street Gate House FS Burial Excavations (WD) N99,090 N99,050 Main Street Main Street Gate House P O The Manor West Gate N99,130 N99,110 BBHT Gallery Set II N99,150 M L K J I H Pottery Mound N98,970 We D B rn 5 6 7 8 To N98,930 E C ste N98,950 G F Abu el-Hol Sports Club Soccer Field House Unit 2 A Z Y X SFW wn W V U Lagoon 1 T S N98,910 R Q 0 50 m 25 N98,890 P Standing Wall Island O N Lagoon 2 8 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report E500,790 E500,770 E500,750 E500,730 E500,710 E500,690 E500,670 E500,650 E500,630 E500,610 E500,590 N98,870 E500,570 M L K J http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 1. Introduction he 2005 season of the Giza Plateau Mapping Project at Giza, Egypt, took place over two periods: January 8th to May 31st and September 13th to December 13.th During the irst period we carried out major clearing, mapping, and excavation. We worked on two Pyramid Age settlements, the extensive Worker’s Settlement in Gebel Qibli, designated as Area A (the main focus of our work since 1988) and the Khentkawes Town. Between January 21st and March 17 t,h we conducted the Giza Field School for Supreme Council of Antiquities inspectors. We reopened the season in September and devoted this period to analysis and study of collections in our storeroom and to work on two areas of the Workers’ Settlement: the conservation pilot work on the Eastern Town House (ETH) and limited excavations of House 3 in area Soccer Field West (SFW) (ig. 1). Our work focused on four arenas: clearing and mapping, intensive excavation, mapping Late Period burials, and conservation. Since 1999 our excavation seasons in Area A have included large scale clearing of sandy overburden and mapping the ruins of an underlying ancient settlement over broad areas, as well as intensive, detailed excavations of selected, speciic parts of the site. We carried out large-scale clearing in three major areas, which are shown in igures 1 and 2: 1. Khentkawes Town (KKT) 2. West of the soccer ield (SFW) 3. North of the Wall of the Crow (WCN) We conducted detailed excavations in the following locations (ig. 1): 1. North of the Wall of the Crow (WCN) 2. West Dump (WD), Osteo Field School Training 3. East of the Galleries (EOG) 4. North of the Royal Administrative Building (BBN), Field School Unit 4 5. Royal Administrative Building northwest corner (Area BB) 6. he Enclosures, E1 and E5, Field School Units 2 and 3 7. Transect A and the Western Roadway (WRW) 8. East of the Pedestal Building (Area AA), Field School Unit 1 9. Pottery Mound (PM) in the Western Town (SFW) 10. House Unit 3 in the Western Town (SFW) We cleared our own back ill sand from previous seasons in order to map Late Period burial pits in every other 5-meter range north of Main Street and west of the Galley Sets I and II. In the fall extension of our 2005 ield season we worked on the conservation of Eastern Town House (ig. 1) as a pilot project to conserve the site by backilling and to reconstruct select structures for presentation. Figure 1. Facing page, plan of the GPMP site showing 2005 operations. Giza Occasional Papers 2 9 500700E 500,600E 500,500E 500,400E 500,300E 500,200E Mokkatam Formation 99,400N Pyramids Plateau Nazlet es-Semman H a r b o r? 99,300N Muslim Cemetery Menkaure’s Causeway WCN Menkaure Valley Temple he Crow Wa l l o f t W ad i Area A Site Passage to Upper Terrace Water Tank Upper Terrace Coptic Cemetery n Khentkawes Causeway 99,200N M a i Gebel Qibli Fieldstone House Lower Terrace Ramp Glacis Vestibule Maadi Formation 0 50 100 m 99,000N Limits of Clearing Ante-Town Menkaure Causeway Corridor Figure 2. Map of the Giza Plateau showing the Khentkawes Town, Main Wadi, and Area A Workers’ Settlement. (Topo map by Peggy Sanders, Archaeological Graphic Services.) http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report 500,000E 10 Khentkawes T) n (KK mastaba & tow http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 2. Area Clearing and Mapping In our broad area clearing and mapping we removed an overburden of mostly modern sand and other modern material to map ancient structures that show on the surface of the ruins without detailed, deep excavation. In the case of the Khentkawes Town, the overburden was a mixture of sand and deteriorated mudbrick that had accumulated in the 73 years since Selim Hassan excavated the site. The Khentkawes Town (KKT) he expansive settlement that we have been mapping and excavating south of the Wall of the Crow did not exist in isolation. On the other side of the wall, across the wadi now covered by the Muslim cemetery, lay the urban conglomerate of the Khentkawes Town and, 30 m southwest, a dense little settlement in front of the valley temple of Menkaure’s pyramid (ig. 2). Khentkawes, a 4th dynasty queen, ruled for a short time ater Menkaure. Her tomb looks like a giant mastaba or uninished pyramid. Several courses of large masonry blocks sit atop a giant block of bedrock let over from the quarries where the 4th dynasty builders took most of the stone for the inner core, and major bulk, of the Giza Pyramids. Stripped of most of its inish masonry, the chapel opens wide like a garage door in the lower southern corner of the eastern façade. Locals call the monument “he Sphinx’s Bread Oven” because the angular sides and the wide opening look like the ovens in traditional village houses. At the beginning of his third excavation season in mid-November 1931, Selim Hassan dug test trenches in search of a place for his dumps from excavations in the Central Field cemeteries. East of the Khentkawes Monument, his workers found the “remains of brick buildings lying at a depth of three or four m below the surface of the ground” (Hassan 1943:1). He began to excavate around the Khentkawes complex on January 20, 1932. he mudbrick buildings turned out to be a town of modular houses arrayed east-west along a causeway leading to the Khentkawes Monument. General Description of the KKT Town KKT is an L-shaped mudbrick settlement. he “foot” of the L, the priority area of our 2005 season, points southward. he “leg” of the town extends about 150 m west to east along the southern side of the causeway leading to the entrance of the Khentkawes Monument. he western part of the leg is about 26.44 m wide, while, due to a southward jog of the northern wall, the eastern end is about 23.37 m wide. From the southern side of the leg, the foot of the town extends about 61.5 m south and is about 43 m wide. he town covers an area 6,402 m2 (measurements from Selim Hassan’s [1943: :35-61, ig. 1] published map and text). he leg of the Khentkawes Town extends along a narrow causeway, 1.70 m wide, leading eastward from the chapel. Ten modular houses line the causeway. his planned community is set between thick enclosure walls. On the south an additional thinner wall forms the causeway to the queen's tomb. he southern extension (the foot) contains two, possibly three, much larger houses that might be comparable to the large houses we discovered in 2004 in the Western Town. The Menkaure Valley Temple Town and Ante-town he Valley Temple of the hird Pyramid of Menkaure (GIII.VT) lies just 30 m southwest of the end of the foot of the KKT. he GIII.VT is mostly buried. George Reisner (1931) excavated and back illed most of the Valley Temple more than a decade before Selim Hassan’s work. Reisner and Selim Giza Occasional Papers 2 11 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Hassan excavated houses and small bins and granaries that occupied the court of the Valley Temple and illed an ante-town that grew onto the eastern front of the GIII.VT. Reisner (1931:34-54) saw only a small part of the ante-town. Selim Hassan (1943:35-62) excavated the rest, an 18.45meter-wide extension on the eastern front contained by a thick mudbrick wall with reinforcing accretions. He called this the Valley Temple of the Khentkawes Monument, but it is probably really an extension of the Menkaure Valley Temple town. he north end of the ante-town had its own columned vestibule and is separate from the KKT, but lies only 18 m from the southwest corner of the foot of the KKT. People occupied this temple town ater the 4th dynasty for most of the rest of the Old Kingdom, a period of more than 300 years. Roads Running East Altogether four roads may have led east from the Khentkawes and Menkaure Towns, heading in the direction of our area WCN, north of the Wall of the Crow: 1. One road might have continued from the end of the Khentkawes causeway. 2. Another path might have run east from a stairway leading up to a terrace with granaries in the southern extension of the KKT. 3. he third road was a brick paved path up to the area between the southern foot of the Khentkawes town and the separate walled eastern addition—the ante-town—to the Menkaure Valley Temple Town. 4. he fourth road was the extension of the Menkaure causeway corridor south of the Menkaure Valley Temple. hese roads might begin somewhere north of the Wall of the Crow, within range of our clearing in WCN. Period of Occupation of the KKT In spite of the close proximity to the GIII.VT town, which lasted through the Old Kingdom, we know little about the life span of the KKT. When Selim Hassan excavated the Khentkawes Town in 1932 he found the walls standing waist-high. he town was never backilled nor in any way protected following excavation. Trodden by horse, camel, and cart riders, the walls have eroded down to the last few brick courses. Selim Hassan (1943:49-50) thought that the KKT was inhabited through the Old Kingdom. He mentions that houses in the eastern part of the settlement show evidence of rebuilding, possibly in two phases, but there was little indication of “a second level of building” elsewhere. Since he did not systematically publish the pottery or other material culture from Khentkawes Town, we do not know much about life in this town, how long it lasted, or even when it was built. The Environmental Setting of KKT We are not certain how far the KKT or the GIII.VT settlements extended eastward. We have hypothesized that a harbor illed the wide mouth of the wadi, but with more insight from sedimentary geology, and the results of our work north of the Wall of the Crow, we are now aware that the wadi might have lushed out sandy and gravelly material that could have illed any depression and built up a fan of deposits. he Khentkawes Town fronts directly onto the broad area between the Wall of the Crow on the south, and the Khafre Valley Temple and Sphinx on the northeast. his area takes in the mouth of the wadi, more than 250 m wide, between the Mokkatam and Maadi limestone formations. he KKT is on the opposite side of the wadi from our Area A, between the Gebel Qibli (the Maadi Formation knoll above our site on the northwest) and the Central Field quarries and cemeteries cut into the low southeastern slope of the Mokkatam Formation, the Pyramid Plateau proper. he modern Muslim cemetery has illed the wadi and expanded to the southeastern corner of the KKT. In aerial views and the 1:5,000 contour map of Giza, the KKT appears to ill the deep part of the wadi channel, about 125 m wide, where the cemetery clips its southeast corner. Our WCN operations in 2004 and in the contractors’ trench north of the Wall of the Crow in 2005 (see pages 17-20) are about 300 m due east of the GIII.VT. he contractors’ trench, 90 m long x 5 m wide, shows sand, gravel, and clay layers that might have been washed out by wadi looding. 12 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf hese layers occur mostly underneath two compact Old Kingdom surfaces. We have to wonder about the efect the active wadi had on KKT. Why does it turn 90° southward in the foot of the settlement? Did wadi looding clip the southeast corners of both settlements? Where did the roads from the GIII.VT and KKT settlements end on the east? Aims of the Fieldwork in the KKT he principal aims for our 2005 ieldwork in the KKT were to 1. examine the state of preservation of the town; 2. gather information about the deposits on which the town is founded and the relationship of the settlement to the wadi channel between the Mokkatam and Maadi Formations; 3. learn about the period that people occupied the town; 4. compare architectural forms, particularly domestic structures, with structures in Area A (the Gallery Complex and the Eastern and Western Towns). Fieldwork in KKT At the beginning of the season, a wide horse and camel trail cut northeast to southwest across the foot of the KKT. Everyday innumerable tourists and their guides would cross upon loose sand, chaf, and modern material that barely covered what remained of the ancient town walls. In 20042005, the contractors who were building the new high security wall around the Muslim cemetery laid down a red tala-gravel road, which covers more than 5 m of the southeast corner of the KKT foot. Much of this part of the town was already lost 73 years ago to the modern cemetery plots. In collaboration with the Giza Inspectorate, we restricted the horse and camel traic to this road by enclosing a wide area around the KKT and the GIII.VT with barbed wire fencing. Ana Tavares surveyed in a grid of stakes at 10-meter intervals that Pieter Collet and Mark Lehner used for mapping the KKT remains at scale 1:20. Kathryn Piquette recorded features and surface inds. She excavated one shallow probe along the southern wall of the causeway just west of the corner between the leg and foot of the town. The Upper Terrace On January 15 the workmen began to clear the KKT foot, working in swaths about 20 m wide from west to east, across the western enclosure wall. hey peeled of a thin layer of ine, dusty sand mixed with living and dead plants, mostly obnoxious camel thorn. his material, laid down in the last 73 years, covered crushed limestone debris that forms a broad terrace along the western edge of the KKT foot. he crushed, marly, limestone debris is very similar to the “masons’” debris banked against the south side of the Wall of the Crow (WCS) that we exposed and mapped in 2001. Pieter Collet and Mark Lehner mapped a series of 10 x 10 m squares from the causeway southward, taking in the upper terrace. hese squares included the western enclosure wall. Our aim was to provide a detailed large-scale mapping at 1:20 to augment the only published map of the whole town at scale 1:200. Western Enclosure Wall he western enclosure wall of the town showed almost immediately as a wide, dark band of alluvial mudbrick that contrasted with the yellowish-white limestone debris. he enclosure wall, 2.40 m wide, runs north-south. What remains of the wall is nearly lush with the surface of the terrace. For much of the wall, only millimeters remained of the bottom course of bricks. We had to re-clean and re-articulate the brickwork several times because of the windy, sand-blowing days. With every cleaning we lost more of the worn edges of the walls. he bricks difer signiicantly from most of the brick types in the Area A settlement, south of the Wall of the Crow. hey are much larger, 40 cm long and more. he mud is dark and crumbly. he workers call it “canal mud.” he closest bricks in the Area A are what we loosely call, “bubble gum brick,” dense, black, UTA (untempered alluvial) clay bricks used for the foundations of some, but not all, walls. he brickwork of the western enclosure wall of the KKT is very similar to that Giza Occasional Papers 2 13 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf in the foundations of the Menkaure causeway walls, allegedly inished by Menkaure’s successor, Shepseskaf, that we saw when the Giza Inspectorate cleared parts of the causeway up the slope toward the third pyramid in 2004. Like the western KKT enclosure wall, the Menkaure causeway walls are also founded or lanked by a layer of compact limestone debris. Water Tank Court An open court immediately south of the corner between the KKT leg and foot contains a long, rectangular trench that Selim Hassan called the “Water Tank.” During this season we cleared the tank down to sand and mud that probably accumulated since Selim Hassan’s excavations. he tank is oriented slightly west of north like most of the mudbrick walls of the KKT. It is 2.40 m wide east-west and 7.80 m north-south. he tank sinks a total of 1.89 m at the northern end from the top of the upper terrace to the bedrock bottom (measured at middle of tank loor). he thickness of the limestone debris layer forming the terrace is 96 cm here, so the tank drops 93 cm from its bedrock upper rim to the bottom (middle of loor). At the southern end the tank sinks a total of 2.60 m, 66 cm through the limestone debris and 1.94 m through bedrock. It is interesting that the upper bedrock rim slopes down 84 cm from south, elevation 18.82 m above sea level (asl), to the north, elevation 17.98 m asl. his slope runs counter to the general slope of the surface and the Mokkatam limestone formation, which declines from north down to south (or northwest-southeast). We only cleared a little more than the southern half of the bottom of the tank down to the bedrock loor, which shows a slight slope in the opposite direction from the upper rim, from north (elevation 17.07 m asl) down to south (elevation 16.88 m asl). he tank is situated in the open court to catch water running down the corridor parallel to, and south of, the Khentkawes causeway, and around the corner into the KKT foot where the court slopes markedly to the south-southeast, following the general slope of the limestone formation. here remain scant traces of an east-west mudbrick wall to the south, separating the Water Tank Court from another court that once contained the bases of three round silos, probably granaries. Selim Hassan mapped this wall as solid, so it must have eroded badly since his time. We mapped the remains of two round, brick-lined hearths or the bases of ovens between the southern end of the western side of the Water Tank and the Enclosure Wall. Selim Hassan mentioned the ovens, but does not show them on his map. Court of Silos and Magazines he bases of three round silos, probably granaries, which Selim Hassan found in a court against the western Enclosure Wall, have completely eroded away. In this area, erosion scoured the terrace down to the crushed limestone surface, except for dark patches here and there that remain from walls or other settlement deposits. East of the silos all that remains of two long rooms (possibly magazines) that Selim Hassan mapped and numbered 165 and 166 is the prominent Tura limestone slab marking the threshold to the northern room and traces of the mudbricks of the walls against the threshold slab and the southern wall of the southern chamber. Farther south on the upper terrace more traces of the walls remain. We mapped the walls as far south as our square 101.V28, taking in the rooms that Selim Hassan numbered 175 and 184 and the northern edges of rooms 174 and 183. The Lower Terrace he limestone debris terrace slopes slightly to the east, and then drops suddenly along a northsouth line to the lower level on which the walls of the large houses of the eastern part of the KKT foot are much better preserved, especially to the south southeast. Our workers had to move limestone debris that tomb builders from the Muslim cemetery had dumped onto the lower terrace. he new high security wall has arrested the advance of modern tomb building, but the wall was uninished along the KKT site during our work, existing only as a foundation and rebar framework. As of December 2005 the lower part of the wall was inished. he same layer of ine, silty, dusty sand with dried camel thorn illed and covered what remains of the lower town. To the southeast, the workers took out concentrated modern trash, dead wood, and twisted branches of live evergreens. We exposed the top of the ancient mudbrick walls 14 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf of a large house at the southeastern limit of Selim Hassan’s clearing and mapping. he walls on the lower level, a denser room structure, held up against erosion better than the walls that were isolated on the windswept and horse-trodden upper terrace. We exposed one of the long east-west walls forming the sides of the corridor and stairway leading from the wadi up to the upper terrace with the granaries and magazines. Khentkawes Town - Menkaure Valley Temple Town Interface Selim Hassan’s map leaves blank the area between the southern end of the KKT foot and the Ante-town of the GIII.VT. In his report Selim Hassan called the Ante-town the Valley Temple of Khentkawes, which he described as lying “at the south-eastern corner of a vast open area bounded on the north and east by the girdle-wall of the city. Access to this courtyard is gained by means of a broad causeway running westwards from the valley and lying between a thick mudbrick wall attached to the Valley-Temple and the girdle-wall of the city” (Hassan 1943:53). Selim Hassan (1943:54-55) mentions this causeway again in reference to the temple’s entrance: “he main entrance is approached by means of a wide brick-paved causeway which runs up from the valley in a westerly direction. At some time ater its original construction, this causeway had been repaved, and a thick layer of limestone rubble was laid down for the new paving.” During our Season 2005 the place in question was mostly covered by the new road used in constructing the high security wall. he road covers the little stretch of the southern wall of the Khentkawes foot that Selim Hassan mapped. he area in front of the east wall of the Ante-town, from its north end to the western wall of the KKT foot, has long been a depression choked with thick stands of reeds and modern trash. In order to check the condition of this important interface between the two settlements we cleared a strip 50 m long, narrowing from 19 (north) to 3.5 (south) m running northeast to southwest along the curving embankment of the new road. Fieldstone House On the north of the cleared strip we exposed the southern end of the western wall of the KKT foot on the east, and to the west we exposed the ieldstone walls of a small building, possibly a house, in which Selim Hassan numbered the rooms 186-190. A corridor 2.60 m wide runs between the KKT enclosure wall and this house. he house has been cut across east to west. he section appears to show that the house is founded upon layers of concentrated limestone gravel—the end of the upper, western terrace of the KKT foot—and gravely sand. hese layers combined are nearly a meter thick. he section drops from 17.97 m to 16.97 m asl. Ramp A ramp paved with alluvial mud at the bottom of the cut section is Selim Hassan’s “causeway.” We exposed it for a width of only 9 m east-west. From Selim Hassan’s map, a line that might represent the northern edge of the ramp extends to the limestone basin located of the northeast corner of the GIII.VT. In our exposure, the ramp is 8.2 m at its widest. It slopes markedly to the east, dropping from 17. 77 m asl to 16.97 m asl, 80 cm over the 9 m length of our exposure. he north side of the ramp ends at the cut through the house. At the base of the cut on the western side, a trench, illed with gravelly sand, angles southeastnorthwest, possibly let by a robber who pulled out the wall marking the northern shoulder of the ramp. he trench trends in the direction of the line on Selim Hassan’s map that might represent the northern edge of the trench farther west near the basin. he stratigraphic relationships are not clear. he limestone gravel appears to be the ill of the upper KKT terrace and to overlay the gravelly sand. he ramp does not appear to extend north under the gravelly sand. Rather, the gravelly sand continues deeper and goes under the ramp. It is certain there was a drop between the loor level of the KKT foot, the ieldstone house, and the top of the ramp. he cut may have removed a thick, mudbrick retaining wall that held back the limestone gravel and gravelly sand on the north. Such terracing is indicated on the southern side of the ramp, a large mudbrick wall, 1.3 m wide, plastered on the northern face. We exposed the wall for a length of 8 m. On the west, the wall meets the northeast corner of the Ante-town Giza Occasional Papers 2 15 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Ante-town Glacis he southern side of the southern wall of the ramp drops precipitously from elevation 17.75 to 16.00 m asl over a distance of 2 m. It forms a somewhat acute corner with the eastern front wall of the Ante-town. In Selim Hassan’s schematic map this wall appears to have been thickened in two or more phases. he rounded end of an accretion on the eastern side gives it the appearance of a fortiication. We found this face of the wall eroded into a slope that drops from 19.25 to 16.00 m asl, 3.25 m over 5 to 6 m. he slope is covered by many alluvial mud lenses or layers caused by erosion, studded with the stumps of reeds that have long grown here. As indicated by the elevation at the top of the wall, it rises much higher than the southern wall of the ramp. his dramatic slope gives the wall the appearance of a glacis, a slope that runs down from a fortiication. As for the Ante-town interior, we found the thick marl plaster line of the eastern side of its four-columned vestibule embedded in the mud that had deteriorated from the walls since Selim Hassan’s excavation. We also found where the plaster line turns the northeast and southeast corners of the vestibule—at the limit of our clearing of the overburden. It is important to work out the stratigraphic relations between the KKT foot, the ieldstone house, the terrace on which they sit, the ramp, the Ante-town, and the GIII.VT. he stratigraphy would inform us about the chronological relationships between the KKT and the GIII.VT temple town. We know from historical sources, including inscriptions that Reisner found in GIII.VT., that people occupied the town over the course of the whole Old Kingdom. As for the ramp and glacis, they seem to point to a dramatic drop in level between both the KKT and the GIII.VT and the wadi to the east. he ramp and glacis are approximately on line with our next major sphere of operations in 2005, the Wall of the Crow North, 300 m farther east. Backilling KKT At the end of the season we placed clean sand over the area where we had removed the thin overburden. Horseback riders and other traic remained restricted to the contractors’ road along the new high security wall around the modern cemetery. Area Clearing and Mapping in SFW (The Western Town) During early February, Reis Ahmed Abd al-Basat and the workers removed our backill from the Pedestal Building, which we had excavated in 1988-’89 and 1991 in our Area AA (see ig. 1). Mansour Bureik and Mohsen Kamel supervised Mohammed Musilhi as he used the loader to remove a series of long, linear, tall debris piles that ran north-south along the western limit of the southern part our site west of the soccer ield (SFW). It is within the area of the ancient settlement that we call the Western Town. We temporarily cut the road to our camp that crossed from south to north between the Workers’ Cemetery and our site below. he road ran over a corner of Area AA, which we had backilled in 1991. We exposed the surface of the settlement ruins from the Pedestal Building to the mastaba tomb that we had partially excavated in the squares designated A5 and A6 in 1988-’89 (Lehner 1992). he marl-lined walls of the settlement continue up to, under, and beyond the mastaba up the slope to the west. We quickly backilled with a band of thick, clean sand to create a roadbed, so that vehicles could once again cross from the GPMP camp to the parking area below the Inspectors’ rest house at the Workers’ Cemetery excavations. Cement trucks had to come through here for work on the high security wall around the modern Muslim and Coptic cemeteries adjacent to the site on the northwest. his work continued throughout most of our 2005 winter-spring excavation season. To the east of the road, we exposed more of the ruins of the settlement over an area about 15 to 20 m east-west (E500,615 to 635), and extending about 50 m north of the Pedestal Building (N99,015 to N99,060), and 55 m south of the Pedestal Building (N99,000 to N98,950). Upper Town? When we removed the sandy overburden that remained between the Western Town and Area AA, we found that the “mud mass” (the surface of the ancient settlement ruins) rises dramatically up 16 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf to the west toward the Pedestal Building. he preservation of the settlement along this western slope promises to be much better than in the rest of the Western Town. he dramatic change in elevation occurs almost exactly along our north-south grid line E500,630, between our Grids 5 and 6. here is much more of the Western Town on the upper slope of the ruins which continue, as I indicated above, west of the mastaba in our 1988 squares A5-6 (currently designated 5.K45-46). We might think of an upper and lower town. Fieldstone Wall of the Pedestal Building he western ieldstone wall of the Pedestal Building appears to have been a common wall for a much larger complex than just this structure. he wall, 75 cm thick, runs 30 m to the north where it thickens to 82 cm and merges into a stony mass. his mass is the tumbled ruins of a ieldstone structure, the “Stony Building” (see page 65), at the northwestern corner of the Western Town, below the irst bend of the thick Enclosure Wall around the Gallery Complex. he major ieldstone walls of this complex are 65 cm wide and run east. he building is 15.20 m east-west by 20 m north-south. Lying just north of it, the “Trapezoid” (see page 65) complex forms the south wall of RAB Street, which runs along the outside of the Enclosure Wall. Adjacent to the Trapezoid, RAB Street widens and opens to the northwest. he Stony Building may be part of an entrance into the Western Town from a pathway along the southern side of the Enclosure Wall. Area Clearing and Mapping at the Wall of the Crow North (WCN) During our October 2004 visit to Cairo to interview applicants for the ield school, we found a large, deep trench that the contractors for the new high security wall dug with a mechanized excavator. he trench was intended for the cement and steel walls of a corridor running from the town to the modern cemeteries. Work was suspended. In collaboration with the Giza Inspectorate of the SCA, we examined the archaeological layers in the cut. Recording the information in this trench became one of the main operations of the 2005 season. he trench, 4.5 to 7 m wide and 90.5 m long, ran roughly parallel to the Wall of the Crow (WOC) (ig. 3). Located 19 to 24 m north of the Great Gate in the WOC it extended eastward to a point about 14.8 m shy of the east end of the wall. he west end of the trench turned and ran south to meet the east corner of the north side of the Great Gate. Here the trench was shallow. But, 13.50 m east of where the trench turned to run parallel to the WOC, it drops from 1.50 to more than 2 m below the ancient compact surface that we exposed in our 2004 operations WCN and WCGN to reveal layers below that surface. Two Old Kingdom Horizons he sections in the long, east-west part of the trench showed a deeper and older compact layer of the masons’ debris that we had found in our previous operations. his older layer sloped down toward the east. A sand layer separated it from the masons’ debris layer that forms the compact surface we mapped in 2004. he east end of the south side of the trench cut through, and nicely sectioned, a brick-lined hearth associated with the lower horizon about 37.2 m west of the east end of the WOC. We sketched and measured the hearth in October 2004. he upper and lower layers of compact stony debris merge together, due to the upward slope to the west of the lower layer, about 18 m west of the hearth. his is why Adel Kelany did not encounter the lower horizon in his WCGN trenches in our spring 2004 ield season. In 2005 we labeled the contractors’ trench DDT. Derek Watson supervised work in the DDT trench with Ali Witsell. Ken Lajoie investigated the layers from his perspective as a geologist. Peter Collet drew the entire north and south sections at 1:20. Witsell and Watson drew selected patches of the sections at 1:10. Collet’s 1:20 drawing of the entire south section, a total length of 64 m that penetrated below the Old Kingdom compact surface, is 3.2 m long. he team color-coded some 200 features, each requiring description on our recording forms. Altogether the team recorded more than 500 stratigraphic features from the contractors’ trench. Giza Occasional Papers 2 17 18 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 L 0 K 25 50 m K N99,260 Car Park J J H G F E D I DDT WCGN 2004 Mohsen Kamel/ Adel Kalenay N99,240 F E WCE “Probe” 2001 D C Jessica Kaiser 1 A Z G WCN/E N99,230 Crow e h t f o Wall B H ound 2002 s’ M n o s Lauren Bruning Ma Ana Tavares/ Mohsen Kamel WCG (2001 Fiona Baker) C Trench 2 WCN Survey 2004 BP N99,250 WCE Drill Core 2002 Serena Love N99,220 B 2 A N99,210 Great Gate WCS 2001 FB/PS 3 Z 4 Bakery Y Y N99,200 X X Deep Trench W V all ure W Western Compound W U N99,190 Gallery Set I Eastern Compound V U N99,180 T T North Street Gate House Q 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Figure 3. The WCN 2005 and related Wall of the Crow operations. 45 46 47 48 49 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 S N99,170 E500,680 E500,670 E500,650 E500,660 North Street E500,640 E500,630 E500,620 E500,610 E500,600 E500,590 E500,580 E500,570 R E500,560 E500,550 S R 11 12 13 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf I Enclos Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report L 13 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Trench (DDT) Clearing in 2005 By January 2005, a huge chunk of the south section collapsed, taking the hearth into the soggy bottom of the trench. he sides of the trench had sloped into the bottom, which was illed with standing water and trash blown in from the parking lot for tourist buses just above and to the north of the Old Kingdom surface we exposed north of the Wall. he water table had risen markedly since the end of our previous season in May 2004. Our Saidi (Upper Egyptian) workmen cleaned the trench. hey brought down the material that had collapsed from the sides of the trench and used it to ill the bottom and create a raised working platform or ridge running the length of the trench. he contractors let large spoil heaps along the southern side of their trench, between the trench and the Wall of the Crow. he workmen cut the base of the spoil heaps back from the side of the trench to reduce the danger to those working in the bottom of the trench below. hen Mohammed Musilhi used the loader to remove the spoil heaps. He dumped the sandy material on the higher level to the north, along the southern side of the tourist bus parking lot. He also used the loader to clear a track down to the area of the eastern end of the Wall of the Crow and to widen our clearing there. Ancient Channels in the Trench Sections he contractors’ trench cut through ancient pits or channels that we could see in the sections. Sand and ine gravel that might have been water-sorted illed the channels. he north side of the trench cut through a prominent pit or channel, 4 m wide and 60 cm deep, about 29 to 33 m west of the east end of the trench. Mudbrick clumps, potsherds, limestone debris, coarse sand and other cultural material illed the channel, which is associated with the lower horizon of compact masons’ debris. A layer of ine granite dust, 12 cm thick, caps the channel. his layer indicates that people were working granite nearby. Granite would have been brought from Aswan, 500 miles south of Giza. (We have found much granite dust in the masons’ debris on the south side of the wall of the Crow, and in similar debris illing the loor of the passage through the Gate. We found a massive deposit of granite dust illing a deep cut through the remains of the galleries of the east end of the Wall of the Crow in our WCE operation in 2002.) Another pit (BP, see below), which could be part of the same channel, shows in the southern section of the trench much farther to the west, near where the bottom of the trench stepped up before it turned toward the Gate, 60 m from the east end of the trench. Here a dark layer of black ash and/or alluvial mud, 18 cm thick, caps the channel, which is more than 4 m wide and 90 cm deep. he pottery we saw in the ill included a nearly complete, crude, red-ware jar. Black, muddy ash and coarse pebbly sand also illed the channel, which cut through natural layers of gravelly sand deposited and sorted by running water. If the pits in the north and south sections are parts of the same continuous channel, this channel would have run longitudinally west-east, nearly but not quite parallel to the Wall of the Crow. hat may be why it shows in the south and north sections at locations so far apart. he channel could have followed a sinuous, rather than straight, course from west to east. Hearths In addition to the hearth located 37.2 m west of the east end of the Wall of the Crow, we saw more hearths in the sections toward the central and eastern part of the trench. hese are not as substantial as the one we sketched in October 2004, consisting of deinite patches of burning and cultural material, located here and there, close to the cut of the channel in the northern section. here is also a bit of architecture in the form of a pan-shaped, shallow pit with a uniform lining of gray alluvial mud. he layers and pits (possibly channels) that show in the sections of the trench might indicate that the mouth of the wadi between the Maadi and Mokkatam Formations occasionally lowed with water that cut the channels and distributed gritty and gravelly sand. It was, perhaps, during a hiatus in this hypothetical desert looding that people camped in the area north of the Wall of the Crow, next to a narrow wadi channel, into which they dumped their debris. Were the campers there to build the Wall of the Crow and, if so, did they leave the lower limestone debris layer with which their hearths are associated? Giza Occasional Papers 2 19 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf The Sand Sandwich: An Interruption in Crow Wall Building? he pits or channels occur in the sandy layer that separates the lower from the upper Old Kingdom horizons, two anthropogenic layers of what looks like masons’ debris. One hypothesis is that water from wadi outwash cut these channels and deposited the sand between the two compact layers. he sandy ill contains limestone and alluvial mud fragments. According to the water low hypothesis, these fragments rated down with the wet, sandy ooze and illed the channels. In the lower layer of masons’ debris, we can see layers and lenses of variegated material that must have resulted from individual baskets that the ancient workers dumped and very deliberately spread out to make the lower compact surface. hey may have created this surface around the same time that they built the Wall of the Crow, some 20 m south of the trench. Our datum line, running about center-height of the trench section, is at elevation 15.85 m asl. We found the very bottom of the south side of the Wall of the Crow in the 2001 WCS trench at 15.40 m asl, so the lower layer of masons’ debris in the trench could well be the “loor” the builders laid down when they founded the wall. he thin hearths and mud-lined pit that the trench cut and sectioned may be evidence of the builders’ camp. he sandy layer implies some kind of interruption during which wind, water, or people deposited sand on the loor of masons’ debris. he “channels” could be pits that people dug. he ill includes mudbrick and pottery. Or perhaps wadi loods carved channels that either people or lowing water illed with sand. he cultural material, including mudbrick, might have washed down from upstream. he sand layer, channels, and ill of the channels must relect some kind of hiatus, and possibly problems, for the builders of the Crow Wall and their activity. When they resumed, they prepared a new, higher surface of limestone debris, the upper Old Kingdom horizon. In 2001 Paul Sharman came to a similar hypothesis ater studying the layers of the deep trench that we excavated up to the Wall of the Crow in WCS: an interruption in work that is relected by layers of sandy, luvial material. he hypothesis is compelling for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact (ascertained by Reisner’s excavation between 1908 and 1910) that desert wadi looding destroyed the Menkaure Valley Temple and mudbrick town, located about 300 m due east of our operation WCN (Reisner 1931:44-45, 54). his would have been a looding event of a much later period than the sandy layers between the two horizons in the contractors’ trench. he Menkaure Valley Temple lood seems to have occurred in Dynasty 5 ater the royal house had moved to Saqqara and Abu Sir for the location of the royal building projects, well ater the time that the builders erected the Wall of the Crow, probably in the presence of the royal house at Giza. For the team, ascertaining the distinction between sand deposited by wind, water, or people was not a facile task, and there was some diference of opinion between archaeologists and geologists. Would the gray mud fragments have held their shape, rather than simply dissolve, as they travelled down stream or as they oozed forward in wet, viscous sand? 20 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 3. Excavations in 2005 When we excavate we give every deposit, from walls to layers, feature numbers. When we remove archaeological deposits we intensively collect artifacts, pottery, animal bone, chipped stone (lithics), charcoal, and plant remains. We draw plans at a scale of 1:20 and sections at a scale of 1:10. We construct stratigraphic matrices to show chronological relationships within the excavated area. he following sections describe our 2005 excavation operations. Excavations North of the Wall of the Crow (WCN) he investigations that Derek Watson, Ali Witsell, and Ken Lajoie carried out in the DDT, along with Pieter Collet’s 1:20 mapping, fell within the following objectives for work in WCN: 1. To record the depositional sequence within the DDT. his stage had priority as it was effectively a salvage operation. 2. To assess and reconstruct wadi hydrology, “natural” sedimentation processes, anthropogenic impacts, and the interplay between these depositional agents. 3. To excavate a trench extending from the DDT through the western side of the Masons’ Mound to determine the internal structure of the mound and connect the DDT to the Wall of the Crow. his strategy provided a stratigraphic sequence for the whole WCN 2005 operation and a north-south composite cross-section of the Wall of the Crow foundations when combined with the proiles of WCS “Deep Trench” excavated in 2001. 4. To correlate these results with previous operations in the area in order to elucidate the wider archaeological sequence of the WCN. Watson, assisted by Aneis Hassan, excavated Trench 2 (ig. 4) from the DDT to the north side of the Wall of the Crow. Banu Aydinoglugil excavated a trench across BP, the large pit or channel cut by the northern side of the DDT trench at its western end. Table 1 lists the three WCN operations. Table 1. WCN Units Unit Squares Dimensions Orientation Trench 2 1.D48-1.H48 18.54 m x 2.60 m x 3 m North-South DDT 1.G37-1.G47; 1.H371.H50-2.H1; 1.I46-1.I69 BP 1.F37-1.G37 West-East 4.5 m x 1.5 m x 1.3 m North-South Trench 2 Excavation We wanted to investigate the relationships between features in the contractors’ trench (DDT) and the Wall of the Crow and sample a portion of Masons’ Mound, a mound of compact limestone debris on the north side of the Wall of the Crow near its east end, which might be the remains of a construction ramp (ig. 3). For this purpose Watson laid out a trench perpendicular to the contractors’ trench (DDT) running from DDT to the Wall of the Crow, approximately 18.54 m in length x 3 m wide. Watson located Trench 2 toward the tail-end of the western slope of Masons’ Giza Occasional Papers 2 21 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf DDT 1.G48 Stone Line [22629] 1.F48 Stone Line [22659] Mud/Rubble Infilled Wall Facing [22663] Infill [22664] 1.E48 226 Infill [ Area Mud/Rubble Infilled Wall Facing [22666] Infill [22665] } Infill [22667] 26] 0 1.D48 Dry Stone Wall [22668] 5m Wall of the Crow Figure 4. Mud/rubble in-illed and dry stone walls in Trench 2, schematic section (after Watson 2005:ig. 3). Mound within grid squares 1.D48-1.H48, 1.50 m from the east line, and 50 cm from the west line of range 48 on our grid, between coordinate lines E500,610 and E500,615. he north end of Trench 2 took in the west side of the prominent channel or pit that showed in the south section, east end of the contractors’ trench (DDT). Watson found that the general reddish sand layer [22,882] (feature numbers are shown in brackets) between the two compact debris layers is the same as the ill [22,207 - 229] of the channel or pit. He interpreted the sandy layer as sediment dumped by people in order to prepare a level surface for building Masons’ Mound. he darker striations within the sand result, in his view, from the tipping or dumping of baskets of the sandy material. hese thin layers and lenses cover crude walls and ill (rubble ill, limestone and mud) that belong to the structure of Masons’ Mound. he uppermost layers of the mound (evident in DDT south section and the surface characteristics of the mound) appeared to comprise “construction debris.” Close to the Wall of the Crow, Watson’s team exposed a mass of mud and limestone fragments of very irregular, rounded shapes and sizes, somewhat yellow and marly, so they probably derive from the Maadi Formation above our site. he mass has structure. It appears to be a roughly linear, east-west oriented berm —about 3 to 3.5 m wide—that comprises the tail of Masons’ Mound. he stone appears to be more concentrated along the southern edge, just 1.60 to 1.8 m from north base of the Wall of the Crow. Most curious are the layers just above this hump or spine of loose but roughly articulated stone debris (ig. 5). he Trench 2 sections clearly show a series of slanted, thin, contrasting layers 22 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report N WCN East Section 18.45m 19 m, asl 13.10m Ph VI Ph VC - Tip-lines WCS West Section 25m, asl 18 m, asl Tip-lines Ph VB Ph VA1 Season limit of Excavation - approx. 16m, asl Top of Foundation Block 16.07m, asl Giza Occasional Papers 2 Base of Foundation Cut 15.40m, asl Figure 5. he Wall of the Crow schematic composite section. WCN 2005 Trench 2 and WCS 2001 “Deep Sondage” (ater Watson 2005:ig. 2). http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Ph VF 23 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf that are certainly “basket tip” lines, from dumping quantities that would just about ill an ancient worker’s basket. he thin layers are somewhat intercalated, that is, they alternate between sandy or gravelly material and darker alluvial mud. he upper tip lines include many mudbrick fragments and generally show a high dark silt content in the matrix. he tip lines angle down to the south at about 40° toward the Wall of the Crow. Watson (2005) points out in his Data Structure Report how diferent this is from the deep trench we excavated in 1991 and 2001 on the south side of the Wall of the Crow (WCS). here the tip lines sloped down away from the wall, because on the south side they are certainly waste from trimming the blocks of successive courses on the wall itself. On the north side the tip lines are of diferent material, and slope in toward the Wall, being located only 2.80 m from the Wall’s northern face. Within the stony structure of Masons’ Mound, Watson’s team found a plastered ieldstone wall with a sandy marl render, 73 to 43 cm from the west balk of Trench 2, running north-south slightly angled east of south. he plaster render goes up against the Wall of the Crow, where the face of the Wall of the Crow is dressed lat and the seams between blocks are plastered over, for a height of 20-30 cm above the height of the section, from 16.15 to 19 m asl. he east section shows a gap, 90 cm deep, and 1.30 m wide, in the compact material up against the Wall of the Crow. Gritty sand layers [22,892 – 22,920] ill the gap. Trench 2 revealed the following gross sequence of human and natural activity during the Old Kingdom, 4th dynasty: 1. People laid down the lower compact debris layer (Watson Phase III), probably commensurate with the building of the Wall of Crow. We did not positively ascertain this, because we came to the end of our excavation period before reaching the bottom of the wall, and were not able to trace the layers in the contractors’ trench (DDT) to the foundation of the wall. 2. People made and used hearths, clay-lined pits and other pits and installations for some time on the surface of the lower compact layer. (Watson Phase III). 3. Wadi streams laid down sediments over the lower compact rubble layer (Watson 2005, Lajoie 2005). Wadi streams laid down foreset beds (Lajoie 2005), that further covered and leveled the sloping surface of the lower compact rubble layer, or people covered the lower layer to purposefully level it with basketfuls of sand (Watson 2005, Phase IV). 4. People built casemate retaining walls to hold debris (Watson Phase V.AI) upon which they created Masons’ Mound (Phase V.AII) by building additional dry stone walls (Phase V.B) and dumping baskets of dark silty material (Phase V. C). hey spread the material of the upper layers Masons’ Mound to the north and west, creating the upper compact layer cut by the contractors’ (DDT) trench (Phase V.D). 5. As people continued construction activity (on the Wall of the Crow?) in the vicinity, they made pits and cuts into the upper compact surface (Phase V.E) and deposited the upper layers that cap Masons’ Mound (Phase V.F). BP Excavation Ater Reis Ahmed and the Saidi workers cleared out the western end of the contractors’ trench and pushed back the overburden, we had a better look at the large pit or channel showing in section at the western end of the southern side of the trench. his is the pit (BP) or channel illed with cultural material, pottery, and mudbrick (see above). he pit, located northeast of the Great Gate in the Wall of the Crow, is 6 m wide and 84 cm deep. A granite and limestone chip layer capped the top of the pit. A muddy layer that showed in the DDT section with nearly complete red-ware “beer” jars illed the bottom of the channel. Examining this layer closely, we noticed that the pieces of dense, dark gray mud took the form of the bottoms of jars and bread-baking pots. hese mud pieces are unired pots, or parts of vessels. In some of the pieces the gray mud phases into silt that is ired red; these are partially ired vessels. Someone discarded these incompletely ired, or unired pots into the pit. In the same pit we ind that some of the upper layers look decidedly like gravel worn and washed by water: probably wadi loods. 24 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Banu Aydinoglugil supervised the excavation of the BP trench, 4.5 x 1.5 x 1.3 m into the western side of the pit at the western end of the DDT, in an attempt to determine its north-south extent and its stratigraphic relationships to contiguous DDT layers. he excavations revealed no tip lines that would indicate basket dumping and intentional illing. All the layers that we saw illing BP in the southern section of the contractors’ trench thin out to the south, so that the whole sequence of layers illing the pit or “channel” thin out from 1 m to only 34 cm thick. his indicates that the original pit is a fairly sharp cut in cross section from east to west, but very shallow and gradual to the south. he pit or channel cut through older, underlying layers of gravel and sand, probably the edge of the wadi fan. his is the irst phase of deposition north of the Wall of the Crow that we saw in the contractors’ trench, and in the deep 2004 excavations of Adel Kelany in WCGN, north of the Gate. Summary and Comments on the WCN Sequence Watson (2005) summarized his phasing of the stratigraphic sequence from the contractor’s trench (DDT), Trench 2 to the Wall of the Crow, and the excavation of the large pit (BP) at the western end of the contractors’ trench 2 in table 2 (see below). Phase I: Fluvial Sands Watson (2005) noted that the uppermost elevation of this lower unit of sand and marl beds, his Phase I, is approximately 15 m asl. During the 2005 ieldwork, the local water table luctuated around 14.75 m asl, which prevented deeper excavation. he lower layers were damp throughout the exposure of the contractors’ trench, which prevented making iner distinctions. Watson suggested that running water deposited the lower sand and marl clay layers: he bedding structures and features within these layers comprised relatively simple bedsets with predominantly wavy parallel to wavy-to-even nonparallel bedding surfaces, frequent laminations within these layers, well-to-moderately sorted sands and normal graded beds suggesting sediment transport and deposition by turbidity currents most likely attributable to luvial processes. Indeed, frequent deposits/lenses of levigated clay deposits indicate the presence of standing water in the area (Watson 2005:101). he luvial deposits of ine to coarse grains in sand layers, and the ine clay deposits, suggest “a prevailing, or perhaps more likely a localized, hydraulic regime characterized by low to moderate energy discharge by shallow streams” (Watson 2005:102). Citing Boggs (1995:306-317), Watson further hypothesized that the episodic streams may have constituted a sandy braided stream system: “if the WCN [area north of the Wall of the Crow] was situated adjacent to an active wadi system then it appears on the basis of Phase I data from the DDT that it may have been on the southern margins of its alluvial fan” (Watson 2005:104). he irst indication of human activity in the contractors’ trench is a crescent-shaped ash and charcoal deposit, possibly from a hearth, in the southern section at the western end. Watson compares its elevation at 15 m asl with the earliest exposures of cultural material in the WCE 2001 and 2002 squares 2.H6 and 2.C8 at 14.87 and 15.21 m asl respectively. Phase II: Gravel/Sands he distinction between Phase I and II, while somewhat arbitrary, is a marked increase in gravel deposits consisting of ine to coarse pebbles and angular and platy limestone fragments that crossbed the general trend of the bed-sets. Cross bedding refers to layers within a bed that dip at an angle to the orientation of the primary beds (Watson 2005: 27; Boggs 1995: 118-122). In lay terms, the gravel deposits look like pockets of limestone fragments, quartzite pebbles, and chert cobbles with the heavier fraction concentrated near the base, and the material becoming iner toward the top and east. Watson designated as Phase II gravel/sand deposits that reach a maximum thickness of 1.10 m from 15 m asl to about 16.10 m asl in the western section of the contractors’ trench. he layers declined eastwards to merge into the water table at about 14.75 m asl ater which the team could not trace them further. his is part of a much wider slope of the ancient surfaces to the east and north in the northeast part of our site. Giza Occasional Papers 2 25 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Watson (2005:105) interpreted Phase II layers as “the existence of a sandy/gravelly braided wadi river system, which appears to have been prograding.” Used in reference to shorelines, “progradation” or “regression” refers to seaward movement (Boggs 1995:502-503). In WCN the idea is that the wadi fan was building out and extending gradually eastward. Watson (2005:105) observed that “combined with the notion that the WCN area was contiguous with the margins of the wadi alluvial fan, it seems probable that the Phase II deposits generally comprise lateral and/or longitudinal bars” that form between the braided streams of such a fan. he contractors’ trench gave us cross-sectional views of the longitudinal bars. Watson (2005:106-107) suggested that the “cross-bedding and lateral grading of the gravel sands within the Phase II deposits denote low velocity luctuations resulting in diferential deposition of sediments (bedload).” Citing Lajoie (personal communication 2005) Watson (2005:106107) suggested further that the “particle size diferences evident between Phases I-II suggest that the wadi system was prograding eastward.” He concluded that, “in terms of the environmental assessment of the WCN area this is perhaps the single most important interface or facies in the entire sequence” (Watson 2005:107). Noting that the sequence (Watson’s Phase I and II) slopes gently from west to east, Ken Lajoie (2005) characterized these layers as typical scour and ill from wadi lash loods. He suggested that the quartzite and chert inclusions probably washed from the high desert, while the more abundant limestone chips, which he saw as tabular and imbricated, may have derived from quarrying stone for the pyramids and other monuments in quarries along the northern side of the wadi up slope. Lajoie agreed that lenses of levigated yellow clay (marl) in this lower sequence might represent water that stood in shallow pools on the surface of the wadi fan (Lajoie 2005). To sum up the picture given by the lower layers in the contractors’ trench, before people built the Wall of the Crow or did much else in the area just north of the wall, intermittent rains sent water down the wadi between the Mokkatam and Maadi Formations, and out to the east, building up an alluvial fan from the sandy sediments let by braided shallow streams. At some point the velocity of the streams increased, carrying coarser gravels that inter-bedded with iner sands, building the wadi fan higher and carrying it farther east. Watson (2005:107) cites as possible causes drier conditions, which resulted in a loss of plant cover and increased soil erosion, increased precipitation and changes in the local landscape caused by people. It is certain that during the time people laid down the Phase III deposits (the lower rubble layer) directly upon the Phase I and II wadi deposits, quarry work had been underway for some time along the lower southern slope of the Mokkatam Formation, upstream along northern bank of the wadi. Probably the irst thing the quarrymen did was remove the absorbent sand cover from the limestone bedrock, which would have increased the low of any rainfall across the bedrock. It is likely they removed and used as fuel any wood and plant cover near the wadi mouth. his may have contributed to the more forceful activity of the wadi streams lower and to the east, in the area north of the Wall of the Crow. hat pyramid building was a major, if indirect, cause for changes in force, duration, and frequency of wadi streams seems a reasonable inference. We can possibly investigate this hypothesis by exposing the Old Kingdom wadi bed upstream. his would help interpret the data from the 2005 contractors’ trench: he major problems associated with interpreting the WCN data are that the seasonal/cyclical incidence of rainfall and Central Wadi looding and/or discharge, its duration, intensity and the reliability of these putative spate events (e.g. the impact on propagation due to slope gradient and bed iniltration) are entirely unknown. he contemporary geomorphology of the area suggests that the ‘drainage channel’ of the wadi slopes from about 95 m, above sea level, in the west to about 20 m asl in its known eastern extent, with the water discharge lowing from west to east. Yet, we have no data concerning morphology of this purported wadi network during the Old Kingdom or the impact of hydraulic interventions (e.g. dams, canals), which may have been constructed by the Pyramid makers in order to secure the local area against possible spate events (Watson 2005:103). 26 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Table 2. Summary of stratigraphic phases identiied in area WCN 2005 Phase VII - Modern Disturbance Modern Disturbance, GPMP 2004 dumps, and Selim Hassan’s dumps Phase VI - Dune Activity Post 4500 BP (?) and ‘modern sand bank’ Sub-phase F Sub-phase east Sub-phase D Phase V - The Upper Rubble Layer and the “Masons’ Mound” Sub-phase C Sub-phase B Sub-phase AII Sub-phase AI Phase IV - The Interplay of Fluvial and Human Activity ‘Surface preparation’ in the DDT area Tip-line deposits - Building the Mound Burying the rubble/mud in-filled and dry stone walls Early deposition/construction of Masons’ Mound Construction of rubbled in-filled/retaining walls Marl plastered/mudbrick structure (Provisional subphase as based on season “End of Excavation” from Trench 2) Sub-phase B Make-up/levelling activity (Provisionally included in Phase V as based on 1.F48 test trench) Fluvial event(s) Sub-phase B Lower rubble layer: exposure, activity and further construction Sub-phase A The lower rubble layer: construction - ‘bucket dumps’ Phase III - Lower Rubble Layer Phase I - Lower Sands Construction activities: Pits/cuts Sub-phase C Sub-phase A Phase II - Gravel/Sands ‘Surface layers and completion of “Masons’ Mound”’ Gravel/sands: DDT - changing hydrodynamics and human activity Lower sand deposits: low level hydrodynamics and the first indications of human activity in the WCN 2005 sequence Phase IIIA-B: The Lower Rubble Layer he Lower Rubble Layer consisted predominantly of ine to coarse sand (10%-70%), angular limestone and marl fragments (30%-90%) with pebbles, chert, occasional charcoal and gray alluvial mud fragments. he material of Phase IIIA was compacted forming a “mass-like” quality that “may have occurred as a result of inundation in the area, with the subsequent calciication of the limestone and/or solidiication of the marl elements. Alternatively, water may have been added as bonding agent prior to deposition in order to deliberately ‘cement’ the constituents and so construct a ‘hardened’ or metalled surface” (Watson 2005:38). he contractors’ trench exposed approximately 48 m of this layer in the north and south sections, beginning about 20 m from the west end of the trench. he layer slopes gently to the east to disappear below the extent of excavation. he approximate top elevations of the Lower Rubble Layer are 16.13 m asl (north section), and 16.23 m asl (south section), on the west to 15.29 m asl, and 15.35 m, asl at the eastern end of the trench. Additionally, a similar “surface” was exposed at the base of the Trench 2 test trench. People purposefully created the “Lower Rubble Layer,” as indicated by “bucket dumps” (more likely basket dumps) that show in section. he dimensions of these dumps ranged from 20 cm to 40 cm thick x 15 cm to 90 cm wide, roughly 1.35 m3. his dumping created a surface that was intentionally “metalled,” a British term for a road covered with small or crushed stones. Giza Occasional Papers 2 27 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Watson (2005: 37-53, 109) designated two sub-phases: “A) the initial construction phase and B) a period of further construction and related activities, including incidental aeolian deposits.” People let many features across the Lower Rubble Layer indicating ires: ire scrapes, ash, and charcoal dumps, and a brick-built hearth. Additionally a clay-lined mixing pit, a large pit, and variable quantities of lithics (chipped stone), bone, charcoal, and miscellaneous “objects” were also let. Watson (2005:109) noted, “hese remains indicate various activities associated with construction and manufacturing activities as well as food consumption and, possibly, preparation.” People covered some of the features, such as the mixing pit, with the material of the Lower Rubble Layer, as sand drited onto the surface around the given feature. Watson (2005:110) noted of the creation of the metalled surface: “It also appears that this construction project may have been overcome by a lood event. his is indicated by the Phase IIIB ‘mud pit’ which was in-illed by overlying Phase IVB deposits that are ascribed to an inill/makeup phase subsequent to an ostensible lood (Phase IVA) in the immediate area.” In sum people laid down the artiicial layers of Phase IIIA and B soon ater a period when wadi streams began to low with increased energy, extending the wadi fan to the east. he lower end of the artiicial surface, at the eastern end of the contractors’ trench (DDT) is around 15.30 m asl, while the base of the Wall of the Crow in the 2001 WCS deep trench is 15.40 m asl. Watson (2005: 110) suggests that the builders may have laid down the layer “in order to provide a stable working surface over sand and gravel in an area situated at the margins of an alluvial fan or braided stream. Such a surface may have been necessary for initial construction of the foundations of the Wall of the Crow and/or transportation of its constituent limestone blocks.” Phase IV A-B: Flooding and Make-up Watson designated as Phase IV the sand layers that separate the Upper and Lower Rubble Layers (Phases III and V). he separation begins 43 to 43.50 m from the east end of the contractors’ trench. Like the Lower Rubble Layer, the sandy layers slope gently to the east where they disappear below the limits of the trench at square 1.H50. he sand separation layers thicken from a mere 3 cm on the west (north section) to 1 m on the east (south section). It thins to the west because the Phase V layer slopes up to become the leg of the “Y.” It meets the later, higher compact layer, the surface we exposed in 2004, the upper arm of the Y. Both arms of the Y and the leg slope to the east. Sub-Phase IV A Watson (2005:110-11) interpreted three U-shaped pits or depressions about 6 m from the eastern end of the trench as belonging to a channel cut by a meandering stream “with suicient low velocity to cut or more likely gradually erode a channel through the Phase III ‘metalled’ surface.” He suggests that his interpretation implies “a distinct change in the local hydrological regime, i.e. the morphology and orientation of the wadi system” from the shallow braided streams, which “tend to have high gradients and develop in the distal reaches of river systems, and which may grade or merge down slope in to a meandering river as gradient and bed load decrease… Meandering channels form where streams are lowing over a relatively lat landscape such as a broad loodplain. Channels in these streams are characteristically U-shaped and actively migrate over loodplains” (Watson 2005:111 cites Boggs 1995:307). He notes again that quarry activity upstream “may have widened the mouth of the wadi and altered its direction, low velocity and/or drainage pattern. Equally, potential water diversion and/or management techniques (e.g. the emplacement of dams) in the upstream reaches of the wadi system may have fundamentally altered the capacity and orientation of the wadi system with concomitant changes in the local environment and ecology (e.g. wadi morphology and drainage)” (Watson 2005:111, 6.4.1). Excavation Trench 2 cut the prominent channel [22, 232] that showed in the south section at the east end of the contractors’ trench. Watson noted, the precise orientation and axis of the Phase IVA channel is at present unknown as the Trench 2 excavation remains uninished, though it appears from its position in the DDT [contractors trench] sections to be approximately North to South. However, assessment is complicated by the limited exposure and the presence in the DDT North Section of a possible ridge and swale (levee) or an abrupt and sinuous bend in the meander (2005: 111). 28 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf By the end of the 2005 excavations, the channel in Watson’s deeper probe at the north end of Trench 2 appeared to be a semi-circular pit that extends 1.3 to 1.4 m out from the east side of the trench. A slightly raised shoulder lined the north and south sides of the depression, which was 2.60 m across. Watson (2005) and Lajoie (2005) agree that lowing water brought the sand that illed the channel. According to Watson, when the low that carved the channel slowed, the running water brought ine sand that illed the channel. he potential foreset beds (or tip-lines) in the Trench 2 test trench were sloping from the north/northwest to south/southeast which may indicate the direction of “spate” low. Consequently, it is possible that the channel evident in section, or a contiguous meandering channel, over-spilled its banks during a period of spate. It is diicult to accurately assess the extent and impact of this “lood”, especially as is currently unknown whether it pre- or post-dates the construction of the Wall of the Crow, or even occurred during its construction (Watson 2005: 112). Sub-Phase IVB Lajoie (2005) maintained that running water deposited three sand layers above the lower rubble layer. All channels that cut through the lower rubble layer are illed with luvial sediments and sandy sludge deposits in three phases: 1. Yellowish brown sands with limestone debris, 2. Reddish sand with some gray striations, 3. Gray sandy sludge with common mudbrick clasts. All three units are lood deposits (Lajoie 2005). Watson (2005:113), on the other hand, suggested that people purposefully laid the middle sand layer, his Phase IVB, directly over the “lood” sands: “hese layers are muddy in appearance and contrast starkly with the underlying sub-Phase IVA sand layers in colour, texture and inclusions.” Watson (2005:113) cites Boggs (1995: 75) to say that mud lows are relatively common in arid and semi-arid environments, usually ater heavy precipitation, and are composed of “mud sized grains” that have enough cohesive strength to prevent settling of coarser fractions but not enough to inhibit low. hese deposits are characteristically poorly sorted and lack sedimentary structures, except possible reverse grading (i.e. coarser particles at the top) (Boggs 1995: 75, 301-302). Essentially, they behave like a viscous plastic and generally solidify ater lowing over relatively short distances. I, however, do not support this theory…Phase IV consists of a ca. 40-cm-thick, well-deined layers and lenses with inclusions comprising relatively large angular mudbricks, some with mortar/plaster still attached and distinct and undistorted lenses of granite dust. Evident stratigraphic layering/lensing, normal grading within the layers and the improbability of these inclusions, especially the granite dust lenses, surviving within a mudlow precludes this as an explanation.. Lajoie (2005:113) understood thin, darker, slightly reddish layers and lenses as foreset beds, markers of water lows that built up and extended the sand deposit eastward. Watson took these thin layers as basket dumps deposited by people intentionally building up the surface in preparation for renewed building activity and to “stabilize the area ater the sub-Phase IVA lood event and prepare it for Phase V construction activities.” Comments on Phase V in WCN Watson believes that the builders illed in the BP pit that Banu Aydinoglugil excavated, as well as other pits and irregularities in the surface extending north of the Wall of the Crow. Stratigraphically it appears that the general throughput of surface deposition was approximately west-east, i.e. as Masons’ Mound was under construction the Upper Rubble Layer surface was being laid in adjacent “construction zones,” which gradually expanded towards the mound area until its internal structure was completed. Giza Occasional Papers 2 29 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf In Watson’s Sub-Phase F, ater they completed the upper part of Masons’ Mound (Sub-Phase D-e), the builders inished spreading the Upper Rubble Layer, the “compact Old Kingdom surface” that we exposed in our 2004 WCN trench. his sub-phase comprises the completion of the Upper Rubble Layer and “Masons’ Mound”. he Upper Rubble Layer surface appears to be ‘continuous’ across the entire WCN, as it appears similar in its attributes to surfaces described in previous archaeological operations in the area…extending from at least the western side of the mound to the great Gate of the Wall of the Crow (Watson 2005:118). By capping the sand layers above the Lower Rubble Layer and conjoining the compact surface Upper Rubble Layer to the Lower Rubble Layer on the west, the builders leveled out the eastwards slope west. he result was an indurated, terrace-like surface extending for some unknown distance north of the WOC, from the Masons’ Mound to the Gate and possibly farther west. The Reasons for Masons’ Mound and the Wall of the Crow Watson (2005:119-120) reviewed the general sequence of building: 1) Gallery Set I, followed by 2) the Wall of the Crow, and inally 3) the “Masons’ Mound (ig. 6). He cited the reasons for concluding that “all three of these structures were likely to have been in ‘use’ simultaneously.” He then evaluated the following hypotheses for the function of the Wall of the Crow (WoC) and Masons’ Mound (MM): 1. Barrier to protect the town from the loodwaters of the contiguous Central Wadi (WoC). 2. Symbolic separation of the sacred Giza Necropolis from the secular “City of the Pyramid Builders” (WoC). 3. Remains of a construction ramp for the wall of the Crow (MM). Watson (2005:119-120) cites a “3-m diference in the topmost elevations of the mound (ca. 21 m asl) and the wall (ca. 24 m asl).” He assumed that the putative ramp would have facilitated transporting stone to the highest course. “Combine this with the lack of any indication for truncation of the upper levels of the mound or any of its slope faces and the ramp hypothesis seems unlikely” (Watson 2005:119-120). He also rejects the lood-barrier hypothesis, given that “available evidence for “loods” predate the construction of Gallery Set I.1 or post-date its abandonment or predate the mound itself (i.e. Phase VA)” (Watson 2005:119-120). He is not the irst to cite “an additional problem with this hypothesis…the location and dimensions of the gate, which seems an unlikely contrivance for a lood barrier” (Watson 2005:119-120). Perhaps so, but we must keep in mind that the path through the gate slopes up some 2.5 to 3 m from the compact surface on the north to the surface of the debris banked along the south side. In any case, the wall seems more massive and taller than required for protection from wadi looding. As for the hypothesis that Masons’ Mound was an auxiliary lood barrier to direct wadi low out north and east away from the juncture between the east end of the stone Wall of the Crow and the mudbrick walls of Gallery Set I, Watson (2005:120) sees “no data available to indicate that it ever served this function.” He concluded his 2005 report: “Despite my ‘negative’ assessment of these hypotheses, I tend towards the notion that the mound was indeed a (prematurely) ‘obsolete’ construction ramp for the wall given its internal structure, which appears designed for vertical load-bearing rather than withstanding lateral forces” (Watson 2005:120). We might suggest another hypothesis for the functions of the Masons’ Mound, the Upper and Lower Rubble Layers on the north side of the Wall of the Crow (WCN), and the masons’ debris embankment that exists on the south side (WCS) from the east end to the Gate. he 2001 WCS deep trench indicated that the wall is founded upon desert sand and gravel. he builders might have let the compact debris gravel to the north and south sides as to keep the wall being undermined. We hope to continue excavation in Trench 2 in 2006 to complete the proile down to the base of the Wall of the Crow and obtain further information to test our hypotheses about the purpose of this mysterious, huge stone structure. 30 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I I N99,250 H H DDT Trench 2 G oun d m m 17 17 Masons’ M G 18m N99,240 19m F F 20m E E N99,230 21m Gallery Set I D C GE1 24.19m C N99,220 Wa 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 1 2 3 4 Giza Occasional Papers 2 Figure 6. Schematic map of Masons’ Mound, Trench 2, and the Wall of the Crow (ater Watson 2005:ig. 5, 32). 5 6 E500,670 E500,660 A 25 m E500,650 12.5 E500,640 0 E500,630 A B E500,620 B 7 8 N99,210 9 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf ow ll of the Cr D 31 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf West Dump (WD) – Osteo Field School Training In order to teach the ield school students how to excavate and document human remains, Jessica Kaiser and Tom Westlin inaugurated excavations of Late Period burials at the high western edge of the site, in what we had taken to be the dumps from the Old Kingdom settlement up against the slope. We expected to ind skeletons in relatively good condition in this relatively undisturbed context. he site of the 2005 Late Period burial excavations is slightly north of the West Dump (WD) trench that Lauren Burning and Adel Kelany excavated in 2004, about 90 m south-southwest of the gate in the Wall of the Crow (ig. 7). he team excavated in four 5 X 5 m squares (3.J40, 3.J41, 3.I40, and 3.I41) (ig. 8). hey later extended excavations into squares 3.J39 and 3.I39. hey examined an area 10 x 12 m at the foot of the escarpment on a ridge that sloped down 2.5 m from 20.4 m asl. Contractors working on the new high security wall around the modern cemeteries northwest of the site laid down a broken limestone and tala roadbed in 2004 that bordered the foot of the escarpment burial excavations on the west. he team excavated 11 burial pits cut into layers of dense Old Kingdom pottery and sand. Burial 398 Field school student group FS1 began, and FS2 continued, the excavation of Burial 398, which was comparatively deep. he painted mud coin, which appeared 1 m below the surface, retained a winged scarab headdress with an inscription: Inpu, htp di nsw Pth-Skr-Wsir, nb…“A git that Anubis (god of embalming), the king, and Ptah-Sokar-Osiris (a compound deity at Giza and Saqqara in the Late Period), Lord….give.” Kaiser and Westlin (2005:12) report that Burial 398 was of “an older female (45+ years) with slight arthritic changes in the feet, severe attrition on all teeth, premortem tooth loss, medium to severe periodontal disease, and pathological thickening of the skull vault, which could be the result of sickle-cell anemia.” he team found a large, torpedoshaped pottery jar, either a Persian import or a copy of such, at the eastern end of the grave. Burial 399 he same teams that dug Burial 398, FS1 followed by FS2, excavated Burial 399, a double burial. A child skeleton, about four years old, lay on the let side facing north. Under the child the team found a wooden coin and an amulet of the cat-goddess, Bastet, in the area of the neck. he adult was female (25-35 years old). Traces of wood and textile imprints remained near the skeleton at the eastern end of the grave. here were ive additional burials designated 401, 402, 404, 405, and 406. he instructors selected 401, 405, and 406 for FS3 to excavate. Burial 401 A painted plastered mud coin included a molded mask with a reddish brown face and a black wig. here remained the beginning of an inscription, htp di nsw Pth-Skr-Wsir… , which is similar to the that of the coin in Burial 398 but with diferent pattern and colors. he skeleton was that of an older male 45+ years. “His spine was severely alicted by osteophytic growths, especially in the cervical vertebrae and DISH-like (Difuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis) ‘melted’ early bone formations in the lumbar vertebrae” (Kaiser and Westlin 2005:13). Burial 402 FS4 excavated burials 402 and 404. Burial 402 in squares 3.J39-40, contained an anthropoid plastered mud coin with badly fragmented drawing of an anthropoid deity on the chest and a hieroglyphic inscription: R’-st3w…“a git that Osiris... Ra-Setau.” he wig of the coin mask was striped blue and yellow with red dots along the inner margin. he facial features were damaged. he throat area had transverse ields of yellow, red and blue with black outlines. Fragments of wood were preserved. he skeleton of burial 402 was that of an elderly male, 45+ years old, with a pathological spine consisting of both fused thoracic vertebrae and compressed lumbar vertebrae with extensive osteophytic growth (grade III). Loose osteophytic bone plates were found on the ventral intervertebral 32 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 38 40 41 42 44 45 46 3.I 47 3.K Main Street N99,130 ne sto of on siti po ate 3.J 3.J 406 402 West Gate 405 399 401 409 3.I 410 404 398 408 N99,120 407 Enclo s bri de 3.G 3.H all sure W 2004 Western Dump Trench ay dw roa 3.H 3.G Burials 363 and 365, excavated in 2004 39 40 39 0 41 42 43 40 2.5 44 E500,600 38 N99,110 E500,590 3.F 10 m E500,580 5 E500,570 0 3.J 43 xim pro Ap 3.K 39 45 41 F 46 47 42 5m 3.J 406 402 N99,125 405 399 401 409 410 3.I 3.I 398 408 40 41 E500,580 39 E500,570 404 407 42 N99,120 Figure 7. Top. Location of 2005 Field School burial excavations. Figure 8. Bottom. Burials excavated during the 2005 Field School. aspect of the lumbar vertebrae as well. Teeth attrition was severe. While liting the tibiae of burial 402 we found a large fragment of the coin bottom with yellow paint on both interior and exterior aspects. On the exterior, deep rounded incisions were found, possibly from the chaing of a thin rope (Kaiser and Westlin 2005:14). Burial 405 Burial 405 in square 3.I-J40 contained an anthropoid plastered mud coin in a poor state of preservation. he skeleton was that of a woman approximately 45 years or older. he age was hard to assess because of very unequal tooth wear due to premortem tooth loss of most maxillary Giza Occasional Papers 2 33 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf molars. She had two dental abscesses (one maxillary and one mandibulary), arthritic changes in the cervical vertebrae and a possible healed Colles´ fracture on the distal let radius with complementary bone remodelling of the styloid process on the let distal ulna (Kaiser and Westlin 2005:4). Burial 404 Burial 404 in square 3.I40 contained an anthropoid, plastered and painted (white and yellow) mud coin that was badly preserved. he skeleton was that of an elderly woman 50+ years. “She had very unequal tooth wear and arthritic changes on the cranio-dorsal aspect of caput mandibula. Periostitic lesions were found on the distal ibula, proximal ulna dx (let) and sin (right). here was also a healed fracture on costae sin (let rib) nr 9. he spine was generally healthy for such an old woman except for some minor osteophytic growths (grade 0-1)” (Kaiser and Westlin 2005:15). Burial 406 Burial 406 in square 3.J39 held the remains of a child-sized, rectangular wood coin [23737] with no surviving evidence of decoration. he skeleton of a child 3-4 years old “had cribra orbitalia (grade I)” (Westlin in Kaiser 2005:4). Cowrie-shell bracelets adorned the wrists, and the burial included the remains of a bead necklace and four metal earrings. Burial 407 FS4 began, and FS2 completed the excavation of Burial 407 in square 3.I41, Burial 407 contained an anthropoid coin of mud that was plastered and painted completely yellow with no decoration. “he skeleton is that of a young woman, 16-20 years old, richly decorated with beads and amulets. Postmortem displacement of the body had shited its position within the coin but it is very probable that most of the trinkets were parts of a necklace and bracelets from both wrists, as most of them were found at these locations of the body. he largest amulet (from the cervical region) was a seated Isis igurine with an inscription on the backpillar of the throne” (Kaiser and Westlin 2005: 15). Burial 408 FS2 excavated Burials 408, 409, and 410. Burial 408 in square 3.I39-40 contained a anthropoid coin [23749] of painted plastered mud, “partially preserved with spots of textile imprints on the outside of the coin. he coin mask once had a delicately molded face that unfortunately had deteriorated. he skeleton was that of a young male, 13-16 years old, with cribra orbitalia (grade I) and a possible ear infection (porotic auditory meatus). here were also enamel hypoplasias and dental calculus” (Kaiser and Westlin 2005:15). Burial 409 his burial was in a very large pit that contained two anthropoid coins of painted and plastered mud. People digging sand had cut away most of the western parts of the coins except some fragments at the western edge of the burial pit. he northern coin contained a truncated skeleton of an adult male preserved from the waist down. he southern coin contained an even more damaged adult skeleton. Fragments of wood were preserved in the coin. At the bottom of the ill of the burial pit the team found a lat limestone piece. Incised with a crude picture of igures facing each others and the inscription, kki (“Keki”). According to Mansour Bureik, the SCA team of Dr. Zahi Hawass excavated a small Old Kingdom tomb of a man called Keki about 50 m upslope to the west of our Area WD burial excavations (Kaiser and Westlin 2005:16). Burial 410 Burial 410 in square 3.I39 contained no coin. A lump of deteriorated wood that was found next to the cranium of the skeleton probably originated from some kind of burial object, rather than a coin. he skeleton is that of a juvenile boy, age 13-19. hree copper or bronze pendants in the shape of Amun-Min with loopholes were found at the medial aspect on the proximal diaphysis of the let humerus (Kaiser and Westlin 2005:16). 34 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Burials in the Settlement Area Tove Björk and Petter Nyberg excavated the following burials outside the 2005 excavations of Late Period burials in Area WD. Burial 397 A frame of stones surrounded the skeleton of Burial 397 in square 6.Q7 in our operation Transect A. “he skeleton was in a tightly lexed position, which indicates an Old Kingdom date. Preservation was not very good which made sexing impossible in the ield although the age was assessed to 33-45 by teeth attrition” (Kaiser and Westlin 2005:16). “Burial” 400 Burial 400, in square 6.R10, was in the area of the FS2 excavations inside Enclosure 5. he pit turned out to be an oval cut let by people robbing the wall. No skeletal remains were found. Burial 403 Burial 403 was also in the FS2 excavation inside Enclosure 5 in square 6.R10. he skeleton, which was very badly preserved, was that of an adult female. he excavators found the skeleton under Old Kingdom limestone tumble. “She was buried in a tightly lexed position that together with the stratigraphy suggests an Old Kingdom date. he only pathology noted was a very thick skull vault 1-1.3 cm thick” (Kaiser and Westlin 2005:17). East of the Galleries (EOG) Tim Stevens, with Ashraf Abd al-Aziz, Amelia Fairman, and Banu Aydinoglugil supervised our EOG work in 2005. his work brought us back to one of the irst places that we excavated in the site: the backhoe trench (BHT) in squares 4.e-F20-21. he BHT narrowly missed the northwest corner of the western of two bakeries that we excavated in 1991. hat season we also excavated small trenches into a massive, thick, deposit of pottery, mostly bread mold sherds, and other material to the east of BHT. To the west of BHT we found the irst troughs, benches, and column bases of the Hypostyle Hall during our 1995 and 2000 seasons. In 2001 we cleared and mapped a patch of ancient deposits that survived between two deep bites of the backhoe in the northern end of the BHT. hese layers are older than the bakeries. hey belong to a general lower phase of the settlement. he patch contained parts of mudbrick walls and deposits of what might be Egypt’s oldest known facility for producing faience, the distinctively Egyptian blue-glaze material. he walls and deposits of this phase pass under the Hypostyle Hall on the west and north of BHT, and under the thick layer of bread mold sherds and other waste on the east. During our 2004 season, Angela Milward Jones and Brian Hunt began excavating to the east of the BHT through the massive, thick layer of discarded pottery, composed mostly of bread mold fragments. hey came down on a thick and extensive layer of speckled, pinkish, burnt, slag-like material, which we dubbed the “pink stuf” (PS). he PS of the lower phase looks like ine pink slag, speckled with lighter grayish green particles. We found similar pinkish material in the patch of lower phase deposits in direct association with pieces of faience of various shapes. his material resembles waste from faience production at other sites of later periods. he University of Pennsylvania excavators, Steve Harvey and Matthew Adams, found just such pinkish slag-like stuf in a faience production area at Abydos in Upper Egypt. he faience production was associated with a series of hearths in sunken pits (Nicholson and Peltenburg 2000). It appears that the inhabitants dumped the substantial, thick layer of pinkish slag-like material (PS) from some kind of pyrotechnic production that took place in an interior space west of a north-south mudbrick wall that Angela Milward Jones exposed in 2004 between the pinkish material and the faience deposit in the bottom of the BHT. his lower phase dumping was superseded by the major phase of pyrotechnic activity of a very diferent sort—bread baking, with the discarded material changing from pinkish slag to massive quantities of pottery sherds. According to our ceramicist, Anna Wodzińska, the pottery mass is 70% fragments of bread pots. Giza Occasional Papers 2 35 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf During the 2005 season, Tim Stevens, Amelia Edwards, and Ashraf Abd al-Aziz continued excavation at points around the BHT. hey incorporated their probes into a wider study that ties together the stratigraphic relationships revealed by their digging and all previous excavations on all sides of the BHT. he sides of the BHT trench cut through the older layers of the earlier phase under the Hypostyle Hall on the west, the south end of the Hypostyle enclosure, the “bread mold gravel” dumps east of the galleries (EOG), the 1991 bakeries on the south, and more bakeries of the north end of the BHT. he 2005 team exposed the surface of the pinkish stuf over a much broader area by removing much more of the bread mold sherd layer to the south. he question is whether the pinkish material relates to activities that could include and subsume faience work. Bread Mold Gravel, Pits, Troughs, and Pedestals Already in 1991 we removed a massive quantity of the upper (younger) phase “bread mold gravel” in our A7/16 at the southern end of the east side of the BHT, up against the eastern of the two bakeries we excavated that year. his deposit [21,383 and 21,384] consisted “of very frequent bread mould ceramics within a grayish-brown silty-sand matrix. Other occasional inclusions included bone, lithics, small limestone and sandstone fragments, exotic stone fragments (dolerite, pink granite, alabaster), and two sandstone abrader fragments” (Stevens 2005:3.5.2). In 2004 Milward-Jones and Hunt removed more of the heavy, sherd-discard layer, stopping at the surface of the lower layer of pink stuf (PS). he lower layer is evidently waste from production of a diferent sort than bread baking. In 2005 the EOG team excavated more of the massive, thick, layer of bread mold sherd dumps. A single day of excavation produced more than 80 large sand bags of material. In 2002 and 2004 we found and partially cleared several rows of ieldstone pedestals (ig. 9) embedded within the “bread mold gravel” in EOG. he pedestals are about 60 cm wide, and about 1.25 m long, separated one from the other by spaces about 10 to 20 cm wide. hin lines of single ieldstones, 25 to 35 cm wide, run down the center aisle between the rows, dividing the aisles into 90 cm-wide corridors. Narrow troughs or channels run along the outside bases of the pedestals. he channels appear to be associated with a series of pits dug into the underlying layer of pink stuf (PS) at the bottom of the bread mold layer. he removal in 2005 of more of the upper layer of bread mold fragments and other sherds let three of the pedestals, each at the end of a series running east, projecting from the west-facing excavation section. Now we see very clearly that the inhabitants built the pedestals nearly upon the surface of the lower horizon. Tim Stevens (2005:6.5) pointed out that “this eastern area was repeatedly surfaced, and new pits and channels excavated, until the area was turned over wholesale for the dumping of bakery debris.” he surface under the heavy bakery debris consists of gray silty loors in the northern part of the exposure, and the pinkish, slag-like stuf (PS) at the southern part of the exposure. he inhabitants formed little channels or troughs into this surface along the bases of the pedestals. he trough along the southern side of the southern of the three pedestals is lined with stones where it extends westward beyond the pedestal. his trough ends in a deep bag-shaped pit. his is one of six pits, a little less than a m in diameter, scattered about the surface of the lower horizon, which is, again, the pinkish, slag-like material (PS) on the south and gray silty loors to the north. In addition to the channels running along the bases of the pedestals, there are other channels, including one [222,284], 26 cm wide and 7 cm deep, that curves in an arc, that seem to connect the pits, which are much deeper than the channels. In excavating these pits the team removed the same “bread mold gravel”—the thick layer of dumped sherds—that accumulated all around the pedestals, enguling them right up to their upper rims. What is the relationship of this ill to the functions of the pedestals, troughs and pits? What is the function of the pedestals? here are three possibilities: 1. he inhabitants used the pits and troughs in such a way that they let them unilled with any material until the time they began to discard the bread mold waste. Or, they may have completely cleaned out the pits and channels of any material that might have accumulated from their use, which is unlikely. 36 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 2. he pedestals are unrelated to the bakeries and bread mold gravel. he inhabitants began to dump the ceramic waste ater they had stopped using the pedestals. his would imply three major phases of industry: a) faience production and whatever let the pinkish material; b) “pedestal production” (as Tim Stevens put it); and c) bread production. 3. he inhabitants created the pits and channels to dispose of the waste from their production in the bakeries and from the activity they carried out on the pedestals. On the last hypothesis, Ashraf Abd el-Aziz found a cache of animal bone next to one of the pedestals in one of the squares he excavated in 2004. We also found a fair amount of animal bone in and around one of the pits that we excavated in 1991, in the spot labeled A7h that season. Could the pedestals have been used for butchering? Were the troughs to conduct luids to the pits where they also disposed of organic sot tissue? Also on the last hypothesis, the pits in our current EOG operation may be similar in function to pits illed with ceramic waste that Ana Tavares excavated in the sandy area just in front of the entrance to the Royal Building in 2002 (in Area ZAC). In the 2005 season, Aneis Hassan excavated more pits illed with waste in the area north-northwest of the Royal Administrative Building (RAB), the area designated BB-n. We also found more ieldstone pedestals in this area. Areas BB-n and EOG are part of a large rectangular zone that extends about 75 m north south, from Main Street to the RAB, and 40 m east west, from the Gallery Complex to the Eastern Town. he inhabitants used this zone for industry and waste disposal. he thin and shallow ieldstone “walls” that ran north-south along the western part of this zone may have been walkways. hese walls, one of which we removed in the 2004 EOG excavation, are only a single course of lat ieldstone over the ceramic dump. hey may have been easier on bare feet (and most feet were probably bare, though leathery tough) than the sharp, angular texture of the bread mold gravel. he inhabitants may have initially dug the pits to dispose of this ceramic and other waste in the early stages of bread baking and pedestal production, and to maintain the smooth loor upon the lower layers. As they intensiied production, they could not keep pace with trash pits, and they stopped maintaining the area. Instead they simply allowed the waste to accumulate around them. We see in the 1991 A7/16 trench how, at one point, they built a ieldstone wall to retain the trash away from a row of pedestals. Also, the ieldstone walls of the pair of bakeries that we excavated in 1991 are themselves built upon a layer of ceramic waste, while more ceramic waste accumulated against the eastern wall of the eastern bakery. We have found at least one pedestal that is founded not upon the smooth surface of the older, lower phase, but on ceramic waste. It may seem unlikely that the inhabitants would allow the waste from their production to rise like a lood that slowly engulfed the structures that they used in their production. But there are good parallels for this. In the nearby bakeries, they allowed the rooms to ill with black ash. he ash accumulated and was homogenized by being churned as the bakers removed and re-planted bread pots into the egg-carton-shaped baking pits, and they continually brought in new fuel and charcoal to surround the pots of each batch with more glowing embers. At the island town of Elephantine in Aswan our German colleagues excavated a bakery attached to the governor’s palace of the late Old Kingdom and First Intermediate Period in which the bakers allowed the ash to accumulate nearly to the roof, which was supported by wood columns built in sections to a height of 3.20 m. he accumulated ash preserved the columns, about 28 cm in diameter, to their total height, as well as some of the thin wood lattice screens that ran between the columns near their base. Pink Stuf, Faience, and Other Older Phase Deposits his 2005 EOG excavations removed more of the thick bread-pot sherd gravel, exposing older layers over an area about 11.20 m north-south x 3 m east-west forming a kind of terrace above the patch of older phase deposits with evidence of faience production in the northern end of BHT. hese excavations also revealed more of the mudbrick wall of the older lower phase running north-south along the east side of the BHT and separating the faience production deposits from the pink material (PS). he pink stuf (PS) lay under the bread mold gravel layer on the north end of the terraced older phase. Truncated patches of brown-gray sandy silts are possibly remnants of loors that people Giza Occasional Papers 2 37 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf laid over the PS. To the south other layers intervene. hese layers show in the east (west-facing) section of the backhoe trench (BHT). his section was the very irst exposure of ancient layers that we saw in this part of the site. When they trimmed back the section in the spring of 1991, Nicholas Conard and John Nolan assigned to these layers the very irst feature (or context) numbers of our running sequence, now up to 24,000. Hearth 11 he most prominent feature of the BHT section is a large hearth, consisting of black ash (feature number 11) in a pit, 2.10 m wide and 30 cm deep. Late in our 2005 excavation period, our sixth season of examining the original BHT section and its surroundings, we wondered if this hearth held a clue to the meaning of the pink stuf (PS), and possibly to the faience production of the lower phase. It appeared as though the top of the hearth on its southern edge is commensurate with a loor level upon which the PS was dumped. here are some marl bricks that appear to line the hearth just here. We mapped some of these in the 1991 section as feature 63. Here the PS shows in section and not on the surface, because here to the south there are other layers that intervene between the bread mold gravel, now removed, and the PS. We perceived a line from high in the PS down to the top of the hearth, as though people used the hearth, as they allowed the PS to build up around it, just as later people allowed the bread mold trash to build up around the exterior of the bakeries and around the pedestals of the higher layers of this area (EOG). hey seem to have kept the hearth open at the bottom as a pit through the rising PS layer and possibly through layers above the PS. To the north of the hearth, the intervening layers thin out over the PS like the end of a triangular piece of pie. We decided to take out the intervening layers of this pie piece to the south, excavating up to a line that became an east-west stratigraphic section cutting through the intervening layers and through the center of the hearth. Our idea was to reveal the relationship of the PS layer with the hearth. he excavation on the north of the 11 x 3 m terrace, up to the east-west section that cut the hearth, exposed the top of the ash ill (feature 11), 70 cm x 1.15 east-west where the section cut through. he top was slightly pinkish, slag-like, granular, burnt material. he north-south wall of the lower phase, running along the eastern side of the BHT, now showed a thick tala (marl clay) render on the eastern face. he plaster stood alone, 11 cm high, apparently because someone had robbed the mudbricks from the wall, along the western side of the plaster, just where the wall would contact Hearth 11. he wall was originally 90 cm wide. Where the backhoe cut the wall next to Hearth 11 in the east section of the BHT the bricks at irst appeared to partially overlay the hearth pit, which would make the hearth earlier than the wall. he modern backhoe and the ancient wall robbing disturbed the relationships. So we were not certain if the hearth is older than the wall or lowest deposit that illed a bigger and broader pit. On the last possibility, the BHT section and the north-facing east-west section of our 2005 excavations might have shown that Hearth 11 is the epicenter and absolute bottom of a broad and shallow pit, 7.5 m wide, which was dug through the PS layer, and through the wall. his was excavator Tim Steven’s assessment at the end of the 2005 excavations: he black pit had been visible in section since 1991 as feature [11] and it was uncertain whether this was an early pit sealed by later deposits, a later pit cut through from much higher up, or a pit whose sides were maintained until a higher elevation had been reached. It seems from the 2005 season that the pit was early, and that the congruence with the later cut (Group 64) was purely coincidental. his hypothesis does remain unproven, as there remains a baulk in the southern part of square 4E21. Excavation of this baulk may resolve this issue (Stevens 2005: 5.4.2). he excavations on the north of the 11 x 3 m area of the east-west section took out the ash in the northern half of Hearth 11, which was 21 cm deep. Faience in the Pink Stuf Because of limited time, we could not excavate the entire northern part of the 11 x 3 m excavation area to the east-west section through the PS layer. So the team excavated a trench 1.5 m wide north- 38 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf south alongside the east-west section. he cut into the PS showed this deposit is yellow mottled with pink, the colors possibly relecting basket dumps of slightly diferent material. Aside from the similarity of the pinkish, slag-like material to waste from faience production at other sites and periods, white material, possibly residual of faience production, lined the rims of some of the pits. It is important to keep in mind that the pits are later than the PS layer, and cut down into it. From the excavations of pink material (PS) [22,764] or dumped deposits intercalated with PS dumps to the north, as well as in the trench along the east-west section, the team recovered a number of faience pieces. Two of the pieces are rectangular, 2 x 4 cm and 1.6 x 4.5 cm. he excavators found seven fragments of beads on the surface of the PS layer around the rim of one of the pits sunk into the PS layer. “At least thirteen cylindrical faience beads were also recovered, along with several fragments and a larger semi-circular tabular piece” (Stevens 2005:4.12.1). he semicircular piece was the largest at 3.7 cm long, 2 cm wide, and 6 mm thick (Stevens 2005:3.63.45). he excavators retrieved it from a dark brown-gray, silty sand [22,727] within the dump layers that included the PS. Pending analysis of the “pink stuf” (PS), Stevens summed up the evidence for faience production in the vicinity: he recovery from the dump deposits of at least 11 cylindrical beads and several fragments, plus two rectangular and one large semi-circular inlay piece, constitutes the largest assemblage of faience pieces at the site, and does provide corroborative evidence of faience production in the vicinity. It is unlikely to have been within the conines of the current trench, as all of the rooms/spaces identiied were either illed with possible faience-related dumps, rather than in situ material, or had no indications of faience-related activity at all. It is therefore unlikely that in situ faience manufacturing occurred within the trench, even in the unexcavated areas (Stevens 2005:7.2). We should not expect the discarded, dumped waste from faience production—if that is what the PS material is—to have been very far from the actual site of production. It is still a possibility that this was located in the spaces evidenced by patches of loor and walls that the backhoe missed to the west. The Floor Under the Pink Stuf Excavating 15 to 30 cm down into the PS layer in the trench to the east-west section, the team found an alluvial mud loor [22,781] that comes up against the plaster of the north-south wall [20,647]. Burnt bricks and upside down bread molds are embedded in this loor near the east section of this 1.5 meter-wide trench. his surface was unexcavated, but appeared to be composed of a dark brown and black sandy-silt. Set into the top of this were at least three bread moulds against the eastern limit of excavation, with their upper surfaces protruding up to 50 mm above the loor….A further vessel was removed accidentally by workmen along the southern section of the slot trench, and it appears that there may have been two rows of vessels aligned north-south in this part of the loor. Visible on the upper surface were ring marks caused either by vessel emplacements that had later been removed, or by extant vessels beneath or embedded in this loor. Much of the visible surface was comprised of burnt mudbrick, and in the southern part of the slot trench a row of ive burnt mudbricks was elevated to a maximum elevation of 16.01 m asl. hese were laid as headers, and extended into the eastern baulk, and may represent an installation at this, or a lower, loor level (Stevens 2005:3.75.1). Giza Occasional Papers 2 39 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf North of the Royal Administrative Building (BBN) and Field School Unit 4 In our 2005 season we continued our study of the stratigraphic sequence, site history, and the older, lower phase in square 6.W19 and the surrounding area. Just outside the northwest corner of the Royal Administrative Building, this area is the link to stratigraphic relations across much of the site. Square 6.W19 takes in the bottleneck of a passageway that splits into three ways running from the area between the Royal Administrative Building and EOG. he paths lead from the Eastern Town to the Gallery Complex, South Street Magazines, Enclosures and the Western Town. Ana Tavares, Banu Aydinoglugil, and Aneis Hassan supervised excavations outside the northwest corner of the RAB. Field School Unit 4, under the supervision of Ana Tavares and Aii Rahim, excavated to the north of the area outside the northwest corner of the Royal Administrative Building (RAB). he FS4 team included Mohammed Abd al-Basat, El-Tayeb Mohammed Khudary, Mohammed Aly Abd el-Hakeem, Hoda Abdallah Bakry, and Amani Abd al-Hamid. he FS4 team excavated an area of stony walls and pedestals north of the RAB (Tavares et al. 2005). RAB Street Excavations Banu Aydinoglugil supervised excavations in RAB Street between the two thick, parallel, ieldstone walls: the Enclosure Wall and the perimeter wall of the Royal Administrative Building (RAB; we formerly called this enclosure the Buttress Building, so we still call the area BB in our excavation records.) Aneis Hassan excavated a trench through the Enclosure Wall, to establish the stratigraphic link with RAB Street and the ieldstone wall around the RAB enclosure. RAB Street Road Bed Aydinoglugil’s excavations established that RAB Street was very well traveled. Traic must have consisted of people on foot, possibly on donkey, or even small herds of sheep and goat. When people and animals rounded the northwest corner, they hugged the inside of the turn. his pedestrian traic wore down the roadbed, street surface [20,877], which is contemporary with the walls, creating a deeper pathway just at the base of the outer corner of the RAB wall, the interior of the two parallel walls. At the same time, more refuse accumulated along the outside of the turn, around the base of the interior corner of the outer Enclosure west wall. he result was a roadbed that sloped down from northwest to southeast, into the corner. Stratigraphic Link Across RAB Street: North In square 6.V22 and 6.W22 Aneis Hassan excavated a trench, 2 m east-west by 6 m north-south, through the Enclosure Wall [5432], which we once took as the outer wall of two parallel ieldstone walls of the Royal Building, and across the silty surface [20.877] of RAB Street. he street surface lay above another street surface [21,766], which lay above a sandy bed [21,745] that was in turn laid over a layer of gray sandy silt [21,749], which ran under the Enclosure Wall [5432] but up against the RAB wall [5433]. As Hassan and Aydinoglugil (2005:12) summarized: “here are a series of loor surfaces that abut wall [5433] and are at a level beneath wall [5432].” We now have no doubt that the outer wall [5432] is later than the inner wall [5433]. he outer wall is actually a continuation of the Enclosure Wall around the site as it jogs north to get around the RAB. In the section of the trench, the layers that run under the Enclosure Wall [5432] and across the street between the two walls “lip up” to, or respect, the RAB wall [5433]. his shows that the RAB inner wall existed before the Enclosure Wall was built. he foundation of the Enclosure Wall is shallower, and preserved only 10 to 40 cm thick, whereas the RAB ieldstone wall runs more than 55 cm lower and is founded at a lower level. Hassan removed the section of the Enclosure Wall [5432] within his 2-meter-wide trench and a make-up layer of sandy silt [21,753]. At this point it became apparent that there was a general diference between the deposits in the street area and those in the area underlying the wall. hose in the street were obviously a series of compact/concreted surfaces and those underlying the wall appeared to more like dumps and/or make-up deposits (Hassan and Aydinoglugil 2005:7). 40 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Ater he removed the make-up and dumps under the Enclosure Wall and its bed, Hassan found an older surface [21,776] and patches of articulated mudbricks that remained of a mudbrick wall [21,785], which corresponded in alignment to the southern edge of the Enclosure Wall [5432]. An older street surface [21,776], covered an older marl surface [21,777] another line of bricks, and yet another, older silt surface [21,787]. hese are probably older street surfaces up against an older enclosure wall [21,785=21,788] of mudbrick replaced by the ieldstone Enclosure Wall [5432], just as the western RAB ieldstone wall is a thickening and capping of an older and thinner mudbrick wall (see below). It is possible the inhabitants almost completely removed the hypothetical earlier mudbrick wall when they built the Enclosure Wall. It is worth recalling that in 2002 Fiona Baker found remnants of an older mudbrick wall that ran around the sunken court of silos at the eastern side of the RAB. he builders replaced the mudbrick wall with one of ieldstone, which later toppled down onto the decommissioned silos, illing the sunken court like a ieldstone platform. Later, people removed the western side of this toppled ill, and trenched out most of what remained of the ieldstone of the wall itself, leaving only the very regular and prominent trench of the wall’s foundation, with just traces of both its mudbrick and ieldstone incarnations. he older mudbrick wall [21,785=21,788] in Hassan’s BBN trench sat on layers that ran under the RAB ieldstone wall [5433], so they may have been contemporary with the older RAB mudbrick wall. hese deposits consisted of dumps and leveling, or ill of pits, upon clean sand [21,801]. Within his north-south trench across RAB street, Hassan excavated a smaller probe trench into the basal sand [21,801] and was surprised to ind “clear silty tip lines running downward from east to west and slightly down from north to south” (Hassan and Aydinoglugil 2005:9). Cultural material included mudbrick and mudbrick fragments, pottery, sealings, faience beads, animal bone, and chipped stone. This probe is significant for its similarities to a deep probe into a basal layer of clean sand that Stephanie Durning excavated alongside the eastern RAB fieldstone wall in 2002. Durning’s trench, measuring 1.50 x 1.90 m, showed that the ieldstone wall survives for a height of 70 cm. Narrowing her probe to 90 cm x 1.0 m, she reached a depth of 2.40 m, elevation 14.48 m asl. She stopped, for safety reasons, about 8 cm above the water table. he two probes show that below the RAB there is a consistent series of layers of dark, sandy silt intercalated with clean sand that slope radically down to the south by more than 45°, all the way to the bottom of the probes. hese are probably also tip lines, that is, episodes of intentional dumping, like the tip lines in Hassan’s 2005 probe into the basal clean sand [21,801]. he two probes suggest that the area of the RAB was intentionally illed with sand and silt, dumped from the north and east. We know that the surface of the ruins of the Eastern Town slopes dramatically to the south, just beyond the north boundary of the modern sports club, which is the southern boundary of our clearing of the RAB. he ancient inhabitants must have illed up a large depression, extending the surface to the south, perhaps to build the RAB enclosure, while leaving a sunken court into which they placed their storage silos. Stratigraphic Link Across RAB Street: West Our team recorded another section between the Enclosure Wall and the RAB wall on the west side of the RAB where, in 2004, Astrid Huser and Ana Tavares regularized and documented the section of an intrusive pit. hey gave feature number [20,877] to the alluvial mud paving of RAB Street that functioned in phase with the ieldstone wall of the RAB and the Enclosure Wall. he paving rests upon layer [20,869], a sandy bedding for the street. Below this, a surface [20,870] functioned with an older mudbrick wall that the builders enlarged and capped as the thick ieldstone RAB wall. A layer above the surface [20,870] and below the mud paving [20, 869] runs up against the RAB ieldstone wall but under the Enclosure Wall. his indicates again that the inhabitants built the Enclosure Wall ater the RAB wall. he builders jogged the Enclosure Wall around the RAB, which they had built earlier, in order to segregate the RAB on the south from the Gallery Complex to the north. During the 2005 season Aneis Hassan supervised excavations in squares 6.U19 and 6.U20 that took the 2004 section through the western RAB ieldstone wall [5435] to establish the relationship Giza Occasional Papers 2 41 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf of the extramural layers to the older mudbrick wall embedded within the thicker ieldstone wall and to link up with the structures of the earlier phase that Freya Sadarangani excavated within the northwest corner of the RAB (see below). Hassan removed what remained (ater the intrusive pit) of the limestone of the western RAB wall [5435] and the preparation or bedding layer [21,795] directly underlying it. he builders had mortared together the east-facing and west-facing facing stones of the RAB wall [5435]. hey illed the void between the casings and the older mudbrick “core” wall with limestone cobbles and loose sand. he excavations made it clear that the RAB ieldstone wall, [5433] on the north and [5435] on the west, was constructed before the Enclosure Wall [5432] on the north and [5434] on the west. Big Pits in BBN Aneis Hassan found a series of large pits in the in lower surfaces of his excavations on the north of the RAB. he pits are as large as 2 m in diameter and illed with sherd-laden debris. he pits illed with trash and dumped “make up” layers began soon ater the inhabitants seem to have artiicially built up and leveled the site with sand. Once the area had been leveled there was a pitting episode where [21,743] and [21,799] were created. It seems that the pits were probably irst illed with burnt/ashy material and then illed with general refuse, including a relatively high proportion of sealings. It then seems that the quantity of refuse became too much for the pits to hold and/or the area used as a general dumping location (for refuse rich in ceramic material and mud-brick fragments), which also helped to build up and level the area on which some kind of building was set (i.e. mudbrick walls [21,785] and [21,788]). It is also highly probable that this building is directly related to the irst phase of architecture in RAB. Ater a period of use this building was demolished and the RAB wall [5433] (north) and [5435] (west) were constructed (Hassan and Aydinoglugil 2005:12). We may see in the large pits here an early attempt to dispose and conceal trash. he chain of inference is that the inhabitants disposed of trash in large pits until the trash became so voluminous that this proved impractical. hey then spread trash over a general area, and thereby raised the level. his is similar to the inferences we made about the pits and “bread mould gravel” trash in area EOG. Pedestal Installations: FS4 he FS4 team excavated up to a section line 3 m north of the south side of squares 6.X21-22 just east of the narrow restriction, 90 cm wide, at the eastern end of South Street beside the northwest corner of the Royal Administrative Building (RAB). he FS4 excavation took in the southern end of the long rectangular enclosure that we count as Gallery IV.11 (Tavares et al. 2005). he two bakeries that we found in 1991 occupy the full width of the northern end of Gallery IV.11. his is the last gallery on the east in Set IV, and probably the last gallery to be built. he excavation also extended across the southern end of a kind of mini-gallery east of Gallery IV.11. Both long enclosures nearly match the length and appear to be in sequence with the galleries of Set IV (the mini gallery is a little shorter). But they are of odd widths, 6.0 and 2.26 m respectively. he FS4 excavations have revealed that these “galleries” are very late additions. A curved ieldstone wall swings into Gallery IV.11, like an open gate from the street, on the western side of the southern boundary of the gallery. It ends at a thin wall that divides the southern end of the gallery into spaces, 2.20 m wide on the west and 3.75 m wide on the east. he curved wall is a continuation of the north side of the narrow corridor at the eastern end of South Street. he southern side of the narrow corridor is the ieldstone Division Wall and the curved mudbrick wall around the northwest corner of the RAB. he FS4 excavators revealed that smaller ieldstone walls compartmentalize the southern ends of these late, anomalous galleries (Tavares et al. 2005; Kamel, Lehner, and Tavares 2005). hese walls are founded upon the youngest street and loor levels in this area. We now know that the Division Wall, running down the center of South Street and forming the southern side of the restricted corridor, is later than the Enclosure Wall (which is later than the RAB wall). All the walls that compartmentalize the southern end of Gallery IV.11 are later than the Division Wall. 42 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf he compartments contained more of the pedestals so ubiquitous across the site. he pedestal structures were the “last hurrah,” of building in this area, and maybe much of the site. Only the lowest parts of the foundations remain. Yet, there is enough that we can see a familiar pedestaland-slot arrangement (ig. 9). Mohammed Aly Abd el-Hakeem excavated one of these arrangements at the end of the mini-gallery, inside a little chamber that measures 2.10 m east-west and 3.70 m north-south. here was a space just wide enough (1.80 m) for someone to stand in front of the pedestals against a wall, 55 cm wide, at the north side of the chamber. his wall completely closed of the end of the mini-gallery. he set consists of one center pedestal, 70 cm wide, and two half pedestals, 30 cm wide, projecting from the sidewalls. his arrangement leaves two slots or notches. Again, we have clear evidence from the Pedestal Building in the Western Town and from a set of pedestals in Transect A2 (see below), that a thin partition wall on the center of the middle pedestal formed two compartments that stood above the slots or notches. As with storage systems attested elsewhere in the ancient world, the idea was to have some air underneath the compartments or containers. Figure 9. Reconstruction of compartments formed by slots over pedestals. Royal Administrative Building (RAB) Northwest Corner (Area BB) We irst saw what we thought were the double walls of the northwest corner of the RAB in 2001. Embedded in the level mud mass, the patches of stone that had collapsed from the walls looked like buttresses, hence our original designation, BB, for “Buttress Building.” History of GPMP Excavations and Names of the RAB During the 2002 ield season, Bob Will and Susan Bain began excavations in the northwest corner of the complex, while Fiona Baker supervised excavations to the east in the sunken court of silos (see ig. 1). Paul Sharman excavated around the entrance in the northeast corner of the RAB. Many of the deposits that we excavated that season came from pits and other features of a period ater the RAB had been abandoned. he excavations in the northwest corner yielded an impressive number of clay sealings, and material related to sealing. Archaeologists who work with ancient Near Eastern civilizations have thought of sealings as an index of administration. Fiona Baker discovered the large centralized storage facility—the sunken court of silos, which certainly appear to be royal in size and character. his led Lehner to dub the whole enclosure the Royal Administrative Building (Lehner 2002). he RAB/BB complex covers a large area, at least 48 x 32 m. It continues south 10 to 15 m into “mud mass” that we have not yet excavated and then further south under the modern sports club. Rather than a discrete building under a single roof, it is a large enclosure, within a two-meterthick ieldstone wall that contained complexes of smaller structures, courtyards, and pathways. Five narrower enclosures, E1-5, each about 10.20 m wide, extend west of the RAB. In 2004 Freya Sadarangani’s team found a lower lying, older architectural complex under the northwest corner of the RAB. It became awkward to use our colloquial names for this complex and its acronyms, BB and RAB. Sadarangani (2005:4) wrote “he earlier structural complex Giza Occasional Papers 2 43 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf directly underlies the later complex. he exact limits of this older earlier complex are currently unknown…the later complex (also known as BB or RAB) will be referred to as Structural Complex 1. he earlier building or complex will be referred to as Structural Complex 2.” In the 2004 winter-spring season, within six grid squares in the northwestern corner of the complex, Freya Sadarangani and James Taylor excavated all features and exposed all the walls pertaining to the upper occupation and structural phases of the RAB. In 2005 Sadarangani resumed the excavations inside the northwest corner of the RAB. She excavated within the six grid squares down to a level of architecture that existed before the inhabitants built the RAB. Early in Season 2005 the thick, double, outer ieldstone walls of the RAB, and the mudbrick walls forming the courts and chambers of the younger phase inside the RAB, ran like trestles over and across mudbrick walls of the lower, older phase. Dismantling and Recording Walls of Structural Complex 1 In order to understand the history of this part of the site it was necessary to remove parts of the younger walls that are in phase with the outer ieldstone wall of the RAB. In February Henan Mahmoud and Banu Aydinoglugil drew elevations of the walls of Structural Complex 1, the higher, later phase, in anticipation of taking them down to fully expose the lower phase walls of Structural Complex 2. By late February 2005 the team members were well along in the process of dismantling the walls of Structural Complex 1. hey began by systematically shaving of the eroded tops of the walls down to the highest continuous course. his showed every brick in the wall, giving a clear picture of the structure. For the big walls, 72 cm wide, the ancient bricklayers placed headers on one side and stretchers on the other (headers are bricks laid perpendicular to the face of the wall, stretchers are placed lengthwise along the face of the wall). In between, the masons laid more headers, albeit somewhat more haphazardly, in a mud ill. he pattern alternates: the side that has headers in one course has stretchers in the next up, and vice versa. In the thinner walls, 60 cm wide, they laid two outside rows of stretchers, with headers in between for the core. Pieter Collet drew detailed 1:20 plans of the uppermost continuous course. Henan Mahmoud measured and drew detailed sketches of the courses below. Collet mapped the foundation course of each wall at 1:20. As part of his pan-site brick study, Ashraf Abd el-Aziz sent some of the bricks for lotation to recover ancient plant remains. He dissolved other bricks and wet sieved the material to pick out micro-fauna (small animal bone), ceramics, sealings, and other material. All these classes of material culture had gotten molded into the brick because the ancient brick workers used settlement mud for their products. Abd el-Aziz saved many bricks whole and stacked, sorted, and examined the best of the complete specimens for his evolving brick typology at Giza. Summary of 15 Phases In her analysis of the 2002, 2004, and 2005 excavations, Sadarangani identiied at least 15 phases of discrete activity in the BB area. She tabulated these phases from oldest to latest (table 3). It should be noted that there are certainly earlier phases than Sadarangani’s Phase 1, which is really the last phase of Structural Complex 2. his layout had its own phases of development, like the successive structural and occupational phases of Structural Complex 1. here are likely phases preceding the earlier architectural layout. We may gain information about these earlier phases in subsequent excavation, which will then change our phasing. Phases 2 through 4 represent the most dramatic change. his is when the inhabitants demolished Structural Complex 2 and built the irst walls and chambers of Structural Complex 1. In this report we draw on Sadarangani’s Data Structure Report (2005) to summarize Structural Complex 1 at the end of its development, followed by Structural Complex 2 as we found it at the end of its development. Structural Complex 1 When the builders constructed the main ieldstone wall [5433/5435] that borders and deines Structural Complex 1 (RAB), they orientated the western wall about 6° west of north and the northern wall a lesser degree north of east. hey were probably following the orientation that 44 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Table 3. List of phases for Area BB Phase 01 Earliest – (Structural Complex 2) Phase 02 Demolition – (Interface between Structural Complexes 1 and 2) Phase 03 Structural – A (Limestone Wall, Structural Complex 1) Phase 04 Structural – B (Mudbrick wall construction, Structural Complex 1) Phase 05 Structural – C (Mudbrick wall Construction, including Annex, Structural Complex 1) Phase 06 Leveling and Preparation - (Structural Complex 1) Phase 07 Occupation – A (Structural Complex 1) Phase 08 Structural – D (Leveling, Consolidation and Minor Structural Remodeling, Structural Complex 1) Phase 09 Occupation – B (Structural Complex 1) Phase 10 Structural – e (Minor Remodeling, Structural Complex 1) Phase 11 Occupation – C (Structural Complex 1) Phase 12 Occupation – D (Abandonment Interface) Phase 13 Post-Abandonment – A (Primary Tumble/Demolition) Phase 14 Post-Abandonment – B (Mud Mass/Degradation and Erosion) Phase 15 Post-Abandonment – C (Modern Truncation/Disturbance) they, or other builders, followed when they constructed the western mudbrick wall of Structural Complex 2, for it appears that the earlier mudbrick wall is embedded within the later wall, running along the western side of its foundation. (All the major walls of this settlement, including the Gallery Complex and the Wall of the Crow, follow the slight orientation west of north or north of east. his whole city was turned slightly counter clockwise with respect to the cardinal directions.) We see the western wall of the RAB Wall [5435] running north to south for approximately 32 m before it dives under the soccer ield. From the RAB northwest corner, the northern wall [5433] runs 48 m to a major doorway near the Eastern Town area. he eastern wall runs south where it also runs underneath the soccer ield. Embedding the Older Mudbrick Wall At least at the west side of the building where Sadarangani excavated, the builders seem not to have cut a foundation trench for the thick ieldstone wall (Paul Sharman and Stephanie Durning found a construction cut for the eastern ieldstone wall on the northeast part of the RAB in 2002). hey built the western and northern limestone walls, [5433] and [5435], directly upon the western mudbrick wall [22,822] of Structural Complex 2 and upon the demolition and leveling layer that covered the remains of the earlier complex. Aneis Hassan’s 2005 trench, 2.30 m wide through the western RAB wall [5435], showed that the builders erected the newer limestone wall against the eastern side and then over the top of the earlier mudbrick wall [22,822], thereby utilizing it as part foundation and part internal core for a new limestone wall. hey did not even attempt to level wall [22,822] to a uniform height. Consequently the base of the newer wall is 23 cm higher on the west than on its eastern side, where there was no wall to act as a deeper foundation. Giza Occasional Papers 2 45 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf We have seen a similar embedding of older mudbrick walls in thick ieldstone walls in the large south-facing enclosures of Standing Wall Island that we cleared in 2004 of the southeast corner of the modern soccer ield (see ig. 1). RAB Internal Mudbrick Walls he outer RAB ieldstone wall was the irst of three phases of structural remodeling. Sadarangani (2005:71) stated, “It seems that the chronology of Structural Complex 1’s remodeling spans a fairly short time period; perhaps even being contiguous blocks of work, separated only by the order of construction. Of note, both the [outer] limestone and mudbrick walls seal the same primary demolition deposits.” he masons set up the main internal mudbrick walls of Structural Complex 1, creating six spatial units or rooms of varying size and to the east, the courtyard, a much larger, open space. Orientations and Alignments he builders kept to the alignment and orientation of the older walls of Structural Complex 2, and in some cases they built the new walls directly over the Phase 1 walls. One case in point: the common eastern wall [5587=5639] in the new complex followed the common eastern wall in the old complex. he newer eastern wall created a 10-cubit-wide (5.25 m) band or strip between it and the RAB western wall. he same strip in the earlier complex was about 1 m wider because of the narrower western mudbrick wall. Rooms 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of Structural Complex 1 (ig. 10) are all within this band, just as were all the rooms A-N in the older Structural Complex 2 (ig. 11). Rooms of Structural Complex 1 he general layout of Structural Complex 1 is a long strip, 10 cubits wide, between the western ieldstone wall of the RAB, and the eastern mudbrick boundary wall [5587] and [5639]. At 75 cm wide, this eastern wall was thicker than the other internal walls. It abutted the northern RAB ieldstone wall [5433] and continued south for 10 m where it was interrupted by the main doorway Rm 8 Rm 8 Rm 1 Rm 1 Rm 9 Rm 9 Rm 5 Courtyard Rm 5 Rm 2 Rm 2 Rm 6 Rm 6 Rm 6 Rm 3 Rm 3 Rm 4 Rm 7 Rm 4 Phase 8 0 Rm 6 Rm 7 Phases 10-11 5 10m Figure 10. Structural Complex 1 in northwest corner of RAB. Floors are shown as hatched areas. 46 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf into the complex, and then it continued south as [5639] for a further 4.67 m before disappearing into the southern limit of excavation. We can see it continuing farther south embedded in the mud mass, which is to say that the entire 10-cubit strip continues south. Room 1 An east-west cross wall [5554] closed of Room 1, which takes up the entire width at the north end of the 10-cubit strip, measuring, 5.80 m (north-south) by 5.20 m (east-west). hree openings or doorways gave access to Room 1. One, 80 cm wide, opened between the western ieldstone wall and the south wall of Room 1 and led into Room 2. Another, 56 cm wide, opened south into Room 5. he third opening, 50 cm wide, led through the eastern wall [5587] in the southeastern corner of Room 1 to Room 9. South of Room 1 another north-south wall [5555=5640], 60 cm thick and 45 cm high, divided the 10-cubit strip in half longitudinally. While we have excavated this wall for 10 m north to south, we can see it continuing south in the mud mass well beyond the present limit of our excavation. Shorter cross walls formed ive additional spatial units or rooms of variable sizes. Room 2, one long space, took up the western half-strip. A cross wall divided the corresponding space on the eastern half of the strip into two smaller spaces, Rooms 5 and 6. he east-west division continues south, where we have only a portion of the north ends of Rooms 4 and 7. Room 2 Room 2 was a long rectangular space, 6.80 m north-south, against the RAB western ieldstone wall on the western side of the 10-cubit strip. A doorway, 60 cm wide with a mudbrick threshold, opened at the southern end of its eastern wall to Room 6. Another doorway, 50 cm wide, opened through the southern wall into Room 4. Room 3 Room 3 was corridor 3, 96 cm wide running west from the doorway to Room 6. Someone added a thin east-west partition wall [485], 2.10 m long, from regular courses of large mudbricks, one course thick (12 cm), across the southern end of the Room 2 to create this corridor. he thin wall survived two courses high (23 cm). he thickened western end provided support for a small entrance between Rooms 2 and 3. At a later time (Sadarangani’s Phase 9), the occupants added a small posthole or door socket, [494], 12 cm diameter, to the eastern side of the doorway between Rooms 2 and 3, which indicates a door that swung open southward into Room 3. he occupants eventually (in Sadarangani’s Occupation C) blocked the doorway between Room 3 and 4 with six bricks [20,019] that they laid as headers along the northern edge of the threshold. Room 4 Room 4, 2.30 m wide (east-west), continues south beyond our current limit of excavation. In addition to the doorway from Room 2, another doorway, 50 cm wide, opened through the eastern wall over a mudbrick threshold into Room 7, which also continues south beyond our excavations. Room 5 Room 5, south of Room 1 and north of Room 6, measured 3 m (north-south) by 2.3 m (east-west). A doorway gave access from Room 6. Another doorway opened in the center of the northern wall into Room 1. Room 6: Complex 1 Central Room 6 measured 3.40 m (north-south) by 2.40 m (east-west). Four doorways opened into Room 6, one in its southwestern corner to Room 2, another south into Room 7, and one in the northern wall into Room 5. A fourth doorway through the north end of the eastern wall opened to the courtyard. his doorway, 1 m wide with a formal mudbrick threshold [21,675], was the major access into Structural Complex 1 from the open courtyard to the east. A limestone door socket indicates that a wooden door for this entrance/exit swung open into Room 6. his wider doorway, and the other doorways into the adjacent rooms, makes Room 6 a kind of foyer. Giza Occasional Papers 2 47 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Sadarangani (2005:74, 5.4.6) reported that all entryways in Room 6 had evidence of doors: he presence of structural indents and/or small wall returns in the termini of these access spaces were speciic to Room 6. It is possible that the function of these indents and small returns was to house doorjambs. As such, each of the access spaces associated with Room 6 contained a door. Further, the location of these indents in the adjacent rooms (Rooms 2, 5, and 7) would suggest that any door would have swung outwards into the adjacent room, and not into Room 6. he exception to this is the internal to external access route, where the indents and a limestone door socket were located inside the room, thereby indicating that the door would have swung inwards. he question of doorways is crucial for other evidence, such as sealings and their distributions. he ancient Egyptians were very keen on the practical and magical signiicance of doorways, and locked some doorways with sealings of string and mud impressed with texts that, when broken and the doorway opened, would fragment into the “sealings.” he main access into Complex 1 via Room 6 and its other three doorways make it a kind of Complex 1 Central. In fact, just here, in the main juncture, is where most of the living activity is evidenced, as we shall see. In a later period, the occupants laid a mudbrick threshold across the doorway between Room 6 and 7 and added a mudbrick barrier [2954] to enclose the eastern side of the hearth in the northwest corner of the room. he barrier, consisting of one heavily degraded mudbrick and two ‘ghost’ (robbed) mudbricks [2954], measured 1.16 m (north-south) by 20 cm (east-west) and 4 cm (high). he occupants also added a dog-leg mudbrick partition [4057] that divided Room 6 into northern and southern halves. Two courses of mudbrick remained of the partition wall [4057] (with the upper course being signiicantly degraded). he partition ran 1.06 m west from the eastern wall of the room, turned south for 10 cm, and then continued west 1.12 m, on a alignment slightly south of west. he dog-leg wall divided hearth-related activities in the northern half of the room from activities in the southern half. he purpose of the jog southward appears to have been to allow for continued use of a spouted vat sunk in the loor south of the hearth. Room 7 Room 7, which lies south of Room 6, measured 1.30 m (east-west). A doorway, 58 m wide, in the northern wall opened into Room 6. he Annex: Rooms 8 and 9 At a later stage, the builders added Rooms 8 and 9 up against the east face of the eastern wall [5587]. Together the two rooms of this Annex seem to form a unit. his phase also includes the construction of two bins into the corner between the Annex and the main eastern wall of Rooms 5 and 6. he southern wall [5466] of the Annex was 98 cm thick, the eastern wall [21,299], 76 cm thick. A thin mudbrick partition wall [5566], 43 m wide, separated Rooms 8 and 9. Room 8, the northern room of the annex, measured 2.10 m (north-south) x 2.70 m (east-west). Room 9, the southern room of the annex, measured 3.16 m (north-south) x 2.66 m (east-west). A doorway, 66 cm wide, opened between Rooms 8 and 9 through the partition wall. he occupants cut a gap through the western wall [5587] of Room 9 to make a passage, 60 cm wide, into Room 1. At a later time they blocked it with mudbricks, two courses high [21,303], 15 cm high over the loor [21,114]. hey cut through the eastern wall [5565] to make another access, 44 cm wide, in the northeast corner of Room 8 to the Courtyard, leaving the lower courses as a threshold. Rooms 8 and 9 completed the main structural footprint of Structural Complex 1. he area to the east and south, measuring at least 15.50 m (north-south) x 5 m (east-west), seems to have functioned as an open courtyard. Courtyard Bins he occupants built two square compartments enclosed by thin mudbrick walls nestled into the corner formed by the east wall of the main complex and the south wall of the Annex. We found that only a single course of brick headers remained of the common exterior wall. A cross wall 48 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf divided the rectangular enclosure into two compartments. he southern compartment was 1 m (north-south) by 90 cm (east-west); the northern compartment was 1.16 m (north-south) by 94 cm (east-west). Courtyard: Corridor, Access Restricted Builders later (Sadarangani Phase 8) added a north-south wall of mud and limestone [5357], 58 cm wide, east of Rooms 6 and 7. his wall formed a corridor with the main eastern mudbrick wall [5639] of Structural Complex 1. he wall runs from the southern limits of our excavation north for 5.62 m (north-south) and is preserved between 12 and 24 cm high. his wall must have drastically restricted the entrance to Room 6, the main access to Structural Complex 1. he entrance was now of-view from the courtyard. he new limestone wall [5357] may have turned west to run along the southern side of the bins and to attach to the eastern wall [5465] of Rooms 5 and 6. his would have let the bins in a recess, the north side of which was the southern wall of Room 9. Sadarangani (2005:90) noted that the occupants used the limestone wall [5357] and the corridor it created for only one phase or period: “he courtyard’s limestone wall …had a one phase use—constructed within Phase 8, used within Phase 9, and dismantled within Phase 10.” Observations on Structural Complex 1 As far as we know, the walls and rooms of Complex 1 were all within the 10-cubit-wide (5.25 m) strip along the western RAB ieldstone wall. It may seem odd to us to have such a thick enclosure wall, and then have the rooms up against it, leaving empty spaces in toward the center of the RAB enclosure. But Abd al-Aziz Saleh (1974) of Cairo University found this same kind of pattern in the 4th dynasty industrial settlement southeast of the Menkaure Pyramid, and Günter Dreyer and Horst Jaritz found similar patterns in ield stone compounds near the Old Kingdom dam at Wadi Gerawi, across the Nile Valley from Dahshur (Dreyer and Jaritz 1983). One pattern that repeats from the older Structural Complex 2 (see below) is the room complex with a narrow north-south zone against a western perimeter wall, with an open space or broad court to the east. Room 1, measuring, 5.80 by 5.20 m and without any pillars or columns, must have been an internal open court. Closed of by Rooms 2 and 5 to the south and just inside the thick ieldstone walls making the northwest corner of the RAB, this court must have been very sheltered and private. We might consider this as an increased concern for security on the part of the planners. he thickening of all the walls, especially the perimeter RAB walls reinforced with compacted broken stone, also indicates an increased concern for security, a concern relected as well in the Enclosure Wall which was built slightly later around the Gallery Complex, segregating it from the Eastern and Western Towns, and from the RAB. Occupation in Structural Complex 1 Here we simplify and summarize principal features let by people living in the rooms of Complex 1 over the several major occupation phases that Sadarangani (2005) identiied. Use of Room 1 for Dumping hroughout the occupation of Complex 1, Room 1 was less a functioning room or courtyard than dead space where the inhabitants let heaps and layers of debris from the demolition of Structural Unit 2, and then discarded ash and pottery. “Certainly it is notable that there was no evidence for the complex occupation sequences identiied in Room 6 for example” (Sadarangani (2005:81). Room 1 appears to have remained relatively dead space for dumping. Occupation in Room 2 Eventually (in Sadarangani’s Phase 9, Occupation B), people cut two pot emplacements through the loor [7117] of Room 2. he one in the southern part of the room, close to the southern wall, was a small straight-sided cut [4107], 44 cm in diameter. People packed 15 cm of the bottom of the hole with irm, brown, clayey silt with frequent charcoal lecks and occasional lenses of sand [21,608]. A small, fragmented bowl [21,607] sat directly on this ill. he bowl displayed clear Giza Occasional Papers 2 49 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf signs of in situ burning. Loose, dark grayish-brown, sandy and ashy silt with frequent charcoal lecks and bright red burnt mudbrick fragments [4079] covered the vessel and sealed the pit. he occupants seem to have reused this pot emplacement as a hearth. hen the hearth fell out of use and the occupants illed the hole with loose, dark colored, ash-rich soil, bringing the depression let by their disused installation level with the loor. Another pot emplacement [7100] in the northeastern corner of the room was 54 cm in diameter and 52 cm deep. People removed the pot and backilled the hole leaving only the clay lining [7197] that had kept the pot irmly in place. Ater the earlier installations fell out of use in Room 2 (Sadarangani’s Occupation C), the residents set into the loor a large vat [4104] that we found still within its pit [21, 618]. he vat, 50 cm in diameter and 41 cm deep, was located in the western half of Room 2. his type of vat is associated with beer and bread-making in tomb scenes. he sides and base of the pit were lined with a compact clay-silt [21,617]. Just to the north of the vat, two shallow depressions [4102] and [4103] were illed with black, ashy silt. Occupation in Room 4: Ash-Rich Features In Room 4 the inhabitants laid down a distinct, very compact, pale yellow-brown loor surface [5669] (Sadarangani’s Occupation B). In the southwest corner of the room they made a large rectangular pit, 16 cm deep, that was illed with quantities of dense, inely laminated, black ash deposits and charcoal [7087]. A shallow depression [5670], illed with ine, grey-brown silt on the north side of the room against the wall [5567], belongs to this period. Another shallow depression [5671] in the southeast corner was also illed with ine, grey-brown silt. A dark brown-black deposit [5666], 14 cm deep, sealed this depression and most of the southern half of the room. A second ash-rich deposit [5641] sealed [5666] in the northeast corner, however, was a much lighter grey with frequent charcoal lecks. Occupation in Room 5: Two Troughs In the northeast and northwest corners of Room 5, the occupants made two parallel, shallow, rectangular troughs, ater the initial occupation period (Sadarangani’s Occupation B). he northeast trough [20,151] was 1.54 m (north-south) by 95 cm (east-west) and 12 cm deep, with a relatively lat base. he northwest trough [20,981] had similar dimensions, 1.50 m (north-south) by 80 cm (east-west) and 10 cm deep, with a gentle slope from south to north. hese troughs are cut features, gaps in the loor [20,977]. Two layers of ash, the irst with many pottery sherds [20,174] and the second without sherds [20,151] illed the northeast trough. he northwest trough [20,981] similarly contained two ills: irst, moderately compact, grey, sandy silt mixed with dark brown, silty clay with frequent charcoal lecks and occasional limestone pieces [20,982]. he second ill [20,980] consisted of dark gray-brown mudbricks in a loose matrix of silty sand. A shallow circular hole [20,992], 43 cm in diameter, was sunk 9 cm deep in the loor in the approximate center of the room south of the two troughs. he base of the hole was relatively lat, its break of slope gradual. his may have been the receptacle for a bowl, plate, or one of the small vats with diameters approximately 42 cm such as we have found sunk into loors elsewhere on the site. An additional depression [20,988] was cut into the loor [20,992] in the southwest corner of the room in the form of a shallow quarter-circle 33 cm (north-south) by 30 cm (east-west) and 7 cm deep. his may have also been a pot emplacement. Room 5: Curved Structure Late in the occupation (Sadarangani’s Phase 11, Occupation C) of the room, upon a loor of which a large remnant [20,020] was conined to the northeast corner of Room 5, the residents built a semicircular mudbrick partition [5637] that swings south then east into the northeast corner of Room 5 from the east side of the doorway to Room 1. Our excavators found two courses of mudbrick, 20 cm high, that abutted the end of the east side of this doorway. he curved wall [5637] ended with an irregular piece of limestone, leaving a gap of 40 cm between it and the eastern wall [5465] of Room 5. Mudbrick stretchers formed the lower course and a random mixture of headers and footers comprised the upper course of the curved partition. 50 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf At the end of the partition, near the limestone piece, the internal, northern face of the upper course of bricks was stepped back, which let a small ledge, 12 cm (north-south) by 30 cm (eastwest). At this level, the end of the wall [5554] forming the western side of the doorway between Rooms 1 and 5 was uneven, and appeared to have been almost hacked, suggesting that the occupants had, in a rather crude fashion, widened this access between Room 1 and Room 5, to facilitate movement around the curved partition [5637] and between the rooms. he primary deposit within, and up against, the curved partition [5637] was loose, dark gray sandy ash, rich in charcoal with moderate pottery sherds [20,014/7131], 12 cm thick. his deposit was sealed by grayish-brown sandy silt containing frequent bones and pottery sherds, and moderate amounts of charcoal [5632]. he rounded enclosure formed by the curved wall [5637] might have had something to do with ash that spread from Room 1, through the threshold and into Room 5. A 40-cm gap existed between the eastern end of the curved wall and the east wall of Room 5. It is possible that the curved wall rose up and bridged the gap, which was open only at the bottom. he space inside the partition might have been roofed or otherwise closed at the top. his would make the enclosed space and curved wall similar to ovens or granaries, which had openings at loor level to insert fuel or to let out grain respectively. he space enclosed by the curved wall contained ash overlain by a layer that contained much animal bone. here was no evidence of in situ burning. his might preclude the structure functioning as an oven. It might have been for storage, possibly serving as a crude granary. he narrow ledge built into its internal north face may have received a removable cover of wood or wicker. Sadarangani (2005:92) suggests that a small door or hatch may have closed the lower space, “thus allowing material to remain contained within the structure.” he limestone piece at the end of the curved wall may have helped it some kind of hatch. Room 6 Pottery Installation Successive surface layers, three pot emplacements, the construction of a limestone-bordered hearth, and the other deposits remained from the earliest use of Room 6 (Sadarangani’s Occupation A). he earliest loor, composed of compact, dark brown, silty clay [5304], survived only in the southern half of Room 6 and continued south into Room 7. A pottery jar (“beer jar”) [5353] occupied a clay-lined [21,602] hole that had been cut [21,603] into the loor. Dark grey, ashy sand with lots of pottery fragments [21,601] illed the jar. Another pot emplacement, a circular hole 32 cm deep and 42 cm in diameter [5352], cut through this ashy ill [21,601]. his was the receptacle for a large spouted vessel [4072] with a 32-centimeter-diameter. Northwest of this vessel, a thin, circular clay deposit [4073] with sloping sides and 36-centimeterdiameter probably served as an emplacement for a shallow bowl or plate. A patch of dark brown clay comprised a 2-centimeter thick loor or occupation surface [3196] that covered the rim of the spouted vessel [4072]. his patch of loor was 1.28 m (north-south) by 1.35 m (east-west) and 2 cm thick. he way it lapped over the rim of the vessel suggests that this patch [3196] was a surface that functioned with the use of the vessel. Room 6 Hearth A single course of irregular limestone pieces [20,143] lined the walls in the northwest corner of the Room 6. he limestone fragments rested on mudbricks. Two of the east facing stones had been discolored red, indicating in situ burning. his limestone installation deined a hearth, 90 cm (east-west) by 90 cm (north-south) and 16 cm high. hin intercalated ash and sand layers, with some burnt red and orange spots, charcoal lecks, topped by 3 cm of dark gray ash, illed the area of the hearth. In later periods (Sadarangani’s Occupation B and C) the occupants of Room 6 laid down more loors over accumulations of sand with charcoal and ash. Eventually the occupants laid down 2 cm of greasy clay [4050] over the accumulated debris [4051] in the eastern half of the room. his new loor [4050] featured a large circular pot emplacement [21,612], 66 cm in diameter and 40 cm deep, with a sharp break of slope, a lat base, and vertical sides. Compact mudbrick material [21,620] that lined the emplacement was 8 cm thick on the sides and 20 cm thick at the base, which had a circular concave depression. A secondary layer of compact, dark brown, sandy silt Giza Occasional Papers 2 51 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf [21,611] lined both the ill [21620] and the base of the emplacement. Soil [21,610] eventually illed the emplacement making a patch 38 cm in diameter. An almost complete beer jar came to sit on the surface of the ill, snuggled into the corner, abutting the dog leg partition wall [4057] and the eastern wall of Room 6 [5639]. Room 6: Beer Jars and Bread Molds Late in the occupation (Phase 11) of Room 6, the residents laid down the bedding [21,127] and surface [20,031] of a new loor south of the dog-leg wall [4057]. Pressed into this loor, were the bottoms of two beer jars [20,027 and 20,028] and a bread mold [20,028] that formed a triangle. A shallow circular depression, 40 cm x 9 cm deep [20,030], in the center of the triangle, may have been an emplacement for a bowl or platter. North of the dog-leg wall [4057], in the northwest corner of Room 6, the occupants laid down a bedding [20,040] for a new loor [20,035] adjacent to thick ash [20,142] enclosed within the limestone and mudbrick border of the hearth. Occupation in Room 7 Two holes that might have been pot emplacements and a loor remained in Room 7. One pot emplacement [21,633] was 58 cm in diameter and 57 cm deep, so it was possibly for a small vat. hree courses of mudbricks lined the emplacement, and clay [21,632] covered the bricks and lined the base of the emplacement. To the northeast a shallow circular depression [21,615] with a diameter of 23 cm must be the emplacement for a ceramic bowl. Occupation in Rooms 8 and 9 Room 8, the threshold connecting Room 8 to the ‘courtyard’ area, and Room 9 contained several superimposed loors. A loor [21,124], 5 cm thick, covered the entire area of Room 9. A shallow circular depression [21,124], 8 cm deep and 52 cm in diameter, was cut through the loor in the southeast corner of Room 9 near the eastern wall. It may have held some sort of shallow ceramic vessel. A limestone mortar lay on the loor near the depression. In a later period (Sadarangani’s Phase 9) the occupants laid down a pale gray, compact silt loor [7107] that sealed earlier loors and extended over most of the area within Room 8. In the northwest corner of Room 8 the excavators found a thin north-south line of mudbricks [7227] that could have been the eastern border of a hearth, evidenced by a scorched red ash deposit in this corner, burnt discoloration on the south face of the northern RAB wall, on the east face of the western mudbrick wall, and on the west face of the mudbrick border. Two circular depressions [7190] and [7191] in the loor nearby may have been sockets for ceramic vessels that were removed. In the southwest corner of the room, a larger circular depression [7233] cut through the loor [7107]. A black ash deposit [5667], 12 cm thick, later spread throughout the room, covering the red ash deposit in the northwestern corner. Sadarangani (2005) points out that similar pot settings were adjacent to the hearth in the northwest corner of Room 6. Positioned within the northwest corner of Room 8, the hearth would have been directly visible from the courtyard, occupying the transitional space between external spaces and the internal room. he coniguration is similar to Room 6. he similarities may suggest that Room 8 functioned as a unit with Room 9 in a way similar to Room 6 with Room 5, or possibly with Room 7 to the south. About the same time, in Room 9 the occupants laid down a 4-centimeter-thick loor, made an emplacement for a large pot, and let behind a series of deposits from their activity. hey covered the entire area of Room 9 with a loor made of compact, brownish-gray, sandy silt with potsherds [20,135], laid over a bedding [21,119]. hey spread the loor into the threshold connecting Rooms 8 and 9, and through the threshold into Room 1. In the northeast corner of Room 9 they made a large circular pot-emplacement [20,974] with a diameter of 60 cm. he primary ill comprised a dense clay UTA (untempered alluvial) mudbrick [20,978], which may have served as packing for a large pot that was removed. Late in the use of Room 9 (Phase 11), the residents cut another emplacement [21,117] for a pot through the gray sandy silt loor [5643] in the southeast corner. he emplacement was 50 cm in diameter and 21 cm deep. Our excavators found the vessel itself [7102] in place and intact, measuring 39 cm in diameter and 24 cm deep. 52 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Occupation in the Courtyard During Sadarangani’s (2005) Occupation A, people dug pits and dumped within the courtyard. Sterile black ash [4099] illed one nearly square pit [4098], 1.68 m (north-south) by 1.28 m (eastwest), and 27 cm deep. A thin layer of sterile yellow sand [5372] sealed the ash. Light gray ash with burnt ish bone [4097] sealed the sand. To the south, an oval depression [21,673] with a relatively lat base measured 1.45 m (east-west) by 1.76 m (north-south) and 7 cm (deep). Concreted yellow marl [21,637] illed this pit and lipped up the sides of its cut. his feature is probably a mixing pit for marl plaster that the builders applied to the walls. Small circular depressions in the surface of the marl might be inger impressions. In addition to these and two other pits, this period of occupation is further represented in the courtyard by material that illed the bins south of Room 9. Both compartments contained layers of loose yellowish-gray slightly silty sand [4093] and [5284]. he southernmost bin contained frequent ceramic sherds and occasional mudbrick [5284] whereas the northernmost contained occasional lenses of ash and moderate amounts of ceramic sherds [4093]. Over time a sequence of loors built up over the courtyard. he Courtyard: Grid of Holes: In the area of the courtyard that corresponds to the southern end of our square 6.S22, the occupants (of Phase 11) formed twenty-six shallow circular depressions in rows aligned both east-west (with 7 in a row) and north-south. he north-south series disappear under the southern limit of our 2005 excavation. hese shallow depressions were fairly uniform in dimension, depth, and spacing. hey averaged 12 cm in diameter, 6 cm deep. hey are spaced, from the central point of each depression to the central point of any adjacent depression, on average 35 cm. he material that illed these depressions showed some variation, but it consisted mainly of loose, grey, ashy sand that contained moderate charcoal lecks. he shallowness of these depressions preclude them from having had any structural function—at less than 6 cm deep they could not support a post or stake. heir shallow circular form, slightly concave base, gradual slope gradient and general dimensions could easily accommodate bread-moulds. Indeed, their dimensions and form match the depression caused by the bread-mould pressed into the loor at the southern end of Room 6. It is possible, therefore, that the depressions represent rows of bread moulds, with each mould stabilized by any one adjacent mould, set into the loor (Sadarangani 2005:93). It is noteworthy that the distance between the centers of the holes is about 35 cm, which is close to the rather standard diameters of the largest size-class of bread molds on our site. So, if bread molds of this size were stuck into the holes, they would just touch rim to rim and support one another as Sadarangani suggested. Also, there are limestone models from Old Kingdom tombs that represent just such a grid of pot sockets, in some cases on a little platter that is a separate piece from the model bread molds that could be set one to each socket. Sadarangani continues with more evidence of these holes as bread mold sockets: Further, the ashy matrix common to the ills of almost every depression could be remnant of the ash used to surround bread-moulds during the bread making process. It is possible therefore, although entirely speculative, that the rows of shallow depressions represent bread-cooling processes – having baked the bread, the bread and their moulds are set out in an external space to cool. Once cool, the moulds are removed, leaving traces of the ash that had packed the mould (Sadarangani 2005:93). Comments on Occupation: Room 6 as Complex 1 Central Sadarangani (2005:77) points out that activity during the irst phase, and throughout much of the occupation, appears to have centered on Room 6. his is indicated by the density and complexity of features within this small room, which, as we will recall, lay just inside the main access to Complex 1, and gave access to the rooms north, west, and south. Giza Occasional Papers 2 53 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Here is an abridged version of Sadarangani’s (2005:77-79) comments on the Room 6 occupation: Construction and use of the limestone-bordered hearth begins at this phase and it continues to be used and modiied throughout subsequent occupation phases. Located in the northwestern corner of the room, the hearth would have been directly visible from the courtyard and would be the irst feature encountered when accessing the internal space from the external space. he absence of any small neutral ‘transitional’ space between external and internal areas, coupled with the hearth’s very visible location difers greatly from the ‘domestic’ habitations seen elsewhere (see North Street Gate House and Eastern Town). Contemporary with the construction of the limestone border, pots were set into the loor almost adjacent to the southern limit of the hearth. If domestic activities were being performed they may have functioned as units to prepare food/ mix ingredients etc prior to cooking. he truncation of one vessel by a larger spouted vessel shows a deliberate, same phase re-use of this space, an importance to locate vessels next to the hearth, and the need for only one pot emplacement at a given time. Within the same phase of occupation, an ash illed rectangular pit was in use in the courtyard…It is highly feasible that during this early phase of occupation, the residue from the burning activities in Room 6’s hearth was the source of the pit’s re-deposited ash (the scrapings from the hearth). An archaeobotanical and micro-faunal comparison between the deposits within the hearth and the ills of the pit may either refute or conirm this. We might suggest that a guard lived in Room 6. Elsewhere on the site, including in the older Structural Complex 2, we have found what we believe are sleeping platforms across, or near, crucial doorways. It suggests that people on guard duty lived and slept close to the port of access. In this case anyone entering Complex 1 had to cross the person who virtually lived in Room 6, a foyer to the rest of the complex. Second Story for Structural Complex 1? Sadarangani makes an important point about the thickness of the RAB outer ieldstone wall, one crucial for our thinking about other major architectural components, like the galleries with their thick walls, and about the numbers of people they accommodated: It is possible that the much greater scale of this limestone ‘casing’, compared to its mudbrick forbear, may be in order to support a second story. A ‘buttress’ located on the external side of the wall, in square 6.S20, may for example have supported a staircase, although this cannot be proven without further investigation (Sadarangani 2005:72). If there were a second story, it surely did not extend over most of the 48-meter breadth of the RAB. Instead, what we seem to have here are roofed structures formed of thinner walls built up against a massive enclosure wall of broken limestone or ieldstone. We see similar patterns at other Old Kingdom sites, notably of industrial settlements. As mentioned, a series of compounds with open courts and rooms built against thick enclosing walls exist near the Old Kingdom dam in the Wadi Gerawi, published by Günter Dreyer and Horst Jaritz (1983). A more formally organized example, very similar in ways to the RAB, occurs at Giza in the settlement that Abd al-Aziz Saleh (1974) excavated for Cairo University in the early 1970s southeast of the Menkaure Pyramid, just beyond the edge of the quarry that likely furnished most of the stone for that pyramid. Like the RAB northwest corner, house-like structures are built against a thick ieldstone wall that enclosed the compound on the south and east. On the possibility of a second story over the RAB internal mudbrick walls, Sadarangani (2005:72) made the following observations: he substantial widths of the majority of the Complex 1 walls (including the annex walls) suggest that they supported an upper storey. However, to date, there has been no evidence of access to an upper loor. Evidence of the existence of an upper storey could have been provided by the presence of huge volumes of mudbrick tumble. However, postabandonment leveling event(s) combined with the ‘mud mass’ process means that minimal 54 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf amounts of tumble (not even enough to be generated by one storey) are represented in the archaeological record. Evidence of roofed internal spaces and non-roofed external spaces through quantities and locations of rooing material has been greatly afected by the ‘melt down’ of the post-abandonment mudbrick collapse. Structural Complex 2 So far we have excavated down to the uppermost loor of the older Structural Complex 2 (ig. 11), so Sadarangani (2005) assigned only one phase to it. In Room F, Sadarangani saw an alignment of mudbricks underlying the uppermost loors, hinting at distinct structural phases within Structural Complex 2. Cuts through the loors of Complex 2 for pot emplacements show two loors overlying what appears to be sterile sand. So we know there are older, underlying loors. Within 15 m north to south of the strip that is 10-cubits wide east to west, Sadrangani excavated 14 spaces enclosed by walls. She designated these as rooms A through n. he space to the east showed no structural features for a distance of 4.5 m, so we infer this was already an open courtyard in the earlier period, as it was during the time of Structural Complex 1, making a total of 15 spaces. The Older Layout on the North he overall pattern in the northern 8.5 m is a very long room, F, with doorways into four smaller, more square chambers, along the west of F, from north to south A, B, C, and e. Limestone pivot sockets for swinging doors are itted into one lower corner of the doorways, which are about 52 cm (1 cubit) wide. he chambers are fairly modular in size, ranging from 1.4 m to 2.14 m for B, C, and e where we have the total dimensions. Modular Two-room Units he modularity of the small rooms gives them the appearance of magazines, but now we see, thanks to the breach through the later RAB western wall (see pages 41-42), that thin mudbrick partition walls jut from the walls separating A from B, and C from e, to form narrow western chambers (H, I, D, and J) for all four units. Chamber I, at the back of B, was only 1 m wide between the partition wall and the mudbrick western wall of Structural Complex 2. A limestone pivot socket indicates there that a wooden door opened into this back chamber. he mudbrick western wall of Complex 2 is embedded with the later, thicker, western ieldstone RAB wall, but if the mudbrick wall continues along the length of all four units, as it probably does, the back chambers H (belonging to A), and J (belonging to e) are also only 1 m wide, while D, the back chamber of C was 1.4 m wide. With these back chambers, the pattern is four units, A-H, B-I, C-D, and e-J, with a larger front room and narrow back room. he length of each unit is about 3 m between the walls; the width is about 2.6 (5 cubits) from the center of the shared wall between each. he four units opened onto the common vestibule, F. he plan of each of these two-room units is similar to our so-called Workers Houses that existed along the western side of the Hypostyle Hall in a later phase of the overall site. he plan consists of a rectangular unit, with a single partition wall forming two rooms, an of-axis entry, but here the units are smaller than the so-called Workers’ Houses. Could the back rooms here have been for sleeping, or, being so narrow, for storage? Common Vestibule, Room F Room F continues north under the northern RAB limestone wall [5433]. Room F is at least 8.50 m (north-south) by 2.60 m (east-west). If the northern wall of Structural Complex 2 is 60 cm wide along and under the northern side of the northern RAB wall, the total length of F would be about 9.5 m. Room F resembles the long, rectangular chambers we see in some of the structures in the Western Town, such as House Units 1, 2, and 3. Only a scant layer remained of the bottom of the eastern boundary wall of Room F. he traces consisted of a plaster face on a foundation composed of dense, black UTA (untempered Nile alluvial) mudbricks [22,817]. Doorways opened from Room F into Rooms A, B, C, and e in the western Giza Occasional Papers 2 55 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf RAB North Wall RAB West Wall l r mudbrick wal East side of olde Court 0 5 10m Figure 11. Structural Complex 2 in Area BB (RAB). Floors are shown as hatched areas. wall. Limestone pivot sockets indicate that these were itted with wooden doors that swung open into the smaller chambers. Another doorway in the southeast corner of Room F opened into Room G. Any evidence of doorways through the eastern wall of Room F was destroyed when the builders of Complex 1 took this wall down. At the northern end of Room F a small section of a north-south plastered wall [21,304] 20 cm thick, juts out from under the northern RAB ieldstone wall [5433]. A low plastered bench, 30 cm wide by 1 m deep, is oriented north-south just south of the doorway to Room C. Sleeping Platform A platform occupied the southern end of Room F. It lay immediately east of the doorway into Room G. It is similar to features we have interpreted as sleeping platforms in other parts of the site. 56 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf his one is oriented east-west and slopes down from west to east. A thin, north-south return wall, [4108] with a plaster face frames the low eastern end of the platform. he builders of Complex 1 cut [21,661] the foundation for one of their later walls through the western end of the platform. Before this, the platform was 1.90 m long. What remains of the platform measures 80 cm north-south by 1.5 m east-west. At its high western end, the platform is 10 cm above the surrounding loor, and it slopes down to level with the loor. Dark brown, clayey silt covered the platform, which had a small shallow depression at its eastern end (worn by feet?). he silt plaster lipped down to and was continuous with the remains of the loor within Room F, which appeared to seal an underlying marl surface. his platform is similar to what we hypothesize are sleeping platforms in Gallery III.4 and elsewhere on the site. Before the wall foundation cut through its western end, the platform might have extended across a second doorway into Room G. Courtyard he area along the east of Complex 2 might have been an open courtyard. Here the excavators found patches of loor unbounded by walls. However, we should note that only the foundations are let where we can see the walls, because the builders of the later, higher phase took them down and possibly reused the bricks. The Older Layout on the South An east-west cross wall divided the pattern in the southern 6.5 m of the 10-cubit strip into two sets of rooms, G-K and M-n-L, 2.60 and 3.14 m wide, north-south, respectively. One, or possibly two, doorways allowed access into Room G from the vestibule, Room F, at either end of the sleeping platform in Room F. Anyone entering G from F had to pass by anyone else occupying that platform. Unit G-K Room G spans an area 4.40 m (east-west) by 2.60 m (5 cubits) (north-south). A thin north-south wall [21,695], the width of a single row of UTA (untempered alluvial) bricks, partitions Room G into a main square chamber and a narrower rectangular vestibule on the east. he thin wall turns west for 70 cm to form a short corridor along the north side of Room G. If extrapolated this leads west toward a doorway, 58 cm wide, which opens to Room K. A limestone pivot socket indicates the access to K was once itted with a swinging wooden door. A small marl brick bench, measuring 46 cm (north-south) by 29 cm (east-west) and at least 8 cm high, abuts the western wall of Room G. Sadarangani’s team found a rich artifact assemblage on the silt loor, including large pounders, polishers, a limestone door socket that was out of its original place, a complete bowl, and various other ceramic vessels. Room K appears to belong to Room G in a pattern similar to, but larger than, units A-H, B-I, CD, and e-J to the north. he later western RAB ieldstone wall [5435] conceals most of Room K; we see only 45 cm of its width (east-west). But if the western mudbrick wall of Structural Complex 2 that we see in Room I continues this far south, Room K is 1.5 m wide. In the narrow exposure, the bricks of the southern wall of Room K might mark the threshold of a doorway into Room L. Unit M-n-L Room M, located south of Room G, is 4.60 m (east-west) by 3.14 m (north-south) and is T-shaped with the small leg of the T extending south to the west of Room n. A thin partition wall in the southeast corner of Room M forms the leg of the T, and turns a 90-degree corner to run east and partition of Room n, 1.16 m (north-south) by 2.50 m (east-west). A doorway opens 44 cm wide in the northwest corner of Room M into Room L, which is 2.8 m long and probably the equivalent of Room K. If the western mudbrick wall of Complex 2 continues this far south under the later RAB wall, Room L is only 1.40 m wide, maximum. he heavy truncation of Phase 1 walls by the construction cuts for the later Complex 1 obliterated any additional doorways into Room M. Another low platform occupies the southwestern corner of Room M. his platform measures 1 m (east-west) by 1.8 m (north-south) and 12 cm high. It abuts the southern and western walls of Room M. An additional, narrow east-west wall [7147] borders the platform to the north. he presence of a mud render [21,865] on top of this wall indicates that this is the original height of Giza Occasional Papers 2 57 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf the wall [7147], which is only 25 cm higher than the platform itself. he mud render on the surface of the platform sealed the top of the eastern retaining wall [21,691]. he same plaster lips down to cover the east face of platform retaining wall, and then continues throughout Room M as a compact loor. his platform is similar to what we have taken as sleeping platforms in other buildings across the site, except it is level and not sloped. If so, it gives unit M-n-L a domestic cast. With their subdivided front rooms (G and M), and narrow back rooms (K and L), these two units looks like large versions of those west of the vestibule (F) in the northern part of our exposure of Structural Complex 2. Material Found in Structural Complex 2 Table 4 summarizes, by room, the objects and material our excavators found on, or close to, the loors of Structural Complex 2. Table 4. Objects and materials on or near Structural Complex 2 loors Room Objects and Materials A Flint artifacts, including a scraper and flint knife blade, mineral pigments, sandstone polishers, painted plaster, and a whole pot. B A saddle quern, sandstone polishers (including a cluster against the southern wall), and mineral pigment. C Whole pots, “pillow-stones,” mineral pigments, various pieces of chipped flint, sandstone polishers, whole shells, and a dolerite hammer stone. D Pottery and mineral pigment; a polisher; and a polished, worked bone point, provisionally interpreted as a weaving implement. E Two beer jars set into a small mudbrick installation, two pillow stones, a quern fragment, polishers, and red mineral pigment. F Chipped stone, sandstone polishers, and broken stone tools. G Large pounders, polishers, loose limestone door socket, a complete bowl, and various other ceramic vessels. H A pounder, polishers, and red mineral pigment. J and E Charcoal, complete cylinder seal, triangular limestone object with etched design. Courtyard 11 fragments of clay sealings, four of which were inscribed. Workshops, Magazines and Overseer he materials that we found on or near the loors of Structural Complex 2 suggest activities like pounding, cutting, scraping, grinding, and polishing. he “pillow stones” are rectangular blocks of limestone with rounded corners and edges. All of the above-listed rooms, except one, contained polishers, which are generally of sandstone. he querns might have been domestic, for grinding grain, but we should also note the presence of mineral pigment in six of the 11 rooms listed above. Altogether, the material might seem most appropriate for cratwork in stone and pigment. 58 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Sadarangani (2005:68 5.1.5) noted: Signiicantly, the rich artifact assemblages that were identiied sitting directly upon the Structural Complex 2 loors were mainly recovered from Rooms A, B, C, D, E, H, I and J. hese assemblages were comprised of a repeated range of artifacts including lithics, sandstone objects, mineral pigments, pot stands, beer jars, vessels, polishers, pounders, mineral pigment, and ‘pillow stones’. Although it is possible that these objects may actually be associated with the abandonment of Structural Complex 2 and the construction of Structural Complex 1, the fact that the artifact assemblage was not as rich in rooms F, G, K, L, M, and n, may suggest that these objects were associated with the function of these rooms. As such, it is possible that this network of small, square to rectangular rooms functioned as workshop/magazine spaces. Magazine Doors Sadarangani went on to point out that the limestone door sockets “were all located on the western side of an access. As such all doors would have swung west” (2005:69). Ancient Egyptian workshops, depictions of workshops in Egyptian tomb scenes and on models, generally include rear roofed rooms for storage of tools and materials, and open front rooms or courts where people could work in the light. he four units A-H, B-I, C-D, e-J could have been such workshops. he common “vestibule,” F might have remained open to the sky, or lightly covered with reed mats, although it is narrow enough to have had a solid roof without pillars (something like 3 m might have been the limit). About the access into Room F, Sadarangani (2005:69) noted: Although it is possible that other accesses existed into Room F, both to the east and to the north, these are unsubstantiated due to concealment by the limestone enclosure wall and wall robbing events respectively. he only identiied access into Room F (not including the ‘magazines’) was located in its southeastern corner, from Room G. Bowabs of Antiquity he Abusir Papyri are the records of the administration of the pyramid temple of the 5th dynasty pharaoh Neferirkare. his literary window into a royal complex reveals just how very concerned the administrators of such an institution were about guarding doors, passageways, and especially magazines. According to the service rosters, people of high and low titles, in a social leveling of obligatory labor, performed guard duty at some time, especially during the night (PosenerKrieger 1976). Sadarangani (2005:69, 5.1.8) points out that “he morphology, size and orientation of [the Room F] platform exactly corresponds to the series of platforms identiied within Gallery III.4, all of which have been interpreted as sleeping platforms.” Bed platforms are known in ancient Egyptian houses from other sites and periods. We have the hypothetical bed platform across the southern end of vestibule F. We found similar sleeping platforms across or near doorways within Gallery III.4 and in the southwest corner of the Hypostyle Hall. It is possible that guards actually slept across the doorways for which they were responsible during the night, as bowabs (door keepers) do in Egypt today: he location of this possible sleeping platform at the southern end of Room F adjacent to Room F’s southeastern access may be related to the activities associated with Rooms A, B, C, D, e, H, I and J. If the head of a sleeping individual was placed at the western end of the platform, that individual would have had full visibility of Room F, its southeastern access and the [doorways] into the individual ‘magazines.’ As such this platform may represent a guard’s sleeping unit (Sadarangani 2005:69, 5.1.8). Anyone occupying the platform at the southern end of the vestibule (F) would be able to monitor all comings and goings from the doorways of the two-room units to the north, provided this person was not asleep. Giza Occasional Papers 2 59 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Houses for Overseers? Perhaps the southern part of Structural Complex 2 was more domestic than the northern part. It is possible that cratsmen, the guard, or an administrator of the complex lived in the southern chambers. Sadarangani notes that while one could access Room G through its southwestern corner (into Room K), northeastern corner (into Room F), and possibly from its eastern side, it may be signiicant, there was no direct access south into Room M. his could indicate that Rooms G and M belong to two distinct units. Sadarangani (2005:70, 5.1.10) also notes that the platform in Room M is of a size suitable to it a supine individual and may therefore represent a diferent type of sleeping platform of that seen in Room F and in Gallery III.4, equally it may represent a raised work/storage platform….he enclosed area of space identiied within Room M’s southeastern corner (Room n) may represent a similar platform for the following reasons: irstly Room n and Room M’s platform are of similar sizes, secondly no loor was identiied within ‘Room n’s’ enclosed space. If the larger platforms of Room M were beds, they might indicate a higher status, similar to the larger bed platform in the house of an overseer at the back of Gallery III.4 compared to its smaller bed platforms in the front colonnade. Demolition of Building Complex 2 People demolished the walls and robbed the bricks from Structural Complex 2 prior to the construction of Structural Complex 1, the RAB. hey cut [21,684] out the eastern wall of Structural Complex 2, common to both the north and south layouts, although they let the lower bit of the marl plaster of the “robbed” wall. Where they took out the wall, broken brick and plaster illed the trench. Next, they covered the backill of the trench with layers from their demolition and other material they had dumped and spread into the northern rooms of Structural Complex 2. In the southern part of the complex they sealed all the loors and occupation deposits within Rooms D, e, G, J, K, L, M, n and the southern half of Room F with a single, uniform, demolition/ leveling layer [21,641]. his deposit consisted of loose brown, silty sand, with frequent marl plaster and mudbrick fragments, charcoal lecks, and pottery sherds. his deposit was rich in inds, which included a quantity of clay sealings, lithics, pigment, and whole ceramic vessels. It is likely that the builders of Structural Complex 1 mixed fragments of the Complex 2 walls with Phase 1 occupation material to provide a level surface for their new limestone enclosure walls, and the new internal mudbrick walls and loors. Brick Recycling: Complex 2 into Complex 1 Sadarangani (2005:70) noted that the demolition layers between Structural Complex 1 and 2 were not of suicient volume to account for all the walls of Complex 2, saying, “Rather, it seems likely that the walls were partially dismantled—its bricks possibly used for Building Complex 1’s walls— and the rest was mashed up to create a spread of leveling material throughout the complex, on which to found Building Complex 1’s walls and loors.” On the time interval between the two layouts, Sadarangani (2005:71) sums the evidence: Signiicantly there was no archaeological evidence for a phase of abandonment of Structural Complex 2 prior to the construction of Structural Complex 1. No deinable tumble or aeolian [wind-blown] events were identiied. Rather, there appears to have been a swit remodeling of the complex, from use of Structural Complex 2, to demolition of that complex, to construction of Structural Complex 1. The Enclosures E1 and E5 (Field School Units 2 and 3) he excavations of Field School Units 2 and 3 were the irst in the large Enclosures, each about 10.20 m wide, separated by thick ieldstone walls, that run in a series of ive (E1-E5) west of the Royal Administrative Building (itself more of a large enclosure than a discrete building) (see ig. 60 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 1). Here we report irst on the excavations of Field School Unit 3 (FS3) in E1, because it shares a common wall with the RAB. We proceed from east to west to the excavations of Field School Unit 2 (FS2) in Enclosure E5, which shares a common wall with the excavations of Transect A. FS3 Excavations in Enclosure 1 James Taylor and Mansour Bureik supervised FS3 excavations in the northern middle of Enclosure 1 (E1) immediately to the west of the excavations under Freya Sadarangani in the northwest corner of the RAB. FS3 excavated in grid squares 6.R19-21. FS3 team members included Gaber Abd alDayem Ali Omar, Rabea Eissa Mohammed, Ahmed Mohammed el-Lathiy, and Amira Fawzy Ahmed. At the northern end of the enclosure, thin walls deine rectangular magazines, measuring about 1.70 to 1.80 m wide, each oriented north-south, in an east-west series. Entrance Corridor he western wall of the RAB (which is half mudbrick and half ieldstone) and a thinner mudbrick wall, 45 cm wide, deine a corridor on the east, leading south into E1 from an entrance, 80 cm wide, at the northward jog of RAB Street where it runs along the western side of the RAB. he corridor is 1.30 to 1.40 m wide. Amira Fawzy excavated the corridor down to a clean plaster loor that lips up to the plaster on the western face of the RAB western wall. She found charcoal fragments embedded in the loor where the plaster gives out. Magazines in E1 hree internal mudbrick dividing walls, each about 40 to 50 cm wide, and orientated north-south divide the northern end of E1 into four spaces or rooms. Room 1 on the west is 4.20 m wide and extends south into the unexcavated area. Room 1 was probably an open court. Rooms 2 and 3 to the east are 1.66 m and 1.6 8 m wide respectively. Again the southern limits of these rooms extend under the limit of FS3 excavations. It is possible that Rooms 2 and 3 were magazines; they are similar to long, narrow rooms in the north ends of Enclosures E4 and E5. Up against the eastern walls in Rooms 2 and 3, the FS3 excavators found concentrations of pottery, including many beer jars and bread molds. Toward the western side of their excavation, FS3 members retrieved many kilograms of chips of Egyptian alabaster. hey came down on an unusually large, square piece of alabaster, 43 x 68 cm, embedded in the ill. Walls are indicated by marl plaster lines in the surface of the mud mass south of the excavations within E1. he pattern suggests another, roughly matching set of chambers or magazines to the south. A central corridor separates the two series, each running east-west. Each magazine in the series is oriented north-south and opens onto the corridor. Bakery in E1 In Room 1 in the northwest corner of E1, the FS3 team came down on a hearth, consisting of a mound of stones, mud, and bread pots that must have served as a platform for stack-heating the pots, as we know from our previous excavations of Old Kingdom bakeries. he burning on the walls attested to the use of the hearth. In the tumble alongside this hearth, the team excavated a complete bread mold of the smallest size class, about 20 cm in diameter. Another bread mold lay broken on the loor near the base of the hearth. Stretching from the hearth along the western wall of E1, FS3 found a hump of ashy material, 1.28 m wide, with subtle but tell-tale circular depressions and round spots of lighter ill. his must be the baking pit with its characteristic egg-carton-shaped depressions, illed with ash from the last baking session. he team found these features within Room 1, between the western ieldstone wall of E1 and a north-south wall, 48 cm wide, of mudbrick. Room 1 was probably an open court, given its width and the pyrotechnic activity. he magazines lay to the east of this court. E1 Internal Organization Taylor et al. (2005:10) made the following comments about the internal organization of E1: Giza Occasional Papers 2 61 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf he internal division of the enclosure clearly continues to the south of the excavation area. here is some indication of a large east-west wall dividing the complex about 4 m to the south of the excavation area. To the south of this are at least three north-south dividing walls that continue on the same alignment as those identiied inside the excavation area… suggesting a similar division of space to the south of the dividing wall, relecting Rooms 2 and 3. However, there is no evidence yet to suggest how long the ‘corridor’ extends south, because as yet it remains covered with overburden. he southern part of the area adjacent to Room 1 appears to have another north-south dividing wall separating it into a further two units roughly the same size and shape as Rooms 2 and 3. his suggests that the form and function of Room 1 may be unique within the complex. FS2 Excavations in Enclosure 5 Justine Gesell and Abd al-Ghafar supervised the FS2 excavations in the middle of Enclosure E5, immediately east of the Transect A excavations. Mohsen Kamel took Justine Gesell’s place when she had to leave before the end of the excavation period. he FS2 team included Sherif Mohammed Abd al-Moneem, Amer Gad el-Kareem Abu el-Hasan, Momen Saad Mohammed, Shaima Rasheed Salem, Jihan Abd al-Raheem, and Amer Gad el-Kareen Abu el-Hasan. he excavations in squares 6.Q10 and 6.R10 focused on the middle two of four narrow chambers, probably more magazines, and a small court in the north central part of E5. Digging through a ill of ashy, muddy, pottery-rich soil, they found a possible entrance through the common north wall of the magazines. he team also ascertained the existence of a chamber or small court enclosed by ieldstone walls at the northern end of E5. Western Wall of E5 FS2’s excavations were nearly joined on the west by the western end Transect A2. he trench cuts across the robbed western wall and into the western corridor of E5, through ashy material with tumbled mudbricks some 90 cm deep. he deep and wide trench let by the robbing of the western wall of E5 “has indicated that the wall would have been set on a foundation pad of large, roughly hewn limestone blocks, which were in turn set onto the hard packed foundation surface” (Hounsell 2005:30). Magazines in E5 Trench A2 cut through the irst magazine to the west, 1.62 m wide, descending 47 cm through very dark, ashy ill with pottery, but did not reach loor level. FS2 excavated the two central magazines in square 6.Q10. he team also found very dark ill, albeit less ashy, in the second magazine to the west, which is 1.90 m wide. he FS2 team established that a wall [23,551], 68 cm wide, separates the two middle magazines in 6.Q10. he western of these two magazines is about 1.70 m and the eastern magazine is 2.00 m wide. hese walls and the magazines extend south into 6.P10 beyond the limit of the FS2 excavation. he two magazines seemed to be linked by a doorway [23,623], located between north-south wall [23551] and cut [23,553]” (probably from robbing a wall) (Gesell et al. 2005:2). Northern courts in E5 FS2 discovered that there are actually two rectangular, east-west oriented courts or chambers, and two east-west walls, at the north end of E5. he 2004 map, based on surface indications, had only one wall and one court on the north. he northern court or chamber is 1.50 m wide, and the southern one is about 2.50 m wide. he southern wall of the southern court is the common northern wall of the magazines. he 2.50 m wide chamber or court north of the magazines is bounded by an east-west stone wall [23,560] to the north. his wall was plastered with a layer of marl [23,617] overlying a layer of mud [23,618] on the northern face and a layer of marl [23,612] overlying mud [23,616] on the southern face (Gesell et al. 2005:6). 62 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf RAB Street North of E5 Neither of these northern, east-west-running walls align with the east-west wall that is the northern border of the Western Town (minus the trapezoidal Guard House which was added on later) as found in Transect A1 to the west of E5. he northernmost wall of E5 that FS2 discovered is only 48 cm thick. his wall reduces the width of RAB Street, which runs east toward the RAB between the Enclosures and the Enclosure Wall, to 4.20 m. his wall could be a later addition onto E5. However, the second wall that FS2 discovered would leave RAB Street 6.10 m. Neither measurement agrees with the 5-meter width of RAB Street to the west, where Transect A1 cut through the street. he width of RAB Street in Transect A1 is closer to the 5.25-meter width of North Street, Main Street, and the original South Street within the Gallery Complex. Old Kingdom Burial Gesell and her team (2005:6-7) described a burial in E5 as follows: At some point during the Old Kingdom, the chamber or court north of the magazines was reused as a cemetery, as indicated by Burial 403 (cut [23723] and ill [23724]). he burial of a female skeleton oriented north-south and in the fetal position had been partially obstructed by tumble [23573]. he tumble had shited and squashed some of the bones. he burial resembles the burials in the Old Kingdom cemetery west of the GPMP site… It seems that the cut was made to align with a north-south wall running along the square line to 6.R11. As other parts of this area were used for burials, e.g. another burial in Transect A, which was also dated to the Old Kingdom, it might be possible that another cut, [23600], also belongs to a burial. his pit is oriented east west and was made along the northern wall in square 6.S10. Limited time of excavation made it impossible to investigate cut [23600] and ascertain if it indeed is a burial cut. Its location right along a wall is similar to Burial 403, but it could also have been made at a much later point in time (e.g. Late Period), as its position within the later debris layer [23595] would suggest. Transect A and the Western Roadway (WRW) We planned Transect A in order to determine the relationship in time between the Gallery Complex, the Western Town, and the thick ieldstone Enclosure Wall, which separates the two districts. Dan Hounsell supervised the Transect A excavations with Katherine Bandy, Kathryn Habbot, and Petter Nyberg. We located Transect A just south of the bend in the Enclosure Wall where it turns to run due east (ig. 12). he trench runs alongside the Western Roadway (WRW), a pathway between the Western Town and Enclosures E5. his path seems to penetrate south into the labyrinthine Western Town from an opening onto RAB Street, which runs along the outside of the Enclosure Wall. he Transect A team also worked in two parallel trenches, A2 and A3, east to west, each of which spans the Western Roadway (WRW), the structures to the west, and the interior of Enclosure E5 to the east. he goal was to establish the stratigraphy in each area. Western Town Structures in Transect A he main north-south trench, Transect A1, cuts cross the eastern end of a trapezoidal building, built onto the north wall of the Western Town. he fact that this wall runs straight east-west, while the north wall of the building runs parallel to the southeast-northwest bend of the Enclosure wall, creates the trapezoidal ground plan. While we could see and map much of the ground plan of Enclosure E5 last year, the structures east of the WRW were more problematic because they ran down into depressions that wind and water illed with layers of sand, gravel, and desert clay (marl or tala) ater the site was abandoned. Giza Occasional Papers 2 63 64 5.49 5.50 6.1 6.2 6.3 0 6.4 6.5 2 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 6.X 5m 6.W N99,060 South Street En clo “Trapezoid” 6.V su re Wa ll 6.U N99,050 “Guard House” “Stony Building” 6.T En clo sure Wall RAB Street A1 6.S N99,040 Northern wall of Western Town 6.R 6.Q N99,030 WRW A2 E4 E5 Figure 12. Transect A, with north-south Trench A1, east-west Trenches A2 and A3, and FS excavations. E500,690 E500,680 6.O E500,670 E500,660 E500,650 E500,640 E500,630 N99,020 E500,620 A3 6.P http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report 5.48 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf RAB Street he team excavated down to the latest road surfaces [22072, 22071] of RAB Street, consisting of small, broken limestone fragments in a coarse, sandy matrix. A shallow (14 cm deep), 55centimeter-wide (ca 1 cubit) channel [22,064], lined with clay, runs roughly along the center of the road. Remnant stones indicate that the builders may have edged it with small, unworked limestone blocks. It is similar to the carefully built channel in the center of Main Street that Ashraf Abd el-Aziz found in 1999-2000. Silty sand with much pottery [22066] illed the drain ater it fell out of use. Guard House and Trapezoid At the west side of the juncture between the RAB Street and WRW is a structure that constricts RAB Street to less than 2 m before it runs as a wider roadway to the east. We provisionally called it the Guard House because it looks like it might be domestic and because its position at the intersection of the two paths and its restriction of RAB Street suggest that someone ensconced here could have monitored traic through the two ways. Eastern Domestic Unit he south wall of the Guard House is the straight east-west wall forming the northern boundary of the Western Town. he north wall of the Guard House runs at an angle, 17.5 m southeast to northwest, nearly parallel to the bend in the Enclosure Wall, although the distance between the two walls widens from southeast to northwest. he ground plan is, therefore, a trapezoid. he eastern ieldstone wall of the building, exposed in Transect A immediately west of the opening of the Western Roadway, is only 2 m long north-south. he western ieldstone wall, 18.5 m to the west, is about 7 m long. Six or seven chambers occupy the northern side of the trapezoid, connected by a common corridor along the south side. he Trapezoid he trapezoid continues farther west because the north wall of the Guard House continues another 25 m northwest beyond what we believe was the west wall of the Guard House, for a total length of 42.50 m. Over this distance RAB Street, that is, the corridor between the Enclosure Wall and the north wall of the Trapezoid, increases from 1.5 m at the east end of the Guard House to 7 m, ending in the vicinity of the stony mass that marks a building at the far northwest limit of our clearing of the Western Town ruins, immediately below our camp and guard tent as of the end of our 2005 clearing operations. We provisionally call this structure the Stony Building. he Stony Building his structure occupies the southwest corner of the Trapezoid. he south wall of the building is the continuation of the north wall of the Western Town. Trenches, where someone robbed the walls, indicate that three east-west walls divided the 6.8 m north-south interior of the building into four long magazines or corridors about 7 m long east-west. he remainder of the interior of the Trapezoid is comprised of a few walls that deine wide, open courts west of the Guardhouse. RAB Street appears to come to no formal end on the northwest, rather the far end of the north Trapezoid wall turns south and then east, forming, with the north wall of the Stony Building, a 2.60-meter corridor leading into the open space of the broad northwest end of the Trapezoid. Guard House Building and Function he Guardhouse probably had some function connected with the larger purpose of the Trapezoid in addition to housing people who monitored the paths leading east and south. he inhabitants built the Guardhouse later than the RAB Street surface and its channel. he inhabitants built the so-called “Guardhouse,” which narrowed the road near the juncture of RAB Street and the Western Roadway. he builders laid a footing of one course of mudbrick [22,080] and then built a sizable limestone wall upon the footing [22,081]. his Guard House wall partially overlies the drainage ditch (on its southern edge), and the nature of its construction is visible in the excavated section of this area of the ditch (Hounsell 2005:30). Giza Occasional Papers 2 65 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf he team cleared a considerable quantity of broken pottery illing the east end chamber of the building. Someone dumped the sherds into the room long ater its occupants had abandoned it. Fieldstone Walls and Chambers: Trench A1 South he southern end of the north-south trench, Transect A1, penetrated small chambers deined by ieldstone walls south of the north wall [22,103], of the Western Town. he walls here are preserved more than 1.20 m high, which is extraordinary for our site. In square 4.R8, a space that was blank on the overall map from 2004, the excavations revealed a series of three small chambers built on the western interior side of the west wall of the Western Roadway. he northern chambers measure 1.70 m wide east-west by 2.2 and 1.0 m north-south respectively. he southern chamber is 2.3 m east-west by 1.9 m north-south. he trench did not penetrate the southern chamber, but the surface cleaning revealed the tops of the walls that walls deine it. In the northern chamber, the north face of the southern wall is carefully fashioned into stepped, narrow shelves, about 15 cm wide and from 15 to 35 cm tall with marl plaster on the faces. A doorway, 65 cm wide, opens west to another chamber or court. he three chambers and court appear to belong to a larger, square compound or interior space, about 6 m long and wide, with three more small chambers on the south and west sides. Western Roadway: Trench A2 East he Western Roadway (WRW) appears on our schematic map of the walls, ater removing all the “noise” of toppled stone, uncleared sand, and debris. he path, about 1.5 m wide, was framed by the thick western wall of Enclosure E5, now marked by a robber trench, and a thinner wall on the west. he reality on the ground is a mass of toppled stone that Dan Hounsell’s group cleared where the east-west part of the transect cuts across the hypothetical path. he western wall of Enclosure E5 formed the eastern side of the Western Roadway. Trench A2 cut perpendicularly across the trench that robbers let when they removed the thick western wall of Enclosure 5. Here, the ancient cut is extremely straight and neat. he wall robbers let a brick lining, about 16 cm thick, extending 35 cm down into the eastern side of the trench, which is the “ghost” of the wall. he robber trench itself is about 80 cm deep and 1.40 m wide, nearly the same width as the eastern wall of Enclosure 5. Trench A2 exposed part of the western wall of WRW, which is composed of mudbrick 70 cm wide. he A2 trench conirmed that this path could not have been more than 1.50 m wide. We picked up more of WRW about 40 m south in square 6.I8 along the west side of House Unit 3 where it is also 1.50 m wide. WRW must have penetrated north to south deep into the Western Town like some of the narrowest lanes through contemporary villages. Magazines and Pedestals: Trench A2 West he western end of Trench A2, west of the WRW, exposed parts of four rooms that could have functioned as magazines. East-west ieldstone and mudbrick walls frame these small chambers on the north and south. he excavation cut a stratigraphic section through the ill across the southern side of the three rooms. From east to west the chambers are 1.00, 2.00, 2.00, and 2.60 m wide. he last chamber on the west extends beyond the limit of the A2 excavation, across a balk that we let through the clay and gravelly sand illing a depression, and into square 6.Q6. (Beyond these rooms to the west, the surface slopes rapidly into a wide depression that might have been an open court.) he western wall of the eastern chamber, and the eastern wall of the western chamber are T-shaped, ending on the south in short cross-bars, such as mark the ends of the magazine partition walls in Enclosure E1. T-endings mark the southern extent of the chambers, making them about 2.5 to 2.6 m long north-south. In the center chamber, the excavators came down on a set of four small pedestals set within the two-meter width of the chamber. hese are similar to pedestals that we have found in various places throughout the site, such as east of the galleries (EOG), in BB-n (FS4 see above), and in the Western Town. he most elaborate set is in the Pedestal Building in Area AA. We found a set of one full-width pedestal lanked by two half-width pedestals within a box or bin in the northeast corner of the Pedestal Building (in 1991), and in the large Unit 3 house in SFW (in 2004). 66 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Here we have two full-width pedestals lanked on east and west sides by a half-width pedestal. hese pedestals are about 70 cm long (north-south). he full-width pedestals are about 40 to 50 cm wide, and the half-width about 30 cm wide. Slots about 18 cm wide separate the pedestals, which are aligned in an east-west row, with the long axis of each pedestal orientated north to south. hey are built against the inner face of the southern ieldstone wall of the chamber, while the eastern and western pedestals join to the inner face of the eastern and western mudbrick walls respectively. In 1991 we found traces of thin, single brick, dividing walls forming a cross pattern on top of one of the pedestals in the Pedestal Building, Area AA. he original marl plaster surface remained in the four quadrants on the top of this pedestal. he thin partitions formed compartments that were positioned, not square on the pedestal, but over the slot or space between pedestals (see sketch above, page 43 ). In Trench A2 we found the bottom of thin partition walls down the top center of the middle two full-width pedestals. he eastern partition was damaged and only the base remained, but the western partition survives to a height of 15 cm, and it is unmistakably like those traces of partitions that we found on the pedestals in Area AA in 1991. In this case the partitions formed three compartments, 50 to 60 cm wide, situated over the slots between the three pedestals below. What we found in Trench A2 in 2005 conirms that when compartments stood upon the pedestals, they stood over the slots or spaces, not directly upon the pedestals. More Magazines and Larger Compound: Trench A3 he team found another east-west series of chambers in their second east-west trench, A3, 2 m south of Trench A2. he chambers that trench A2 partly exposed are fairly regular, although not quite modular in size. he eastern one is 1.50 m north-south and 2.62 (5 cubits) east-west; the middle is 1.04 (2 cubits) east-west and the western chamber is 1.50 east-west. A doorway, 60 cm wide, connects the eastern and the middle chambers of this southern series. he chambers in trench A3 do not quite mirror the chambers in the northern cross-trench, A2. he two meters of unexcavated ground in between the two trenches, and between the two sets of chambers, covers the northern ends of the walls of the southern set, and what is probably a central corridor that gave access to the northern and southern sets. he coniguration is probably similar to the two facing sets of magazines separated by a common corridor in enclosure E1 where ield school unit, FS1, excavated in 2005 (see above). We excavated in these narrow trenches, A2-A3, to obtain the stratigraphic relations between structures—what came before what—not to get a broad view of the layout of the structures and to know their function. But now, of course, the broader layout and function intrigue us. he chambers appear to be some kind of magazines in another broad, open area immediately west of the Western Roadway, and south of the six-meter square compound partly excavated in the southern end of trench A1. his compound, the outer walls of which show in the ruin surface, measures 10.2 m east-west by 6.5 (east end) to 7.2 m (west end) north-south. he evidence indicates that these square or rectangular compounds, like the large enclosures (E1-5) contained magazines for storage and small courtyards where the inhabitants might have accounted for goods going in and out. Less than 5 m farther west of Trench A3, our surface cleaning and mapping in squares 5.P5-6 exposed another row of six pedestals separated by slots. he pedestal series appear to be intrinsic to some particular storage function. Stratigraphic Sequence in Transect A By the end of March 2005, Dan Hounsell and his team inished their excavations and within these trenches established the sequence from oldest to latest. Northwestern Town Wall: Two Phases he Western Town ends on the north along an east-west ieldstone wall. We now see that this is not a single construction. he western side of Trench A1 exposed a seam running vertically through the wall. West of this seam [22,104] the wall foundation is set deeper than to the east. he inhabitants built the eastern part [22,103] on higher ground that had accumulated up against the western part. hey also built the eastern part up over the western part as a kind of capping. Giza Occasional Papers 2 67 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Western Town is Older Than The Enclosure Wall Two distinct layers [22,501, 22,506] of silty sand accumulated up against the face of the older wall segment. he team traced one of these layers [22,501] to the north where the inhabitants built the Enclosure Wall [22,102] upon it. Since the Enclosure Wall is built upon this layer, [22,501], which banks up to the north wall of the Western Town, the Enclosure Wall must be younger than the older part of the Western Town’s north wall. The Enclosure Wall is Younger than the South Street Magazines he northern end of Transect A included a the trench north of the Enclosure Wall across a corridor, 1.50 m wide, between it and the southern back wall of the South Street Magazines. he stratigraphy here showed that the Enclosure Wall is younger than the South Street Magazines (SSM), which are enclosed by the wall and therefore belong to the Gallery Complex. he Enclosure Wall sits upon a layer, 35 cm thick, of dark, sandy silt with many pottery fragments (30%) that runs up against the southern wall of the Magazines, making the Magazines older than the Enclosure Wall. RAB Street is Younger than the Enclosure Wall People laid down a layer [22,088] as a level bed for RAB Street. Above this they formed the road surface [22,502] with a drain running through the center. At this point they built the addition [22, 103] or repair to the older north wall [22,104] of the Western Town. hey founded this addition or repair on the road surface itself. The Guard House is Younger than RAB Street Surface Up against their addition [22,103] to the older wall [22,104], they next added a mud padding or foundation for the trapezoidal building that we provisionally dubbed the Guard House. he inhabitants built the walls of the Guard House in ieldstone up against the younger part [22,103] of the Western Town north wall. he Guard House illed much of the space between the north wall of the Western Town and the Enclosure Wall at its elbow or bend to the east. he extension to the west of the northern wall of the Guard House, which runs southeast to northwest, carried RAB Street northwest alongside the bend of the Enclosure Wall. Someone cut a pit [22,138] through the loor of the Guard House, and further down through the old surface [22,088] of RAB Street. he inhabitants illed the pit with layers of pottery [22,494], and a higher layer of sand, clay, and limestone fragments [22,500]. hey laid down a thick plaster loor [22,486] over the pit and made other repairs [22,493] to the old road surface that now served as the loor of this building. In sum, we cannot conirm an early hypothesis that over time the settlement expanded from north to south. At least part of the Western Town is older than the Enclosure Wall. Separations and Control Since parts of both the Gallery Complex and the Western Town predate the Enclosure Wall, we must conclude that at some point it became important to those who made the decisions about the city to segregate residents of the Gallery Complex from residents of the Western Town by building the 2-meter-thick Enclosure Wall. For now, it looks like both the Eastern and Western Towns existed and thrived prior to the Enclosure Wall, which established a strict separation of north (Gallery Complex) from south (Western Town). he Royal Administrative Building established an east-west separation between the Eastern and Western Towns, with RAB Street as a controlled link between the two towns. We do not know how far north the older parts of the Western Town might have extended before the Gallery Complex was built. Here and there we have excavated deep into the area of the Gallery Complex to encounter older, lower walls of another pattern. We have seen these hints of an older layout in WCE, the Manor, RAB, EOG and the 1991 Backhoe Trench (BHT). Did authorities superimpose the strict, rather orthogonal Gallery Complex upon a more conventional settlement and later tighten control all the more with additional construction: irst, the massive Wall of the Crow and then the Enclosure Wall? Finally, did they exert even greater control through regulating access into and out of the Gallery Complex? 68 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf East of the Pedestal Building (Area AA) Field School Unit 1 Lauren Bruning supervised Field School Unit 1. he team included Essam Mohammed Shihab, El-Said Abd al-Fatah Amin, Mohammed Abd al-Moeen, Said Mohammed Abd al-Raheem, and Susan Sobhi Azeer. FS1 excavated a strip 10 m wide east-west by 8 m long north-south in squares 5.K50 and 6.K1 and the northern 3 m of squares 5.J50 and 6.J1 (see ig. 1). hese squares connect our old Area AA, our irst excavation squares where we found the Pedestal Building in 1988-’89 and 1991, with the Western Town, which we discovered in 2004. his zone takes in a dramatic drop from the highest point on the west side of square 5.K50 to its lowest point on the east side of square 6.K1. he area above and west of this slope is the upper settlement that we exposed in our 2005 clearing (see page 17). he goals of the FS1 excavations were to stratigraphically link Area AA to the Western Town and contribute to the understanding of the Pedestal Building. Square 6.K1 was chosen because it included two architectural structures, walls [23,625] and [23,626], which were believed to comprise the southwestern corner of a large building of the Western Town. he importance of square 5.J50 lay in the presence of limestone wall [23,629/23,647]. he relationship between this wall and limestone wall to the south of the pedestal building would have to be found in square 5.J50 (Bruning et al 2005:4). he team began to expose mudbrick walls and spaces, probably chambers, illed with mudbrick debris that tumbled from the walls. he walls could belong to one of a series of large houses that make up the Western Town, possibly the residence of administrators who had access to the storage facilities in the large Enclosures northeast of the area. Underneath the layers of mudbrick collapse, the excavators exposed a great deal of ash, which could be from people burning the reed rooing material when they abandoned the settlement. We thought walls [23,625] and [23,626] might be the southwest corner of a separate building in the northeast corner of square 6.K1. he FS1 excavations revealed a connection to the walls east of the Pedestal Building, by way of the east-west wall [23,625]. his wall turns a corner to run south, and may link with the prominent ieldstone wall [23,629] that runs farther west to become the back wall [23,625] of the Pedestal Building. his wall [23,629] is one link between the Pedestal Building and the Western Town. Although the investigations of area FS1 are still at a very preliminary stage, the results of this year’s excavations suggest that area AA functioned as a part of the Western Town. A irst indication for this was that the limestone wall to the south of the pedestal building in Area AA proved to extend to the east, across square 5.J50 into square 6.J1. he eastern end of this wall lines up—and possibly meets—with the Western Town architecture in square 6.K1. Second, the southern face of the limestone wall was covered with black painted plaster similar to the plaster that was noticed on many of the architectural elements of the Western Town (Bruning et al. 2005:2). Pottery Mound (PM) in the Western Town (SFW) Yukinori Kawae and Tove Björk supervised excavations in Pottery Mound, assisted by Nevine Moussa and Fatma Hussein. Pottery Mound is the name we gave to a large mounded midden in squares 6.G2 and 6.H3 (see ig. 1). Pottery Mound ills an enclosure surrounded by walls composed primarily of mudbrick with some ieldstone. he enclosure measures about 6.40 m north-south by 11+ m east-west (we have not yet ascertained the western wall). Repeated dumping within the enclosure created the mound. Ater the soter mudbrick of the adjacent walls and chambers that we provisionally call House Units 1 and 2 eroded away, they let the harder pottery, which constitutes the bulk of material in the mound. Giza Occasional Papers 2 69 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf he team excavated opposite quadrants, squares 6.G2 and 6.H3, inside the enclosure where the pottery mounded up. hey also excavated in a small corridor, or chamber, 1.60 m wide (northsouth) and 3.4 m long (east-west) along the north side of the Pottery Mound, between the mound and House Unit 1 on the north. Hints of Roofs and Decorated Walls: The Corridor and House Unit 1 By March 3rd the team excavated almost all the potsherd layers down to a loose sandy soil within the enclosure of the Pottery Mound south of the south wall [21,579] of the corridor between House Unit 1 and Pottery Mound. On the other side of this wall [21,579], inside the corridor, the team excavated two little trenches (“slots”). he western trench measured 2.30 x 1.60 to 1.75 m and the eastern trench was 2.00 x 0.65 to 0.70 m. Within these trenches they excavated down to the loor of the corridor and cleared the southwestern doorway of House Unit 1. Painted Plaster As the team removed the mudbrick that tumbled into the corridor, they found red painted plaster fragments in the compact sandy soil [24,461] above the loor. In the western of the two small trenches they found thin fragments of white plaster with red paint [24,465] that had fallen onto the silty gray loor of the corridor, probably from the surrounding walls. As we excavated the soil, we realized that scattered, thin, red-painted white plaster fragments had been deposited irst, and then yellowish white plastered mudbricks, some of which were also painted in red, had tumbled over, probably from surrounding wall(s)…. Some fragments clearly showed that the plaster face had been repainted. Under the layer with the plaster fragments, we found charcoal, presumably traces of living activities, on a silty gray loor (Kawae and Björk 2005a:1). Kawae noted that the bottom of some of the walls of the surrounding Western Town retain black-painted plaster. He had already observed in his inal report of Season 2004 that, “the plaster faces of the walls in this area (the Western Town) could originally have had a decoration of horizontal bands of black and red (or more colors). he linear pattern of color decoration seemed to have been common in houses, palaces, and estates during the dynastic period” (Kawae in Kamel et al. 2004:25). For this astute observation, Kawae ofered published references to houses and palaces in other settlements dating to the Early Dynastic, Old Kingdom, and Middle Kingdom. he black color at the base of the walls could remain from a dado, a term for the lower part of a decorated interior wall. We see black dados painted on paneled mastaba facades of the Early Dynastic and Old Kingdom. Remains of Roofs In the eastern slot that the team excavated into the ill of the corridor, they found clumps of mud with impressions of reed and rope. Kawae found similar mud fragments in his 2004 excavation inside the rooms of House Unit 1 that stretch north of the Pottery Mound. hese mud fragments are likely pieces of the roof. he ancient Egyptians roofed their houses and other structures with layers of reed daubed with mud over wood spanners. he fragments lay in ashy sand [24,460] banked against the south wall of the corridor. he largest piece (25 x 6 cm), retained rope imprints on the surface but the impressions were rather irregular compared with the rooing materials found in the 2004 season. By March 25 the excavations in square 6.H3 arrived at what Kawae called “the pre-pottery mound phase,” down to a compact layer of mudbrick tumble [24,462], and under this was a layer of loose sandy soil including a few potsherds, limestone fragments, and faunal remains, “which was very similar to the foundation underlying a well-preserved silty loor to the north of the wall” in the corridor (Kawae and Björk 2005b:2). More Pedestals: PM Quadrant in Square 6.G2 In square 6.G2, the southwest quadrant of Pottery Mound, Tove Björk cleared layers of potsherds and ashy, muddy soil to expose the southern wall [4,721] of the Pottery Mound enclosure and the western end of a series of pedestals, like those so ubiquitous across the site. Here Björk found what 70 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf must be the end of a double series of pedestals, backing to a wall that projected from the eastern (west-facing) section of her excavation. Someone removed stones from one of the pedestals leaving only its plaster, and the end pedestals, possibly to reuse the material elsewhere (tombs in the Workers’ Cemetery?). his disturbance obscured the pattern of the pedestals. However, the pedestals appear to have belonged to two series attached to the north and south sides, and to the western end, of a mudbrick wall running east to west. By March 25 Björk had exposed the northern plaster face of this wall. If we extrapolate this wall under the unexcavated part of Pottery Mound in square 6.G3, it lines up with a doorjamb attached to the eastern wall of the Pottery Mound enclosure. We saw and mapped the marl plaster lines of this doorjamb when we removed the sandy overburden in 2004. It is very possible that the two or three pedestals exposed in Björk’s excavation are the western end of a series that continue another 5 m to the east along both sides of this wall. Two other sets of pedestals occupy an open area immediately to the east of the Pottery Mound enclosure. here are six pedestals in each set, back-to-back, one set running north to south, the other east to west. hese pedestals are not attached to a wall like those that Björk found in 2005. We must consider the function of these pedestals when assessing the meaning of Pottery Mound. he purpose of the pedestals seems to have been to provide a slot—the space between two pedestals—of empty space below storage compartments, so that one storage compartment stood over each slot (see sketch, page 43). he compartment walls were of single bricks founded on half of the two adjacent pedestals, such as we found in Transect A2 (see above). Such storage compartments were sometimes tucked into dark, small, cupboard-sized chambers. We have found pedestal foundations in such chambers in the northeast corner of the Pedestal Building in Area AA, BB-n (see page 68), House Unit 3, and Transect A2 (see page 66). The Stuf of the Pottery Mound: Material Culture We excavated Pottery Mound in the hopes that this dump might be refuse ejected by the people who lived in the nearby structures. We designated two complexes of walls, chambers, and courts, to the south and north respectively as House Unit 1 and House Unit 2. hese “houses” frame the enclosure of the Pottery Mound. he idea was that the garbage would tell us as much about life in the vicinity as the architectural footprint and what we ind on the loors inside the courts and chambers. Beer Jars and Pig Bone: Refuse of the Commons In spite of the large size of the courts and chambers of House Units 1 and 2—which immediately evokes the term “elite”—much of the material extracted from Pottery Mound is the sort one would expect to ind in the most menial domiciles anywhere in the Old Kingdom. he most common ceramic form appears to be the hand-made, crude red-ware jar, our type AB-4, oten called a “beer jar.” Across the entire site, this is one of the two or three most common types. (At the same time, we seriously question the idea that certain types of pottery, like the thinwalled, red-burnished, carinated “Meidum ware” bowls, relect “elite” use and consumption, more than cruder pottery like the so-called beer jars. he ceramic corpus of the Old Kingdom appears relatively uniform, and we have found the Meidum ware bowls in all kinds of contexts across our site). Tools, Games, and Beads he team found fragments of lint knives, oval ceramic objects (possible weaving tools), a bone weaving tool, fragments of diorite hammers, beads, many whetstones (or polishers) a possible game piece, and one conical limestone object about 5 cm in height with a string groove in both a horizontal and vertical direction. Animal Bones he team retrieved bones of ish, cattle, sheep, and pig. Björk noted that epiphyseal fusion of the cow and sheep bones might indicate that many of them were young. In her preliminary assessment, all the pig bones were from more or less fully grown animals. he individuals had lived for at least two years before they died. he pig bones all came from less meaty parts of the body and may have been Giza Occasional Papers 2 71 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf waste from slaughter rather than food parts. he team also found bone that may derive from adult bulls (Kawae and Björk 2005a, 2005b). Björk reported one deposit [22,826] “contained a talus of cow with gnawing marks all over the bone, that probably came from a dog. We have had several bones earlier with gnawing marks on them. But this talus had really ‘gone through’ a dog’s jaws” (Björk in Kawae and Björk 2005b:2-3). Richard Redding (personal communication 2005) reported: One deposit, feature [21,557], from Pottery Mound produced ten bags of animal bone. Cattle are very dominant, with 88 and only 15 sheep-goat, resulting in a sheep-goat to cattle ratio of 0.2:1.his is lowest on site and the only sample so far in which cattle outnumber sheepgoats. (In the whole site sample, the ratio of sheep-goat to cattle is 3:1). he cattle are all very young—there is not one fused bone! Of 9 phalanges all are unfused (fuses at about 18 months). House Unit 3 had ive phalanges and all were fused. Jars and Pedestals We now know that the Pedestal Building and other structures in area AA belong to the Western Town. As Fiona Baker excavated the rear, southern part of the Pedestal Building in 1991, she was exposing a series of compartments formed by thin marl-plastered walls with rounded tops. We never completed that part of the excavation, but here we may have the compartments that stood over spaces between pedestals. We hypothesize that if we dig deeper we will ind the pedestal foundations of the compartments, pedestals like those that we found in the Pedestal Building and in the open court just east of the Pottery Mound, and like those that we have found elsewhere on the site. Jars and pedestals appear to go together in the Pottery Mound enclosure and in the Pedestal Building. It is our impression that fragments of crude red ware jars are the major constituents of Pottery Mound. Jars and jar fragments were numerous in area AA, especially in the tumble above the southern compartments. In a preliminary report on the relative frequencies of pottery from the 1988 to 1991 excavations in AA Ana Wodzińska (2005) notes that the “beer” jar (AB4) is the most frequent type (23.43%), whereas in the rest of the site bread molds tend to be the most frequent (as of 2003). From the 2005 excavations of FS1, which are within meters of AA excavations, again AB4 “beer” jars are the most frequent type, almost 40% of the entire assemblage, whereas they are just above 10% for the entire site. John Nolan (2003:3) reported about the sealings from AA: “When I displayed all 335 sealings from Area AA (including the 119 un-inscribed pieces), the vast majority seem to it the description of jar sealings—either direct or indirect.” It is possible that the relative abundance of sealings and jars is a clue to the functions of the pedestals, and to the function of those places where pedestals, jars, and sealings are found together in abundance, as they were in pottery mound in 2005. We might hypothesize that the pedestals supported compartments for storing material sealed in jars, in dark, and relatively dry conditions. Sealings from Pottery Mound 2005 One of the salient inds from the Pottery Mound in 2005 was an extraordinary number of sealings with many motifs and designs that we have not seen on sealings from previous excavations on our site. Prior to Season 2005, John Nolan had a total of 2,664 registered sealings (fragments inscribed, or incised with signs, or un-inscribed; and objects related to sealing such as mud cores, little tokens, etc.). A preliminary sort and count indicates that Pottery Mound alone produced 2,540 registered sealings, nearly doubling the corpus. he preliminary total from all excavations this season, 4,446, more than tripled the corpus. Feature 21,557 alone, which yielded such a high ratio of young cattle to sheep-goat bone (see above), yielded 1,551 out of 2,540 sealings. his feature probably represents a single dumping event or a short period of dumping; perhaps a clearing out of some accumulated cache. he clay sealings from Pottery Mound included the most formal and sophisticated designs from anywhere on the site. he formality of these sealings, the apparent high rank of the titles, like “Royal Scribe,” and the variability of the motifs strike a contrast to the crude pottery that comprises so much of the bulk of Pottery Mound. he sign for “Scribe” is frequent. In addition to 72 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf the title, “Royal Scribe,” some fragments bear the Horus name of Khafre, Wesir-ib, others carry the Horus name of Menkaure, Ka-khet. he corpus presents “a mixed batch of Khafre and Menkaure” (Witsell 2005:9), however, those with the name of Menkaure were more numerous. he mix of two royal names suggests an accumulated cache of sealings dating a period that saw the transition between the two reigns, cleared out and dumped all at once or in a short time. he Pottery Mound sealings include a large number that John Nolan and Ali Witsell thought are “box” sealings: “the back surface will have a lat impression (sometimes with a clear wood impression), and the sides and back will show strategic placement of the clay over horizontal or vertical crossing of the twine or string used to secure the package” (Witsell 2005:9). he backs of some of the sealings that are inscribed with royal names appear to show the impression of a string, about 2 to 3 mm wide. hese could derive from rolled papyrus documents. From Pottery Mound, the most numerous back impression was twine, with box sealings second most frequent. Using repeated and overlapping designs on the diferent fragments, John Nolan is now reconstructing several of the original compositions on diferent seals that produced the impressions. House Unit 3 in the Western Town (SFW) We identiied this layout of walls and chambers as a discrete domestic unit in 2004, when we began excavating House Unit 3 (ig. 13). he main unit is 16 m north-south and 12.3 m east-west. A series of four long chambers or corridors, 1.0 to 1.2 m wide, run along the inside of the outer walls for most of the north, west, and south sides. A small chamber at the north end of the house contains a set of two half pedestals and one complete pedestal against the south wall. A room, 4 m north-south by 3.5 m east-west, occupies the very center of the house. Two large rectangular chambers, just under 7 m long north-south, and 2.5 to 2.8 m wide east-west, occupy the length of the east side of the house. Mohsen Kamel supervised a team that excavated in House Unit 3 in the Spring 2005. He continued excavations in the fall ield season, assisted by Freya Sadarangani and Aneis Hassan. he work, which ended October 27, 2005, took place within squares: 6.G9, 10, and 11; 6.H9, 10, and 11; 6.I9, 10, and 11; 6.J9, 10, and 11. Kamel, Hassan, and Sadarangani (2005) report the following 2005 indings room by room: Room F: It appeared, ater clearing the western extent of House Unit 2 in search of a doorway, that the western wall of this room had been re-patched, where an extra skin of mud-brick had been added from the north of the room extending about two thirds of the room’s length to the south. his was built on two cut features, which were cut up against the pre-existing western wall. he reason for this is unclear and will require further excavation to determine. A pot emplacement that respected this later addition to the wall was excavated in the northwest corner of this room. Coupled with the in situ bread moulds and the large pot emplacement in the southeast corner of the room, this leads us to conclude that Room F was an area for the production of bread. Room J: he only additional feature to be excavated in this room, other than the two makeshit hearths, was a clay-lined dish emplacement in the northwest corner of the room. Room H: he large pit cut in the loor of the centre of this room was half sectioned. Prior to the excavation of this feature it was assumed that this was a large post hole or possibly a hearth. However, the nature of the cut—extremely irregular and extending under the loor surfaces with portions of ill diving into the natural sands—led us to conclude that this was in fact a tree bowl, that is, the position of a once-standing tree. his is comparable to the Middle-Kingdom wooden model of a house portico and court from the heban tomb of Meketre, which show trees on either side of a pool in the court. his implies that room H was open, acting as a light well in the midst of the surrounding chambers. Giza Occasional Papers 2 73 E500,685 E500,680 E500,675 E500,670 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf N99,000 6.J S A P B N98,995 0 D 6.I G N98,990 F I 6.H Q J K 6.G M L N98,985 Unclear Truncated area N Possible entrance 6.F 0 5 10 m N98,975 6.9 6.10 6.11 Figure 13. SFW House Unit 3 after 2005 excavations. Lehner ield drawing, reduced from 1:100. 74 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Room/space M: It was discovered that what was thought to have been a platform in this area was in fact an in-illed storage bin, with two equally sized compartments. (It is possible that the space functioned as a platform in a later phase, ater the compartments were illed.) Room O: Two small pits measuring roughly 40-50 cm in diameter were excavated. he one in the northwest corner of the room contained ill very similar to the ashy overlying deposit. he other, just north of room R, against the east wall of Room O, was fairly rich in pottery, containing an almost complete small beer jar. A large granite dust deposit was removed from the northeast corner. his deposit was very well contained and did not appear to spread out into the rest of the room. Room P: he excavation of the ill and primary collapse from this room revealed two jambs directly opposite each other towards the south end of the room on the east and west walls. hese may have been the base of an arch that set of the small southern portion of the room. We investigated the possibility of a doorway leading to the north-south running street to the east of the building, through the eastern limestone wall. his probing proved that there was no door here, instead just a portion of disturbed wall that was possibly repatched with mud and UTA (untempered alluvial) brick. Room Q: he removal of the primary ill and collapse revealed a doorjamb towards the south against the east wall. his suggests the presence of a doorway, although the other side of this doorway has been cut away. Room Q/Room N: he southeast corner of House Unit 3 is cut away, heavily truncated. From the beginning of excavations in this area we expected to ind a door here. Ater exhausting all other possibilities for the location of an entrance into House Unit 3, we decided that the door must have been near the southeast corner. In search of more evidence we excavated a two-meter-wide trench outside the house to the south where the wall had been completely truncated away. We hoped that these exterior deposits might help us show that there had a door here. We found a series of dumped deposits that were very rich in alabaster dust and fragment, worked alabaster pieces, including one fragment of the rim of a vessel, and an incomplete vessel. An ashy layer that lay under these deposits ran under the truncated limestone wall. his deposit continued east for about 20 cm where it was vertically cut. About 80 cm east of this cut a north-south mudbrick wall continued into the south section of the trench. It is my assumption that this is the location of the door and that the silty sand between the ashy deposit and the north-south wall respects this feature. Giza Occasional Papers 2 75 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 76 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 4. Mapping Late Period Burials Two thousand years ater the 4th dynasty occupation of the “Workers Settlement,” the site became a burial ground. People of the Late Period through the Persian Periods (664-332 BC) dug burial pits through a sand layer and oten down into the “mud mass” of the settlement ruins. When wind, the modern sand diggers, or our own clearing removed the sand cover, the outlines of the burial pits were exposed. It has long been an objective to try to survey burials that are visible from the surface, as a record of this cultural phase of the site and in order to give us the option to choose areas for excavation where the density of burials is low. During our 2005 season, Jessica Kaiser, and Tom Westlin began this task, assisted by Baghdadi Mohamed and El-Soughaer Said Ahmed. Jessica Kaiser summarizes this operation below (Kaiser and Westlin 2005). The 2005 Burial Survey by Jessica Kaiser Burial Survey Methods Due to time constraints, we limited our survey to the area from the Wall of the Crow to Main Street. Across this area, we took away our own backill, light sand cover from previous seasons, along every other 5-meter wide range, that is, squares running north-south. his would still gave us an idea of the density and distribution of burials across the selected area, with one test range stretching from Main Street to SFW. he osteo team members took four points, with a total station, one in each corner of every burial. hey surveyed 630 burials. hey gave each burial a survey number, starting with 1. We sketched the visible cuts on a 1:100 plan, and took notes (Kaiser and Westlin 2005, Appendix 7) on visible features—the approximate dimensions and shape of the cut, whether or not coins or bones were exposed, orientation and any visible burial objects. he team downloaded the total station points each night, and plotted against the 1:100 site plans to ensure accuracy. While the workmen cleaned the irst two ranges, the surveyors carried out a visual survey, square by square, of the opened areas of the site. On paper copies of the 1:100 site plans, they crossed out the squares in which no burials were visible, and noted the squares where we could see deinite or possible burial cuts. By combining the visual and total station survey, we could make a digitized map (Kaiser 2005:ig.18). he team also surveyed another 100 burials in 13 squares east and northeast of the 1998 area called TBLF and north of Main Street. Burials were clearly visible here even without cleaning. Here in the area they designated the EF (Eastern ield) 2001-2100, they took eight points on each burial, giving an approximate outline of the shape and orientation of the pits. Ater the end of the winter-spring season, Johnny Karlsson digitized the plans of the areas north of Main Street (ig. 14). Giza Occasional Papers 2 77 78 Crow Wall of the Previously excavated 0 25 G aller y Comp le x Main Street Covered by overburden or dump-piles TBLF Figure 14. Digitized map of the surveyed burials north of Main Street. Shaded areas are approximate outlines of un-surveyed or incompletely surveyed areas. Digitized by Johnny Karlsson. (after Kaiser and Westlin 2005:38, ig. 20) 50 m http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report Partly covered in aeolian sand http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Burial Density and Survey Limitations From igure 14, it appears as if the central and western part of the surveyed area did not contain any burials. hat image is probably misleading. Although it does look as if the density of the burials decreases to the west, we could not successfully survey the entire area. First, excessive overburden, or dumps from previous seasons, obscured some areas, as indicated in igure 13. Second, the GPMP team let part of the area covered by what was deemed to be ancient sand that is later than the burials themselves. he sand cover was not complete, and the surface was undulating, in some areas to the point where part of a burial was visible, and part of it continued under the sand. he burial cuts were not visible on the surface of this deposit. It is probable that many more burials are hidden under this later, windblown surface. We let this sand in place. his area is indicated in the igure. Finally, we did not remove the overburden from areas where we previously excavated burials, also denoted. Because of these limitations, only the four easternmost ranges in the selected area were satisfactorily surveyed. On average, each square in these four ranges contained nine burials. It is important to remember that the survey only recorded burials visible from the surface. During complete excavation in previous seasons, we have encountered, on average, seven times more burials ater complete excavation than what was visible from the surface. For example, nine burials were visible in area NSGH in 2004 before extensive excavation was started. At the end of the season, we had lited 64 burials. his means that if previously excavated areas should be taken as the norm, the area north of Main Street could contain as many as 5,670 burials. Some 65 burials have bones exposed, and some 20 burials have exposed coins. he locations of these burials have been recorded, and it is the team’s recommendation that they be excavated for conservation purposes, since the exposure to the elements rapidly accelerates the deterioration of the burials, which will result in loss of data. Burial Survey: Observations he 2005 burial survey conirmed that the GPMP concession contains a large Late Period burial ground. he cemetery includes several hundred graves visible from the surface, and most likely several thousand graves at lower elevations. It is interesting to note that the Wall of the Crow seems to limit the Late Period burial ground on the north and Main Street limits the cemetery to the south. No Late Period burials were identiied south of Main Street, and the southern limit of the grave ield is very abrupt. Hence, it is possible that the Old Kingdom walls or some otherwise deining feature of this Old Kingdom thoroughfare was still visible and recognizable during the Late Period. It seems unlikely, however, that Main Street was still in use as a street proper, since 16 burials were located down the center and edges of the street, resting on street level. With the exception of one burial that was interred north-south partly under the tumble and therefore deemed Old Kingdom, and two Old Kingdom child burials from square 4.E1, no burials were noted between Main Street and South Street. It is possible that additional Old Kingdom burials are hidden under the limestone tumble in this area, but even so, the burials in this area seem to be few and far between. Although the Old Kingdom burials excavated at the GPMP constitute only a small fraction of the total corpus of human remains hitherto recovered, it should be noted that all areas that have been opened for excavation in the southern parts of the site have contained grave cuts. Most of these cuts have been hidden under the limestone tumble, and have not been discovered until the stones have been lited. It appears likely, therefore, that the deteriorating ruins of the Old Kingdom production area were utilized to some extent as makeshit tombs by the poorer population of late Old Kingdom Giza, albeit with a lesser density than during the Late Period. Giza Occasional Papers 2 79 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 80 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 5. Conservation In the fall extension of our 2005 ield season we selected the Eastern Town House (ETH) (see ig. 1) as a pilot project for our program to conserve the site by backilling and reconstructing select structures for presentation. he conservation team included Ana Tavares, project director, Ed Johnson, conservator, Günter Heindl, architect, and Ashraf Abd el-Aziz, archaeologist. Conservation and Restoration versus Backill A body of experience and literature supports the idea that backilling with proper material is the best way to preserve archaeological sites and structures, unless the structures stand high above the surface as, for example, the Hierakonpolis “fort” or the Shunet el-Zebieb at Abydos. Why, then, would anyone want to cap ancient mudbrick walls as we initially proposed for certain, select structures on our site? he answer is that people want to present ancient architecture, in this case, of mudbrick, as well as to conserve it. Showing the structure is important as a transfer of information in its own right, and heuristically, it generates insights about how people built and used the ancient structure. For example, at Dahshur, the German mission capped the mudbrick chapel walls of certain Old Kingdom mastabas. Here, they had to cap the sides as well as the top. hey, therefore, had to thicken the walls as well as raise them. hey choose to illustrate the heights of the walls as they found them with the height of the casing that they applied to the sides, and the original thickness of the walls with the width of the capping on top (Günter Heindl, personal communication 2005). While this “shows” the structure, it also drastically changes its dimensions. It is, in efect, backilling or covering the original completely. Instead of covering the ancient structure with clean sand, or some neutral material, this procedure covers the structure with modern materials. At the Seti I Temple, Günter Heindl capped the walls, but only ater putting in a separation layer. his was essential to keep ground moisture from wicking up through the ancient walls and causing the bottom of the capping to deteriorate. he team at the Seti Temple found that they had to put a separation layer between the ancient fabric and modern materials whether they used modern mudbricks or ired bricks. Using tar paper as the separation layer, they went on to reconstruct the walls in part with ired brick and cement (Günter Heindl, personal communication 2005). We believe that backilling with clean sand is the best measure to conserve our site (Johnson 2005). At the same time, we want to present examples of the ancient mudbrick and broken stone architecture that lies embedded in the compact ruin layer (what we loosely call the “mud mass”). he SCA Inspectorate encouraged us to make some of the structures on the site presentable in order to “show” the reality of the archaeological structures. It is important to be able to “show” the signiicance of the site to those who make decisions about factors such as the new high security wall, the eventual removal of the soccer ield, and the control of the numerous stables and horse and camel riders. So in this indirect way, “showing” the architecture also aids the conservation of the site. And, we believe, it is important to present some of the salient ancient architectural structures for colleagues and scholars in the future. Giza Occasional Papers 2 81 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Eastern Town House Pilot Study, 2005 We chose the Eastern Town House (ETH) for our pilot project because it is a small, discrete compound, a core house within a series of larger rooms or courts—in efect, a small urban estate. By the time we started in mid September, Ed Johnson had reviewed some of the results of capping on other projects and sites through the desk-based assessment that we proposed would be part of our study (Johnson 2005). At the beginning of the season, Johnson and other team members visited other sites in the Cairo area where restoration or conservation had been done. Ground Water Rise and Separation Layer Like Heindl in his work at the Luxor Seti I Temple, we had to provide a separation layer between the fabric of the ancient mudbrick and our new reconstruction of the ETH. In our original proposal, we suggested using a separation layer. At the time we thought it could be pottery sherds, such as our German colleagues used at Elephantine between the ancient walls and the modern capping. At the beginning of the season we were concerned (as we still are) about the rise in ground water at our site. It was higher in 2004 than in previous seasons and higher still in winter-spring 2005. We continue to measure its rise. Around the corner of the soccer ield we measured the ground water level at 14.67 m asl in 2004. During fall 2005 just south of the ETH in our Area BB it was 15.12 m asl. his is a rise of nearly half a meter. When he joined our team this fall, Günter Heindl shared Ed Johnson’s concern that we would need a substantial separation layer between our modern capping and the ancient fabric in order to keep the modern, drier mudbrick from wicking up ground water, as did the modern materials at the Seti I Temple. Given the concerns about rising ground water and the weight of the reconstructed walls, Johnson and Heindl recommended that the sand layer be at least 30 cm thick, which meant it had to be even thicker where the ground sloped down in the northern part of the ETH (Johnson 2005, Heindl 2005). he end result was a completely new, reconstructed ETH, rather than a capping of the ancient walls. The Reconstructed ETH To retain the sand layer, we used walls that approximate the position of the ancient outer walls of the ETH on the south and east, and that correspond exactly to the positions of the ancient outer walls on the west and south. In order to follow the mandate to “show” the structure, we reconstructed the walls to the same exact widths as the ancient walls, and we positioned them on the sand separation layer exactly over the locations of the ancient walls. For our bricks, we used a mixture of alluvial mud and sand similar to the original bricks in the ETH. We established this mixture as part of Ashraf Abd el-Aziz’s (2005) long-term study of mudbricks, which includes a typology of bricks across our site based on size and fabric. We made the bricks the same size as those in the original walls of ETH. Günter Heindl (2005) recommended the program we carried out at ETH as an adaptation of his work at the Seti I Temple. He saw this as more appropriate than other methods to the conditions of our site, to the protection of the ancient structure (ETH), and to the sensitive archaeological deposits. Our procedure is also more reversible. We can simply take down the modern reconstruction and remove the sand. he reconstruction of the ETH that now sits exactly upon the ancient ETH is inspiring to our team. We expect it will similarly interest visitors and colleagues. It is a dramatic presentation of the reality of the architecture that once stood here. he exercise has generated new ideas and hypotheses about how the ancient inhabitants built and used these spaces. Ater reconstructing a short segment of one of the 1.57-meter-thick gallery walls nearby, we began to think about second stories over the galleries, which has important ramiications for all our interpretations about the population and organization of the overall site. 82 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf What We Did and What We Proposed How was our pilot program at ETH diferent from what we proposed? In spring 2004, we proposed the following: Our plan requires minimally invasive methods that are, as far as possible, reversible. A variety of techniques are available but the one that meets our criteria is capping and renewing. his method consists of covering the original material and structures with new but identical material that is sympathetic to the original, while leaving a break, such as a line of sherds, which distinguishes our restoration from the original. his makes the structure more easily recognizable by conforming the protective coat to the form of the original, keeping it open to the elements. Near the beginning of the 2005 fall season we outlined our plans for the conservation part of the season. As outlined, we did the following: • Carried out a desk-based assessment, augmented by site visits (Johnson 2005). • Prepared ETH for our conservation program. We resurveyed the ancient walls for three dimensional, graphic reconstructions, and carried out a new photographic coverage, feature by feature. • Found sources of both alluvial silt and desert marl clay. We experimented with mixtures of sand and silt. We tested rates of drying on wall segments that we built for such tests and for long-term monitoring (Johnson 2005). • Tested diferent compositions and techniques of applying plaster. • Began a monitoring program to assess erosion factors on the site for exposed and backilled surfaces (Johnson 2005). • Continued to analyze the materials used by the ancient builders of our site (Abd el-Aziz 2005). he only diference between what we proposed and actually did was to use a sand layer, rather than pot sherds, as the separation between the ancient and modern reconstructions. True, this is more substantial than tar paper or a sherd layer, but also more appropriate for the conditions of our site. We came to see that capping as a covering is sometimes worse than backilling for ancient surfaces. Without a separation layer, the capping puts modern material directly in contact with the ancient material. Backilling, on the other hand, is a way of controlling the immediate environment of the mudbrick structures. Sometimes capping merely hides problems. Capping directly against the sides and tops of ancient walls thickens and distorts the ancient structure. Conservation Pilot Season: Conclusion We selected our methods and carried out the pilot conservation program this season ater careful consideration of other conservation eforts, ater observing the changing conditions of our site, and ater a desk-based assessment of literature on capping and backilling. Rather than sticking rigidly to preordained protocols, the conditions of our site (probably any site) require a certain degree of lexibility and leeway. Capping ancient mudbrick walls, while perhaps more beneicial at other sites than at ours, covers up the ancient structure, as does backilling. It difers from backilling, however, in that the cover is new, or at least of new material. It would be ironic if a program to both conserve and show the original ancient structure were not considered conservation if it did not involve applying modern material directly onto the ancient fabric. Many of the conservation programs that we examined were never published (although colleagues were most generous in providing photographs and information on their projects). We, however, plan to publish our conservation work. he publication will include Günter Heindl’s Giza Occasional Papers 2 83 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf architectural report (Heindl 2005), Ed Johnson’s conservation report (Johnson 2005), Ashraf Abd el-Aziz’s report on the mudbrick study (Abd el-Aziz 2005), appendices with our observations on the results of other restorations of ancient mudbrick walls in Egypt, and a bibliography on the issues of backilling and capping. We are preparing this report because we feel that in wrestling with these issues on the ground this season, can contribute to future restoration and presentation work that the SCA might want to support. We believe we may have found some innovative, as well as reversible, solutions. 84 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf References Abd el-Aziz, Ashraf 2005 Making Bricks. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Boggs, Sam 1995 Principles of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy. (Englewood Clifs: Prentice Hall). Bruning, Lauren, Essam Mohamed Shihab, El-Said Abd el-Fattah Amein, Susan Sobhi Azeer, Hamada Mohamed Abd el-Moeen, and Said Mohammed Abd al-Raheem 2005 Data Structure Report: Area FS1 - GPMP 2005. March 17, 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Dreyer, G. and H. Jaritz 1983 Die Arbeiterunterkünte am Sadd al-Kafara, Leichtweiss-Institut für Wasser Bau der Technischen Universität Braunschweig, Mitteilungen 81: 2-20. Gesell, Justine, Amer Gad el-Kareem Abu el-Hassan, Momen Saad Mohammed, Shaima Rasheed Salem, Sherif Mohamed Abd el-Moneem, Jihan Abd el-Raheem, and Abd el-Ghafar Wagdi 2005 GPMP 2005 - Field School Data Structure Report for FS2. March 17, 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Hassan, Anies M. and Banu Aydinoglugil, 2005 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Data Structure Report for Area BBNW. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Hassan, Selim 1943 Excavations at Giza IV (1932-33). (Cairo: Government Press). Kamel, Mohsen, Aneis Hassan, and Freya Sadarangani 2005 Area SFW House Unit 3: Squares: 6.G.9, 10, and 11; 6.H.9, 10 and 11; 6.I.9, 10, and 11; 6.J.9, 10, and 11. October 27, 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Heindl, Günter 2005 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Conservation Project: Eastern Town House Conservation 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Hounsell, Daniel 2005 WRW and Transect A 2005: Data Structure Report. March 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Johnson, Ed 2005 Survey of the State of Mudbrick Conservation in and Around Giza and the Memphite Necropolis. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Giza Occasional Papers 2 85 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Kaiser, Jessica and Tom Westlin 2005 2005 Cemetery Excavations, Osteology Field School, and Burial Survey: Data Structure Report. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Kamel, Mohsen, Mark Lehner, and Ana Tavares 2005 Giza Field-School 2005: Preliminary Field Report to the Supreme Council of Antiquities. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Kamel, Mohsen, Tim Evans, Justine Gesell, Yukinori Kawae, and Mark Kincey 2004 GPMP 2004: Data Structure Report of Soccer Field West [SFW]. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Kawae, Yukinori and Tove Björk 2005a Soccer Field West - he Pottery Mound: Weekly Report 12 to 17 March 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Kawae, Yukinori and Tove Björk 2005b Soccer Field West - he Pottery Mound: Weekly Report 19 to 24 March 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Kawae, Yukinori and Tove Björk 2005c Soccer Field West: Pottery Mound, Squares 6-G2 and 6-H3, Data Structure Report. April 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Lajoie, Kenneth 2005 Geology of DDT North of WOC. February 14, 2005. Notes on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Lehner, Mark 1992 Giza, in W. Sumner, ed. he Oriental Institute Annual Report 1990-1991 (Chicago: he Oriental Institute), 19-27. 2002 he Pyramid Age settlement of the southern mount at Giza. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 39: 27-74. Nicholson, Paul T. and Edgar Peltenburg 2000 Egyptian faience. In, Paul T. Nicholson and Ian Shaw, eds. Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 177-194. Nolan, John 2003 AA Sealings Report, Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Posener-Kriéger, P. 1976 Les archives funéraires de Néferirkare-Kakai, les papyrus d’Abousir; traduction et commentaire, 2pts., Bibliothéque d’Étude 65 (Cairo: IFAO). Reisner, George 1931 Mycerinus, he Temples of the hird Pyramid at Giza. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press). Sadarangani, Freya 2005 Area BB: Data Structure Report, 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. 86 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf Saleh, Abd al-Aziz 1974 Excavations around Mycerinus pyramid complex, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 30: 131-54 Stevens, Tim 2005 East of Galleries (EOG): Data Structure Report, April 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Tavares, Ana, Aii Rahim, Mohammed Abd al-Basat, El-Tayeb Mohammed Khudary, Mohammed Aly Abd el-Hakeem, Hoda Abdallah Bakry, and Ameni Abd al-Hamid 2005 Data Structure Report, Area FS4, GPMP 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Taylor, James, Mansour Bureik, Gaber Abd al-Dayem Ali Omar, Rabea Eissa Mohammed, Ahmed Mohammed el-Lathiy, and Amira Fawzy Ahmed 2005 Data Structure Report: Area FS3 - GPMP 2005, March 17, 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Watson, Derek 2005 Area WCN: DDT, BP, and Trench 2 Data Structure Report. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Witsell, Ali 2005 GPMP Sealings 2005 – Preliminary Sorting and Triage, April 2005. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Wodzińska, Anna 2005 Area AA Pottery Report. Report on ile, Giza Plateau Mapping Project. Giza Occasional Papers 2 87 http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf 88 Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report http://www.aeraweb.org/gop/gop2.pdf The 2005 Team Director Mark Lehner Assistant Director John Nolan Field Director Mohsen Kamel Assistant Field Director Ana Tavares Archaeobotanists Mary Anne Murray Jonathan Digby Rainier Gerisch Menna el-Dorri Archaeologists Banu Aydinoglugil Ashraf Abd el-Aziz Kathryn Bandy Tove Björk Lauren Bruning Amelia Fairman Nevine Moussa Farag Justine Gesell Katharine Habbot Anies Hassan Dan Hounsell Fatma Hussein Astrid Huser Yukinori Kawae Kathryn Piquette Freya Sadarangani Hanan Mahmoud Soliman James Taylor Tim Stevens Derek Watson Architect Guenter Heindl Archives and Data Base Team Tobias Tonner, Designer & Manager Nicole Hansen Brenna Hassett Emmy Malak Artists Johnny Karlsson William Schenck Business Manager Erin Nell Ceramicists Anna Wodzińska, Storeroom Manager Anetta Lyzwa, Assistant Ceramicist Conservator Edward Johnson Draftsman, Surveyor Pieter Collet Geologist Ken Lajoie GIS Team Farrah Brown Rebecca Miracle Johnny Karlsson Brian Hunt Luke Lehner Carolyn Swan Monica Hanna Objects Analysts Ana Tavares Marie-Astrid Calmettes Emmy Malak Osteo-archaeologists Jessica Kaiser Tove Björk Tom Westlin Petter Nyberg Photographer Yukinori Kawae Sealings Team John Nolan, Director Ali Witsell Statistician Nick Fieller Faunal Analyst Richard Redding Field School teams are listed in the text under each Field School section Giza Occasional Papers 2 89

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report. Giza Occasional Papers 2 (GOP2)

Giza Plateau Mapping Project Season 2005 Preliminary Report. Giza Occasional Papers 2 (GOP2)

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS