Kom Firin II: The Urban Fabric and Landscape 9780861591923

Citation preview

Kom Firin II: The Urban Fabric and Landscape

Neal Spencer with contributions by Judith Bunbury, Ross Thomas, v Kveta Smoláriková, Louise Bertini and Eleanor Hughes

Publishers The British Museum Great Russell Street London wc1b 3dg

Series editor Sarah Faulks

Distributors The British Museum Press 38 Russell Square London wc1b 3qq

Kom Firin II: The Urban Fabric and Landscape Neal Spencer isbn 978 086159 192 3 issn 1747 3640

© The Trustees of the British Museum 2014 Front cover: Excavations in the Citadel area of Kom Firin (2007) Printed and bound in the UK by Latimer Trend and Company Ltd Papers used by The British Museum Press are recyclable products made from wood grown in well-managed forests and other controlled sources. The manufacturing processes conform to the environmental regulations of the country of origin. All British Museum images illustrated in this book are © The Trustees of the British Museum. Further information about the Museum and its collection can be found at britishmuseum.org.

Contents

Preface

v

1 Introduction

1

Site maps and figures (Figs 1–8)

3

Part 1: Ancient landscape 2 Ancient landscape reconstruction at Kom Firin Judith Bunbury, Eleanor Hughes and Neal Spencer

11

Ancient landscape figures (Figs 9–10) and plates (Pls 1–3)

14

Part 2: The Ramesside enclosure 3 The Ramesside enclosure wall

17

4 Occupation within the Ramesside enclosure

35

5 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure Kveˇta Smoláriková

47

6 Finds from the Ramesside enclosure

53

Ramesside enclosure figures (Figs 11–72) and plates (Pls 4–306)

59

Part 3: The Citadel 7 The Citadel: a glimpse of the Saite town

161

8 Finds from the Citadel

175

9 Ceramics from the Saite occupation (Citadel) Ross Thomas

179

The Citadel figures (Figs 73–129) and plates (Pls 307–558)

185

Part 4: Later temple enclosures 10 Later temple enclosures

265

11 Ceramics from trench NA Kveˇta Smoláriková

272

12 Finds from trench NA

276

Later temple enclosures figures (Figs 130–46) and plates (Pls 559–645) 279

13 Faunal remains at Kom Firin Louise Bertini

306

14 Conversations with modern Kom Firin

312

Conversations with modern Kom Firin figures (Figs 147–8) and plates (Pls 646–84)

319

15 A metropolis in the Western Delta: further considerations and future possibilities

332

Appendix 1: Checklist of contexts

335

Appendix 2: Ceramic typology

357

Appendix 3: Finds

432

Bibliography

463

Preface

The excavations published here took place each autumn between 2004 and 2011, although surveys undertaken in 2002 and 2003 underpin many of the conclusions regarding the development of the urban layout at Kom Firin.1 We are of course extremely grateful to the Supreme Council of Antiquities, since superseded by the Ministry of State for Antiquities, for issuing the permit to excavate, and facilitating our work under the auspices of successive Secretary Generals: Gaballa Ali Gaballa, Zahi Hawass, Mohamed Abdel Fattah and Mostafa Amine. Magdy el-Ghandour and Mohamed Ismail always ensured timely issuing of paperwork from the Foreign Missions Department. Our work in Egypt was made all the more enjoyable through the friendship (and logistical support) of Ayman Eshmawy Ali, Ahmed Ameen and especially Hisham el-Leithy. We were accompanied by the following inspectors who proved of great assistance with our work: Abdel Rahim Ali Tohamy el-Medawy (2004), Ibrahim Sobhy Ibrahim (2005), Bahgat Ibrahim (2006), Karim Tolba (2007), Mohamed Ali Abd el-Hakim Islamil (2008), Nagwa ezz el-Din Mohamed (2009) and Ahmed Said Kharadly (2011). In addition, Ahmed Kamal and Ashraf Abdel Rahman proved to be very helpful. Thanks are also due to the successive directors of the Beheira region: Fawzi el-Khoulani, Naama Ibrahim Selim and Moustafa Rushdi. Eman Saad Suweilem visited each season to open and seal the storeroom, and also facilitated access to registered objects in the magazine at Marea. At Kom Firin, our work benefitted from the assistance of the site ghaffirs: Sami Ismail Heymeda, Ahmed Abdelmajid (Garamut), Ali Rashad Daoud, Mahmoud Sobhy and especially Nasr Allah Abdel Hafiz and Hamed Abdelsalam. We experienced fluctuating levels of police attention over the years, but several individuals were notable for their assistance: Khalil Ibrahim Mohamed, the late Ahmed Abdel Hamid and Mohamed Naguib. Brothers Gaad Seif el-Nasr and the late Rifalla Seif el-Nasr kindly hosted us in their sprawling farmhouse complex between 2003 and 2011, discussed further in Chapter 14. Ramzi Rifalla and Abdel Aziz Gaad proved of enormous assistance in a number of logistical matters. Many of the family were involved in cooking meals for the team, until 2007 after which Ramadan Salama Abdel Halim provided sterling service as the project cook. The excavations presented here are the combined effort of site supervisors and local workmen trained across the duration of the project. The following workers participated in the excavations, trowelling, brushing, sieving, removing spoil and pot-washing: Adel Abdel Bary (2007), Amr Abdallah (2007), Sobhy Abdallah (2004–8), Rageb Abd el-Ali (2007), Mohamed Abd el-Aziz (2008), Sharif Abd el-Azim (2008), Abdel Mohsen Abd el-Fatah (2007–8), Ahmed Abd el-Fatah (2004, 2005), Faisal Abd el-Fatah (2005–7), Najah Abd el-Fatah (2004, 2007), Hamdy Abd el-Gawad (2007), Mahmoud Abd el-Hady (2004–

8), Mohamed Abd el-Latif (2007), Mohamed Abd el-Malek (2007–8), Sobhy Abd el-Malek (2008), Amr Abd el-Rahman (2006), Ahmed Abd el-Rahman (2008), Omar Abd el-Reteb (2007), Hamdi Abd el-Saad (2007), Idris Abd el-Wael (2007), Hamdi Abdja (2005–6), Nasser Abdo (2008), Mohamed Abu Alala (2008), Sabah Adel (2008), Rami Ahmed (2006), Shawfiq Alam Tawfeeq (2008), Shaaban Alfahim (2008), Sabah Atif (2007–8), Nisma Atiya (2005–8), Farag Awal (2007), Fathi Awal (2008), Mustafa Awad (2004–8), Mohamed Eithamed (2005), Jabel Elwani (2004–6), Jaber Eid (2007), Nasser Eid (2008), Mohamed Eid (2006–8), Najafy Eid (2006), Gomaa Farouk (2007), Faisal Fathi (2004, 2008), Hamdia Fathi (2007), Nadjeh Fathi (2006), Jamil Gaad (2005, 2007–8), Miguela Gaad (2006– 8), Reda Gaad (2004, 2007–8), Saad Gaad (2004–9), Younis (Ramadan) Gaad (2004–8), Abdel Rahman Gomaa (2007), Rajib Hamed (2008), Ali Hassan (2007–8), Mohamed Hassan (2007–8), Mohamed Jaber (2006–7), Ghary Jaber (2008), Abdelrahman Juma’a (2008), Abdel Aziz Kamal (2007), Ra’id Lotfy (2007), Eimad Mohamed (2006–7), Hassan Mahmoud (2006), Hassan Mohamed (2007), Rajab Mohamed (2008), Samar Mohamed (2008), Siham Mohamed (2006–8), Mohammed Hamed (2004–6), Shahat Hamed (2004–5), Ali Hassan (2004–6), Amira Mahmoud (2006), Khairy Mahmoud (2005), Tulul Mahmoud (2007), Mohamed Mehr (2007), Mahmoud Meshut (2004–7), Ahmed Mohamed (2007), Fathi Mohamed (2005), Hasan Mohamed (2008), Mohamed Sayed Mohamed (2006), Sayed Mohamed (2006, 2008), Shaban Mohamed (2004–8), Zaghloul Hamed (2005–7), Shahat Mohraby (2004), Eid Naguib (2007), Nasr Nagy (2007), Nabil Nasr (2007), Mahmoud Rageb (2007), Sadeek Rageb (2007–8), Atef Rashid (2007–8), Khaled Razk (2007), Mohamed Razq (2006), Farag Rifalla (2004–9), Hassan Rifalla (2004, 2006–8), Miguela Rifalla (2004), Ramzi Rifalla (2004, 2007), Ahmed Saad (2007–8), Mahmoud Said (2004–8), Mohamed Said (2007), Jaber Said (2008), Rashid Said (2007), Ahmed Said (2008), Amr Samir (2007), Hannayat Shabaan (2005, 2007), Samah Shabaan (2008), Atef Shafiq (2007–8), Shawgi Tawfiq (2007), Hamada Yahya (2008), Yousef Yamani (2008), Jaber Zaghloul (2008) and Saad Zayed (2008). The excavations published in this volume were supervised and documented by the following archaeologists: Tiffany Chezum (2011), Elizabeth Frood (2004, 2007), Andrew Ginns (2006, 2008), Helen Macquarrie (2006), Margaret Maitland (2008), Liam McNamara (2007), Paul Murray (2005), Julian Newman (2008), Mary Shepperson (2007), Neal Spencer (2009, 2011) and Charlotte Vallance (2007–8). Assessment of ceramic assemblages were undertaken by Květa Smoláriková (2004–9, 2011) and Ross Thomas (2009), who have authored chapters here, along with Ashraf Sennusi (2007) and Mohamed Ali Abdel Hakim (2008). The role of illustrator was fulfilled by Liam McNamara (2003–5), Garry Shaw (2007) and Matthew Kom Firin II | v

Preface Dalton (2007, 2009). Eleanor Hughes conducted drill-coring in 2007, ably assisted by Omar Farouk el-Qiftawi and under the guidance of Judith Bunbury (Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge), with the assistance of Richard Price (University Museum of Geology, Cambridge). Omar also acted as excavation rais during the 2007 and 2008 seasons, along with Helmi Shared el-Qiftawi and Kamal Helmi el-Qiftawi. Louise Bertini analysed the zoological remains in 2008, while Tracey Sweek (Department of Conservation and Scientific Research, British Museum) undertook the conservation of objects and also the redisplay of stone sarcophagi and reliefs around the resthouse in 2006 and 2007 (see Spencer, N. 2008: pl. 25). Magnetometry survey was undertaken by a team from the Archaeological Geophysics Laboratory at the University of Akron, Ohio, led by Ann Donkin (2003–5). Ann was assisted by Tracey Linville, Charlotte Mader and Linda Whitman (2003), Stuart Nealis (2004) and Jim Sutter (2005). The support of Timothy Matney, Associate Professor in the Department of Classical Studies, Anthropology and Archaeology at Akron, is gratefully acknowledged, and the Robert W. Little Foundation for assistance with funding. We are also grateful to Ladislav Bareš of the Czech Institute of Egyptology at Charles University (Prague) for permitting the long-term involvement of Kveˇta Smoláriková. Conservation and reconstruction of the Ramesside door-jamb was undertaken by Tracey Sweek (Department of Conservation and Scientific Research, British Museum). Back in London, thanks are due to Vivian Davies, then Keeper of the Department of Ancient Egypt and Sudan at the British Museum, for supporting and encouraging the fieldwork project in the first place; David Saunders (Keeper of Conservation and Scientific Research); and Claire Messenger for invaluable logistical and administrative assistance. Evan York (Senior Museum Assistant) provided practical advice and help with equipment; drawings were inked by Claire Thorne (finds), Ross Thomas (ceramics) and Neal Spencer (plans, sections). Elsewhere in the British Museum, thanks are due to David Prudames for help with the project web pages, Jeremy Hill (Research Manager), Xerxes Mazda (Head of Learning Volunteers and Audiences) and Richard Woff for supporting a schools projects in Egypt and London during 2005, developed and led by Nicholas Badcott. The teachers and head at Torriano Junior School in north London were enthusiastic participants in the pilot project to develop teacher resources. In addition to volunteers participating in the excavations, a number of interns within the Department of Ancient Egypt and Sudan helped immeasurably with post-excavation work, particularly the digitisation of records: Karis Eklund, Renate Fellinger, Elisabeth Greifenstein, Min-Soo Kwak, Bori Nemeth, Jessica Tomkins, Hélène Virenque, Atena Ungureanu, Elena Valtorta, Alice Williams and most notably Nicolas Monté. Nicolas designed a bespoke online database for the Kom Firin project. This enabled all finds and photograph registration to be done live from the field, via a USB internet connection, while also allowing study and documentation between seasons to take place simultaneously in London, Cambridge, Prague and Southampton. The following individuals deserve mention for their interesting comments and advice, which has helped inform our vi | Kom Firin II

understanding of the site and its ancient context: Sabri Ali Choucri, John Cooper, Peter French, Angus Graham, Fayza Haikal, Astrid Hassler, Jim Hoffmeier, Salim Ikram, Mohamed Kenawi, Francois Leclère, Aurélia Masson, Paul Nicholson, Elisabeth O’Connell, Richard Parkinson, Richard Preece, Dietrich Raue, Daniela Rosenow, Jeffrey Spencer, John Taylor, Alexandra Villing, Penelope Wilson, and of course all of the contributors to this volume and participants in the field seasons. The workshop on ‘tower-houses’, organised by Dominique Valbelle at the Université de Paris IV-Sorbonne in November 2012, was helpful in interpreting the remains in the Citadel, particularly discussions with Melanie Flossmann, Eva Lange, Manuela Lehmann, Séverine Marchi and Grégory Marouard. Thanks are also due to Shezza Edris and Hany Rashwan for their help with Arabic translations. I would also like to thank David Silverman and Jennifer Wegner of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology for facilitating access to the material excavated at Buhen and Mit Rahina, which provided many good parallels for the Kom Firin artefacts. Further individuals and organisations deserve thanks: Patricia Spencer, Chris Naunton and Faten Abd el-Halim Salah at the Egypt Exploration Society (augering equipment, total station and assistance with payments for inspectors), Stewart White for his logistical help and financial support and Sally Lamloun at Vodafone Egypt for maintaining our phone and internet lines. A special debt of gratitude is afforded to Ahmed el-Mokadem for his generous support of the Kom Firin project between 2007 and 2009, in honour of Safwat el-Mokadem. Finally, Josephine Turquet provided support for this publication in its early stages, with Sarah Faulks overseeing the layout and editing of the volume. Topy Fiske’s checking of the final manuscript was invaluable. It was particularly sad that Mahmoud Said, Zaghloul Hamed and Hagg Rifalla, who all played an important role in our work at Kom Firin, passed away during the project. The book is dedicated to my grandad Benny Hunt (1921– 2012) and nephew Xavier Daigneault (2012–). Notes 1

The field seasons took place from 10–27 September 2002; 8 September –2 October 2003; 4–30 September 2004; 7 September–6 October 2005; 3 September–5 October 2006; 27 September–29 October 2007; 11 October –9 November 2008; 3–23 October 2009 and 14 October–2 November 2011.

1: Introduction

The present volume is the second and final publication of the British Museum fieldwork at Kom Firin in the Western Delta.1 Two principal areas of excavation are presented here: that inside the northeastern corner of the New Kingdom enclosure (Chapter 4) and an area of Saite occupation comprising houses and production areas (Chapter 7). In addition, information relating to the settlement’s enclosure walls is presented, both for the New Kingdom (Chapter 3) and the temenoi of the first millennium bc (Chapter 10). The assemblages – artefacts and ceramics – from each excavation area are treated separately, with drawings and photographs grouped after each section. Though there is some overlap between artefact classes across the areas, unsurprisingly, the differences are more notable, and thus more appropriate to present as distinct assemblages, facilitating those researching contemporary sites elsewhere in Egypt. These chapters effectively provide a glimpse of the material culture of the late New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period (Chapters 6–7), Saite and early Persian eras (Chapter 8–9) and the 4th century bc through the early Roman Period (Chapters 11–12). Few undisturbed contexts were encountered, and it is rarely certain if an object derived from the use-phase of a room or space, or was deposited after its abandonment. Illustrations of these assemblages are also grouped by area of excavation. It is striking how few published parallels from the region west of the Canopic branch of the Nile exist, other than the continued focus on Naukratis.2 The situation is improving, however, with survey projects which are providing an insight into Ptolemaic and Roman settlement patterns in the region (Wilson and Grigoropolous 2009; Trampier 2010; Trampier [in press]; Kenawi 2012a and 2012b). Excavations at Kom Hamman and Kom Giza, ancient Schedia, have revealed baths and funerary monuments.3 Farther afield, excavations at Buto and Sais are most relevant. It is hoped that this situation will change, as there is no shortage of urban sites where the material culture of the New Kingdom and first millennium bc can be investigated. In particular Tell Abqa’in, thus far the subject of only limited fieldwork (Thomas 2000; Trampier 2010: 161–88), could provide a very good parallel to Kom Firin as a new foundation of the 19th dynasty. A key part of the first volume requires revision due to information provided by excavations subsequent to that publication: the layout of late temple enclosures at the site (Spencer, N. 2008: 24–7). As a result of further investigation of several wall segments (Chapter 10), a new map of the city layout is proposed (Fig. 6); the Late Period enclosure has been adjusted, encompassing a larger area. Conversely, evidence for a Ptolemaic enclosure is largely restricted to a single wall length at the north of the site, other than episodes of additions to the Late Period wall. Aurélia Masson, with the assistance of Nancy Wilkie, recently brought to my attention three wooden boxes of

material from the 1970s/1980s American Naukratis Project; these boxes are now housed in Carleton College, Minnesota, acquired as a division of finds. The material was excavated at Kom Firin and Kom Dahab, as well as Naukratis and other sites included in the regional survey. The material has yet to be fully catalogued, but the range of pottery (New Kingdom to Ptolemaic), slag and small finds (e.g. limestone spindlewhorl, faience vessel fragments, pumice) is consistent with that encountered in the excavations presented in this volume. Recording system and future access to material As in Kom Firin I (Spencer, N. 2008), archaeological features are all assigned unique four-digit context numbers, with a checklist of those contexts in the areas published here in Appendix 1. Artefacts and significant ceramic vessels, including all those in the site typology, received numbers prefixed with F and C, respectively (listed in Appendices 2 and 3). Levels on all trench plans, sections and elevations are relative to STN 2 = 12.0m (12.77m ASL). Brick dimensions are given where possible; if only two dimensions are given, it means the third was not visible, for example if bricks were only seen in section or plan view. All topographic data was recorded in relation to the survey stations established in 2002, though most of the concrete and rebar markers have been removed or buried beneath dumps of debris. In November 2011, only that on the roof of the SCA resthouse was still extant. In the site grid, this represents 59.73E 22.30N at elevation 7.20m, located at 30°51’48.86”N 30°29’20.44”E.4 All deposits were sieved, with faunal bone being collected alongside artefacts and sherds. All sherds were washed, except in the largest deposits in trench NA, and then assessed before a selection was made for recording and integration into the site typology. While every sherd in the typology is included in Appendix 2, only a representative sample are published in line drawing. The chapter on zoological remains covers both the excavations published here and those in the temple area (Spencer, N. 2008: 36–57). No botanical collection was undertaken, nor soil samples for other analyses. All of the trenches at Kom Firin were backfilled with spoil after excavations were completed. The illustrations, photographs and information contained in this volume necessarily represent a distillation of the mass of data recorded in the field. This raw data, much of it in unrevised original form, is available online at www.komfirin.org. It is expected that the additional site and artefact photos, as well as field drawings of many sherds not published here, will prove particularly useful to researchers. Original drawings, field notes and photographs, whether digital, film or hard copy, are housed in the archive of the Department of Ancient Egypt and Sudan at the British Museum. Kom Firin II | 1

Spencer The material excavated at Kom Firin – all artefacts, a sample of animal bone, complete pottery vessels and the typology series – are stored in wooden boxes housed in the antiquities magazine (Pl. 682) which forms part of the Supreme Council of Antiquities resthouse in the centre of the site, apart from a small number of artefacts transferred to the magazine in Marea (registered finds, denoted with SCA numbers in Appendix 3). Applications to access the material should be made to the Ministry of State for Antiquities in Egypt. Silvagou and Kom Dahab The last season at Kom Firin (October 2011) was rather sobering in that the rate of kom reduction, through the extension of cultivated areas into the ancient site, was higher than ever before (Fig. 6).5 The condition of the two satellite sites is also far from encouraging. Silvagou, the cemetery with graves of the late Middle Kingdom through Ptolemaic era, and still used as the burial ground for the village of Kom Firin, has suffered badly in recent years (Spencer, N. 2008: 8–11). A large new house on the western side of the track, and a run of houses flanking the south side of the cemetery, have reduced the accessible area of the ancient site. Furthermore, the ancient burials have been disturbed through the removal of stone architecture, the digging of pits and the accumulation of modern agricultural rubbish. During October 2011, the only remaining evidence for the presence of an ancient cemetery was some small fragments of pottery slipper coffins: none of the in situ complete coffins, nor the mudbrick or limestone tomb structures, had survived.6 This damage occurred between 2007 and 2011. Kom Dahab, the small mound to the southeast of Kom Firin, adjacent to the Firiniya canal, features little new of note in terms of visible architecture, since our first visit in 2002 (Spencer, N. 2008: 17–18). This site is also subject to ongoing destruction but especially conversion into a working area with accumulations of agricultural and construction debris brought from elsewhere, making ancient deposits difficult or impossible to see. The most recent visit, again in October 2011, was during the rice harvest season, when large mounds of chaff covered much of the surface. Field incursion seems to have been less of an issue here than at Kom Firin, but a large amount of rubble, including some concrete, cement and red brick, has been dumped across the eastern part of the kom. The provenance of this material is unclear, as it significantly post-dates the construction of a tarmac road to the south of the site (that leading to Kom Firin village). The recent identification by Aurélia Masson of ceramics from Kom Dahab which may predate the New Kingdom (and see Coulson and Leonard 1982a: 83, figs 15–16), may reflect the presence of a settlement contemporary with the earliest burials at Kom Firin.

2 | Kom Firin II

Notes

1

2

3 4

5 6

In addition to the publications cited in the bibliography, the reports submitted to the SCA after each season are available at www. britishmuseum.org/research/projects/kom_firin,_egypt/ project_reports.aspx; summaries of work at Kom Firin have appeared in Orientalia volumes 73 (12–13), 74 (199–200), 75 (196), 76 (180–1) and 77 (191–2) (www.egyptologues.net/orientalia/ home). Research has concentrated on the Greek material culture from the site, though the British Museum Naukratis Research Project is also undertaking a full study of Egyptian artefacts and has instigated new fieldwork (www.britishmuseum.org/research/research_ projects/naukratis_the_greeks_in_egypt.aspx). Reports on the fieldwork at Schedia are available at www.schedia.de. Rebars, of 1m length, were also hammered into the surface at 200W 0N, 200E 0N and 0E 100N, and at the eastern end of the northern wall of the Ramesside enclosure (0307), at 377.1E 115.6N and 380.4E 113.1N. Some sites have lost between 50 and 90% of their extent in the last four decades (Trampier 2010: 317, table 4.5). An additional object in the Graeco-Roman Museum in Alexandria (30697), omitted from Kom Firin I, is a small limestone sarcophagus, presumably for a child. The SCA excavations at the site, into the 1990s, will be the subject of a publication by Sabri Ali Choucri.

Figure 1 Map of the region around Kom Firin. The location and extent of archaeological sites is taken from Survey of Egypt/EGSA maps; the positions of the modern road, the Rosetta branch of the Nile, canals and modern towns (labelled in upper case) are from satellite imagery. The course of the other two branches (the Canopic and ‘Western’ Nile branches) is indicative only, being based on satellite imagery, survey maps cited and previous studies (see Wilson 2008). These channels will have meandered over time, and further bifurcations are likely to have occurred at different periods. The augering at Kom Firin, discussed in Chapter 2, does not provide sufficient information on the course of the waterway adjacent to the site, perhaps west of the modern Firiniya canal?

Site maps

Kom Firin II | 3

5m

STN5

3m

8m

3m

5m

3m

200m

200m

3m

STN4

STN4

5m

Figure 2 Site plan with Ramesside enclosure and temple.

STN5

8m

Lake

Lake

STN20

4m

2m

2m

STN 23

SCA STN1

STN1

STN 23

SCA

2m

STN12

STN12

4m

STN2 STN20

8m

STN2

8m

Citadel

Citadel

STN3

STN3

STN10

STN10

3m

STN6

STN6

STN9

STN11

2m

STN14

STN 24

STN 24 STN13

STN13

STN14

STN15

STN15

2m

0

STN7

STN8

STN9

STN11

2m

0

7m

STN7

7m

4 | Kom Firin II 4m

3m

STN17

STN17

3m

STN8

3m

5m

4m

N

Survey points (STN) Site limits (2002) Ramesside enclosure

Paths Contours (1m) Survey points (STN) SitePaths limits (2002) Ramesside enclosure Contours (1m)

STN16

STN16

N Site maps

3m 3m

3m 3m

4m 4m

5m 5m

Site maps

N

Kom Firin

Tell Borg Tell Hebua I

Tell Abqa’in

Zawyet Umm el-Rakham 0

Amara West

Sai

Sesebi

100m

Figure 3 Comparative plans of walled New Kingdom complexes, with location of principal temple indicated (where known). For references, see bibliography.

Kom Firin II | 5

Site maps

N

0

100m

Figure 4 Magnetometry survey of Kom Firin, eastern zone. In collaboration with the University of Akron.

6 | Kom Firin II

8.33 6.93 5.53 4.13 2.73 1.33 -0.06 -1.46 -2.86 -4.26 -5.66 -7.06 -8.46 nt

Site maps

N

TM TI

Gate

0306

0311

0169

ED

EA EC EE

EB 0326

Temple

TL 0200

0607 0500 0626

0613

0

E44 0614

0627

0617 0528

0615

E43

200m

Parts of wall confirmed through ground-truthing

Figure 5 Schematic plan of Ramesside complex based on magnetometry survey, with ground-truthed (excavated or surveyed) parts indicated in red.

Kom Firin II | 7

8 | Kom Firin II

5m

3m

8m

Lake

0624+1689

1030

STN10

STN20

STN2

8m

Citadel STN1

2m

Resthouse

STN12

4m

0622

0621

STN18

0600

0436

0327

0601

4th century BC (?) enclosure Renovated enclosure Saite (?) enclosure Ramesside enclosure

0623

4m

Trench NA STN15

0417+0416

Ramesside temple

STN13

0606

STN14

3m

200m

3m

STN4

STN9

STN11

2m

3m

4m

5m

5m

Figure 6 Site plan with reconstructed location of Late Period temenoi, location of Citadel map (Fig. 73), trenches NA and NC and areas of site levelled for agriculture.

STN5

STN8

0605

2m

0

STN6

STN7

7m

3m 3m

1900 (trench NC)

Paths Contours (1m) Survey points (STN) Site limits (2002) Levelled for agriculture (between 2002 and 2011)

STN16

N Site maps

Figure 7 Comparative plans of Late Period temple enclosures, with location of principal temple indicated where known. For references, see bibliography.

Site maps

Kom Firin II | 9

10 | Kom Firin II

0

200m

5m

STN5

8m

AS11

STN4

3m

AS03

STN9

AS09

STN20

STN2

8m

Citadel

2m

2m

AS02

STN1

Resthouse

STN12

4m

4th century BC (?) enclosure Renovated enclosure Saite (?) enclosure Ramesside enclosure

Floodplain Always dry Suggested waterways

STN10

3m

AS04

STN6

STN7

STN8

STN13

STN14

STN15

AS06

Paths Contours (1m) Survey points (STN) Site limits (2002) Auger boreholes (AS)

3m

Silvagou

AS05

AS07

AS01 4m

STN18

2m

5m

3m

Figure 8 Site plan with location of auger cores, reconstruction of enclosure walls and suggested river channels.

N

7m

AS08

STN16

AS10

Site maps

3m

4m

5m

3m

2: Ancient landscape reconstruction at Kom Firin by Judith Bunbury, Eleanor Hughes and Neal Spencer

The archaeology of Kom Firin The present-day site presents a distinctive kidney-shaped outline, created by a large cut into the northern edge of the site for fields (Pl. 2); although there are no major natural waterways in the immediate vicinity today, many other ancient sites, when river transport was of strategic importance, are associated with waterways, including Memphis (Jeffreys 1985), Karnak (Bunbury et al. 2008) and Sais (Wilson 2006). The southern limit of the site is flanked by a large pool of standing water (Pls 1–2)1 and a modern village which stretches southwards along a track. Another, larger, pool of water stands some 340m southeast of the site. Eight seasons of geophysical survey and excavation have elucidated taphonomic processes that have resulted in the present-day appearance of the site, including ancient remodelling of the town layout, levelling operations, large-scale sebakh-removal aided by a railway line, natural erosion and modern incursions. This last category includes the construction of houses, cultivation of land, built and de facto paths and roads, use of the site for animal pasture and the erection of poles to support electrical wiring. The region was a very different environment prior to the industrialisation of Egypt under Mohamed Ali and the network of canals built at this time. Indeed, Daressy described Beheira as ‘swampy … of sandy aspect, peppered with tufts of plans, cypress and roses in the depressions’ (1905: 129). The earliest occupation in the early 19th dynasty consisted of a cult temple of modest-size, built from mudbrick but with stone architectural elements, set within a walled complex of distinctively fortified appearance, featuring corner towers, thick walls and a narrow gateway (Fig. 2). These structures were founded directly upon the surface of a Pleistoscene sand turtleback (Pl. 24). Inscriptions in the temple suggest that this complex may have been founded in response to the military threat and subsequent waves of immigration from Libya (Spencer, N. 2011), which would eventually culminate in parts of Egypt being ruled by Libyan elites. The layout of the town seems to have been significantly expanded and modified in the mid-first millennium bc, with a succession of large temple enclosures (Fig. 6; Chapter 10). Within, areas of housing and small-scale industrial activity have been identified (Chapter 8). The western zone of the site has not been the subject of extensive excavation, and geophysical survey has provided little evidence of significant structures (Spencer, N. 2008: 31–2). Two satellite sites also deserve mention (Spencer, N. 2008: 8–18). To the southwest, Silvagou was, and remains, the burial ground for the settlement. Ancient graves span the New Kingdom through Ptolemaic Period but, intriguingly, burials of the late Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period have also been identified here. The earliest evidence for occupation of the

settlement is some three centuries later. A second satellite site to the southeast, Kom Dahab, is a modest archaeological mound with a number of late Ptolemaic kilns dedicated to the production of amphorae. Investigation of the palaeo-landscape of the site, its surroundings and the deep stratigraphy underlying the investigated archaeological deposits was designed to seek clarification of the following questions. Is the Ramesside town founded on an ancient sand turtleback, or do earlier occupation deposits exist? Does the site extend far beyond its current area? What was its relationship to regional waterways, and was this consistent with its (apparent) strategic function? Palaeo-landscape of the Kom Firin area The Nile Delta is known to have had more channels in antiquity, both from borehole studies (Stanley and Warne 1993) and the reports of Herodotus (c. 400 bc, retranslated 1998). Kom Firin is situated close to the route of the no-longer extant Canopic Nile (tracked by Wilson 2006, 2007), which is thought to have connected Naukratis with the Mediterranean Sea in antiquity. However, this major waterway passes around 10km to the northeast of the settlement, thus would not have provided convenient access from Kom Firin to other major centres, such as Memphis, nor to the Mediterranean Sea. Note that Naukratis, the Greek trading emporium, was founded several centuries after Kom Firin. Examination of a number of early surveys of the region, in particular the Egyptian Survey Authority Maps of 1914 (see Spencer, N. 2008: 3–4), reveals a line of sites including Kom Firin (Fig. 1) that are associated with an area of low ground marked by chains of lakes, marshes and gharraghets (natural salt pans), an important source of natron (nitrates) described by Bernand (1971).2 Interpreting the chain of lakes and swamps as a former waterway, presumably emptying into Lake Mareotis,3 we conducted a season of augering in 2007 to test the hypothesis that the waterway was extant at the time of occupation of the site of Kom Firin. Auger studies Eleven auger cores were obtained from locations (Fig. 8) in and around Kom Firin, using an Eijkelkamp hand auger (Pl. 3). The auger recovers a sequence of columnar samples that represent between 5 and 20cm of sediment, which can be combined to create a profile of deposits, to a depth of up to 10m. For each of the samples the grain size, colour, sorting and other geological indicators of sedimentary environment were described. Archaeological materials were then sieved from the sediment, cleaned, dried and sorted. The occurrence of sherds generally indicates nearby anthropogenic activity at the time of deposition of the sediment. The results of the analysis were plotted as summary logs (Fig. 5). Kom Firin II | 11

Bunbury, Hughes and Spencer Shells recovered within the sediment were identified by Richard Preece of the Zoological Museum in Cambridge. The lower deposits typically featured Plano bid sp. and Ballymore sp., consistent with fresh water environments and fluviatile sediments. Above these deposits were terrestrial deposits containing the gastropod Hellicid sp., representing a phase in which local channels had either migrated away or silted up, leaving dry land. In addition, some large samples (up to 8cm in length) of the fresh-water bivalve Unionid sp. were found amongst the stratified sherd and bone material; this can be interpreted as evidence that this local bivalve was being exploited as a food resource, if only a biproduct of fishing. Inferred landscape at time of occupation The units encountered in the cores can be broadly divided into five groups, each representing a particular depositional environment (Table 1). A number of sedimentary units were encountered that reveal the landscape history of the area (Figs 5–6). The double mound of Kom Firin and the mound of Silvagou seem to have been founded on sherd-free sands, probably relict Pleistocene gravels. Sandy deposits typical of a turtleback can be seen in AS03 and AS06 (Kom Firin), and in AS05 at Silvagou. The flanks of the Kom Firin mound (AS02 and AS09) show evidence of occupation; a pattern followed at Kôm el-Khilgan (Buchez and Midant-Reynes 2007) as well as other turtlebacks in the Delta. However, the western part of the mound is anomalous as it contains sherd-rich material (AS11) to a much lower depth: this is perhaps indicative of a kom at this location, representing the occupation of lower lying land with easy access to the floodplain, but with recourse to the sandy ridge of the turtleback at times of high floods (see Fig. 8). In antiquity, the silty sediments in cores AS01, AS04, AS07 and AS10 suggest that for much of the year the site was surrounded by the waters of a branch of the Nile Delta distributary system; the presence of a waterway along the southern part of the site may be corroborated by Corona satellite imagery (Trampier 2010: 130–1). Edible bivalve shells, intercalated with anthropogenic detritus, suggest that the local aquatic environment was exploited as a food source; secondary Nile channels are likely to have been good places for fishing, flora and fauna. Pottery from the cores was consistent with that from the occupation strata investigated during excavations (see Smoláriková 2008; Chapters 5, 9 and 11), being principally of late New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period date (c. 1300–700 bc), though with material of later periods also encountered. A distinctive Third Intermediate Period sherd (C5000 [Fig. 58]), found deep in core AS11, could reflect

contemporary settlement of this area, or be redeposited from elsewhere. In the former case, this may have been temporary or small-scale activity associated with light industry or a seasonal harbour, as this area may have been prone to seasonal inundation (Fig. 8), at least in the earlier periods of the site’s history. In common with many sites in the Delta, Kom Firin was founded on the flanks of sandy mounds in the Nile distributary system. Our reconstruction suggests that the site was upon a branch of the Nile that flowed to the west of the Canopic branch and was probably surrounded by water for much of the year. Combining the core data with archaeological markers, particularly the layout of successive temple enclosures, provides an indication that the landscape surrounding the site must have changed between the late second millennium and the 7th century bc (Fig. 8). The elevated land not subjected to annual inundation, on the main eastern mound, was the location of the Ramesside enclosure, the earliest significant feature at Kom Firin (Chapter 3; Fig. 8); the choice of island sites for strategic towns in the Ramesside era is attested elsewhere (e.g. Amara West in Nubia, see Spencer, N. 2009; Spencer, N. et al. 2012). As the Late Period enclosure, built in the 7th century bc (Chapter 10), extended into the area subjected to flooding, it can be suggested that the waterways had migrated northwards, leaving this area permanently above the annual flood level, and thus suitable for construction. Reconstructing river channels on the basis of a restricted number of cores can mask temporal variations in water channels in this dynamic landscape, and the interpretation here can only hint at how the environment around Kom Firin may have changed across the lengthy period during which the site was occupied. This suggested reconstruction of the local environment contemporary with the foundation of the town and subsequent remodelling provides a case study of a major settlement within the context of the wider region. The regional context of Kom Firin (Spencer, N. 2008: 3–8),4 is now better understood through the work of several survey projects active in the western Delta (Wilson and Grigoropoulos 2009; Kenawi 2012a and 2012b; Trampier 2010; Trampier [in press]). Given that these surveys are presently relying largely on surface collection, topographic recording and geophysical survey, the later phases of pharaonic history, especially Ptolemaic and Roman levels, dominate the datasets. A small number of sherds dated to the Late Period at several other Western Delta sites may reflect the occupation of these settlements prior to the Late Period (Wilson and Grigoropoulos 2009: 287 table 2.1),

Table 1 Outline of sediment types encountered at Kom Firin and the cores that contain them.

Environment

Description of sediment

Cores in group (see Fig. 8)

In-filled delta channels

Thin (~20cm) fining upwards silt and fine sandy units. Pottery is present in some units indicating nearby occupation while channel was active.

AS01, AS04, AS07, AS10

Pleistocene sand (gezira)

Coarse to very coarse sand units with pottery sparse or absent.

AS05, AS06, AS08

Cores associated with human activity

Cores that include pottery in the deposits and can thus be associated with occupation of the site.

AS02, AS03, AS06, AS09, AS10, AS11

Sebakh

Anthropogenic residue ploughed into upper part of section as fertilizer.

AS01, AS02, AS04, AS07, AS10

Mud brick

Dense, pottery-rich mud interpreted as mud brick.

AS11

12 | Kom Firin II

Ancient landscape reconstruction at Kom Firin though further work would need to be undertaken to confirm these are not residual sherds from elsewhere. New Kingdom sherds are notably absent from this survey of 67 sites; toponyms of a modern village named Ramsîs could echo a New Kingdom settlement where the main western channel branched off from the Canopic Nile (Wilson 2011a). Strabo’s description of moving upstream from Schedia towards Memphis evokes a sense of the settlement landscape in which Kom Firin was sited: After Schedia, when one is sailing towards Memphis, one finds on the right a great number of villages which extend up to Lake Marea and among which is found the village of Chabrias, as it is called: upon the river is found the village of Hermopolis then Gynaeconpolis and the Gynaeconpolite nome; then, immediately after, Momemphis and the Momemphite nome; but, in the interval, there exist many canals which flow in the lake Mareotis (Strabo, Geography, XVII, I: 22).

Gynaeconpolis and Momemphis are toponyms that have been associated with Kom Firin or sites nearby (Spencer, N. 2008: 7–8). If Kom Firin was located on a relatively major Nile channel west of the Canopic branch, could it have been the ‘x ns-channel upon the desert (XAst)’, upon which Kom el-Hisn was located, according to a late dynastic block from Achmoun and a door-jamb from Kom el-Hisn itself (Trampier 2010: 80–1). Kom Firin may also have been upon a subsidiary channel related to this x ns-channel, or a distinct waterway. Trampier (2010: 323–6, fig. 5.1) offers a tentative reconstruction of the New Kingdom landscape, but the riverine landscape was dynamic, shifting over the period of nearly two millennia during which Kom Firin was occupied. The varying wind, current and channel flows across the seasons would have considerably conditioned lifeways in settlements such as Kom Firin and its role in riverine trading networks (see Cooper 2008). Further, the boundaries imposed by waterways would prompt a vertical development of the town over time, with structures being built upon the partly levelled remains of the previous phase (see Leclère 2008: 650), rather than horizontal development to occupy new tracts of land. The deep stratigraphy of the Citadel part of Kom Firin (Chapter 7), not far from the main southern river channel, embodies this phenomenon, as does the construction of the Late Period temenos over the partly standing remains of the Ramesside enclosure (Chapter 10). It is perhaps unsurprising that river channels, lakes and canals play such a prominent role in the ancient conception of the Egyptian city, as echoed in poetical texts (Ragazolli 2008: 192–205).

Notes

1

2 3

4

The present colour of the lake is the result of chemical fertilisers used in the adjacent land under agriculture; the lake level can fluctuate dramatically within a matter of days. Some decades ago, salt was apparently harvested from its edges (see Chapter 14). Lake Mareotis itself was closer to Kom Firin in ancient times; currently only 17% of its ancient size, it once extended much further south (Khalil 2008: 10). Note that Kom Firin is shown on the ‘Canal de Beheira’ on the d’Anville map of 1765, with a watercourse emptying into a small body of water which may echo an older, larger, extent to Lake Mareotis (Spencer, N. 2008: pl. 3). Trampier (2010: 106–32) combined satellite imagery and cartography to reach a similar conclusion; for Islamic-era waterways in the western Delta, see Cooper 2008: 26–72. Notable publications on individual sites include Sais (Wilson 2011b), Naukratis (Spencer, A.J. 2011b) and Heraklion (Goddio 2007; Goddio and Fabre 2010); reports of the work at Schedia are available at www.schedia.de. Excavations at Kom el-Ghuraf and Kom Truga (www.horusfoundation.hu/kom_truga_ szakirodalom/index.php?id=4) have yet to be published.

Kom Firin II | 13

Ancient landscape plates

Plate 1 View across the southern part of Kom Firin, with standing water visible at edge of site, and modern fields beyond.

Plate 2 Aerial view of Kom Firin, showing areas of standing water (in red), surrounding cultivation and modern village. Gaad and Rifalla house within the red box.

Plate 3 Augering in the Ramesside temple at Kom Firin, 2007.

Kom Firin II | 14

Ancient landscape figures

Figure 9 Borehole logs for the eleven cores of the Kom Firin auger survey shown relative to sea level (0m) in metres and grain size on the logarithmic Φ (f) scale.

Kom Firin II | 15

Ancient landscape figures

Figure 10 Cross-section through a selection of the deposits encountered at Kom Firin. The shaded area of the map indicates the area of the kom. The upper surface of the section indicates the land height at the top of the core. Note that core AS06 was augered in an existing excavation and is hence below the original ground surface. The lower (dotted) line is the lower limit of sherds within the cores. Sherds of Third Intermediate Period date were recovered from the deepest core (AS11).

Kom Firin II | 16

3: The Ramesside enclosure wall

Although large areas of the site have not been investigated beyond surface survey, present knowledge suggests that the first significant structure at Kom Firin was a large walled complex in the southeastern area, centred around the cult temple decorated in the reign of Ramses II (Fig. 2). The discovery of this precinct, and a brief summary of its characteristics, was presented in the first monograph (Spencer, N. 2008: 22–4); this chapter presents the enclosure in more detail. A consideration of the historical context of the Ramesside complex and its settlement concludes this chapter; excavation of the area inside the northeast corner of the complex is presented in the following chapter. Form, appearance and taphonomy Pharaonic towns, though rarely walled, typically feature one or several extensive precincts, defined by massive mudbrick walls. The presence of enclosures at Kom Firin was noted in late 19th-century descriptions (see Spencer, N. 2008: 26), but the activities of the sebakhin, ongoing erosion through wind and rain, deposits of windblown sand from the Western Desert, the use of the site to pasture animals and the presence of several tracks connecting the villages and nearby canalside road – many used by motor vehicles – have all contributed towards disguising the position and layout of ancient enclosures at Kom Firin. This is particularly true of the Ramesside enclosure, which once dominated the southeastern part of the site. Following the geophysical survey of the temple in 2004, the extension of the magnetometry survey 1 to cover the majority of the eastern part of Kom Firin provided a clear indication of the layout of an imposing mudbrick enclosure (Fig. 4), which has been ground-truthed through excavation in three areas (Fig. 5): the northern gateway (trenches TI, TJ, TM, TO), the northeastern corner (EA, EB, EC, ED, EE) and a small segment of wall in the eastern stretch (TL). This ground-truthing provides evidence for the dating of the wall to the 19th dynasty, most likely contemporary with the temple which lies at the centre of the enclosure (Spencer, N. 2008: 36–57). In addition, topographic survey, complemented by the cleaning and recording of exposed segments of brickwork along the southern enclosure wall, has confirmed details of the structure and the subsequent taphonomies that created its present-day appearance. The rectangular enclosure extends 225m east–west by 199m north–south (or 430 x 380 cubits), though the western stretch of wall, and both the southwestern and southeastern corners, do not appear to be preserved. The wall segments appear in the magnetometry data as areas of negative magnetic gradient, here represented by a darker colour (Fig. 4). The clarity of definition of individual features is a function of not only size and material, but also how deeply the feature is

buried and the nature of material over and around it. Even though the wall is built of mudbrick, and often surrounded by clay deposits similar in material composition, the compaction of the clay, along with the effects of drying the mudbricks, results in a clear distinction in the gradiometry data. The thickness of the wall was consistent within the magnetometry data, around 5m, but this is in all likelihood the width of the wall near the preserved top. Excavations suggest that the wall was up to 5.95m thick at its base along the eastern wall, and perhaps 8.25m in the southern wall, with evidence for an external stepping in places. Two distinctive features are apparent in the dataset: a northern gateway flanked by two towers of 16 x 8m, and features of just over 10m square, integrated with the external northwest and northeast corners. It is reasonable to assume these were corner towers, mirrored by further towers at the southern corners of the complex. The gateway and parts of one corner tower were partly exposed in excavations. The lack of definition to the wall outline along the southern and western segments also leaves a further question unresolved: were there additional gateways providing access to the enclosure? Zawyet Umm el-Rakham, the closest parallel in terms of layout and period, is provided with only one gateway; the reconstruction favoured here follows this arrangement (Fig. 5). However, a second gate at Kom Firin, in the western or southern wall, would mirror the provision of additional entrances in the contemporary enclosures at Tell Abqa’in near Kom Firin (Thomas 2000, 2002) and Amara West in Upper Nubia (Spencer, P. 1997: 17–19, 33–4, pl. 3). Considering the magnetometry data (Fig. 4) in relation to the present-day appearance of the site, three particular site formation processes can be identified, which have impacted in different ways on distinct parts of the enclosure. The western stretch of wall appears on the survey data as a thick scar, up to 22m wide,2 suggesting that the wall was entirely levelled, down to, or beyond, the first course of bricks. Part of this levelling may have occurred in antiquity, in preparation for a new Late Period temple and processional avenue. This project had already prompted the destruction of brickwork in the northern stretch of the Ramesside wall (Chapter 10; Spencer, N. 2008: 25). It is more probable, however, that the apparent absence of any brick architecture in the western wall stretch is the result of sebakhin-quarrying. The area is rather unremarkable today, with low-lying ground partly covered in halfa-grass, although the surface level rises some 1.5m as one approaches the northwestern tower, suggesting the preservation of significant brickwork here, as confirmed in the magnetometry data. The southern wall, in contrast, survives in significant portions, though cloaked by later deposits, eroded surfaces and especially the three-dimensional ‘moonscape’ left behind at the cessation of large-scale sebakhin-activity (see Spencer, N. 2008: Kom Firin II | 17

Spencer 21­­­­–2 and Chapter 14). That so much of the wall remains, often simply as parts of the external or interior skin of the original structure, is presumably the result of fortuitous timing, namely when sebakh-removal became more regulated or less economically viable. A sequence of site formation processes from foundation to the present day are thus preserved in this area of Kom Firin; the discussion of individual wall segments below presents detailed slices across this history. Following foundation of the wall, presumably upon the natural sand of the Pleistoscene turtleback (Chapter 2), occupation deposits accumulated against the the interior and exterior of the wall. Eventually, rubble from the upper parts of the wall became intermingled with settlement debris, with episodes of large-scale wall collapses suggested by dense concentrations of mudbrick rubble. Yet Kom Firin was occupied for more than a thousand years after this wall was constructed, and later structures were built against and over the remains of the wall. Following a period of abandonment, in the 7th century ad if not earlier, the next dramatic stage of site formation was the quarrying away of the enclosure wall, and to a lesser extent, the surrounding deposits; this sebakhin-activity is largely responsible for the current appearance. The site is not static, of course, and continues to evolve, with the appearance of individual features and areas changing from year to year through natural erosion and increasing levels of human and animal activity. The remainder of the eastern segment, and the entire northern wall of the precinct, are buried and relatively well preserved, as shown through magnetometry survey and excavation. This suggests a different site formation process in this zone. The wall is preserved to several metres in height, though almost entirely buried in deep occupation deposits by the mid-19th century ad. The wall may have been intentionally levelled in preparation for the Late Period temenos (see Fig. 8), with natural erosion and burial under deposits resulting in it escaping the attention of the sebakhin. If the walls had been visible, sebakhin excavation would undoubtedly have targeted the brickwork, given that it lies so close to the canal and the light railway which allowed transport of quarried material. This part of the site thus remains significantly less vulnerable than the southern part of the enclosure, the temple or the Citadel. The southern part of the eastern enclosure wall does not appear clearly in the magnetometry dataset, and the only visible segment is that discussed below (0200). It is possible, however, that the first few courses are preserved in places. The northern gateway Located off-centre along the northern stretch of the enclosure wall, 110m from the northeastern corner (Fig. 5), the twin towers of the entrance gate are the only exposed architectural feature in this area of the site (Pls 4, 6). Both towers are approximately 16 x 8m in plan, with a 5m passage between them, ample space for chariots to pass through. It is unknown why the gateway was positioned off-centre, aligned with a temple apparently constructed at the same time; local topographic variation or an earlier structure may have been factors. The eastern tower, better defined in the magnetometry data, is now an eroded mass of brown-grey mudbrick with grass growing on its lower slopes; the roots of the halfa-grass were often encountered as deep as 2.4m beneath ground level. 18 | Kom Firin II

Its highest point stands over 5m above the surrounding ground or 7.76m from its foundation level (Pl. 5); the western tower stands just over 1m above the modern surface and was not investigated in our excavations. Two sets of trenches were located against the eastern tower, to ground-truth the geophysical data. Trench TJ (3 x 2m), against the southern (interior) face of the eastern tower, extended down to natural sand, and thus provided a stratigraphic sequence of deposits accumulated against the southern face (Figs 14, 16). The top of the natural sand (0205) here lies at level 1.13 and is characteristically clean, finegrained and moist from the nearby water table;3 this sand is equivalent to that identified, through augering, as belonging to the Pleistoscene turtleback (Chapter 2; Fig. 9; e.g. AS06). The gatetower itself (0152-0169) was built directly upon this sand – thus the walled complex was founded on previously unoccupied land (Pls 7–8) – seemingly without a foundation trench, a situation that mirrors the construction techniques identified in the temple (Spencer, N. 2008: 37), but also the eastern enclosure wall (0326; see Fig. 12). The bricks used in the eastern tower consisted of examples in a variety of clays, including grey-brown, sandy yellow and a distinctive mixture of the two clays within single bricks (38–43 x 14–20 x 9–12cm). This variety is consistent with the brickwork in the temple. Along the gate passage, well-preserved brickwork, with a row of headers, defined the edge of the eastern tower (0169; Fig. 16; Pls 9, 11). Above this, the brickwork was badly eroded, creating a west-facing slope (Pl. 5), though at least 18 courses were distinct within the trench confines (Fig. 13), covered in places with a deposit of compacted, partly articulated, brick collapse (0168). This rubble had undoubtedly fallen from higher up the tower, given that the dimensions are identical to those bricks still in situ. Above this collapse lay loose, crumbly brown silt layers (0141-0150-0176), up to 128cm thick, including a significant proportion of brick rubble, which could derive from either gatetower. Lenses of windblown sand, interleaved between layers of brick rubble, reflect intervals of time between collapse episodes. The ceramic assemblage in these rubble deposits was dominated by Third Intermediate Period forms, though a number of Late Period (C280 [Fig. 56]), Ptolemaic (C238, C239 [Fig. 56], C287 [Fig. 52], C344 [Fig. 57]) and Roman (C286 [Fig. 57]) sherds confirmed the interpretation of a long and gradual decay of the gateway tower; the upper (later) deposits seem to contain a higher proportion of late first millennium bc sherds (e.g. C230 [Fig. 52], C231 in 0141). The mass of brickwork in these towers, even in their current state of preservation, would have been prominent features within the later temple enclosures (Fig. 6; see Chapter 10). Artefacts found in the rubble included small fragments of lapis lazuli (F100), pieces of copper alloy (including F103) and, in one of the upper layers, a ceramic cobra figurine (F147 [Pl. 121]). The most interesting feature of these deposits, however, was the mass of limestone rubble encountered, concentrated in the middle of the exposed area. The majority were small (

< Section set back 14cm

[0877]

[0684]

Phase E-VI

Phase E-IV

Phase E-V

Phase E-III

[0877]

bricks [0780]

2m

sample of deposits recorded 1.70m east of the section line

[0447]

[0449]

[0545]

[0763]

[0577]

[0546]

[0564]

[0778]

[0548]

Oven/kiln [0499]

Room 0915

Figure 35 Trench EC: section across kiln 0499 and associated deposits. For location see Fig. 31.

0

South E14

[0776]

4.19

2.44

Room 0914

Phase E-II

3.13

Figure 34 Trench EC: north-facing section across south side of room 0879. For location see Figs 24, 25, 28 and 29.

0

East E12

ceramic

[0899]

2.99

[0684]

4.07

Section set back 18cm >

[0559]

[0840]

[0853]

[0780]

[0302]

Oven debris [0450]

[0900]

[0913]

[0898]

[0889]

[0877]

[0840]

North E15

dark brown, high silt content

charcoal

medium brown silt and clay

light brown clay and brick rubble

Phase E-VII

Phase E-I

Enclosure wall [0307]

4.31

Section set back 10cm >

limestone

[0880]

Section set back 14cm >

sand lense

2.87

[0855]

West E13

Ramesside enclosure figures

Ramesside enclosure figures

North E18

South E19

C816 C817

[0707]

0

25cm

Figure 36 Trench EE: section across feature 0707. For location see Fig. 49.

West E6

Room 0915

East E7

Room 0914

Kiln [0499] [2204] [2257] sandy plaster

[2255] [2256]

3.25

Wall cut prior to construction of [0757]

[0853]

[2258]

[0763] 2.90

[0880]

2.96

Silo [0757]

[0897]

[0882]

[0889]

[0895] [0895]

0

2m

Phase E-II

Phase E-VI

Phase E-V

Phase E-VII

Figure 37 Trench EC: section across room 0914 and later room 0915 with kiln 0499. For location see Figs 24, 29, 30 and 31.

87 | Kom Firin II

88 | Kom Firin II

[2219]

2m

Pavement [2236]

[2212]

Pavement [2227]

not further excavated

[2253]

[2232]

[2230]

[2214]

[2200]

2m

[2263]

[2253]

[2280]

[2229]

2.29

[2285]

Floor [2283]

not further excavated

Floor [2283]

Room 2251

Figure 39 Trench ED: north–south profile across room 2251. For location see Figs 24, 28, 29, 30 and 31.

0

South E22

Figure 38 Trench ED: east–west profile across room 2251. For location see Figs 25, 28, 29, 30 and 31.

0

West E20

[2263]

[2261]

[2239]

3.51

[2249]

[2210]

[2267]

[2263]

[2266]

2.96

[2262]

[2279]

[2281]

[2263]

[0302]

[2260]

not further excavated

[2246]

Phase E-VI Phase E-VII

Phase E-II Phase E-IV

[2200]

North E23

Phase E-V

Enclosure wall [0307]

[2206]

Phase E-I

Phase E-VII

Phase E-IV Phase E-V

Phase E-VI

[2282]

[2253]

[2249]

3.70

[2221]

Phase E-III

Room 2290

Floor [2283]

Room 2251

4.05

East E21

Ramesside enclosure figures

[2280]

[2229]

3.48

[2221]

1m

Socket F801

[2206]

not further excavated

[2242]

[2222]

[2207]

Phase E-VII

Phase E-IV Phase E-V

Phase E-VI

Phase E-III

2.87

[0855]

Figure 40 Trench EC: section across walls 2221 and 0855, with associated deposits. For location see Figs 28, 30 and 31.

0

West E24

[0547]

[0900]

[0898]

[0889]

[0880]

[0878]

[0869]

[0854]

[0853]

[0545]

3.31

pit [0905]

[0904]

pit [0886]

(set back 22cm) >

E25

[0885]

[0878]

pit [0886]

[0880]

[0763]

pit [0905]

[0900]

[0898]

[0889]

East E26

Ramesside enclosure figures

Kom Firin II | 89

90 | Kom Firin II

[2242]

[2222]

[2200]

2m

[2274]

3.68

[0771]

3.45

[0545]

1m

[0901]

Socket F800

[2273]

[2272]

[0853]

[2214]

3.91

3.29

[2264]

[2232]

[2230]

[2200]

[0776]

[2233]

Figure 42 Trench EC–ED: north facing section showing wall 0776 built over 2264 and 2266. For location see Figs 30 and 31.

0

East E29

Figure 41 Trench ED: south baulk. For location see Figs 25, 29 and 30.

0

[0855]

3.24

East E27

[2212]

[2271]

[2222]

[2206]

[2226] on this section is the remains of the wall’s south face, the remainder having been removed with wall [2221] (walls 0776 and 2206 are later)

[2266]

[2217]

[2236]

[2200]

Phase E-VII

Phase E-VI

[2221]

West E30

Phase E-VI

Phase E-V

Phase E-III

West E28

Ramesside enclosure figures

Ramesside enclosure figures

North E31

South E32

[2221]

3.16

[2229] [2249]

[2239]

Room 2251 [2253] [2261]

Floor [2283]

[2282] [2263] 2.30

[2285]

0

1m

Phase E-II

Phase E-IV

Phase E-III

Phase E-VI

Figure 43 Trench ED: elevation of east side of room 2251. For location see Figs 25, 28 and 30.

West E33

East E34 excavated in previous season

[0545] excavated in previous season

[2226]

[0771]

Oven [2211]

[0909] 3.42

[2234]

Silo [2287]

2.94

[0901]

[0901]

[0910]

0

1m

Phase E-II Phase E-VI Phase E-VII

Figure 44 Trench EC, section across oven 2211, above earlier phase E-II silo. For location see Figs 24, 30 and 31.

Kom Firin II | 91

Ramesside enclosure figures South E35

North E36

walls 2281 and 2279 set back 24cm from section line

[2281] Wall [2229] 3.08

[2239] Wall [2280]

[2279] 2.76

[2262] [2253]

Room 2251

Floor [2283]

[2261]

2.50

[2263] 2.26

[2285]

0

1m

Phase E-II

Phase E-V

Phase E-IV

Phase E-VI

Figure 45 Trench ED: elevation of west side of room 2251. For location see Figs 25, 28, 29 and 30. South E37

North E38 paving [2217] [2200]

Cut [2203] [2200]

3.56

[2202]

[0307]

[2213] [2219]

0

2m

Phase E-I Phase E-VI

Figure 46 Trench ED, west baulk. For location see Fig. 30. East E39

West E40

[0550] [0675]

[0550]

[0691]

[0674-0688-0699]

[0806]

4.57

[0672] [0716]

[0800]

0

[0683]

Door socket F658

[0673]

Enclosure wall [0306]

Phase E-I

Reed impressions [0701]

Phase E-VII Phase E-VIII/IX

2m

Figure 47 Trench EE, south baulk. For location see Fig. 49.

North E41

South E42

clay floor [0703]

[0695]

[0695]

sand [0696]

4.20

[0693]

[0714]

sand [0710]

0

92 | Kom Firin II

[0693]

2m

clay floor [0715]

Phase E-VI

Figure 48 Trench EE, section across silo 0693. For location see Fig. 49.

Ramesside enclosure figures

N

[0684]

4.32

4.05

4.39

[0671] Socket F659

brickwork not preserved; beneath foundation level

Pit [2301]

individual brickwork not visible

[0685]

Mortar F662

[0709]

Room 0917

4.55

Socket F661

[0711]

4.28

Pit [0702]

4.36

E41 4.20

Pit [2303]

[0682] 4.20

[0686]

Silo [0693]

Room 0631

4.10

Enclosure wall [0306]

3.75

Floor [0715] limestone

[0687] 4.38

E18

[0629] C816

3.86

C922

Ceramic installation [0707]

[0677]

E42 [0711]

C817

E19

4.43

[0679] [0675]

4.39

4.62

original plaster facing of wall 0306 preserved

[0690]

[0692] [0718] possible doorway? 3.89

mortar line

[0683]

[0689] [0689]

[0716]

face of 0306 eroded back

Room 0630

4.41

4.60

[0672]

Pit [2302]

walls poorly defined, visible in section

[0673]

Reed impressions [0701]

Enclosure wall [0306]

[0806]

[0675]

E40

4.57

4.31

0

2m

Door socket F658

E39

4.84

4.95

Phase E-I

Phase E-VII

Phase E-V

Phase E-VIII/IX

Phase E-VI

Figure 49 Trench EE: multi-phase plan.

Kom Firin II | 93

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 4 Remains of Ramesside temple (foreground) with gateway in background (eastern tower, 0169). View north.

Plate 5 Ramesside gate, after excavation against eastern tower (0169, right). Temple in low-lying ground behind. View south.

Plate 6 Eastern tower of Ramesside gateway (brickwork 0169) after excavation. View east.

94 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 7 South face of eastern gatetower (0152), with natural sand (0205) at base, under scale. View north.

Plate 8 South face of eastern gatetower (0152), with natural sand (0205) at base, and spur walls 0204 (left) and 0178 (right). View north.

Plate 9 Eastern tower of Ramesside gateway (brickwork 0169), with deposit 0176 under scale. View north.

Plate 10 Preserved top and exterior face of eastern wall (0326) of Ramesside enclosure, with plastered face. Natural sand 0497 at base of trench, and wall 0399 in foreground. View east.

Kom Firin II | 95

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 11 Eastern face of gate passage, with brickwork 0169 in foreground, and deposit 0150 under scale. West at top.

Plate 12 Detail of first course of bricks in eastern gatetower (0152), with natural sand (0205) at base, and spur walls 0204 (left) and 0178 (right). View north.

Plate 13 East-facing section showing deposits accumulated against the south face of the eastern gatetower (0152, to right).

96 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 14 Trench TO. View north.

Plate 15 Illicit excavation northwest of Ramesside gateway, prior to 2007 season. View to east.

Plate 16 Pedestal of archaeological deposits, collapsed prior to 2007 season. View west, with eastern gatetower in background (0169).

Kom Firin II | 97

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 17 Northeast corner of Ramesside enclosure, with north wall (0307), buttress (0311) and later brickwork (0304). View northwest.

Plate 18 Northeast corner of Ramesside enclosure, with rooms built against interior face. View west.

Plate 19 Rooms 0309 (left) and 0312 (right) against inner face of northern wall of Ramesside enclosure. View south.

98 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 20 Preserved surface of eastern wall (0326) of Ramesside enclosure, with Late Period wall segment 0600 on horizon. View north.

Plate 21 Segment 0200 of eastern wall of Ramesside enclosure, with plaster facing (0191). View south.

Plate 22 General view of preserved segment (0200) of eastern enclosure wall and deposits against exterior, after cleaning. View southeast.

Kom Firin II | 99

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 23 Exterior of eastern wall (0326), with plastered face. Natural sand 0497 under scale. View east.

Plate 24 Exterior of eastern wall (0326) of Ramesside enclosure, with plastered face. Natural sand 0497 under scale, and wall 0399 in foreground. View east.

Plate 25 Trench EB at end of excavations. Section illustrates deposits accumulated against exterior of Ramesside enclosure wall (0326, foreground right). View southeast.

Plate 26 Deposit 0581 (trench EB) with half-sectioned pits or post-holes (0584, 0586, 0590, 0592, 0394) in foreground. View east.

100 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 27 Sondage showing corner of eastern wall (0306, left) and northeastern corner tower (0311) of Ramesside enclosure. View northwest.

Plate 28 Brickwork 0304 built over northeastern corner tower (0311, foreground) of Ramesside enclosure. View west.

Plate 29 Interface between Ramesside enclosure wall (0306, 0307), northeastern corner tower (0311) and later brickwork (0304). View west; see Fig. 11.

Kom Firin II | 101

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 30 North-facing section showing deposits accumulated against exterior of Ramesside enclosure wall (0326, right). Natural sand 0497 at base of excavation. See Fig. 12.

Plate 31 North-facing section showing deposits accumulated outside Ramesside enclosure wall, including concentrations of brick rubble. Natural sand 0497 at base of excavation. See Fig. 12.

Plate 32 North-facing section showing large cut 0330. See Fig. 12.

102 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 33 First courses of later temenos wall (0327) above deposits accumulated outside Ramesside enclosure. Large cut 0330 visible in cross-section. See Fig. 12.

Plate 34 Detail of wall 0399, with deposits 0398 (right) and 0486 (left). South at top.

Plate 35 Pit 0342, with deposit 0343 under scale. Enclosure wall (0326) to right. View south.

Kom Firin II | 103

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 36 Segment 0500 of southern wall of Ramesside enclosure, with rubble deposits above, and later wall 0511. View west.

Plate 37 Segment 0528 of southern wall of Ramesside enclosure, with deposits against exterior face (to left). View west.

Plate 38 Segment 0626 of southern wall of Ramesside enclosure, including south exterior face. View west.

104 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 39 View east along remnants of southern wall of Ramesside enclosure segments 0607 (left) and 0627 (right), with projecting brickwork (0613) to right.

Plate 40 East-facing section of wall 0613 (left) and addition 0636 (right). Segment of southern wall of Ramesside enclosure visible background left.

Plate 41 South face of brickwork 0636, added to the projection of the Ramesside wall (0613), visible in background.

Kom Firin II | 105

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 42 Segment 0614 of southern wall of Ramesside enclosure; segments 0500 and 0528 in background. View west.

Plate 43 Segment 0617 of southern wall of Ramesside enclosure, including south exterior face. View east.

Plate 44 Segment 0615 of southern wall of Ramesside enclosure. View west.

106 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 45 Segment 0617 of southern wall of Ramesside enclosure. View west.

Plate 46 Storage jar exposed during illicit digging, west of Ramesside temple.

Plate 47 Room 0309, with walls 0302 (right), 0303 (back) and 0308 (left); floor 0305 under scale. View west.

Kom Firin II | 107

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 48 Room 0312: deposit 0315, with walls 0302 (left) and 0303 (back). View east.

Plate 49 View east over trenches EC and ED at end of 2008 season, with north wall (0307) of Ramesside enclosure to left.

Plate 50 View south over trenches EC and EE, with north wall (0307) of Ramesside enclosure under scale.

108 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 51 Room 0312 (with room 0309 through door at end), against enclosure wall 0307 (left). View east.

Plate 52 Phases E-I and E-II architecture built against enclosure wall 0307. View south.

Plate 53 Room 0879 (foreground) and 0914 (left). View east.

Kom Firin II | 109

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 54 Rooms 0879 (top left), 0915 (top right) and 0914 (foreground). View southwest.

Plate 55 Room 0879: with silo 0864 (phase E-III) and later oven 0861. View south.

Plate 56 Room 2251, with earlier architecture (wall 2285) beneath. View east.

110 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 57 Room 0914, with silo 0739 in foreground (phase E-IV), gateway (0654, 0764; phase E-V) and later silo (0757, phase E-VI). View south.

Plate 58 Room 0914 (with silo 0739) against Ramesside enclosure wall (0307), with suite of phase E-VII rooms (0309, 0573, 0574) behind. View east.

Plate 59 Room 0914, with silo 0739 (floor 0876), and later silo 0757 behind. View south.

Kom Firin II | 111

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 60 Room 0879 with brick rubble (0889) and later walls.

Plate 61 Room 0879: silo 0864, with oven 0861. View north.

Plate 62 Room 2251: vessels C4018 (back) and C4019 in occupation deposit 2253. View north.

112 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 63 Room 0915: kiln 0499, and room 2251 beyond. View west.

Plate 64 Room 2286: vessels C4049–4054 and column base F824, within deposit 2278. View south.

Plate 65 Room 0631: ceramic installation 0707, set against wall 0686 (foreground). East at top.

Kom Firin II | 113

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 66 Room 0631: detail of ceramic installation 0707. View west.

Plate 67 Room 0631: detail of ceramic installation 0707. View northeast.

Plate 68 Room 0631: ceramic installation 0707, set against wall 0686 (left). Silo 0693, with floor 0715 visible to right. View north.

114 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 69 Room 0631: detail of ceramic installation 0707. West at top.

Plate 70 Room 0630, with wall 0675 in foreground, built against eastern wall (0306) of Ramesside enclosure. View west.

Plate 71 Trench EE: general view, with ceramic installation 0707 in room 0631, and rooms 0630 (left) and 0917 (right) in foreground. View west.

Kom Firin II | 115

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 72 Room 0914: circular silo (0757) of phase E-VI, cut into brickwork of phase E-V doorway (0654–0763). View east.

Plate 73 Room 0914: with silo 0739 (floor 0876), and later silo 0757 to left. View west, with room 0915 behind (kiln 0499).

Plate 74 Room 0914: silo 0757, with deposit 0894 under scale. View northeast.

116 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 75 Room 0915: kiln 0499, with oven 2211 in foreground. Room 2251 to right. View south.

Plate 76 Room 0631: silo 0693 with sand 0696 and ash 0695 within. View east.

Plate 77 Room 0630: reed-impressions (0701). North at top.

Kom Firin II | 117

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 78 Wall 0776 in section, with wall 2266 in foreground. View south.

Plate 79 Room 2251: with successive wall phases. View east.

Plate 80 Room 0309: kohl-container F217 and amulet F210 as found in northwest corner, in deposit 0301. View west.

118 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 81 Wall 0303 (under scale) between rooms 0312 (left) and 0309. North wall (0307) of Ramesside enclosure in background. View north.

Plate 82 Suite of rooms (left–right: 0309, 0573, 0574) with space 0312 in foreground. View east.

Plate 83 Suite of rooms (front to back: 0309, 0573, 0574) with space 0312 to right. View southeast.

Kom Firin II | 119

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 84 Suite of rooms (left–right: 0574, 0573, 0309) with space 0312 beyond, and north wall of Ramesside enclosure (0307) to right. View west.

Plate 85 Room 0915: kiln 0499, during excavation. View west.

Plate 86 Room 0915: kiln 0499 after excavation, with surface 0778. View south.

120 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure plates

Plate 87 Pit 2216, with pottery, east of wall 2212 and feature 2210. View north.

Plate 88 Pit 2224, with deposit 2220 containing pottery (C4005, C4007, C4010–4013). View south, with brick feature 2210 in background.

Kom Firin II | 121

Ramesside enclosure ceramics

c4062

Plate 89 Pottery recovered from deposit 2278 in room 2286 (clockwise from top left): C4064, C4074, C4073, C4063, C4050 and C4052.

c4050

c4052

c4063

c4080

c4076

c4049

c4078 c4073

c4074

c4079 c4068

c4075

Figure 50 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Assemblage from room 2286 (deposit 2278; phase E–V). All 1:4.

122 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure ceramics

Plate 90 Pottery recovered from pit fill 2220 (clockwise from top left): C4017, C4009, C4012 and C4011.

c4015

c4010 c4009

c4013

c4012

c4011

c4005

c4014

Figure 51 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Assemblage from pit fill 2220 (Phase E–VII). All 1:4.

Kom Firin II | 123

Ramesside enclosure ceramics c230

c287 c332

Figure 52 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Imported amphorae of later date found around the northern gate of Ramesside enclosure.

c813

c4032

c825

c918

c4072

c883

c309

c778

c603

c818

c4027

c889 c339

c740

c4041

c4057

c917

c895

c4067

c832

Figure 53 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Bowls, goblets and dishes. All 1:4.

124 | Kom Firin II

c4002

c856

Ramesside enclosure ceramics c866

c746

c229

c620

c505

c693

c295

c335

c524

c530 c525

c532

c531

c593

c600

c654

95 c867

c445

c4123

c714

Figure 54 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Bowls (carinated, with everted or rolled rims). All 1:4.

Kom Firin II | 125

Ramesside enclosure ceramics c835

c801

c888

c338

c538

c625

c699

c700

c708

c913

c4030

c533

Figure 55 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Bowls (carinated or with cord decoration). All 1:4.

126 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure ceramics

c623

c844

c865

c4026

c4045

c707

c847

c280

c868

c337

c516

c4031

c294

c607

c613

c841

c679

c285 c239

Figure 56 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Bowls (with ledge rims), vases with moulded rims and shallow trays. All 1:4.

Kom Firin II | 127

Ramesside enclosure ceramics c770

c657

c4034

c870

c336

c4016

c4064 c812

c874

c4047

c233

c849

c573

c344

c666

c879

c289

c4058

c897

c491

c588

c754

c829

c705

c904

c4043

c219

c286

c894

c321

c278

c4077 c764 c500

c595

Figure 57 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Miniature pots, beakers, flasks and wide-mouthed jars. All 1:4.

128 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure ceramics c877 c850

c284

c457

c490 c228

c334

c496

c880

c624

c535

c598

c704

c5000

c4025

c702

c635

c737

c809

Figure 58 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Globular jars, beer jars, jugs and storage jars. All 1:4.

Kom Firin II | 129

Ramesside enclosure ceramics

c891

c507

c513

c499

c594

c734

c884

c843

c898

c1016

c4018

c4059

c4004

Figure 59 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Storage jars. All 1:4.

130 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure ceramics c851

c4006

c534

c763

c777

Figure 60 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Storage jars and amphorae. All 1:4.

Kom Firin II | 131

Ramesside enclosure ceramics c916

c512

c780

c846

c882

c1015

c682

c487

c4001

c4089

c885 c616

c242

c506 c4056 c456

Figure 61 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Egyptian and imported jugs and amphorae. All 1:4.

132 | Kom Firin II

c241

Ramesside enclosure ceramics

c816

c817

c922

Figure 62 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Pot-stands from installation 0707 (see Fig. 36).

c596

c597

c838

c741

c757

c802

c520

c288

c815

Figure 63 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Imported amphorae, lamp and spinning bowl. All 1:4.

Kom Firin II | 133

Ramesside enclosure ceramics

c819

c771

c521 c659

c655 c4029 c660

Figure 64 Ceramics from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Decorated pottery and satyr-appliqué. All 1:4.

134 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure finds F219 F681 F740

F831

F131 F539

F554

F737

F787

Figure 65 Finds from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Cobra figurines. All 1:2.

Kom Firin II | 135

Ramesside enclosure finds F204 F522

F413

F609 F718

F822

F446

Figure 66 Finds from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Cobra figurines. All 1:2.

136 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure finds F391

F732

F361

F574

F755

F325

Figure 67 Finds from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Cobra figurines. All 1:2.

F197

F686

F741

F198 F438 F596

F690 F770

Figure 68 Finds from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Ceramic figurines. All 1:2.

Kom Firin II | 137

Ramesside enclosure finds

F124

F117

F828

F316

F845

F520

Figure 69 Finds from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Firedogs, spindle-whorls, bobbin (?), gaming board (?) and rattles (?). All 1:2.

138 | Kom Firin II

F562

Ramesside enclosure finds

F573

F769

F444

F115

Figure 70 Finds from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Architectural fittings and reliefs. All 1:2.

Kom Firin II | 139

Ramesside enclosure finds F658

F216

F688

F803

F804 F721

Figure 71 Finds from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Architectural fittings. All 1:4, with the exception of F804 (1:2).

140 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure finds

F445

F826

F559

F676

F180 F164

F442

F731

–

F754

F789

– Figure 72 Finds from the Ramesside enclosure including material of later date. Mortar, flint tools, amulets, scarab and faience vessels. All 1:2 with the exception of F180, F442 and F676 (all 1:1).

Kom Firin II | 141

Ramesside enclosure ceramics

Plate 91 C4068 bowl with handles (left; ED 2237); and C4056 blue-painted jar.

Plate 92 C4028 (left; ED 2214) and C469 (NA 0433) Levantine and Cypriot sherds.

Plate 93 C801 (EC 0644) Carinated bowl.

Plate 94 C4007 (ED 2220) Pilgrim flask.

Plate 95 C4079 (ED 2278) Jar.

Plate 96 C534 (EA 0301) Storage jar.

142 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure ceramics

Plate 97 C771 (EC 0576) Bowl.

Plate 98 C813 (EE 0707) Carinated bowl.

Plate 100 C802 (EC 0595) Stamp impression upon amphora handle (enlarged detail above).

Plate 101 C841 (ED 2201). Applied pomegranate decor on tray.

Plate 99 C819 (EC 0740) Iron I decorated bowl.

Kom Firin II | 143

Ramesside enclosure ceramics

Plate 102 Fabric section of vessel C240.

Plate 103 Fabric section of vessel C561.

Plate 104 Fabric section of vessel C584.

Plate 105 Fabric section of vessel C605.

Plate 106 Fabric section of vessel C598.

Plate 107 Fabric section of vessel C610.

Plate 108 Fabric section of vessel C609.

Plate 109 Fabric section of vessel C617.

Plate 110 Fabric section of vessel C621.

Plate 111 Fabric section of vessel C682.

Plate 112 Fabric section of vessel C838.

Plate 113 Fabric section of vessel C849.

Plate 114 Fabric section of vessel C882.

Plate 115 Fabric section of vessel C898.

144 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 116 F084 (TJ 0161) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 117 F130 (TJ 0161) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 118 F085 (TJ 0161) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 119 F219 (EA 0300) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 120 F131 (TJ 0161) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 121 F147 (TI 0141) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 122 F204 (EA 0300) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 123 F125 (TJ 0161) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 124 F220 (EA 0300) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 125 F221 (EA 0300) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 126 F222 (EA 0300) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 127 F223 (EA 0300) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Kom Firin II | 145

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 128 F310 (EB 0322) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 129 F361 (EC 0447) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 130 F446 (EE 0671) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 131 F391 (EC 0449) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 132 F413 (EE 0550) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 133 F522 (EE 0671) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 134 F539 (EC 0576) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 135 F554 (EC 0577) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 136 F564 (EC 0577) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 137 F574 (EE 0699) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 138 F673 (ED 2200) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 140 F681 (ED 2200) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 141 F718 (ED 2202) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 139 F609 (EC, surface near trench) Fired clay cobra figurine.

146 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 142 F732 (EC 0841) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 143 F737 (ED 2214) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 144 F739 (EC 0546) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 145 F740 (ED 2213) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 146 F742 (EC 0841) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 147 F766 (EC 0869) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 148 F768 (EC 2232) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 149 F831 (EC 0900) Fired clay cobra figurine (?).

Plate 150 F787 (ED 2249) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 151 F755 (ED 2214) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 152 F822 (EC 0889) Fired clay cobra figurine.

Plate 153 F596 (EC 0645) Fired clay quadruped figurine.

Kom Firin II | 147

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 154 F140 (TM 0188) Fired clay human figurine (?).

Plate 156 F198 (EA 0300) Fired clay quadruped figurine.

Plate 157 F646 (EC 0646) Fired clay figurine.

Plate 158 F770 (ED 2237) Fired clay goose/duck figurine.

Plate 159 F690 (EC, cleaning) Fired clay bird figurine.

Plate 160 F741 (ED 2215) Fired clay quadruped figurine.

Plate 161 F686 (ED 2201) Fired clay quadruped figurine.

Plate 162 F208 (EA 0300) Ceramic artefact.

Plate 163 F438 (EC 0558) Fired clay model or impression of a human right foot.

Plate 164 F438 (EC 0558) Fired clay model or impression of a human right foot (underside).

Plate 165 F520 (EC 0547) Ceramic rattle (?).

Plate 166 F774 (EC 0756) Ceramic artefact.

Plate 167 F827 (ED 2278) Ceramic bobbin.

Plate 168 F828 (ED 2278) Ceramic bobbin.

148 | Kom Firin II

Plate 155 F197 (EA 0300) Fired clay quadruped figurine.

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 169 F845 (EA 0300) Ceramic gaming-board (?).

Plate 170 F562 (EE 0680) Ceramic rattle (?).

Plate 172 F439 (EC 0462) Ceramic artefact.

Plate 171 F670 (EC 0760) Fired clay socket (?).

Plate 173 F117 (TJ 0161) Ceramic firedog.

Plate 175 F124 (TJ 0161) Ceramic firedog.

Plate 176 F837 (ED 2214) Ceramic firedog.

Plate 177 F203 (EA 0300) Ceramic firedog (?).

Plate 179 F844 (EC 0558) Ceramic firedog.

Plate 180 F744 (ED 2215) Ceramic firedog.

Plate 181 F738 (ED 2202) Ceramic firedog.

Plate 174 F719 (ED 2201) Ceramic firedog.

Plate 178 F214 (EA 0300) Ceramic firedog (?).

Kom Firin II | 149

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 182 Ceramic net-floats from the Ramesside enclosure (left–right) F441, F181 and F202.

Plate 183 Ceramic counters from the Ramesside enclosure (left–right, top– bottom) F799, F832, F834; F695, F680, F810; F797, F743, F796, F806, F749; F805, F808, F811, F412, F836, F835; F791, F807, F809, F561, F692, F207 and F760.

Plate 185 F201 (EA 0300) Limestone artefact.

150 | Kom Firin II

Plate 186 F444 Limestone architectural fragment.

Plate 184 Spindle-whorls from the Ramesside enclosure: (left–right, top– bottom) F854, F793, F753; F833, F794, F792, F665; F206, F771, F795, F696 and F639.

Plate 187 F443 (EC 0450) Limestone column base.

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 188 F484 (EE 0565) Limestone doorsocket.

Plate 191 F573 (EC 0593) Limestone architectural (?) fragment.

Plate 189 F537 (EC 0576) Quartzite grindstone.

Plate 192 F541 (EE 0680) Limestone column base.

Plate 190 F631 (EC 0658) Limestone weight/tool/ implement.

Plate 193 F659 (EE 0680) Limestone door-socket.

Plate 194 F661 (EE 0711) Limestone door-socket.

Plate 195 F658 (EE 0716) Limestone door-socket.

Plate 196 F688 (ED 2200) Limestone door-socket.

Plate 197 F721 (ED 2209) Limestone door-socket.

Plate 198 F748 (ED 2214) Limestone door-socket.

Plate 199 F769 (ED 2237) Limestone door-socket.

Plate 200 F801 (ED 2242) Limestone architectural fragment, reused as door-socket.

Kom Firin II | 151

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 201 F800 (EC/ED 2273) Limestone door-socket.

Plate 202 F803 (EC 0889) Limestone door-socket.

Plate 204 F839 (EC/ED 2214) Limestone architectural fragment.

Plate 207 F357 (EC 0447) Granite vessel (?).

152 | Kom Firin II

Plate 205 F215 (EA 0300) Limestone mortar.

Plate 208 F384 (EC 0449) Limestone vessel.

Plate 211 F662 (EE 0711) Limestone mortar (?).

Plate 203 F804 (EC 0880) Limestone artefact.

Plate 209 F445 Limestone mortar.

Plate 212 F362 (EC 0447) Quartzite smoother/ rubber.

Plate 206 F205 (EA 0300) Limestone mortar (?).

Plate 210 F802 (EC 0854) Limestone mortar (or door-socket?).

Plate 213 F395 (EC 0449) Limestone weight.

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 214 F121 (TJ 0151) Granodiorite smoother/weight/pounder.

Plate 215 F122 (TJ 0151) Quartzite rubber/smoother.

Plate 216 F123 (TJ 0151) Quartzite tool/implement.

Plate 217 F182 (EA 0300) Granodiorite pounder, pestle.

Plate 218 F188 (EA 0300) Granodiorite artefact.

Plate 219 F211 (EA 0300) Red granite artefact

Plate 220 F213 (EA 0300) Flint nodule.

Plate 221 F235 (EA 0300) Quartzite smoother/rubber.

Plate 222 F238 (EA 0300) Limestone weight/pounder.

Plate 223 F239 (EA 0301) Limestone artefact.

Plate 224 F385 (EC 0449) Granodiorite smoother/rubber.

Plate 225 F416 (EC 0546) Red granite grindstone (?).

Plate 226 F411 (EC 0456) Limestone tool/implement.

Plate 227 F469 (EE 0671) Quartzite tool/implement.

Plate 228 F470 (EE 0671) Limestone tool/implement.

Kom Firin II | 153

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 229 F477 (EC 0558) Limestone architectural fragment.

Plate 230 F549 (EC 0576) Granodiorite smoother/rubber/ pounder.

Plate 231 F458 (EE 0671) Limestone weight/tool/ implement.

Plate 232 F565 (EC 0579) Granodiorite smoother/pounder/ grinder.

Plate 233 F566 (EC 0577) Limestone grindstone.

Plate 234 F503 (EE 0671) Granodiorite smoother/ rubber/pounder.

Plate 235 F543 (EC 0567) Quartzite grindstone.

Plate 236 F555 (EC 0576) Limestone pounder.

Plate 237 F630 (EC 0658) Limestone weight/tool/implement.

Plate 239 F655 (EC 0649) Sandstone smoother/ rubber.

Plate 240 F656 (EC 0711) Quartzite grinding-stone.

Plate 242 F674 (ED 2200) Quartzite smoother.

Plate 243 F757 (EC 0863) Granodiorite smoother/ rubber/grinder.

154 | Kom Firin II

Plate 238 F734 (ED 2202) Granodiorite smoother/rubber/ grinder.

Plate 241 F660 (EE 0707) Limestone weight.

Plate 244 F782 (ED 2226) Quartzite grindstone.

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 245 F786 (ED 2222) Limestone doorsocket.

Plate 246 F812 (EC 0898) Limestone weight/ pounder.

Plate 247 F817 (ED 2253) Granite artefact.

Plate 248 F824 (ED 2278) Limestone column base.

Plate 249 F825 (EC 0900) Granodiorite artefact.

Plate 250 F838 (EC 0909) Limestone pounder (?).

Plate 251 F841 (ED 2202) Quartzite artefact.

Plate 252 F216 (EA 0300) Limestone doorsocket.

Plate 253 F544 (EC 0576) Plastered limestone artefact.

Plate 256 F613 (EC 0599) Limestone artefact.

Plate 254 F115 (TI 0150) Limestone relief fragments.

Plate 255 F144 Limestone figurine of a lioness.

Plate 257 F502 (EE 0671) Limestone tool/ implement.

Kom Firin II | 155

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 258 F151 (TI) Limestone artefact.

Plate 259 F189 (EA 0300) Limestone artefact.

Plate 260 F228 (EA 0300) Sandstone artefact.

Plate 261 F236 (EA 0300) Granodiorite sculpture/architecture.

Plate 262 F316 (EB 0339) Limestone spindle-whorl.

Plate 263 F415 (EC 0546) Limestone weight/tool/implement.

Plate 264 F347 Limestone artefact.

Plate 265 F563 (EC 0577) Sandstone artefact.

Plate 266 F723 (ED 2201) Limestone mould.

Plate 267 F731 (ED 2202) Slate palette.

Plate 268 F186 (EA 0300) Flint tool/ implement.

Plate 269 F194 (EA 0300) Flint blade.

Plate 270 F319 (EB 0338) Flint tool/ implement.

Plate 271 F397 (EC 0548) Flint arrow-head.

Plate 272 F814 (EC 0898) Flint knife.

156 | Kom Firin II

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 273 F826 (ED 2263) Flint tool/ implement.

Plate 274 F559 (EE 0580) Flint tool/implement.

Plate 275 Beads from the Ramesside enclosure: (left–right, top–bottom) F727, F679, F519, F481; F227, F209, F224; F256, F767 and F725.

Plate 277 F210 (EA 0301) Faience amulet.

Plate 278 F076 (TJ 0161) Faience amulet.

Plate 276 F217 (EA 0301) Faience cosmetic vessel.

Plate 279 F309 (EB 0322) Faience bead.

Kom Firin II | 157

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 280 F180 (EA 0300) Faience amulet of a lioness.

Plate 283 F442 (EC 0558) Faience amulet.

Plate 287 F146 (TO 0206) Faience lid (?).

158 | Kom Firin II

Plate 281 F324 (TI 0150) Limestone artefact.

Plate 284 F637 (EC 0746) Bone applicator or pin.

Plate 282 F335 (EB 0397) Faience bead.

Plate 285 F676 (ED 2202) Faience scarab.

Plate 288 F164 (TO 0226) Faience vessel fragments.

Plate 286 F720 (EC 0841) Faience scarab.

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 290 F627 (EC 0646) Faience vessel.

Plate 289 F164 (TO 0226) Faience vessel fragments.

Plate 291 F789 (ED 2254) Faience vessel.

Plate 292 F167 (TO 0219) Copper alloy artefact.

Plate 293 F342 (EB 0347) Copper alloy pin or button.

Plate 294 F433 (EC 0465) Copper alloy artefact.

Plate 295 F699 (ED 2201) Copper alloy figure (?).

Kom Firin II | 159

Ramesside enclosure finds

Plate 299 F765 (EC 0857) Copper alloy siphon.

Plate 296 F726 (ED 2207) Corroded copper alloy artefact.

Plate 297 F729 (ED 2213) Copper alloy plaque/chisel blade.

Plate 298 F762 (ED 2218) Corroded copper alloy artefact.

Plate 300 F781 (ED 2235) Lead artefact.

Plate 301 F813 (EC 0896) Corroded copper alloy artefact.

Plate 302 F816 (EC 0895) Corroded copper alloy artefact.

Plate 303 F163 (TO 0223) Plaster artefact.

Plate 304 F557 (EC 0578) Copper alloy artefact.

Plate 305 F736 (ED 2214) Bone artefact.

160 | Kom Firin II

Plate 306 F754 (ED 2226) Limestone artefact.

7: The Citadel: a glimpse of the Saite town

An outline of the topography of the ‘Citadel’, a term coined by Petrie for the elevated area located in the centre of Kom Firin immediately west of the antiquities resthouse (Fig. 6), was presented in the context of the site survey (Spencer, N. 2008: 28–9). Two seasons of excavation in 2007 and 2008 exposed parts of a dense agglomeration of buildings (Pls 307–10), perhaps domestic in purpose and also including a kiln for firing ‘pigeon-jars’. Chronologically, the excavated buildings fall within the 7th to 6th centuries bc, though the uppermost deposits contained remnants of later activity (see Chapter 9). The excavations also provided a stratigraphic relationship between the buildings exposed on the current surface and excavated by Shafiq Farid (Fig. 73), further proving the dating of these buildings to the Ptolemaic era and later, previously suggested on the basis of a test trench by the Naukratis Project. These excavations provided evidence that Petrie’s term, ‘Citadel’, is misleading. Petrie described the area as follows: The centre of the town was occupied by a citadel, which stood on artificial mounds of sand; the retaining walls have all been cut away, and the sand now forms a shapeless mass amid the ruins, strewn on the top with chips of limestone (Petrie 1886: 94).

Trenches CB and CD proved that the sand seen by Petrie should rather be interpreted as deep deposits of aeolian sand accumulated between architectural phases, and that occupation layers are interleaved with these deposits throughout the exposed stratigraphic sequence. The limestone chips described by Petrie might even derive from the destruction of the Late Period temple, seemingly located north of the Citadel (see Chapter 10). Indeed, the apparently distinctive nature of the Citadel, compared to other parts of Kom Firin, may simply be the result of suffering less from sebakhin quarrying. The high elevation of the Citadel area means that the water table was not reached in any of the excavations. At level 3.09 (in room 1201 of Building X), the lowest deposits were significantly higher than the water level encountered elsewhere at the site: 0.24-0.50 in the temple (Spencer, N. 2008: 37), and 1.28 in the northeast of the site (Fig. 133). An eroded segment of wall (1030), partly exposed (Spencer, N. 2008: pl. 81) since the 1970s, as it appears on the key map of Kom Firin produced by the Naukratis Project (Coulson and Leonard 1982a: 96, fig. 9, just south of the label ‘Citadel area’; see Fig. 73), was originally interpreted as part of the Late Period temenos (Spencer, N. 2008: 24), thus providing a boundary for the southern part of the Citadel. This can now be discounted: in 2011, the exposed profile across the wall was cleaned, revealing its thickness and the nature of associated deposits (Fig. 110; Pl. 311). Twenty-three courses of black crumbly bricks were revealed (36­–43 x 14–21 x 7–12cm), set in a pale yellow-grey mortar. The wall is 2.26m thick, of insufficient thickness to be interpreted as an enclosure wall, but perhaps

part of a building similar to those described below, broadly aligned to the temenos wall, 25m to the south (Fig. 73). Stratified deposits of silt, ash, pottery, brick rubble and windblown sand (1682) slope up against the northern face, with layers of concentrated brick rubble (1698). The presence of thick layers of sand (1681 being at least 90cm thick) recalls the comments of Petrie. Against the opposite, southern face, where erosion has truncated the deposits, a similar depositional sequence is visible, though with a more acute slope line to many deposits; many contain small fragments of brick, which might derive from the erosion and collapse of wall 1030. The nature, or even presence, of any pre-Saite occupation in this area of the site is unknown. The focus of New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period occupation at Kom Firin must have been within the walled complex (Chapters 3–6), but activity cannot be ruled out elsewhere at the site (see Spencer, N. 2008: 32). Ceramics of New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period date were encountered in the Citadel (Chapter 9), but these are almost certainly residual within later deposits. Four partly contiguous trenches were laid out between partly standing buildings B, G and C, and into a shallow depression immediately to the west (Fig. 73). The surface here, partly grass covered, was devoid of architectural traces; the area was selected because of the relative lack of disturbance and the potential for revealing earlier architectural phases, pre-dating the exposed buildings assumed to date to the Ptolemaic or later periods (A, B, C, G). Seven principal phases (C-IA, C-IB, C-II, C-IIIA, C-IIIB, C-IV and C-V), unrelated to those in the Ramesside enclosure (Chapter 4), can be discerned amongst the excavated deposits and structures, principally distinguished through architectural stratigraphy, aided by the continuation of walls across two trenches, allowing an architectural sequence to be reconstructed across much of the excavated areas. Buildings were assigned letter designations, following on from the 2006 survey (see Figs 73–4; and Spencer, N. 2008: 28–9), with rooms and spaces assigned a context number. The earliest structures, V and X, were in use until phase IIIA (Fig. 109), which marks a significant reorganisation of space, with the construction of buildings U, T (itself over the remains of X) and W (Fig. 108). This last building, the only one entirely exposed, housed a pottery kiln, and overlaid a series of earlier walls and occupation deposits, in which individual spaces were not exposed. The chapter uses these buildings as a framework for discussing the various phases of occcupation, with due consideration given to contemporaneous features that cannot be assigned to a building. Building V The earliest structures identified in the excavations were a series of bonded walls forming three contiguous spaces in Kom Firin II | 161

Spencer phase C-IA (building V): rooms 1202, 1203 and 1205 (Fig. 76). Interpretation of these spaces was made difficult in that the southern wall, 1183, went through two renovations, with additional brickwork added to extend its use through phase C-IIIA and beyond (Figs 85, 88). Only the southwestern room (1202) was fully exposed, featuring a doorway at the western end of its northern wall, allowing access from room 1203. This last room was of unclear extent, as it continued under the later building C, a mass of partly exposed brickwork that precluded investigation of earlier levels beneath it (Pl. 316). Wall 1130, which provided the eastern limit of room 1202 (and the western edge of room 1205, of which only a small corner was excavated), did not extend northwards of wall 1168, indicating that room 1203 was a wider space than room 1202. Room 1202 Wall 1183 formed the southern boundary of room 1202 and perhaps even the whole of building V, as the extra thickness of this wall (compared to 1168 and 1130) would be appropriate for an exterior wall. This wall dates to the earliest phase excavated (C-IA), for which the western limit of the room is not defined, though it measured 1.75 by at least 2.75m (Fig. 76); it is quite possible that an earlier wall lay beneath the phase C-II west wall 1154, but this was not identified. The wall (1183) is constructed from bricks laid exclusively as headers, mostly light yellow-brown in colour (15–18 x 7–8cm), though with some black clay bricks (width 17cm, thickness 7–9cm; see Fig. 85; Pl. 312). As elsewhere at the site, post-New Kingdom walls generally employ a thinner brick than found in the Ramesside temple and enclosure wall. Parts of the first five courses of brickwork are preserved, later overbuilt with the phase C-IB wall 1121. The eastern wall (1130) is assumed to be bonded with 1183, though the join is obscured by the later wall 1121. However, the construction technique is identical, with the wall thickness comprising one brick length, laid as headers. Again, brick colour varied, with sandy yellow bricks (20–1 x 6–7cm), light grey bricks (17–18 x 5–6.5cm) and dark black clay bricks (25–6 x 7–8cm). The base of this wall was not reached, with 15 courses exposed to a height of 110cm (Fig. 87). Near the assumed join with wall 1183, the coursing slopes up slightly, suggesting that the walls may have been constructed with a slightly panbedded coursing. In contrast to wall 1121, this wall was never significantly repaired for use in subsequent phases, but rather remained part of the architecture through phase C-IIIA (Fig. 77). The northern edge of the room was defined by wall 1168, preserved to 13 courses (100cm), with bricks principally of pale brown clay (17–20 x 6–8cm; Fig. 87; Pl. 313). Again, the majority of the wall consists of brick set in courses of headers, though a combination of headers and stretcher courses are used to form a door-jamb, projecting into the room. A 75cmwide doorway at the end of this wall provided access from room 1203, with a brick threshold (1182) providing a level for the phase C-IA occupation of the space. This doorway was later modified to raise the door threshold to a contemporary level (phase C-II; 1211, Figs 87–8). Within room 1202, the earliest occupation surface (1177) comprised a mixture of rubble, with bricks fragments of various clay types embedded within it. A small worked bone 162 | Kom Firin II

artefact was found on this surface (F752 [Pl. 447]) in addition to small fineware sherds, but the deposit was not entirely excavated. Atop this deposit, at the eastern end of the room, two circular features were placed against the back wall (1171, 1172), representing the beginning of phase C-IB in this space (Figs 75–6, 86; Pls 313, 317). Both were constructed in an identical manner, featuring a 2cm-thick circular casing of ceramic (fired in situ), and between 85 and 95cm in diameter. Small flue holes were provided in the western walls of the oven, and air flow into the oven/kiln was further facilitated by a pair of bricks set outside each flue hole, creating an air channel (Pl. 314). This careful arrangement suggests that these were intended for small-scale industrial activity, perhaps faience or pottery production, rather than a simple bread oven. Unfortunately, it has not been possible to analyse the ashy deposits found within both ovens; there were no large pieces of slag, nor kiln wasters, to aid interpretation. A relatively compact deposit of clay and silt with dark green patches (1169) accumulated above and around these kilns, containing a high proportion of charcoal. This deposit may partly relate to the use of the two kilns, though eventually it came to cover the flue holes and would have rendered the features unsuitable for maintaining high temperatures necessary for industrial activity. This stratum is stratigraphically significant in that it runs beneath west wall 1154, with the south wall (1121) continuing in use through phase C-II; it is also likely that the heightening of the door threshold (1211, Fig. 87) was undertaken before this phase transition. Wall 1154 was preserved to seven courses in height (50cm) and extended into the north baulk of trench CB (Figs 76, 90–1). Constructed from both black and pale yellow bricks (37 x 15–18 x 5–6cm), it varies in thickness from 46 to 70cm, the latter width perhaps to allow it to meet wall 1121 (Pl. 315). This end of the wall also abutted wall 1174 of phase C-IB building X. A layer of clay and brick fragments (1178) between 1121 and 1154 may have been a simple method of bonding two walls founded at different levels (Fig. 90). A series of ceramic tray fragments embedded within the brickwork along its eastern face presumably represents the opportunistic reuse of detritus. Brickwork 1121, designed to heighten wall 1183 for the phase C-IB occupants, added at least 1.2m in height (though much of wall 1183 had become buried in deposits at this point; Pls 312, 315, 320), through 18 courses of yellow bricks, again laid as headers (34–6 x 14–20 x 5–10cm; Figs 85–6, 88). The base of the wall consisted of a 40cm-thick layer of roughly laid bricks, presumably to provide a relatively level surface for the wall proper (Pl. 318). The ensuing occupation stratum (1164) was of a very similar nature, with charcoal inclusions and a number of complete, or near-complete vessels (Fig. 75; Pl. 321): a large bowl (C3122 [Fig. 123; Pl. 408]), a tray (C3120) and a carinated bowl with a pointed base (C3117 [Fig. 125]). Finds included possible fragments of quartzite grinding implements (F745 [Pl. 493]; F746 [Pl. 494]) and fragments of small faience vessels (F747). Prior to the phase C-IIIA rearrangement of this area, deposits continued to build up in this room, consisting of brick rubble, charcoal fragments and silt (1149, 1175, 1176). The only find from within these deposits was a small hollow ceramic object, perhaps a rattle (F779 [Pl. 435]), although a cluster of three small jars and a carinated bowl were found against the

The Citadel: a glimpse of the Saite town northern wall (C3090–3093, Figs 75, 113, 114, 125; Pls 319, 340); one jar had been reused as a pot-stand (C3093). Rooms 1203 and 1205 North of room 1202 lay a space (1203) covering at least 3.7 x 1.0m, which was only excavated down to the occupation deposit 1169 (Fig. 76), also identified in the adjacent room. As with the rooms to the south, this room became sealed with later paving layers (1159 in phase C-IIIA 1163 in C-IIIB; Fig. 75). Little is known about the room (1205) east of room 1202, as the confined exposure along the eastern baulk precluded deep excavation. Above a deposit of windblown sand (1212, not excavated) lay an occupation deposit (1139) rich in ceramic remains, including the base of a jar and pointed bowl (C3003– 3004, Figs 76, 125). The deposit above consisted almost entirely of sand, with few sherds. Building X South and west of building V, a number of architectural features and associated deposits could be placed stratigraphically within phases C-IA to C-II, though it is difficult to gain an impression of the structure, given that it is largely buried beneath the massive brickwork of building T (phase C-IIIA; see Fig. 74; Pl. 322). Again, while an access point through wall 1183 may have existed to the east of our excavation trench, the thickness of this wall is more suggestive of an external wall, hence the designation of the southern area as a separate structure (X). Building X (phase C-IB and later) post-dates building V, being built against the latter’s southwestern corner, and using wall 1121 as the northern edge of room 1201. The space is divided into at least two distinct zones by walls 1184/1185, that to the west was designated 1200, with the eastern space numbered 1201 (Fig. 76; Pl. 322). No walls can be associated with phase C-IA, only a deposit (1187) rich in organic debris, charcoal fragments, limestone chippings and degraded ceramics, and above that 1177, the de facto surface encountered in this room and that to the north (1202). Though only exposed in room 1201, it runs under wall 1184 (Fig. 84), therefore it may relate to a phase in which a wider space existed. A small (bread?) oven (1188) was constructed against wall 1183, directly on deposit 1187 (Figs 76, 86; Pl. 312). As typical in the Citadel, it is constructed from a coarse circle of ceramic (diameter 70cm, preserved to 40cm), with a high proportion of chaff, fired in situ. Room 1201 With the construction of walls to the south (1157) and west (1184) of oven 1188 in phase C-IB, the space becomes defined as a room of at least 2.7 x 2.7m (Pls 322–3). A doorway in the northern part of the western wall corner provided access into adjacent space 1200 (Fig. 76). The southern wall (1157) was exposed to a height of 66cm, and built from crumbly dark clay bricks (15–18 x 7cm), while the western wall (1184) was built from a mixture of pale yellow and dark clay bricks (25 x 16–17 x 5cm), preserved to seven courses in height (Fig. 84). The latter wall was later built over with wall 1185, in a manner similar to the addition of 1121 atop 1183 on the northern side of the room (Fig. 85; Pl. 322). Both walls were only exposed in section, as the two were covered with the phase C-IIIA building T. The

northern edge of wall 1184 was exposed, revealing a 79cm-wide access into the space to the west (1200). Within room 1201 itself, a series of occupation deposits accumulated within phase C-II, with bands of charcoal fragments interspersed with lenses of organic debris, pottery detritus, small limestone chippings and dark clay (1181), which yielded a shell-rich limestone quern stone (F785 [Pl. 501]), superimposed by a compact silty deposit with further pottery debris and charcoal (1180). Phase C-II is represented within this room by the heightening or renovation of wall 1184 with brickwork 1185 (Fig. 75). Nine courses of brickwork (70cm) were exposed along with the eastern face, consisting of crumbly dark clay bricks (13–16 x 5cm), but the wall extended north of its predecessor, resulting in a narrower doorway (69cm wide) into room 1200 (Fig. 84; Pl. 323). A buttress of brickwork (1152) was built against wall 1157; Pl. 324), measuring 1.3 x 0.85m, and preserved to 90cm in height (11 courses); it is constructed with a mixture of pale brown and black clay bricks (25–30 x 25 x 5–7cm). The purpose of this structure is unclear; its size and position would be suitable for a staircase. Perhaps it is related to the contemporaneous construction of the small oven 1167 in the southwestern corner of the room, built upon occupation deposit 1180. As is typical for these structures in the Citadel buildings, it was formed from an 80cm-diameter ring of clay, fired through use, but here the oven was built upon a 20cm high base of mudbricks, with further brick supports against the outside of the oven (Pls 322, 324). The oven was filled with ash, charcoal and fragments of the oven lining (1179), with deposit 1166 (sand mixed with limestone and burnt material) above that. Thereafter, a series of deposits accumulated in room 1201 prior to the brick paving of phase C-IIIA sealing the room (Fig. 77). These consisted of interleaved occupation deposits characterised by charcoal, ash and pottery (1156, 1173, 1153) and episodes of windblown sand (1158, 1150, 1145); a ceramic disc (F722 [Pl. 429]) was the only artefact recovered from here. Room 1200 Initial excavation of building T in 2007 had suggested it was designed to house grain silos within each room, but the discovery of building V to the northeast and the sondages made immediately to the south (in 2008), particularly the exposure of a doorway into the area with silo 1065, revealed that much of building T (brickwork 1064) was founded on an earlier building (X; Fig. 75). The room described above (1201) was provided with access to a space later built over with T, and given the desire not to destroy the latter building, little is known about the pre-phase C-IIIA space 1200. Its eastern limit is defined by wall 1185 (and its heightening 1184), though the thickness of both walls was not exposed. The northern wall was encountered first in a sondage outside building T (as 1082, Fig. 81; Pls 325–6), and thereafter as an external corner in the southeastern corner of trench CD (1676; Figs 74, 98, 105). It was founded directly upon a layer of sand (1083). At the close of excavations, a segment of brickwork 1064 was removed to confirm the alignment of the wall and its thickness (1174), where it abutted wall 1121 of building V (Fig. 76; Pl. 318). Throughout all these exposed segments, the wall is characterised by being built primarily with pale sandy bricks (28–40 x 15–21 x 7–10cm) and was exposed to a height of 74cm (11 courses) of well-constructed brickwork (segment 1676 Kom Firin II | 163

Spencer beneath wall 1064); the foundation course of the wall was not reached. Finally, another segment of this wall, perhaps the western edge of room 1200, might be brickwork 1086, later incorporated into wall 1087–1064 of building T (Fig. 83). Deposits associated with this phase C-IB wall, which created a space of at least 5.2 x 3.6m (southern limit not identified; Fig. 75), were not exposed, other than layers (1180, 1181) seen in the north- and east-facing sections resulting from a sondage (Figs 79, 83; Pl. 320). The sondage was designed to expose the relationships among silo 1065, wall 1064 and related deposits, and it is clear that a construction cut (1191) for the silo was made into deposit 1180 (Pl. 332). Furthermore, the accumulation of deposits against the outside of the silo (1158, 1153, 1150, 1173, 1180; Pl. 327) prior to the construction of phase C-III structure T (wall 1064) makes it clear that the silo was in use for some time before the existence of building T (Fig. 79). The dome-shaped silo (1065) itself is preserved to a height of 2.38m, with a diameter of 2.5m; four pillars act as buttresses against its exterior, each built of a stack of single bricks (34 x 16 x 5cm), which follow the exterior profile of the silo (Figs 75, 77, 80; Pls 328–31, 333–4, 336). Part of the southwestern pillar is bonded with the brickwork of the silo proper; the others are adhered with mortar alone. The only access to the silo seems to have been from above, and 1.24m of space between the north edge of the silo and wall 1174/1676 would have provided ample room for someone to place a ladder for access to the top (Fig. 74). If such a silo was used for storing cereal, it is a far from practical arrangement for removing the cereal. With the later construction of building T, in phase C-IIIA, the silo became encased in a square room (1209), leaving very little room for access; it is thus assumed that the silo was intentionally filled to create a level surface for the raised ground floor of structure T (Fig. 77). A deposit of clean, fine, yellow sand (1066; Pl. 329), with little pottery yielded a number of interesting artefacts: faience vessel fragments (F668), a ceramic quadruped (F644 [Fig. 127; Pl. 417]), ceramic disc (F671 [Pl. 429]), fragment of a limestone object (F602 [Pl. 474], perhaps a mortar or basin), the tip of a bone tool (F669 [Fig. 128; Pl. 444]) and the rim of a pilgrim flask (C2513 [Fig. 121]). The homogenous nature of this fill suggests a fairly rapid accumulation of material. Around the silo, sand accumulated (1110, in which a faience bead was found, F667 [Pl. 523]]), perhaps part of the same process that saw the silo filled with sand (1066). Another silo (1093) lay immediately to the south of silo 1065, but the later architecture (T) precludes ascertaining if the silos originally lay in separate rooms prior to phase C-II, or rather formed part of a group arranged in a courtyard (as shown in Fig. 109), as often suggested by representational evidence. This silo was only partly exposed, as it continued into the south baulk of trench CB, but seemed of identical construction to 1065, including the external supporting piers. Given that only the upper part of the silo was exposed, it is not entirely certain that this also dates to phase C-II, though construction technique, level and situation vis-à-vis earlier architecture suggest that the silos are likely to be contemporaneous. Earlier phase architecture beneath Buildings U and W Strata pre-dating phase C-IIIA were only encountered in small exposures beneath building U, the structure east of buildings T, 164 | Kom Firin II

V and X (Figs 74, 92). Another circular silo (1096) was discovered in room 1206, and the similarity of construction method with the silos in building X (1093 and 1065) and its relative level (the base was not reached) prompt an earlier dating to phase C-II. The silo was revealed against the south baulk of trench CA (Figs 92, 94; Pl. 349), surrounded by a later deposit (1100, 1117), perhaps used to fill the casemate platform of building U. At its widest point, the silo was 1.9m in diameter and preserved to a height of 1.3m, constructed from crumbly brown clay bricks (Pl. 350). The silo cavity was not excavated, other than a small part of the interior fill (1108) of grey-brown clay and silt with limestone chips, animal bone and pottery, which yielded small fragments of faience vessels (F640). Moving to the westernmost area of excavation (trench CD), a number of strata and architectural features can be assigned to the period before phase C-IIIA, and due to the continuity of stratigraphy from the trenches to the east (principally through phase C-IB wall 1676), it is possible to place the architecture and associated deposits within the same stratigraphic framework. These early features were found beneath, south and north of building W (Fig. 98), the massive structure that dominated the trench and precludes a coherent plan of the earlier building being possible. No building designation has been assigned to these walls, as it is unclear if they form part of the same, or several, buildings. Immediately to the northwest of, but not abutting, building X, lay a contemporaneous structure, represented by wall segment 1677. This was exposed in the sondage south of later building W, along a length of 1.05m and to a height of 40cm (Fig. 105). The wall is likely to form the southeastern corner of a building contemporaneous with X, given that no continuation of this wall was seen in the sondage to the north of wall 1676 (trench CB). A deposit of greybrown silt with charcoal flecks (1672) accumulated south of this wall; small fragments of a faience vessel (F829) were found here. Within the later kiln room (1204), a sondage was made beneath the clean sand (1647 [Fig. 101; Pl. 362], a small metal object was found in this context, F815) upon which the kiln and building W was founded, revealing a 1.85m arc of brickwork, 30cm thick and exposed to a height of 45cm (1671; Fig. 98; Pl. 335). With curvature reminiscent of the dome-shaped silos, this is most likely to represent part of a silo akin to those found farther to the east (1065, 1093, 1096) and probably of similar dimensions (see Fig. 98). It is possible, though not provable without further excavation, that this silo lay within a room bounded by wall 1677, perhaps partly along the same orientation as the later walls of building W. Around this collapsed silo, further brickwork was identified, which is difficult to interpret in any meaningful manner. To the north, a 20cm thick wall (1665) ran from the ‘exterior’ face of brickwork 1671 into the edge of the excavation beneath wall 1605 (Fig. 98). Poorly constructed from a mixture of plaster, bricks and lumps of clay, this was exposed to a height of 1.1m, but its purpose remains unclear. A similar wall of equally poor construction (1666) ran east from the silo, and a sloping brick rubble surface (1678) immediately to the west of the silo ran up to the later wall 1665. This early phase construction sat upon a layer of rubble (1679; Pl. 335) sloping down towards the north, with episodes of windblown sand also evident against the southern edge of these structures (1669).

The Citadel: a glimpse of the Saite town The last layer yielded a small glass ball, perhaps a bead yet to be drilled (F819), and two faience objects likely to be amulets (F818 [Pl. 546], F820 [Pl. 527]). Above all of this early phase architecture, layers of compacted brick rubble accumulated (1656, 1670), prior to the windblown sand 1647 which pre-dates the foundation of the phase C-IIIA building W. North of building W, a deep sondage was possible due to the lack of architectural remains of phase C-IIIA and later (Figs 102, 104, 106). Against the north baulk, an east–west wall (1667) was revealed partly in plan, constructed almost entirely from pale yellow bricks (33 x 16–18 x 7–10cm) with a plaster coat applied to the face (Fig. 98). The coursing is rather irregular towards the west, but up to six courses are preserved, in some cases with alternating headers and stretchers. The full thickness of the wall was not exposed, but there was a notable southerly projection to the brickwork in the centre of the visible segment. Seemingly contemporaneous with wall 1667 is a small rectangular bin (1660), 15–20cm thick, creating an internal trapezoidal space of at least 1.5 x 0.6cm, extending into the eastern baulk (Pl. 363). This feature could be a trough for feeding animals, storing material or even the outer edge of a mastaba against an internal wall. It remains possible that this structure (1660–1667) forms part of a building with wall 1677 to the south, given their respective alignments (see Fig. 109). Over and against these walls, a number of deposits were revealed, prior to the construction of phase C-IIIA architecture. These include layers of rubble (1664, 1661, 1644; Figs 104, 106) and a thick deposit of windblown sand (1646; Pls 363–4). The rubble layers slope down to the southeast, as if derived from the collapse of a building to the west. However, there was clearly occupation of the area during these phases, with a small ceramic basin (1662 = C3159) set up against the basin (1660) and framed by mud bricks. Preserved to 32cm in height, and with a diameter of 58–68cm, the oven was filled with a mixture of sand and ash (1663), with a series of bricks laid on the top, as if intentionally sealing the oven. Building T: casemate foundation Phase C-IIIA sees a radical reorganisation of this densely occupied zone of the Saite town, with the construction of two sizeable brick buildings, over and around the earlier remains (Figs 74, 77, 92, 108; Pls 307, 328, 337). In particular, two structures can be interpreted as the lower, foundation levels of a tower-like building (T and U), with the existing silos incorporated into the rubble and sand fill of the casemate cells. The excavation of building T revealed parts of a rectangular structure 6.1m east–west by at least 6.5m north– south (Fig. 77), though it continued into the south baulk of trench CB, where deep sand deposits make further excavation rather difficult. The wall varies in width, but is substantial throughout, being between 72 and 120cm thick and built from grey-brown mudbricks (20–30 x 10–18 x 5–7cm; Pl. 334). Though the upper surface of the walls was largely consistent, the depth of construction varies significantly; in places, the wall is preserved to ten courses (e.g. northwestern segment, Fig. 80), whereas along the eastern wall, only three courses achieved the same level, as the standing remains of earlier phase architecture (walls 1121 and 1185) resulted in less need for new brickwork (Fig. 85; Pl. 324). On the inner northern and western faces, it was clear that the wall had been founded

on a layer of thick brown clay (1124, see Fig. 80). This eastern segment also spans deposits (1173 and earlier) that had accumulated in the doorway between rooms 1201 and 1200 (Fig. 85; Pls 320, 327). Around room 1208, the wall was designated with additional numbers (1087 to the west, 1129 to the east). The western wall (1087) was constructed mostly of the same dark crumbly clay bricks (19–20 x 16 x 5–6cm), but an exposure of the external wall face again suggested that, as with 1082 (Fig. 81; Pl. 325), the wall might incorporate parts of an earlier wall (1086), built with larger bricks (37–9 x 20 x 6–7cm) of pale yellow clay (Fig. 83). An intriguing detail in the southwest corner is the presence of a projecting brick bonded to the interior west wall, with a 12cm-diameter hole cut into the brickwork (Pl. 345). The shape of the cavity suggets that it held a wooden beam, given that it lies beneath the presumed floor level of the building. Could it have been a scaffolding emplacement used in construction? Though it is possible that a phase existed when the walls of building T surrounded a silo still in use, these storage facilities would have been rendered very impractical by the arrangement of the walls; furthermore, as explained above, it is clear that the silos significantly pre-date the wall. Room 1209 The silo had become filled with sand (1066), which may predate the construction of 1064, but equally could include intentional filling of the void or later windblown deposition (Fig. 80; Pls 329, 338). The void between the walls of the casemate (1064) and the silo (1065) was filled with a series of rubble deposits (1109, 1125, 1128), followed by a more homogenous deposit of silt, charcoal and ash (1068, 1079), perhaps part of the intentional redepositing of material to fill the cell (Pls 338–9). Within this debris, a large number of artefacts were encountered: part of a small female figurine on a plaque (F538 [Fig. 129; Pl. 422]), a small faience figurine of unclear form (F514–641 [Pl. 544]), ceramic horse with rider (F568 [Fig. 127; Pl. 426]), fragments of small faience vessels (F430, F453, F504, F533 [Fig. 128; Pl. 448], F605), a faience ring (F501 [Pl. 529]) and amulet (F523 [Fig. 129; Pl. 535]), stone tools including a saddle quern (F483 [Pl. 486]), parts of a limestone vessel (F525), enigmatic greywacke object (F521 [Fig. 129; Pl. 558]), iron object (F524) and ceramic discs (F508 [Pl. 429]). Three fine bone tools were also recovered (F483 [Pl. 486], F499 [Fig. 128; Pl. 445], F528 [Fig. 128; Pl. 446]). Room 1208 The room to the south of 1209 was only partly exposed, defined by walls 1064, 1087 and 1129 (Fig. 77; Pl. 337). Inside, the same process of filling the cellular foundation was achieved with a deposit of loose ashy material outside (1092), and a mixture of sand and brick rubble (1094) inside the earlier phase silo (1093); two walls (1126, 1127) were constructed to link silo and brickwork 1064 of unclear purpose. Within the former deposit, a very large ceramic basin (C2999 [Fig. 123]) was found lying upside down in the northwest corner (Pl. 337); fragments of faience vessels (F603, F604) and a worked limestone fragment (F707 [Pl. 520]) were also recovered here. The deposit (1094) inside the silo, only partly excavated, yielded a small faience plaque decorated with incised motifs on both faces (F591 [Fig. 129; Pl. 542]). Kom Firin II | 165

Spencer Outside building T It is not clear if wall 1157 and brickwork 1152, which had formed the southern boundary of room 1201 prior to phase C-IIIA, continued to be in use. If so, it may be that the second renovation of the northern wall (1151 over earlier walls 1121 and 1183), provided a northern boundary to this space (Fig. 77). The new brickwork consisted of dark clay bricks (17–18 x 5cm) laid over the existing walls but projecting slightly to the north and south; it also followed the curvature at the western end that had created room 1202 in the earlier phases (Figs 85–6, 88; Pls 312–13, 318). In any case, the intervening space was at least partly paved, with a thin layer (1155) of crumbly black clay bricks (20 x 17 x 5cm) preserved in the centre of the space (Pl. 307); it remains possible that the walls to the south (1152 and 1157) were simply levelled to form part of the pavement, while that to the north (1121) was built up (1151) to meet the pavement level. A further patch of 20cm-thick pavement (1190) abutted the southern face of wall 1157 and the eastern face of 1064, again built with dark bricks (25–32 x 10–12 x 8cm; Figs 77, 84, 86; Pl. 340). To the north, the space formerly in use as room 1203, was paved over with a one-course layer of brickwork, again in the dark crumbly clay bricks characteristic of the other pavements (1159; bricks of 20 x 15 x 4cm), but as its level was flush with the top of phase C-IA wall 1168 (Fig. 86), it may be that the divison between the rooms no longer existed. The distinction between rooms 1202 and 1203 was no longer extant at phase C-IIIB, as a layer of brick paving (1163), again one brick thick (dark clay bricks, 18–20 x 15–17 x 6–7cm) was built over deposit 1175 (Figs 77, 86). This pavement actually lipped up against the phase C-IA wall 1130, still in use, and over the earlier phase of paving (1159). Above this, large amounts of ash and charcoal (1141, 1143) accumulated, along with some articulated brick rubble (1147) in the centre of the space once occupied by room 1203. A cluster of wellpreserved dishes and a small jar (C3000–3002 [Figs 113, 124–5], C3005, C3006 [Fig. 125]) were placed against the corner of wall 1151 (Fig. 77; Pls 341, 413). Deposit 1143 yielded the front part of a ceramic quadruped (F677 [Fig. 127; Pl. 419]) and a ceramic spindle-whorl (F751 [Pl. 430]); a counter with a hole part-drilled through one face (F743 [Pl. 183]) was found in deposit 1141. The space to the south was repaved at this period (1134), with slightly larger bricks than before (visible dimensions 34–6 x 16cm); sand lay between the two paving phases (1135, 1142). The secondary phases were damaged by cuts (1132, 1133) and broadly contemporaneous deposits (1137, 1146; the latter yielded faience vessel fragments F701). Above lay a loose sandy deposit which yielded many finds, including fragments of faience vessels (F575), a ceramic disc (F598 [Pl. 429]) and spindle-whorl (F590 [Pl. 431), stone tools (F579 [Pl. 488], F622 [Pl. 481]), a limestone mortar (F580 [Fig. 128]), pieces of worked stone of unclear purpose (F581, F582 [Pl. 475], F587, F616–F621 [Pls 490, 496, 507, 514]) and a limestone artefact used as both door-socket (?) and grindstone (F578 [Pl. 500]). In the southeast corner, a layer of loose sandy deposits, interleaved with compacted lenses of the same material (1074), was encountered. The following artefacts were recovered: fragments of worked stone (F485 [Pl. 518]), limestone mortars (F486 [Pl. 463], F497 [Pl. 487]), stone tools (F487 [Pl. 498], 166 | Kom Firin II

F488 [Pl. 519]), a faience ring (F507 [Pl. 528]), sherds from faience vessels (F511) and a ceramic disc (F531 [Pl. 429]). This area then seemed to have become a relatively open area, with walls of phases C-IA through CIIIA now covered by a layer of silt and sand with vast quantities of ceramics and brick rubble, presumably from the collapsed building nearby (1118, 1138), within which a fragment of an oven lid (F708 [Pl. 439]) and a limestone vessel (F672 [Fig. 129; Pl. 473]) were encountered. At least four ovens or small kilns were set directly on this deposit (1046, 1047, 1048, 1120; see Figs 77–8; Pls 307, 342), each formed from a 2cm thick ring of clay, now very degraded, and full of ash and fragments of the lining, sometimes with sherds used as a base for the installation. Other objects were found embedded in the oven walls (bead F368 [Pl. 523], faience vessel fragment F512). Their diameter varies from 57 to 80cm, and the phase in which these ovens were in use is unclear: they post-date pavements 1163 and 1134 (phase C-IIIB), but may not be as late as phase C-IV, given that the deposits and architecture of this phase are at a much higher level in trench CC, nearby to the north (Fig. 74). A layer of loose brown silt and clay (1050) with lenses of orange sand was removed from around the ovens, in which fragments of limestone mortars (F394 [Pl. 461], F853) and a faience ring (F406 [Fig. 129; Pl. 526]) were found. In the northwestern corner of trench CB, a sondage was undertaken against the north wall of building T (Figs 77, 89). Earlier deposits were discussed above, but after the construction of phase C-IIIA wall 1064, a deposit of brown clay (1103) accumulated prior to the creation of a bank of mud, capped with fragments of large ceramic vessels laid flat (1136), perhaps the foundation for a north–south wall (Pl. 325). This could be part of a small courtyard or installation built outside the building proper. The deposits to either side were distinctly different, that to the west being pink-stained through the high proportion of pottery debris and containing charcoal (1081; faience vessel fragments F567 and F570 were found here), while that to the east was green-stained and also contained charcoal (1090). In the deposit above this (1077), a layer of compacted, charcoal-rich silt and green-hued material built up over and against building T, indicating that the structure atop platform 1064 had fallen out of use. In this 6th-century deposit, a number of Saite amphorae (C2565–2568 [Fig. 115]) had been discarded upside down, leaning against the outside of wall 1064 (Fig. 77; Pls 343, 412). These may well be detritus from the type of activity occurring in and around installation 1607, north of building W (see below and Fig. 99). Three objects were found in deposit 1077: a ceramic disc (F597 [Pl. 430]), a faience handle (F510 [Pl. 536]) and a limestone counter (F506 [Pl. 516]). The topsoil in trench CB that covered the remains of buildings T, X and V consisted of loose sand and halfa-grass (1043, 1045, 1049, 1052, 1061, 1062, 1067, 1104, 1148). The following artefacts were recovered: fragments of glass (F352 [Fig. 128; Pl. 454]), calcite (F431 [Fig. 128; Pl. 462], F460) and faience (F354, F373 [Fig. 128; Pl. 456], F390, F396, F398, F407, F432, F449 [Fig. 128; Pl. 449], F626, F642) vessels; pieces of worked limestone (F363 [Pl. 510], F376 [Fig. 129; Pl. 517], F387 [Pl. 476], F471–472 [Pls 508–9], F475 [Pl. 505], F479 [Pl. 506], F492–F493), sandstone (F461) and quartzite (F491); limestone mortars (F437 [Fig. 128; Pl. 466], F473–F474 [Pls 459, 467],

The Citadel: a glimpse of the Saite town F480 [Pl. 460], F494 [Pl. 465]), a miniature tray (F448 [Pl. 469]) and a fitting of the same material (F657 [Pl. 504]); pumice stone (F353 [Pl. 541], F367, F712 [Pl. 543]), limestone vessels (F495 [Pl. 471], F496 [Pl. 470], F632 [Pl. 468], F650– F652), stone tools (F366 [Pl. 513], F399 [Pl. 479], F418 [?], F419, F425, F435, F466 [Pl. 480], F634 [Pl. 495]), quernstones (F420 [?], F611 [Pl. 489], F633 [Pl. 492], F635 [Pl. 497]); ceramic figures of quadrupeds (F490 [Fig. 127; Pl. 421], F513 [Pl. 424], F653 [Fig. 127; Pl. 423]), a firedog (F478 [Pl. 436]), cobra (F654 [Fig. 127; Pl. 415]) and human figure (F629 [Pl. 428]); an udjat-eye plaque (F663 [Fig. 129; Pl. 533]), ceramic net-float (F447), quartz bead (F450 [Pl. 523]), a faience object (F452 [Pl. 550]), ceramic discs (F360, F408, F457, F459, F462, F463, F610, F649[Pl. 429]), spindle-whorls (F467, F489, F648 [Pl. 430]) and a ceramic mould for an udjat-eye amulet (F383 [Pl. 433]). These undoubtedly represent a mixture of material from the later occupation layers and the buildings discussed here. Building U: another casemate platform In an area of open ground between the exposed remains of three structures (B, C and G; Fig. 73), an 8 x 5m trench (CA) exposed parts of a building U contemporary with, and of similar construction method to, structure T (Fig. 92). The trench also provided stratigraphic evidence for the relative date of the buildings excavated by this project and those previously cleared by Shafiq Farid. Rooms 1206 and 1210 Room 1210 is the clearest example of the principles of casemate construction, with layers of rubble and detritus dumped in the space between walls 1105, 1072 and 1073, and over silo 1096, which is assumed to be of phase C-II (Fig. 93; Pl. 346). Wall 1072 ran the length of the trench and varies in width from 1.3 to 1.6m, perhaps forming the northern wall of the building. The wall is preserved to 1.4m in height, with brickwork featuring both crumbly black clay bricks and a smaller proportion of pale yellow-brown bricks (15–23 x 10 x 7cm; Pl. 354). The room’s eastern and western walls, bonded to 1072, are of a reduced thickness: to the east, wall 1073 is 60cm thick and preserved to a height of 80cm, built using the same size and type of bricks. To the west, wall 1105 was of similar width (55cm) and preserved height (80cm; 9 courses); it extended beyond the excavated area, but the southwestern exterior corner of the building is preserved in trench CB (1119, Fig. 74). A long east– west rectangular building can be reconstructed, consisting of a series of cells, orientated differently to building T (Fig. 108). The space between silo and walls was filled with rubble which consisted of a mixture of sand and silt, with significant amounts of charcoal and some metallic slag (1088, 1100, 1117); as with building T, it is not possible to ascertain which deposits were intentional and those that reflect natural accumulation. Within the rubble, faience (F624 [Pl. 523]) and metal (F571)1 beads, limestone (F589 [Pl. 477]) and ceramic (F645, F848 [Pl. 429]) discs, a spindle-whorl (F664 [Pl. 430]), a ceramic quadruped (F588 [Fig. 127; Pl. 420]), faience fragments (F717 [Pl. 450]) and pieces of worked limestone (F636 [Pl. 503], F638 [Pl. 482], F666) were recovered. At some point, an additional wall (1069) was built along the top part of wall 1072 (Pl. 351), presumably once the platform

building U had partly fallen out of use, or at least collapsed. This new wall was only 40–50cm thick and preserved to a mere 13cm in height, built from a mixture of brick types, all of very large size (40–50 x 8 x 7cm; Figs 92–3). It seems reasonable to assign this to part of the same construction activity as wall 1057 of building G, preserved to 2.1m in height (21 courses) and built with the same large bricks as 1069 (Fig. 94). It was visible in the southern baulk of trench CA, standing proud of the modern surface, with the east, west and southern edges covered in accumulated deposits and overgrown with grass. It sits directly on phase C-IIA (?) silo 1096. A very small area of room 1210 was exposed, revealing an additional thickness of brickwork to wall 1073 in the northwestern corner. Within, a deposit of sand, silt, charcoal and brick fragments was removed (1111; Fig. 93), prior to excavation being halted. Room 1207 and beyond The above suggestion, that wall 1072 represented the northern limit of the building – or at least the principal part of the building – is further supported by the presence of a staircase (1075) leading up to this wall (Fig. 92; Pl. 347), within space 1207 which pre-dates building B. Only a small strip of this space is visible, given that building B was subsequently built over this area (Fig. 73; Pl. 316). The space is bounded to the west by wall 1106, 80cm in thickness but only exposed to a depth of 25cm, built from dark black crumbly clay bricks (20 x 8cm). On the other side of the wall, only a small area was exposed, again restricted by the construction of a later building over the top (C). Multiple floor phases accumulated (1115) outside the building, with flecks of limestone and a reddish hue from degraded pottery (Fig. 95). An unusual faience sculpture, perhaps of a sphinx, was found here (F641, with joining fragments from room 1209: F514 [Pl. 544]). Returning to room 1207, the staircase (1075) was preserved to the top of wall 1072 (which may have been the pavement level for the lower storey rooms of building U). Two steps are clearly preserved (each of 65 x 25cm, with each tread 8cm thick), the remainder hidden beneath building B; the staircase stood around 2m in height, constructed from pale yellow bricks (17 x 10 x 6cm; Pl. 347). In the area between the stairs (1075) and the west wall (1106) of space 1207, a series of deposits accumulated which may show that building C was constructed after U had fallen out of use (Fig. 95). These deposits (1098, 1113) consist of limestone chippings and charcoal within a semi-compact matrix of silt and sand, with small amounts of hard clay (perhaps from bricks), and yielded considerable amounts of pottery and fragments of faience vessels (F608) and a ceramic net-float (F628 [Pl. 432]). A deposit of looser material (1080), principally sand and silt, contained a higher number of artefacts: many more faience vessel fragments (F536, F548, F601, F606, F689) including a decorated example (F550 [Fig. 128; Pl. 453]), and fragments of other objects in the same material (F546 [Pl. 538]), quadruped figures modelled in ceramic (F545 [Fig. 127; Pl. 425]), a ceramic barrel-bead or netfloat (F547 [Pl. 432]), a possible firedog fragment (F593), ceramic disc (F607 [Pl. 429]), spindle-whorls (F595 [Pl. 430], F599 [Pl. 431]) and a fragment of moulded plaster (F600 [Pl. 464]). Kom Firin II | 167

Spencer The subsequent deposit (1070) represents a period of continuous occupation, after the staircase to building U had fallen out of use, with organic debris, charcoal and green-hued lenses, set in a silt and sand matrix (Pl. 348). Again, a large number of small finds were encountered, with a ceramic quadruped figure (F556 [Fig. 127; Pl. 416]), bone tools (F569 [Fig. 128; Pl. 442] and F572 [Fig. 128; Pl. 443], similar to those found in the debris of room 1200), faience vessel fragments (F682, F703, F715, F716 [Pl. 451]) and another fragment of a ceramic spindle-whorl (F599 [Pl. 431]). The final architectural phase here (C-V) is represented by building B, which stands partly exposed on the surface at the northern edge of the 2007 excavations (Fig. 73; Pl. 344). This was not investigated, other than the recording of its southerly elevation (Fig. 95; Pls 351–2). It also featured foundation brickwork (1060), which may be part of a casemate structure under the whole building, that sat directly on deposit 1070. These first six courses of brickwork included pale yellow bricks, some set at an angle to create a level building surface, atop a single course of dark crumbly clay bricks. A second phase of the wall construction was another layer of up to four courses (1059), which also acted as the threshold for the doorway between walls 1012 and 1014, providing access to the southwestern of the three visible rooms. The main wall (1012) was preserved to 1.75m in height, built entirely of pale yellow bricks (25 x 8 x 7cm). Later deposits The striking difference in preservation between walls 1057 and 1069, both assumed to have originally been part of building G, suggests that the latter was levelled at some point, after which further layers accumulated (Fig. 93; Pl. 353), the first being a 40–50cm thick layer of silt and sand (1053) which covered walls 1072, 1073 and staircase 1075. Finds in this deposit included a limestone mortar (F436), a human figurine in fired clay (F440 [Fig. 127; Pl. 427]), sherds from faience vessels (F454, F456, F476), a possible amulet in faience (F455), a ring of the same material (F498 [Fig. 129; Pl. 524]) and pieces of worked stone (F465, F468 [Pl. 485]). The uppermost deposits in the trench could not be explicitly tied to architectural phases, but nonetheless produced a large number of finds. These layers included brick rubble, with notable tip lines sloping down from the east (Fig. 94; Pl. 353), as if they derive from the eastern wall of building G, and also limestone, pottery, charcoal inclusions and patches of burning (1042, 1044, 1051, 1053, 1054, 1076, 1078, 1186). Two thin (1–2cm) layers of limestone chippings may have been used as surfaces during a short period (1056, 1058); an irregular brick feature may also represent low intensity use of the area. Within these surface deposits, the following artefacts were uncovered: udjateye amulets (F356 [Pl. 530], F369 [Pl. 531], F623 [Pl. 532]) and shabtis (F358 [Pl. 547], F386 [Pl. 548]) in faience; many fragments of faience vessels (F355, F359, F378–F380, F381 [Pl. 457], F409 [Pl. 455], F410, F505, F517, F535 [Pl. 458], F542, F704, F714) including one inscribed for ‘Sekhmet lady of…’ (F382 [Fig. 128; Pl. 452]); a faience ring (F500+F534 [Fig. 129; Pl. 525]), a possible fragment of a calcite vessel (F377), ceramic discs (F374–F375, F403–F404 [Pl. 429]), fragments of worked limestone (F364, F393 [Pl. 511]) and limestone mortars (F392, F530 [Fig. 128; Pl. 472], F552 [Pl. 133]), an obsidian object 168 | Kom Firin II

(F388 [Pl. 521]), a flint tool F516 [Fig. 129; Pl. 502]), an ivory cosmetic applicator (F402 [Fig. 129; Pl. 540]) and a faience bead (F401 [Pl. 523]); pieces of corroded copper alloy (F405 [Pl. 554]), a copper alloy bracelet (F414 [Pl. 556]), a granodiorite pendant or fitting (F518), a fragment of a faience talismanic figure (F389 [Fig. 129; Pl. 545]) and faience objects with detailed decoration (F551 [Fig. 129; Pl. 551], F788 [Fig. 129; Pl. 557]). Building W: pottery workshop Room 1204 The well-preserved building W comprises a rectangular, standalone arrangement of brickwork (1605), following the same alignment as the contemporary building T (Fig. 74), and perhaps of broadly similar scale (Fig. 108; Pls 355–6). The room had internal dimensions of 3.25 x 3.35m, with walls constructed mostly with bricks of pale grey-brown clay (31–7 x 14–17 x 8–11cm; Pl. 367) and preserved up to 1.56m in height. A notable inwards overhang and curvature in the southwestern corner (Pl. 368), might support the suggestion of a vaulted roof. The room housed a circular kiln (1619) in the southwestern corner founded directly upon the windblown sand (1647) that covered the earlier features in the area (Figs 99, 101; Pls 357–8, 362). Preserved to a height of 80cm, the kiln is dome-shaped with an external diameter of 160cm and a chamber of 140cm diameter, though it remains unclear if a doorway existed on the northern side, or whether access was simply from above. Constructed from mudbricks, the inner faces coloured red through multiple firing episodes, the outside is coated in mud plaster, in which a ceramic counter was found (F798 [Pl. 429]). Though the coursing is relatively regular, the bricks on the west wall slope down towards the north. The eastern face has a distinctive finish applied (1657), with a series of large sherds from pigeon-pots and an amphora embedded into a layer of mud plaster, itself containing two amphorae, to form an exterior face, possibly part of a refurbishment (Pls 357, 359– 60). A compacted mass of debris recovered from within featured vessel wasters and brick fragments and undoubtedly represents the remains of the internal walls which supported the floor of the firing chamber (see Fig. 101). How the furnace chamber was accessed is not clear. During use, much of the ash produced during firing seems to have been raked out to the east (1637, 1622), and the firing also led to the blackening of the interior faces of the walls of building W (1605). A faience bead (F763 [Pl. 523]), fired clay support (F772 [Fig. 127; Pl. 440]), two ceramic spindle-whorls (F773, F777 [Pl. 430]) and a granodiorite smoother (F778) were found in these two deposits. Within the kiln, an ashy fill (1643; Pl. 361) was mixed with fragments of ceramic trays (or lids), including one example that could be reconstructed (F775 [Pl. 434]), but also a faience handle, perhaps from a sistrum (F784 [Pl. 537]). Later layers of ash and debris were found around a network of poorly preserved walls which must have supported the upper chamber, mixed with collapse from the structure of the kiln (1623, 1627, Fig. 97; Pls 365–6, 371); in this deposit examples of sherds from pigeon-pots, unevenly fired and warped (Pl. 372) provide confirmation that this was the type of vessel being fired in the kiln, as suggested by its dominance of the ceramic assemblage in this area (Chapter 9),

The Citadel: a glimpse of the Saite town and also how examples were used in the refurbishment of the kiln (1657). In addition, a fragment of a quartzite grinding stone (F750 [Pl. 483]), a limestone object (F758 [Pl. 515] and pieces of a faience vessel (F764) were recovered here. The remainder of the deposits within room 1204 consisted of a mixture of sand, brick rubble and ashy remains (1621, 1606; Pl. 355), with more fragments of pigeon-pots prevalent amongst the sherds, although a dump of pottery (1620) contained a mass of fragments of the same form of large amphorae found in the installation to the north (1607, see below). Small finds found in these layers included ceramic counters (F759, F761 [Pl. 429]) and a flat object of corroded metal (F735). At the end of the excavation, the kiln was half-sectioned to allow access to deposits below (Figs 98, 101). The principal problem in interpreting the phasing of building W lies in the construction of the north segment of wall 1605, and this relates to the possible presence of a doorway. Stratigraphically, it is clear from the south wall that the structure is founded upon a layer of windblown sand that runs under the wall and was encountered both outside (1646; Pls 363–4) and inside (1647) the building; this sand overlay the phase C-IB and C-II architecture (Fig. 101). That there are several phases to the northern wall of building W is clear both from the internal and exterior faces. Firstly, in the internal north wall, a clear distinction is visible between the dark brown-black clay bricks of the upper preserved part, identical to those of the side walls. Lower down the wall, however, paler yellow-brown brickwork is visible (1680). This is built upon ash rake-out (1637; Pl. 368) from the kiln and may simply be a renovation of the wall (Fig. 107). However, it is also possible that it partly represents a blocking of a north doorway, as otherwise there would only have been access to the kiln from above, perhaps by using a ladder. The exterior of the north wall further suggests a complex construction history (Pl. 364). Occupation deposit (1632) seems to be present between two segments of brickwork (1605 to the east, 1675 to the west; Fig. 103). This may echo the position of a doorway, either to the room with the phase C-II silo (1671) or indeed the kiln (1619) itself; the level of the ‘doorway’ gap would be more consistent with the former interpretation. Above this doorway, brickwork 1674 might relate to a renovation of building W. It thus becomes possible that the original building to house kiln 1624 features a northern access doorway, which was then blocked up to convert the building into a casemate platform. It is stratigraphically explicit, however, that the kiln was in operation contemporary with structure T. Contemporaneous structures to the north of building W Above the phase C-IB and C-II deposits north of building W, and over walls 1660 and 1667, layers of crushed brick and sand (1661, 1664, 1658) were encountered, seemingly a preparation for the phase C-IIIA installations that were founded directly upon it (Figs 102, 104, 106; Pl. 364). The sizeable architecture of this period has been badly affected by at least two distinct pits (1639, 1653), and the following observations can be made. Wall 1650 was preserved in section as 15 courses of wellconstructed brickwork (87cm; alternating courses of headers and stretchers), but this was not an original face, as a plan view of the wall, 1.05m thick, was preserved in the adjacent trench (Figs 74, 96). Both pale yellow (20–22 x 10 x 7cm) and

dark clay (17–18 x 10–12 x 7–8cm) bricks were used in its construction. It seems, therefore, that we encountered the southern face of a structure founded at the same period as building W. Its western limit is not clear; the wall may have spanned the whole width of trench CD, as brickwork segments 1645 and 1640, founded on the same level, may represent part of the same wall, but any relationship that did exist is cut by pits 1653 and 1639. A series of deposits then accumulated in the space between building W and the walls 1640, 1645 and 1650: occupation layers with silt, sand, ash, charcoal and considerable amounts of pottery (1641, 1629, 1632, 1652) and a layer of compacted brick rubble (1673). The only finds encountered were a faience vessel fragment (F846) and a bead of Egyptian blue frit (F847). Deposit 1413, of similar character in trench CC to the east, probably dates to the same phase. Wall 1650, or at least the space to the south where our excavation took place, evidently remained in use following the build-up of these deposits, as a brick pavement (1630) is then laid over the deposits (Pl. 363). The pavement, two brick courses thick (26–8 x 15–19 x 4–9cm) is visible both in the north and east baulks (Figs 102, 104), as well as a plan exposure over a small area (2.4 x 0.5m; Fig. 97). An area of brickwork (1631) farther to the west, seen in section as one brick thick and also preserved across an area of 3.0 x 1.6m (maximum extent), may represent a continuation of this pavement. Occupation deposits accumulated over the paving, firstly a mixed layer (1608) of sand, mud brick rubble, ash, charcoal, shell and crushed limestone, within which an iron nail was found (F733 [Pl. 555]). This layer became a de facto surface for activities, as an oven or kiln (1624) was built upon it (Fig. 106; Pl. 373). Seen principally in section, this domed-shaped feature was formed from a casing of ceramic, fired in situ, encased in plaster and brick fragments (1607); ashy sand (1626) filled the interior. The kiln was part of a bigger installation, with a series of large locally produced amphorae set into the brick casing, to the left and right of the kiln (Fig. 99). These comprised three tall neckless amphorae with bead rims and handles (C3023 [Fig. 116], C3025, C3086 [Fig. 116]; Pl. 414), with at least one bearing traces of pitch on the interior and two without bases (C3025, C3086). The purpose of this arrangement is unclear and is discussed further at the end of this chapter. A short distance to the east, a series of further amphorae of very similar form (C3026, C3027 [Fig. 118], C3049, C3050) were found standing in a line, within deposit 1604 (again, layers of ash, sand, silt and pottery debris), which abutted building W (Fig. 99; Pls 365, 374). One of these amphorae (C3027 [Pl. 404]) had been repaired, with holes drilled through the wall to allow a crack to be sealed. A series of carefully arranged body sherds (C3051) were stacked up next to this vessel. Several artefacts were found in this layer: the fragment of a grinding stone (F684 [Pl. 491]), parts of a faience vessel (F724) and a ceramic spindle-whorl (F730 [Pl. 430]). In addition, a neonate was carefully buried in a pigeon-pot (C3079 [Fig. 122]; Pls 369–70) just next to the northeastern corner of building W (deposit 1611), accompanied by a small ceramic counter (F713 [Pl. 429]); it remains possible that some of the ceramics arranged nearby were intentional deposits next to the burial. Presumably the deposit of discarded amphorae found in trench CB, though of slightly different form and Kom Firin II | 169

Spencer including an import (C2565–2568 [Fig. 115]; see Fig. 77; Pl. 412), may have been used for a similar purpose prior to being discarded. No further architecture was encountered in the upper levels of the area north of building W, rather further mixed deposits of sand, charcoal, bone, pottery and brick rubble (1603, 1601) and a surface deposit consisting mostly of windblown sand (1600). The finds encountered in these deposits were consistent with the range of activities suggested by the uncontaminated strata: a quartzite saddle quern (F710 [Pl. 484]), ceramic counters (F683, F693, F691, F697 [Pl. 429]) and spindle-whorls (F687, F694 [Pl. 430]), fragments of faience vessels (F702, F705), another faience object (F842 [Pl. 552]), a gaming piece (F675 [Pl. 539]) and cylinder beads in Egyptian blue (F700 [Pl. 523]). In addition, a large fragment of an oven or kiln was recovered, preserving the flue hole (F709 [Fig. 127; Pl. 441]). Later architecture of phases C-IIIB and C-IV was encountered in trench CC (Figs 74, 96; Pl. 375). Walls 1408, 1409 and 1412 all appear to be contemporaneous. The first (1408) is a sizeable structure of 1.05m in thickness (three brick lengths), preserved to five courses in height (bricks of 20–4 x 10–15 x 8cm, in both pale yellow and dark brown clays) and founded directly on the earlier phase C-IIIA wall 1650. It was later thickened with the addition of brickwork (1409) on its eastern face, 40cm thick but with smaller bricks (17–20 x 8–10 x 7–12cm). These walls form part of the same architectural phase as buildings C and G and may even be part of the former structure. The poorly preserved easternmost wall (1412) ran north– south across the whole trench, but was only 50cm in width, constructed from crumbly black clay bricks (dimensions not visible). Wall 1412 acted and may have been intended as the foundation courses for subsequent walls 1410 (35cm thick, large black bricks of 28–35 x 20–22 x 7cm) and 1411 (55cm thick, mixture of brick types, 16–19 x 12 x 6–7cm), which flanked a doorway providing access into a space to the east, contemporaneous with building B to the east. Deposits associated with these walls consisted of a mixture of windblown sand, charcoal and pottery with some mudbrick debris (1403, 1404, 1405), with lower layers containing more organic debris and limestone chippings (1407, 1408); the surface deposits (1400, 1401, 1402) were principally made up of windblown sand and perhaps included spoil from the nearby excavations by Shafiq Farid, including buildings B and D (Fig. 73). The only artefacts encountered were part of the handle from a ceramic oven or basin lid (F823 [Pl. 437]) and a granodiorite smoothing tool (F830 [Pl. 478]). These structures are likely to have extended southwards, possibly over parts of earlier building T, but the depression in the current surface level over building T means that nothing survives of this phase here. Contemporaneous structures to the south of building W Outside the southern wall of building W, and over the architecture of phase C-IB (walls 1676 and 1677), occupation deposits of silt, charcoal and pottery with pockets of windblown sand accumulated (1655, 1659; the latter included part of a faience amulet, F821 [Pl. 534]) on which wall 1635 was founded. This wall is preserved to twenty courses in height, of 170 | Kom Firin II

pale yellow bricks (including two poorly constructed courses as a foundation layer), and sits directly upon wall 1676 (phase C-II), while also abutting wall 1605 (building W). Stratigraphically, however, it must lie within phase C-IIIA, perhaps contemporaneous with wall corner 1084, exposed in trench CB, with pale yellow-grey bricks of 38–9 x 6–8cm. Along with wall 1618 (again pale bricks, 31–25 x 17–19 x 7–8cm), also built up against wall 1605, the segments may define a south room appended to building W, shortly after it was built (see Fig. 108). A final segment of brickwork (1617) was attached to the inner (?) east face of wall 1618, consisting of three bricks laid on end and plastered to the original wall (Fig. 97). Within this space, a windblown sand deposit (1649, 1633, 1634) covered the area, in which the head of a faience shabti (F783 [Pl. 549]) and a spindle-whorl (F756 [Pl. 431]) were found; deposit 1116 in trench CB (Fig. 82) is probably identical to this. A layer of brick rubble (1642) pre-dates sand 1634, and included a small fragment of a fine faience vessel (F776). The next occupation phase (C-IIIB) featured the typical mixture of ash, charcoal and brick rubble (1611) in and around a small kiln or oven (1614; Fig. 99; Pl. 355). This consisted of a typical dome-shaped ceramic core and then clay lining, with ash, charcoal and sand found inside (1615). Broadly contemporaneous with this occupation is a bank of prepared mud (1102, see Fig. 77) built against the exterior face of building T, of unclear purpose, surrounded by a compacted deposit (1101), all covered in windblown sand (1097). The latest deposits south of building W included loose sand with ash lenses (1616, 1610), with a very late wall 1651 (phase C-V?) seen only in section (Fig. 97), perhaps the northeastern corner of a building, just beneath the surface deposit of windblown sand (1609). This last deposit yielded a ceramic lid (F849 [Pl. 438]) and a limestone tool (F706 [Fig. 129; Pl. 512]). Wall 1063, visible in the southwestern corner of trench CB (Figs 77, 82), might represent the same architectural phase as wall 1651, and is again perhaps the corner of a building. In the southern trench baulk, nine courses of this wall were preserved in both dark and pale yellow clay (36–7 x 18–19 x 6cm) built directly upon the remains of the phase C-IIIA building T (wall 1087). A faience vessel fragment was found embedded in the wall (F585). Above this lay brick rubble (1091) and windblown sand (1043, 1045). Characterising the Late Period town The ceramic material recovered from the deposits associated with structures of phases C-IA through C-V provides clear evidence that the exposed buildings were occupied between the 6th and 4th centuries bc, i.e. from the late 26th dynasty through until the early Ptolemaic Period (Chapter 9), with the exposed buildings above (B, C, G) dating to the continued occupation of the area in the Ptolemaic Period and perhaps the early Roman Period as well. The area can be characterised as a zone of densely laid out structures, within the limits of the contemporaneous enclosure wall (Chapter 10); evidence for Late Period housing within temple temenoi is not extensive, though the problems of interpreting buildings preserved only as foundations is a factor (Leclère 2008: 638–9). Textual evidence regarding the need to remove dwellings from sacred space at least suggests that an ideal ‘pure’ space could be sought (Thiers 1995).

The Citadel: a glimpse of the Saite town A zone containing at least four large silos, dating to the 6th century bc, each with a capacity2 of around 4m³, would amount to more than 10 tonnes of barley or 12.5 tonnes of wheat, suggesting commodity storage beyond the needs of individual households.3 A number of large basins (e.g. C2999 [Fig. 123]), and lids (e.g. F775 [Pl. 434] may be associated with the transfer of commodities in and out of these storage units; the small bowls that have been interpreted as grain scoops have not been found in the Citadel. While two of the silos might lie within a single building (X, Fig. 109), or even courtyard, and thus might relate to either large-scale centralised storage connected to a temple or a wealthy household commanding control of parts of local agricultural produce, the incomplete exposure of this phase precludes a more confident interpretation. In some ways, the presence of a number of large silos within a relatively restricted area echoes the situation found in the late New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period phases revealed in the eastern part of Kom Firin (Chapter 4). Though at first appearance, the presence of silos within a casemate structure seems to echo the situation found at Mendes (Wilson 1982: 5–9, pls 3 and 9 [2]; though see Leclère 2008: 653–4), Buto (Hartung and Ballet 2010: 191, fig. 131) and Tuna el-Gebel (Melanie Flossmann, pers. comm.), at Kom Firin these silos pre-date the casemate structures. One building at Buto illustrates how the use of these structures can change within a short time frame: described as an early 6th-century bc house (thus contemporary with phase C-IA to II in the Citadel at Kom Firin) of 17 x 17m, with at least four large silos of c. 2.3m in diameter set within the interior spaces, the building was soon reused for late Saite burials (Hartung and Ballet 2010: 168–9). As these do not seem to have been fully excavated (Hartung et al. 2003: 212), the relationship to the house itself, and whether they are entirely contemporaneous, is not clear. The size of this building led the excavators to argue against its identification as a private house but perhaps as an official or administrative building (Hartung et al. 2003: 215). In the 450m² area in which our excavations took place, a significant reworking of the urban layout occurred at the onset of phase C-IIIA, in the late 6th or early 5th centuries bc, with at least three structures (T, U, W) built over and around the ruins, and perhaps partly levelled remains of the preceding phase. Structures T and U can be designated as casemate foundations, in which the preserved brickwork represents the lower part of buildings, consisting of thick brick walls interspersed with cellular voids, all designed to provide an elevated platform for one or several floors of occupation/activity spaces, although it is possible that some such spaces were used as cellars.4 The examples at Kom Firin were constructed directly upon earlier, partly levelled architecture, without foundation trenches.5 Casemate construction was used for a wide range of buildings (Spencer, A.J. 1999b), but as with so many casemate platforms in the Nile Delta, the disappearance of everything above foundation level leaves interpretation of function rather difficult. It is particularly striking that individual, stand-alone buildings are introduced, in contrast to the contiguous structures found in the Ramesside enclosure (Chapter 4), and indeed characterising modest housing areas in settlements, such as at Tell el-Amarna (e.g. Grid 12, Kemp and Stevens 2010a: 300, fig. 4.1) and Amara West (Spencer, N. 2014). Building W, in contrast, was not a platform building, despite

the significant thickness of its walls. Rather, the walls are contemporaneous with the installation of a pottery kiln. As the exterior ground surface was at a similar level during phase C-IIIA, one must envisage building W as being a street-level pottery workshop, whereas adjacent building T, whatever its function, would have been raised above street level. Nonetheless, the zone can be broadly characterised as an urban area, and one probably including several houses, given the artefact assemblages (items of adornment, grindstones, cooking vessels and especially tableware; Chapters 8–9) and the burial of a child within a ceramic vessel.6 Conversely, there is a notable lack of hearth emplacements, a feature typical of houses. This might be significant for the early phases where occupation deposits survive, but from phase C-IIIA, at least for buildings T and U, only the foundations survive. The evidence for production and craft activities is not inconsistent with a domestic designation of this area. In the Citadel, this seems to have included fairly heavy industry such as pottery production (building W) and perhaps faience production, though the range of flint, bone, ceramic and stone tools (Chapter 8) found in and around the buildings could reflect household-based production of beadwork, leatherwork and textiles; evidence for woodworking is unlikely to have survived. Kemp and Stevens (2010a: 478–96) paint an evocative picture of household production for a combination of individual, local market and central needs in a district of Tell el-Amarna; areas more dedicated to production are also attested to in the central parts of that city. The phenomenon is likely to have persisted into later times (see Leclère 2008: 653). Though some metal objects were recovered from these buildings, the lack of slag, crucible or tuyère fragments would suggest metal production did not take place here.7 The discovery of a bowl bearing an inscription invoking a form of Sekhmet (F382 [Fig. 128; Pl. 452]) in addition to fired clay figurines and amulets hint at the spiritual concerns of the inhabitants, and their relationship (direct or indirect) to the formal cult temple(s) at Kom Firin (see Spencer, N. 2008: 26­–7). The rarity of imported ceramics, particularly once transport amphorae are discounted, underlines how the centuries-old town of Kom Firin may have been largely unaffected by the Greek presence at nearby Naukratis, at least for the majority of its inhabitants.8 The diminishing importance of pig in the diet compared to the earlier phases at Kom Firin, is perhaps notable, though it still remains high compared to the typical profile of faunal remains at dynastic settlement sites; there are also a significant number of horse remains found within the Citadel area (Chapter 13). The limited exposure at Kom Firin (Fig. 108) is sufficient to ascertain that the buildings are narrowly spaced if freestanding and do not all follow the same orientation. Magnetometry survey at Tell el-Balamun (Spencer. A. J. 2009: 104–9) has provided a good impression of the dense, meandering streets which such structures overlooked, many of them undoubtedly houses, located within and beyond the temple enclosure. A similarly dense layout has been identified, though as yet unexcavated, at Tanis (Brissaud 2000), and smaller exposures appear to confirm this pattern was widespread across the Delta, for example at Tell el-Dab’a (Lehmann 2012), Buto (Hartung et al. 2003: fig. 5; Hartung et al. 2009: 136–8, fig. 20),9 Mendes (Wilson 1982: pl. 3), Tell Kom Firin II | 171

Spencer Muqdam (Redmount and Friedman 1997), Tell Fara’on (Mustafa 1988: 144, fig. 3), perhaps Sais (Wilson 2006: 160–1 fig. 46) and in Saite layers at Tell Heboua II. At Elephantine, a similarly dense layout of Saite houses has been cleared (Aston 1999: 214 fig. 8), though these houses lack the imposing walls found in the ‘tower-houses’. Temple temenoi and processional routes that project beyond them, as well as waterways, influenced the urban layout (Leclère 2008: 647–50), though the stand-alone houses would allow for considerable agency at individual or household level. Conversely, the lack of rubble layers and the consistency of reconstruction phases across a number of such buildings at Ptolemaic Buto suggest that widescale rebuilding of parts of neighbourhoods could also occur (Ballet et al. 2011: 81). Although streets or alleys of any significant length cannot be identified in the excavations at Kom Firin, the district is likely to have suffered from rapidly accumulating strata of rubbish, dirt and windblown sand and consequent measures to reduce the impact of these phenomena (see Marouard 2008). At Buto, passages varied from 2 to 5m in width, and a route alongside the Late Period temenos was respected throughout the Ptolemaic occupation of the area (Ballet et al. 2011: 95 fig. 2). Amongst Ptolemaic housing at other sites, it seems that alongside functioning as circulation routes and places to dump refuse, these spaces could also be co-opted for extending the area of houses, particularly with small courtyards for cooking and other activities (Marouard 2008: 125; Hartung et al. 2009: 138; Ballet et al. 2011: 78–82, 94–6 figs 1–5): feature 1136, or those north of building W, could reflect the same phenomenon. In the Citadel at Kom Firin, the three examples of platform buildings appear to have a rectangular, rather than square plan, but this is not uncommon at other sites. With a suggested footprint of 12 x 7m, building T (Fig. 108) is of similar scale to late Saite/Persian era houses at Tell el-Dab’a (Lehmann 2012: 30) or the early Ptolemaic buildings at Buto (Hartung et al. 2009: 137–8 fig. 20). The construction method of these buildings, with exterior walls often more than 1m thick, and often with pronounced panbedding to the lower coursing (e.g. 1130), is familiar from sites across the Nile Delta from the Late Period onwards: used for ‘tower-houses’ (Arnold 2003: 172–7) but probably also peripteral temples, storage facilities and other buildings.10 The Kom Firin examples do not preserve evidence of wooden beams inserted into the brickwork, as at Mendes (Wilson 1982: 7, pl. 8 [1–2]), Tell Basta (Eva Lange, pers. comm.) and Buto (Hartung et al. 2009: 137), nor the thin strata of ash placed at intervals in the brick coursing at Tell el-Dab’a (M. Lehmann, pers. comm.). The remnants of brick pavements found in the Citadel suggest how the casemate voids and foundation walls were covered (see Hartung et al. 2003: 212) prior to a working/living surface being laid. If these structures were several storeys in height, as suggested by the contemporaneous house models (Arnold 2003: 172–7), one would expect internal staircases.11 The emplacement of such staircases can be reconstructed over narrow casemate cells (see Ballet et al. 2011: 80). It is likely that these buildings were, in places, provided with wooden fittings such as doors, but particularly limestone fittings such as column bases and doorpivots, a number of which survived, though not in their original context (see Chapter 8). 172 | Kom Firin II

Though providing distance from the moist ground level, and indeed rubbish accumulating in the spaces between buildings, such construction methods are not restricted to the north of Egypt, but also farther south, for example at el-Ashmunein (Spencer, A.J. 1996b: 215–18, plans 2–3, pl. 1) and Edfu (Michałowski et al. 1950: 111–23, plans 4–5). These structures span from the late Third Intermediate Period through the Ptolemaic era. The well-preserved houses in the Fayum of Roman date retain many of the same architectural traditions (Marouard 2008). Building A, at the northern limits of the Citadel (see Fig. 73; Pls 376–9), probably dates to the Ptolemaic era when many of the houses were rebuilt or replaced and may have been excavated by Shafiq Farid (see Spencer, N. 2008: 29). With a plan of 4.9 x 3.5m, two elevations were cleaned back for recording in 2011. This revealed some notable constructional details. Firstly, at irregular intervals, the brickwork features a course of bricks placed on its sides (Fig. 111; Pl. 378). This construction method may have structural benefits with taller buildings (Arnold 2003: 149–50, fig. 95 [a]); it is also notable that this building does not display the panbedded coursing found in many casemate buildings. The almost ubiquitous use of walls of 60–100cm thick indicate no structural limitation on buildings of four storeys (Arnold 2003: 166–9); such structures would have considerably affected the feel of this urban quarter, with the shadow, light and temperature changing throughout the day. Secondly, the use of brick arches for structural support is evident in the north face (Fig. 112; Pl. 379). It is worth emphasising that these arches are bonded with the brickwork (not rubble) that fills them; these were never intended to maintain voids or define spaces. The presence of domed structures, filled with debris, have been interpreted as structural voids designed to isolate the upper storeys (perhaps with grain storage) from the damp Delta climate, such as at Mendes (Leclère 2008: 653–4). However, without further excavation of this building, it is not clear if the interior features cellular voids typical of casemate structures. The lowest occupation/activity floor of building A may not be preserved, if one considers the top of arch 1005, in which case the foundation is of at least 2.6m in height (similar to a building at Mendes, Wilson 1982: 8, pls 8 [2], 9 [1]), much of which may have stood proud of the contemporaneous ground surface. Another feature of ‘tower-houses’ is the inclusion of a groundfloor court, typically at the back of the house, in which cooking and other activities took place (e.g. Marouard 2008: 118–19, fig. 2); could the spaces north and south of building W (Fig. 74) have fulfilled a similar function? Industry and production This dense agglomeration of buildings, possibly including houses, was clearly the setting for considerable amounts of industrial, craft and production activities, as is clear from the presence of a large kiln and several smaller kilns/ovens, and also reflected in the artefactual assemblage. Within the limited exposure, it is unsurprisingly difficult to ascertain any zoning: such activities are likely to have been an integral part of ancient life in this quarter of the ancient town. A pottery kiln The large kiln (1619), the only high temperature installation in the Citadel which can be definitely associated with the

The Citadel: a glimpse of the Saite town production of pottery vessels, is located within building W, contemporaneous with the construction of the casemate buildings T and U. Open-mouthed jars with moulded rims and a hole in the base were produced in this kiln. Ubiquitous in the assemblage from the Citadel (Chapter 9), large broken segments of these pots were reused to renovate the side of the kiln, and wasters of this shape were found inside the chamber. Clearly something very familiar to the local inhabitants, these ‘pigeon-jars’ could also be repurposed, in one case for the burial of a neonate just metres from the kiln. Textual evidence suggests potters in Roman Egypt were contracted to produce a restricted number of forms (Cockle 1981) whereas at Deir el-Medina, a variety of forms seems to have been produced in the same workshops (Frood 2003), which may have comprised more than one kiln. While smaller vessels could also have been produced, the kiln would not have been suitable for firing the large local amphorae prevalent in the Citadel. Whether building W featured an open, flat or vaulted roof, this would have been a very hot and smoky space once the kiln was fired; as discussed above, the method of access into this space is far from clear. Within the kiln, there would likely have been a lower chamber for fuel and an upper one for housing the pottery destined for firing. Excavation of the interior produced a mass of material that may have collapsed from the walls and also includes elements of kiln furniture and remnants of a network of walls which might have supported the floor of an upper chamber (Fig. 97). Any opening is likely to have been on the northern side, now truncated. If this was of small size, it is possible vessels were loaded from above and then the top closed with a lid, stone slab or simply clay and other material. A reasonable parallel was excavated at East Karnak (Redford 1981: 14, fig. 5) of slightly larger dimensions (diameter of 1.78m, preserved height 1.38m), which was in use during Saite and possibly Persian times. The bases of Saite kilns were found at Buto, but these have yet to be published (P. French, pers. comm.). Another kiln was found in Third Intermediate Period levels in the east of Kom Firin, though not as well preserved (Chapter 4). A late Ptolemaic kiln, perhaps of the 2nd century bc and of considerably larger dimensions, with an internal diameter of around 4.5m, was excavated at the satellite site of Kom Dahab (Coulson and Wilkie 1986: 66–73; Kenawi 2012b: 312–15).12 If pottery was being produced here, one would expect an area for clay preparation and shaping (Arnold and Bourriau 1993), though none was identified in our excavations. It is possible that any rooms south of that containing the kiln might have housed a potter’s wheel (Fig. 108), with clay preparation and drying areas in a space outdoors. A Ramesside site along the Ways of Horus preserved a pottery workshop featuring kilns and also a compartment which may have housed the potters’ wheel and spaces that could have stored prepared clay (Oren 1987: 99–103, pls G–H, fig. 9; Oren 2006: 283 fig. 3); this installation also attested to repeated repairs of the kiln. The presence of a kiln amongst a dense urban area is paralleled at other contemporaneous sites. The East Karnak kiln was originally located in an open space and was later walled in.

Other high temperature installations Phase C-II witnessed up to four silos present in this area (Fig. 109), a considerable storage capacity concentrated within a potentially domestic area (Chapter 9). Broadly contemporaneous with these facilities are circular features made from ceramic material. Two of these (1167, 1188) are located in space 1201 (Figs 75–6), adjacent to the space housing silo 1065. Both are constructed in the same manner and range from 70–90cm in diameter, though 1167 was set on a brick support. Such installations could be made in a matter of hours, forming a ring of clay, supported by mud, with the walls being hardened during the first firing. These are not particularly robust structures and may have been prone to collapse: some were refurbished with further coats of clay, as evident with 1167. Flue holes are not preserved with either example: while 1667 is truncated to less than 10cm in height, feature 1188 was preserved to 40cm in height, so one would expect to find a flue hole if it existed. As such, maintaining sufficient airflow into these ovens would only have been possible with a relatively wide opening at the top. In all likelihood, these were not designed to maintain high temperatures for a long time, and were perhaps intended primarily for cooking; small amounts of ash were recovered from in and around each oven. If cooking bread, moulds filled with dough could have been placed in the chamber, or bread trays, although the considerable size of such trays suggests that the former option may have been more likely. A number of lids recovered from the Citadel (e.g. F775 [Pl. 434]) could have served to close these ovens, perhaps to retain heat during intervals in cooking. The same interpretation is likely to apply to other circular installations of similar size: 1614 south of building W (Fig. 99), and a row of later ovens (1046–1048) found in the northern part of trench CB (Figs 77–8). Such installations are relatively ubiquitous in settlement sites of the Late and Ptolemaic Periods, for example at Tell el-Balamun (Spencer, A.J. 1996a: 68, pl. 47 [a]) and set in a brick matrix at Karnak (Masson 2007: 601–2, pl. 19 [a–b]). Two sets of features demand a different interpretation. Within room 1202, against the eastern wall are two identical circular ceramic structures, slightly larger (85–95cm in diameter) than the examples discussed above (Figs 75–6, 86). Though constructed along the same principles, with a 2–4cm thick wall of clay, both were provided with flue holes and a pair of bricks to direct airflow into the interior. The latter detail, combined with the careful positioning of the features against the rear wall of the room and filling its width, suggests a careful consideration of requirements. As such, one has to question if these were intended for cooking food rather than as part of a production process. It has not been possible to analyse deposits recovered from in and around these installations: finely striated lenses of compacted white- and orange-hued ash were recovered from within and immediately outside both features. No slag, whether vitreous or metallic, was noted in the deposits in this area. A striking characteristic of the artefact assemblage in the Citadel is the number of faience objects compared to elsewhere at Kom Firin, including rings, amulets, shabtis and especially hundreds of fragments of small vessels (Chapter 8). That faience objects were produced in housing areas is clear from a number of sites, including Kom Rabia at Memphis (Aston and Jeffreys 2007: 76–7). A rather different form of kiln, consisting of a series of rectangular chambers, Kom Firin II | 173

Spencer was identified in Ramesside strata at Sais and interpreted as having been used to produce both pottery and faience objects (Wilson 2011b: 65–71). Typically, faience production sites are identified on the basis of object moulds, or lime plaster trays with textile impressions (Nicholson 2007: 139–41). Only one mould was found in the Citadel (F383 [Pl. 433]), for an udjateye amulet, and this derived from a surface layer; no fragments of the trays were found. Of course, faience vessels and most types of beads did not require moulds; no examples of the balls or pads used to fire small beads (Nicholson 2007: 141) have been found. The abundant faience found in the Citadel area is nearly all in various shades of blue, with some black; this colour would be easily obtainable from copper oxide and charcoal respectively. Copper oxide could easily be obtained from scrap pieces of copper alloy, present in small quantities in this area (Chapter 8). The most detailed consideration relates to Grid 12 at Tell el-Amarna, where sheets of faience destined to produce colourful architectural inlays seem to have been produced in modest ceramic-lined ovens not dissimilar to those discussed here (Kemp and Stevens 2010a: 481–5). It is also noted that faience firing might produce little in the way of build-up of by-products from bubbling, splashing or even the finished objects being left behind, and that specific (diagnostic) forms of kiln supports are not necessarily essential. Grid 12 also lacks any evidence for the lime plaster trays. The second unusual feature in the Citadel was partly excavated along the western baulk of trench CD, north of building W, which was probably still in use. Here an oven or kiln (1624) of familiar construction was preserved, built using a ceramic lining to create a chamber of 75cm in height and up to 80cm in diameter, all cased in clay and brick fragments (Fig. 106). While the interior contained ash-rich deposits and charcoal was present in many of the surrounding deposits, it is the presence of several large amphorae set into mud, at least two of which were inserted without bases, lined up to the south of the kiln that makes this installation unusual (Fig. 99). The considerable ‘casing’ around the firing chamber does suggest a desire to maintain temperature over a long period, but the size of the firing chamber would only allow very small ceramic vessels to be produced.13 The production of small faience objects may have taken place here, though faience artefacts were found in less density in this area than in the area of buildings U and V. The careful arrangement of amphorae suggests a requirement for storing liquids, presumably used in whatever production space occurred here; such vessels would not have been practical for mixing substances. Note that further amphorae of the same form were found in deposits to the east, perhaps discards from this facility or related to the burial of the neonate. Though on a much larger scale, the seried rows of amphorae, all with broken bases and inserted into the ground, near Abu Hummus, have been interpreted as a plant nursery (Kenawi et al. 2012).14 With all these high-temperature features, it is likely that flexibility of use was prevalent (see Ballet 1996), especially with smaller features located in households. Alongside pottery vessels, a wide range of other fired clay objects were produced at Kom Firin (figurines, spindle-whorls), alongside faience artefacts.

174 | Kom Firin II

Notes 1

2 3

4 5 6 7 8

9 10

11 12 13 14

This might be modern, deposited in the trench during the course of our excavations. Calculations based on silo 1065, using a fill level near the top of the preserved structure, and dried barley/wheat weights as stated in Möller 2010: 92. A sondage undertaken in the Citadel (trench I, Fig. 73), west of building W, by the Naukratis Project in 1982 (Coulson and Leonard 1982a: 80, wall 1029) identified a circular wall in strata of the late Ptolemaic through 3rd century ad, which was interpreted as a granary. At Buto (sector P5), Bâtiment 7 featured five cells used (reused?) as storage spaces for straw (Ballet et al. 2011: 80, n. 24). As at Tell el-Dab’a (Manuela Lehmann, pers. comm.), but in contrast to the situation at Tell el-Herr (Séverine Marchi, pers. comm.) or Tuna el-Gebel (Melanie Flossmann, pers. comm.). On infant and child burials in housing areas, see Tristant 2012: 44–9. The Ramesside burial of a teenager in a settlement area at Sais seems more unusual (Wilson 2011b: 78–80). For metal production in a suburb at Tell el-Amarna, see Kemp and Stevens 2010a: 488–91. A dump of pottery at Sais, with around 20% consisting of East Greek and Phoenician amphorae, prompted speculation that Greek mercenaries could have been based in the city. Temple offerings may have been one large consumer of imported wine and oil, and cities could have enjoyed direct trade links that by-passed Naukratis or were distributed onwards from Naukratis (Wilson and Gilbert 2007). At Buto, though each structure has a distinct casemate foundation, some are directly adjacent to each other with no intervening space. Arnold speculates whether this form of house was imported from elsewhere or developed from indigenous forms (2003: 187); it should be noted that studies of New Kingdom architecture have foregrounded villas and planned ‘workmen’s villages’, rather than dense areas of contiguous housing, such as found at Amara West (Spencer, N. 2014). Note also Petrie’s description of three-storey New Kingdom houses at Memphis (Drower 1995: 62) and a sevenstorey house at Oxyrhynchus in the 3rd century ad (Marouard 2008: 127 n.4). The architectural technology used in these casemate buildings was long-known in Egypt, for example at Deir el-Ballas (Lacovara 1990: 2–3, fig. 1.6); perhaps climate change (including river movement), a desire for more robust structures or even social motives led to the widescale adoption of this architectural form. Though much later in date, less substantial walls in the Late Antique mudbrick houses at Elephantine may have supported buildings 11m in height (see Arnold 2003: 131–3, table 4). Evidence of a late Ptolemaic or early Roman kiln has been identified at Kedwet Hassan, 33km north–northwest of Kom Firin, see Kenawi 2012b: 312–15. The combination of clay and brick structure, with a chamber of this size, is found with a 5th-century bc kiln at Tell el-Balamun (Spencer, A.J. 1999a: 37–8, pl. 35). Other contexts for reusing amphorae include delimiting courtyards associated with houses at Istabl ‘Antar (Gayraud 2007) to line processional desert routes (Naville 1914: pl. 19 [1]), or installations associated with funerary ritual at Kom el-Giza (Bergmann and Heinzelmann 2009: 1–2, 8 fig. 3). Peña (2007: 119– 92) brings together evidence for the wide range of ways in which large amphorae were reused in the Roman world, including as drains, boundary markers, braziers and hearths, planters, architectural elements and to house burials.

8: Finds from the Citadel

This chapter provides an assessment of the finds recovered from trenches CA, CB, CC, CD, within the dense agglomeration of structures termed the ‘Citadel’ by Petrie (see Chapter 7). The artefact assemblage from the area differs noticeably from that encountered in the eastern part of Kom Firin, a distinction undoubtedly reflecting chronological and perhaps also functional distinctions between these two areas. In chronological terms, the deposits encountered in the Citadel fall within the 6th to early 4th century bc, thus straddling the date range between material excavated in the southeast of the site (Chapters 3–5) and in the slot trench (NA) across the later enclosures (Chapters 10–12). The artefact assemblage is characterised by a lack of Hellenistic-influenced objetcs, in contrast to trench NA (Chapter 12). Ceramic figurines In contrast to the New Kingdom enclosure, in which 37 cobra figurines were discovered (Chapter 6), the large artefact assemblages found in the Citadel yielded only one (F654 [Fig. 127; Pl. 415]), from a surface deposit (1104). As with some of the ceramic material from the Citadel (Chapter 9), the cobra figurine might be residual from an earlier era when such figures were more prevalent, as found with some of the ceramics in these deposits, or even redeposited from elsewhere on site, given that it was found within surface deposit 1104. Handmade quadruped figurines continued to be popular, however, with nine found in the Citadel, across a variety of deposits. Three figurines consisted of a cylindrical body with drawn out stub-like legs (F556 [Fig. 127; Pl. 416], F644 [Fig. 127; Pl. 417], F855 [Fig. 127; Pl. 418]); none of the preserved fragments attested to the figurines being painted. Some were provided with tails, which looped over one side of the hind legs (F545 [Fig. 127; Pl. 425], F677 [Fig. 127; Pl. 419]), while modelled hair (from a mane?) is evident on one example (F588 [Fig. 127; Pl. 420]). The latter is otherwise quite schematic, with legs not distinguished (as with F490 [Fig. 127; Pl. 421], F653 [Fig. 127; Pl. 423]). Stylistically in the same tradition, though with a notably finer Nile silt fabric preferred, is a quadruped with particularly careful modelling of features (F568 [Fig. 127; Pl. 426]). The figurine comprises a cylindrical body, short legs and a slender neck (head lost), with a tail projecting away from the body, rather than over a leg. Here, however, the animal supported a rider, preserved only as the end of their legs, schematically modelled, draped across the back of the body. Similar examples were found in 25th and 26th dynasty contexts at el-Ashmunein (Spencer, A.J. 1993: pls 37 [181. 184], 39 [230]). These riders are also found in 25th to early 26th dynasty contexts at Naukratis (see Thomas in Villing et al. 2013).1 A very crudely modelled ceramic figurine (F440 [Fig. 127; Pl. 427]) clearly represents a human figure, though the legs and

arms are broken. Nonetheless, the head is distinct, with one eye pinched out, the other indicated with a nodule of applied clay. Such simply modelled figures, without distinctive wigs or decorative details, are difficult to date; similar artefacts have been found at Medinet Habu (Teeter 2010: 92–3). F629 [Pl. 428], a small spherical piece of clay but with clearly demarcated nose and eyes, may have come from a similar statue. At Mendes, in and around a casemate building of unclear purpose, more than 100 ceramic figurines were found in deposits of 5th through 3rd century bc date. The variety of subjects – ‘quadrupeds including horse with rider, women on plaques, erotic figurines, the gods Osiris and Bes, a bird and a hedgehog’ (Redford et al. 1988: 67, pl. 22 [d]) – suggest the array of such representations that could inhabit a domestic space, or a modest cult place. Other ceramic artefacts Ceramic counters have been discussed in Chapter 6; many were found in the Citadel (F360, F374-F375, F403–404, F408, F457, F459, F462–F463, F508, F531, F598, F607, F610, F649, F645, F671, F683, F691, F693, F697, F713, F722, F759, F761, F798, F848 [Pl. 429]). There is no noticeable concentration amongst the deposits, in keeping with their ubiquitous nature throughout New Kingdom and first millennium bc deposits at the site. Circular ceramic discs with holes drilled through the centre, whether recut from sherds or created as such (F467, F489, F595, F597, F648, F664, F687, F694, F730, F751, F773, F777 [Pl. 430]; F590, F599, F756 [Pl. 431]) might have been used as spindle-whorls (see Chapter 6). Other artefacts of fired clay are familiar from elsewhere at Kom Firin, including part of a firedog (F478 [Pl. 436], possibly F593), a disc with only partly drilled hole (F743 [Pl. 183]), simple fired clay beads or net-sinkers (F447, F547, F628 [Pl. 432]), udjat-eye amulet-mould (F383 [Pl. 433]) and vessel lids (F775 [Pl. 434], F823 [Pl. 437], F849 [Pl. 438]). The large scale of these lids (up to 57cm) might indicate their use to cover large basins (e.g. C2999, Fig. 123). Large coarse lids with simple moulded handles, perhaps to allow ropes to be run through them, were encountered (F708 [Pl. 439]); this example is burnt on the underside, consistent with being used to cover an oven or kiln. Examples are known from late Third Intermediate Period Tanis (Defernez and Isnard 2000: 185, pl. 20 [41]) and Tell el-Balamun (Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pl. 70 [H2]). One fragment may actually be the flue-hole of a small oven (F709 [Fig. 127; Pl. 441]). Several other pieces of fired clay could not be interpreted with confidence, including F509, F779 ([Pl. 435], perhaps a rattle, see F520, F562) and F772 [Fig. 127; Pl. 440]. The latter object, cuboid in form and found in deposit 1637, may have been used to separate vessels within kiln 1619.

Kom Firin II | 175

Spencer Bone tools Six fragments of bone tools were found in the Citadel area; no others have been found at Kom Firin. Within 1070, an occupation deposit in building U, both a triangular-ended (F569 [Fig. 128; Pl. 442]) and a very sharp-pointed (F572 [Fig. 128; Pl. 443]) bone tool were recovered, the latter complete. In the rooms to the west, further bone tools were found, including two fragments in deposits within room 1209, perhaps rubble from occupation deposits from the preceding phases. The three examples from here again comprised a triangular tool (F669 [Fig. 128; Pl. 444]) and a very sharppointed example (F499 [Fig. 128; Pl. 445]), and also a narrow scoop-shaped implement with a smooth rounded end (F528 [Fig. 128; Pl. 446]). These objects, though later in date, are presumably of identical function to those found at Amarna and other sites (Kemp and Vogelsang-Eastwood 2001: 358–73; Kawinishi and Tsujimura 2012: 12–14, fig. 9 [18–20]), interpreted as pin-beaters, used by weavers to push the weft down between pairs of warp yarns, or to arrange warp yarns and clean the shed. Such tools may also have had a function in working with nets and leather (Kemp and Stevens 2010b: 449) or been part of the potters’ toolkit (Rose 1989: 88–9 fig. 45). Examples from Amarna indicate that a single tool could comprise a rounded edge and a sharp point at opposite ends. Published examples are of New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period date (Memphis, Amarna, Gurob;2 for an example found with loom weights in a room at Tell er-Retebah, see Repka et al. 2009: 264–5, fig. 25), including in Nubia (Smith 2003: 103–4, fig. 5.7); the Kom Firin group can be securely dated to the 7th–5th centuries bc. Fragment F752 (Pl. 447) incised with two parallel incised lines, comes from an earlier phase (C-IA) and is of unknown function. Faience vessels Fragments of faience vessels make up a significant part of the artefact assemblage within the Citadel, with 65 clusters of vessel fragments identified, generally on the basis of the curvature of the fragments; each cluster can contain fragments of different vessels. The findspots were fairly evenly distributed, with notable concentrations in the thick layers of redeposited material (1044, 1076, 1078) in the upper part of trench CA, and also within occupation deposits such as 1070 and 1080 of phase C-IIIA (building U) and the material (1068) which filled the space around silo 1065. The vast majority of the vessel fragments were of medium coarse, friable white core, with a thin light-blue glaze on both interior and exterior, generally with a thickness of 0.5 to 1.5cm, though notably finer examples were encountered (F453, F643, F776). Fragments of vessels with glazing restricted to the interior surface were also identified. The wall thickness of the coarser vessels are likely to have varied significantly within the same artefact. Examples of two-tone glazing were also noted (F379), as well as parts of a vessel glazed with a deeper blue (F456) or green (F504) colour; many examples showed sloppy glazing (F715). A single neck sherd from a shiny black-glazed faience vessel was recovered (F846). Diagnostic sherds indicate that simple bowls/cups with rounded bases (F511, F533 [Fig. 128; Pl. 448], F535 [Pl. 458], F536) and simple rims were most common (e.g. F396, F747). Other forms included flat-based cups of 5cm diameter (F449 [Fig. 128; Pl. 449]), bowls with thick flat-topped rims (F381 [Pl. 176 | Kom Firin II

457], F535 [Pl. 458]), vessels with pronounced shoulders, carinations or restricted rims (F380, F410, F456, F829), vessels with small handles (F705) and the rim of a small flask with a moulded rim (F717 [Pl. 450]). A small number of sherds were embellished with decorative motifs. F398 [Fig. 128], a small vessel of 5.8cm diameter featured vertical ribbing on the exterior; another sherd shows small cups/bowls of this type could have incised decor (F716 [Pl. 451; F378, F703). Finally, a straight-walled vessel (F382 [Fig. 128; Pl. 452]) bearing the inscripton ‘Sekhmet Lady of…’ was presumably destined for a temple, and correlates well with what we know of the principal cults at the Kom Firin in the early- to mid-first millennium bc (Spencer, N. 2008: 26–7). A vessel with a pronounced shoulder and plain rim (F373 [Fig. 128; Pl. 456]) was decorated with at least one bold vertical band of black; other small sherds bore less linear decoration (F505). The existence of bowls with interior, raised relief decoration is attested through a small sherd bearing the depiction of a bird (F550 [Fig. 128; Pl. 453]). One shoulder fragment of a clear glass vessel was found in trench CB (F352 [Fig. 128; Pl. 454]). Faience vessels from settlement sites have received little attention, especially for the Late Period; the earlier assemblage from Kom Rabi’a (Giddy 1999: 265–75, pls 58–9) has similarities in terms of shapes, but the majority of vessels bore decoration, as with the example from the Ramesside enclosure (F789 [Fig. 72; Pl. 291]; Chapter 5). Stone objects and tools Vessels, mortars and containers Four fragments of calcite vessels were recovered, though all were body sherds (F377, F460, F587), with the exception of the rim of a fine flask or cup with flaring rim (F431 [Fig. 128; Pl. 462]).3 Limestone mortars and bowls are not rare at Kom Firin; in the Citadel, at least six were found in our excavations. These are thick-walled vessels with the interior surface smoothed but the exterior not worked (F436, F473 [Pl. 459], F480 [Pl. 460], F486 [Pl. 463], F853 and possibly F394 [Pl. 461]), and often with a pair of projecting handles (F580 [Fig. 128]), thus similar in form to F351 (Pl. 634). The presence of gypsum in this last example provides an indication of one purpose of such containers, and a fragment of gypsum moulded by being in a mortar was also found (F600 [Pl. 464]). Such artefacts were also used in grain processing (Samuel 1989: 259–60, figs 12.2– 12.3). F494 (Pl. 465) might represent part of a shallow bowl, while F392 could be a small mortar (at only 3.0cm wall thickness) or vessel. That limestone vessels other than mortars existed is well established at Kom Firin. One was discovered within the fill of building T (F525), and like the mortars features a smoothed inside but roughly modelled exterior. The majority of limestone vessels were not found in secure contexts, but nonetheless, these attest to examples with both interior and exterior worked to a smooth finish, whether bowls with simple rims (F495 [Pl. 471], F552 [Pl. 133], F650) and rounded bases (some with concentric circles: F437 (Fig. 128; Pl. 466) is a piece of gypsum bearing the imprint of the interior base of a mortar) or tall, narrow jars (F530 [Fig. 128; Pl. 472]). The former type is best represented by F672 (Fig. 129; Pl. 473),

Finds from the Citadel which preserves a complete profile, with rounded rim and an almost flat base. The corner of a larger basin (F602 [Pl. 474]) was found within the fill of silo 1065. A relatively light rectangular container simply modelled in limestone was found in the fill within building U (F666), while a more carefully made rectangular container in the same material (F448 [Pl. 469]) was found in topsoil. Some of the flat disc-shaped (F387 [Pl. 476]) or dome-shaped (F582 [Pl. 475], F589 [Pl. 477]) objects in limestone could have been used as lids; similar objects were found in late Third Intermediate Period levels at Tanis (ZivieCoche 2000: 119, pl. 11). This range of material suggests that stone containers and mortars were a regular feature of the houses and buildings of other function in the Citadel, mirroring the situation at Memphis (Giddy 1999: 255–89). Rubbers, grinders and hammers A sub-spherical granodiorite tool (F830 [Pl. 478]) is likely to have been used as a smoother or rubber, given the lack of percussion marks; several quartzite artefacts (F399 [Pl. 479], F466 [Pl. 480]) and a sandstone object (F461) also fall into this category. The sub-spherical quartzite artefact F622 (Pl. 481), with its lack of worn or smoothed surfaces, should perhaps be seen as a hammerstone. Limestone is more likely to have been used for percussive purposes, for example F638 (Pl. 482), but many small artefacts in this material, suitable for holding in the hand, do not exhibit percussive marks (e.g. F493, F582 [Pl. 475], F618 [Pl. 496]). Limestone is not generally perceived as suitable for use as a rubber or smoother, but the well-worn surfaces of some of these objects might suggest such a function. The range of stone tools is similar to that found in contemporary deposits elsewhere in the Delta, for example at Mendes (Redford 2004: 117–18, figs 70–1). Querns and grinding-stones Quartzite saddle querns were found in deposits around the kiln 1623 (F750 [Pl. 483]) and in a later deposit to the north of building W (F710 [Pl. 484]). Further fragments from elsewhere in the Citadel could derive from such objects (F468 [Pl. 485], F483 [Pl. 486], F497 [Pl. 487], F579 [Pl. 488], F611 [Pl. 489], F621 [Pl. 490], F635 [Pl. 497]; a particularly thin version is F684 [Pl. 491]). F633 (Pl. 492) and F745 (Pl. 493) are significantly smaller objects with eroded edges, but the smoothed upper surface indicates some grinding or smoothing activity was central to their purpose. Flatter, roughly oval objects that could be comfortably held in the hand (F487 [Pl. 498]) may have been used as grinding implements in association with such querns. A large number of other quartzite artefacts with worked, smoothed or worn surfaces (F418, F420) presumably had similar uses; one example (F746 [Fig. 129; Pl. 494]) was found placed within vessel C3122 [Pl. 408] in a phase C-II occupation layer within room 1202. A granodiorite grindstone (F634 [Pl. 495]) may have been used for pigment processing rather than cereal grinding, while the ovoid form of F778 (Pl. 499) is more akin to grinding stones. Grindstones in limestone (F578 [Pl. 500], F785 [Pl. 501]) are unlikely to have been used for cereal, but their form is nonetheless identical to grindstones in harder material.

Other Only one flint implement, a scraper (F516 [Fig. 129; Pl. 502]), was found in the Citadel. As elsewhere at Kom Firin, a large amount of worked limestone was recovered; this was naturally the stone of choice for architectural fittings such as door-jambs (possibly F636 [Pl. 503]?), door-pivots (F657 [Pl. 504], possibly F578 [Pl. 500], F616 [Pl. 507]), column bases (possibly F471 [Pl. 508], F475 [Pl. 505]), paving stones or tables (possibly F479 [Pl. 506]) and for mortars (see above). The door pivots are particularly prosaic in the nature of their creation: essentially pieces of stone (rectangular or dome-shaped), with no finished surfaces other than the necessary circular depression; in some cases, they might represent reuse of grindstones (F578 [Pl. 500]). With many pieces, it is not possible to ascertain their original function (F363 [Pl. 510], F364, F472 [Pl. 509], F485 [Pl. 518], F492, F581), and some of the stone is of quite poor quality (F465). Perhaps surprisingly, no pieces of limestone drilled with holes for use as weights are found, in contrast to elsewhere at Kom Firin (Chapter 6). Some fragments featured decorative bands on the worked surface (F393 [Pl. 511]), reminiscent of some of the worked fragments from the decorated gateway of the Ramesside enclosure (see Chapter 3). Smaller limestone objects with shallow depressions on one surface are of unclear purpose (F419, F435); F706 (Fig. 129; Pl. 512) also bears such a depression but is an otherwise carefully smoothed object. Such objects may have been used as drillheads (see Giddy 1999: 223–5, pl. 49). Quartzite cylinders with depressions in one side might have been used to sharpen blades or points (F366 [Pl. 513], F488 [Pl. 519]).4 A summarily carved statuette of a recumbent lion on a base, perhaps unfinished, was found near the Ramesside gateway (F144 [Pl. 255]); an object of similar scale and workmanship was acquired near Armant (Mond 1940: pl. 24 [S.160]). Small, summarily worked, cone-shaped limestone objects (F619 [Pl. 514], F758 [Pl. 515]) are of uncertain function, though ceramic artefacts of the same size and form (Spencer, N. 2008: 67–8) might have been used as gaming pieces, counters or even to support faience objects during firing (see Friedman 1998: 170, 255 [78]; Redford 2004: 134, fig. 87 [808]). The wear at the top of F506 (Pl. 516) might be consistent with use as a gaming piece. More angular objects, effectively truncated pyramids (F376 [Fig. 129; Pl. 517]), may have had a similar use, although larger examples (F707 [Pl. 520]) are perhaps better interpreted as supports. Finally, natural pebbles (F388 [Pl. 521], F482 [Pl. 522]) would have been collected from nearby waterways for a variety of uses. Other artefacts Items of adornment and amulets The assemblage of jewellery and amulets is consistent with that found in other Late Period contexts in the Delta, such as at Mendes (Redford 2004: 119, fig. 72), though few were found in the Citadel. These include faience beads of roughly spherical form (F624, F667, F763 [Pl. 523]), finer disc beads with carefully applied glaze (F401 [Pl. 523]). Other items in this category include a simple disc bead of Egyptian blue frit (F847), a mixture of faience and Egyptian blue beads (F700 [Pl. 523]), a bead of finely carved milky quartz (F450 [Pl. 523]) and a trapezoidal cornelian pendant (F368 [Pl. 523]); more Kom Firin II | 177

Spencer spectacular adornment is suggested by a granodiorite ear-stud (F518 [Pl. 523]). A number of fragments of ring shanks were recovered, some of plain form in a light blue glassy faience (F498 [Fig. 129; Pl. 524], F500+F534 [Fig. 129; Pl. 525], F507 [Pl. 528]), others with two, parallel, incised lines embellishing the exterior (F406 [Fig. 129; Pl. 526]) and one example of an openwork ring (F501 [Pl. 529]). These could have been hair, ear or finger rings. A small glass sphere may be a bead blank (F819). The most common material used for amulets was faience, with udjat-eyes, including examples with decoration on two (F356 [Pl. 530]) or one (F369 [Pl. 531], F623 [Pl. 532], F663 [Fig. 129; Pl. 533], F821 [Pl. 534]) sides. Representations of deities are limited to the base of a falcon figurine (F820 [Pl. 527]). A small plaque with badly defined relief decor may also have fulfilled an amuletic function (F523 [Fig. 129; Pl. 535]); another piece featured linear and possibly figural decoration incised into the surface (F591 [Fig. 129; Pl. 542]). Two fragmentary objects might have been handles for sistra or mirrors (F510 [Pl. 536], F784 [Pl. 537]); the base of another artefact may once have been part of a similar, though larger object (F546 [Pl. 538]). A further fragment could be interpreted as the base of a gaming piece (F675 [Pl. 539]). A finely worked ivory artefact (F402 [Fig. 129; Pl. 540]) may have been a hairpin (see F637; Chapter 6). Finally, pumice stones with worn surfaces (F353 [Pl. 541], F367, F712 [Pl. 543]) were found in the surface layers of trench CB (see Chapter 6). Figurines and shabtis The most intruiging object amongst the assemblage is F514/ F641 [Pl. 544], which has been partly rejoined from fragments from two different contexts. Those fragments where joins have been identified indicate that this was a three-dimensional figure with a base (though with inset underside), modelled features and a taller element at the front. Elements of the reconstruction point to the form of a sphinx with wig, with a figure in front of its chest, but a close parallel has yet to be identified. Other figural forms included the combination of female (?) figurine upon a flat base (F538 [Fig. 129; Pl. 422]), a form known from other Late Period sites in the Delta (see Chapter 12, and discussion of F329 [Fig. 146; Pl. 601]). A small fitting or figure in light blue faience (F818 [Pl. 546]) is difficult to interpret. The fragmentary faience object (F389 [Fig. 129; Pl. 545]) bearing images of three small monkeys modelled in relief, holding hand to mouth and decorated with black paint, can be associated with ceremonial staff-fittings or ‘talismans’, often bearing a large representation of Bes and embellished with monkey figures around a papyriform sceptre base (British Museum EA 262675 and EA 27375;6 Bulté 1991: 17–33, pls 1–14; Friedman 1998: 210 [75]). The majority of known examples of this object type have been found in the eastern Delta (Bulté 1991: 111–13). Three shabtis were found, including two (F358 [Pl. 547], F386 [Pl. 548]) from a late redeposit of material (1044), while F783 [Pl. 549] was found in a C-IIIA deposit south of building W. There is no evidence for the use of the area for burials, other than the neonate interred in a pigeon-pot, thus it is possible that shabtis were being produced here, perhaps in the small kilns along with vessels of the same material. All three shabtis 178 | Kom Firin II

are consistent with a Saite-Persian date, with a dorsal pillar (e.g. Schneider 1977: 57–70); only one preserves a glaze, with a dark blue wig juxtaposed against the light blue glaze of the face. Finally, other objects are more difficult to interpret, but are clearly not vessel fragments, so might represent the remains of small figurines, amulets or even shabtis (F452 [Pl. 550]], F455, F551 [Fig. 129; Pl. 551], F642, F788 [Fig. 129; Pl. 557], F842 [Pl. 552]). Metalwork As elsewhere at Kom Firin, corroded metal fragments attest to the use of tools and implements of copper alloy and perhaps also adornments such as bracelets, earrings and amulets. Unfortunately, the original form of some objects was beyond identification (F790 [Pl. 553]) and included artefacts of extended/linear form, perhaps nails, pins or plugs (F405 [Pl. 554], F733 [Pl. 555]), bracelets, earrings or armlets (F414 [Pl. 556]), flat objects (F735) and small spherical fragments (F815). Copper alloy objects, once broken and eroded, were a useful source of copper oxide used to create the blue colour in faience. A corroded iron object (F524) was also found. A greywacke palette of unusual form is pierced with small holes (F521 [Fig. 129; Pl. 558]). Notes 1

A quadruped figurine from Medinet Habu featuring a long tail is interpreted as a donkey with baskets draped over its back (Teeter 2010: 122 [156]). 2 A wide range of forms were found at Mit Rahina, now in the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. 3 Perhaps part of a cup similar to one found at Beth Shan: James and McGovern 1993, II: fig. 110 [5]. 4 Examples were found at Mit Rahina: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology 29–74–347 (M3337). 5 www.britishmuseum.org/research/search_the_collection_ database/search_object_details.aspx?objectid=171783&partid=1 6 www.britishmuseum.org/research/search_the_collection_ database/search_object_details.aspx?objectid=171373&partid=1

9: Ceramics from the Saite occupation (Citadel) by Ross Thomas

During two seasons of excavation in the Citadel (Chapter 7), the quantity of ceramics recovered prompted sub-sampling for study and classification, resulting in the selection of indicator sherds to form a typological series.1 No statistical analysis has been undertaken. Only the most typical and significant examples are published here.2 The good preservation of many forms and the relatively short period of occupation for some of the phases make this a valuable corpus of Late Period ceramics. This, and the presence of a kiln, provide valuable chronological and typological information to complement published Late Period ceramic assemblages from the Nile Delta. Though sherds recovered in the excavations span the Ramesside through Roman eras, i.e. echoing the occupation range of the settlement as a whole (Spencer, N. 2008: 32–3), the material from stratified deposits have close parallels with ceramic forms of the mid-8th to mid-4th century bc date, placing the assemblage within the 25th to 30th dynasties. Furthermore, a concentration of pottery distinctive of the 7th to 6th centuries bc presumably reflects the major occupation phases encountered in the excavation, including the operation of kiln 1619 in the 6th century bc (phase C-IIIA). Earlier material is limited and fragmentary, suggesting that it is residual or reused. Rare Ptolemaic and Roman material, including black gloss and red-slipped tablewares and amphorae, were found only in disturbed or surface deposits. Though of a tradition already present in the late 25th Dynasty, the presence of imported 6th century bc sherds confirms that the majority of the material falls within the Saite dynasty. This is followed by 5th and 4th century bc material found within the structures built in phases C-IV and C-V and finally Roman and modern surface material. Fabric The vast majority of ceramics were of Egyptian manufacture, the most common fabric being a local red-brown Nile silt, often with a grey-black core and coarse temper of rounded quartz, limestone, chaff, dung and mica (Pls 380–1). It was used for pigeon-jars produced in the kiln (1619), as well as a range of tablewares, coarsewares, jars and amphorae. It was typically 10R5/6 to 7.5YR7/4 with smoothed surfaces 7.5YR7/4 and occasionally a black or grey core, with medium porosity and hardness. Common inclusions, usually 0.5–1mm but up to 3mm, added as temper include rounded quartz sand, angular limestone with reaction rims (and possibly shell), chaff/straw, yellow-brown organic dung, black or burnt inclusions (clay pellets) and, rarely visible, fine mica. Tableware typically features finer temper (Pl. 382). Other Nile silt fabrics were less common, but include micaceous chocolate brown examples from elsewhere in the Nile Valley. Egyptian marl (calcareous) fabrics were soft, crumbly and filled with organic temper, and mostly attested for mortaria dishes with moulded external rims (Pl. 383) and carinated

bowls. Finer marl fabrics were used for bottles and finewares. Marl fabrics from Phoenicia, Palestine and Cyprus were used to make imported amphorae and bottles. Fabrics typical of the Levantine coast were used to make the Phoenician (Bettles 2003: fabric 1A; Pls 384–5) and Palestinian amphorae (Pls 386–7), with at least two variants (fine orange-pink marl and a coarser pale yellow lime-tempered marl). A soft brown silt fabric produced at Gaza was used for Phoenician amphorae (Bettles 2003: fabric 2B; Pls 388–9), with (presumably Egyptian) copies of these transport vessels in mixed silt and marl fabrics (Pls 390–1). Imported Greek fabrics include a number of examples of Chian (Pls 392–3), Samian (Pls 394, 397) and over-fired (Pl. 395) and Knidian amphora (Pl. 396) as well as Greek black gloss (‘black glaze’, Pl. 398) vessels. Cypriot amphorae in a black sandtempered marl (Pl. 401) and Cypriot flasks in a very fine cream fabric were also found (Pls 399–400). Egyptian jars The majority of the pottery was found in Saite contexts. Whilst many Egyptian forms changed little over a long period of time, the following forms can be confidently associated with 26th dynasty contexts, but for completeness earlier and later parallels are included in the discussion of these often long-lived forms. Common straight-necked, plain-rim (without handle) jars come in globular, oval and pear shaped, shouldered forms made in a local red Nile Delta silt fabric. Usually only rim sherds were available as indicators, not allowing body shape to be determined. Rim variants had a groove below the rim (C2400 [Fig. 113], C2408 [Fig. 113], C2441 [Fig. 113]3), a rib below the rim (C2232 [Fig. 113]), or were featureless (C22324). Parallels for grooved (C2400, C2408, C2441; Aston 1987; Aston 1999: pl. 77 [2124]; Wod´zinska 2009a: LP16, LP17; Aston and Aston 2010: 232 pl. 126 [224–7]), rib (C2232; Wod´zinska 2009a: P24) and plain rims (C2233 [Fig. 113]; Aston 1999: pl. 77; Wod´zinska 2009a: LP41, P67) all have 7th to 4th century bc parallels. Necked globular (C3091 [Fig. 113]) or oval (C3000 [Fig. 113]) jars date from the Ramesside into the 6th century bc (French 1992: 88; Aston 1996: 330, 337 figs 228 and 235; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 1998: 18; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 2000: 11A–12D). Variants with a pear- or bag-shaped body and carinated shoulder, known as ‘shouldered jars’ (C3101 [Fig. 113]) were also found with straight necks and a plain rim. These are dated from 750–650bc to the Saite Period (Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pls 68–9: D1.61–66; Smoláriková 2007: 195, fig. 3; Wod´zinska 2009a: PL64). Small rim fragments of necked jars (C2091 [Fig. 113], C2256 [Fig. 113], C2486 [Fig. 113], C2549 [Fig. 113]), have 5th to 4th century bc parallels (Aston 1999: pl. 75 nos. 2085 and 2086; Wod´zinska 2009b: P7), but these jars have changed little since the 20th and 21st dynasties (Smoláriková 2008: C274), so these residual sherds from disturbed layers are of little chronological significance. A jar or Kom Firin II | 179

Thomas bowl bead rim fragment (C2507 [Fig. 113]) made from an organic Nile silt and marl mix fabric is probably Egyptian, with a close Late Period parallel at Tell el-Balamun (Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pl. 62, no. A.3.146). Flaring rim shouldered/pear-shaped jars (C2562 [Fig. 113], C3032, C3090 [Fig. 113; Pl. 409], C3093 [Fig. 114]) and their rims (C2186 [Fig. 114], C2127 [Fig. 114], C2344 [Fig. 114]) were common. These pear-shaped, ‘shouldered’ jars with flaring necks, have 7th century bc (Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pl. 69 [68–71]; 2003: pl. 14 [3]) and 4th century bc (Wod´zinska 2009a: P24, P26) parallels. Some of the rim fragments may come from globular or oval-shaped jars that date from the late Third Intermediate to the Saite period (Aston 1996: 321, 326, 328, figs 219.g-h, 224.c, 226.105; Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pl. 69 [68–71]; 2003: pls 14 [3], 16 [11]; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 2000: 14A–15B). Finally, bag- or globular-shaped jars with rolled bead-shaped rims (C2271 [Fig. 114], C2365 [Fig. 114], C2471 [Fig. 114], C2535 [Fig. 114], C2569 [Fig. 114; Pl. 403], C3037 [Fig. 114]5) have a long tradition in Egypt, from the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period (Aston 1996: 322 fig. 220 [a–b], 328 fig. 226 [102], 330 fig. 228 [133], see also 300 fig. 198; Smoláriková 2008: C084; Wod´zinska 2009a: TIP34); however, a Late Period date is most likely from the parallels (Aston 1999: pl. 76; Wod´z inska 2009a: LP51). Narrow-mouthed jars with rolled bead-shaped rims (C2053 [Fig. 114], C3204 [Fig. 114]) have 6th to 4th century bc parallels (Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pl. 66 [C5.26–27]; Aston 1999: pl. 80 [221]; Wod´zinska 2009a: LP57). Large wide-mouthed jars (C2179 [Fig. 114], C2207 [Fig. 114], C2473 [Fig. 114]) have 7th to 5th century parallels (Smoláriková 2008: C031; Wod´zinska 2009a: LP56, LP86). Rolled rim wide-mouthed jars (C2044, C2249 [Fig. 114], C2449) have a long tradition in Egypt with 20th/21st dynasty, Third Intermediate and Late Period parallels (C2044, C2443 [Fig. 114]; Aston 1999: pl. 89 no. 2353; Smoláriková 2008: C002, C069; Wod´zinska 2009a: TIP 18). An example with an external groove has 5th to 4th century bc parallels (C2150 [Fig. 115]; Aston 1999: pl. 72 [2039]). Egyptian amphorae The most common amphora form was a neckless almond bead rim amphora, with chunky short handles close to the rim, made of local red Nile Delta silt (C2565, C2568 [Fig. 115], C3023 [Fig. 116], C3086 [Fig. 116], C3143 [Fig. 116], C3144 [Fig. 117]6). These developed out of late 8th century bc precursors (Aston 1989: 289–333b; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 2000: 8A) that continued as ribbed varieties into the 3rd century bc (Aston 2007: 428). These have close parallels that date to the 7th to 5th centuries bc (Aston 1996: 323, fig. 221.c; 1999: 226–31 pl. 70–2, nos. 2007, 2038; Hartung et al. 2003: 223; Redford 2004: XVIII.2; Wod´zinska 2010: 249–50, LP72, LP73), found here with 26th dynasty material. These amphorae were associated with stands made from the same fabric found in 7th to 4th century bc contexts (C2369 [Fig. 116]; Bourriau and Aston 1985: 120; French and Ghaly 1991: 110–11; Aston 1999: pl. 67 figs 1955–6; Redford 2004: XXI.1; Aston and Aston 2010: 173 and 209, fig. 37, pls 3.46–52). Large, wide neckless bead rim amphorae made of local red Nile silt (C3139 [Fig. 117]7) date from the late 8th (but mainly mid-6th) to 4th centuries bc (Aston 1999: pl. 69 fig. 1976, pl. 89 fig. 2353; Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pl. 64 [C3.10–19]; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 2000: 2A2Be1/4, 3A-D; Redford 2004: XVIII.1; 180 | Kom Firin II

Smoláriková 2007: 195 figs 2–3). One form with a triangular everted rim (C2532 [Fig. 118]) is similar to 4th-century bc forms (Aston 1999: pl. 89 fig. 2376). A four-handled jar in Nile silt (C3027 [Fig. 118; Pl. 404]) was found in association with the 6th–5th centuries bc kiln (1619), though a parallel could not be found without diagnostic rim or base features, and broadly has Ramesside to Ptolemaic parallels (Aston 1996: 317, fig. 215, 324, fig. 222d, 329, fig. 227.124 [though all are broader jars]; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 1998: 66). Complex ribbed rim, pear-shaped amphorae with a sharp shoulder carination, small handles at narrow shoulders and ribbed bodies were used in Sudan and Egypt from the 8th to mid-4th centuries bc. The earliest 25th to 27th dynasty forms were made of a marl fabric, whilst copies in Nile silt are prevalent thereafter (Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pls 67 [C6.96–104], 68 [D1]). In the Citadel, these small sherds may be residual as they are common in the 25th dynasty, but the form is known to persist into the Saite and Persian periods. At Kom Firin variants were made from marl (C24848), a marl silt mix9 or local red Nile silt (C2208 [Fig. 118], C2319 [Fig. 118], C2550 [Fig. 118]) and finer chocolate brown silt fabrics.10 The forms at Kom Firin can be dated to the 27th dynasty to the 5th/4th centuries bc (C2319, C3112 [Fig. 118]; Aston 1999: 229, 237, pls 71 and 75, figs 2035, 2037, 2077; 2008: 361–3, pls 144–5 figs 2979, 2976, 2978; Wod´zinska 2009a: 249–50, LP35, LP37). A small fragment of a similar amphora in marl fabric (C2484 [Fig. 118]), but with a straight tapering neck and thickened ribbed rim probably dates from the late Saite to 5th or 4th centuries bc (C2484, Aston 1999: 231–3 pl. 72 fig. 2041, see also 2130; Wod´zinska 2010: 236, LP38). Egyptian Red Nile Delta Silt amphorae with short, widemouthed, flaring, ribbed and thickened rim with two handles (C2336 [Fig. 118], C2396 [Fig. 118], C2529 [Fig. 118]11) are dated from the late Third Intermediate Period down to the late 8th to early 7th centuries bc (see C4089; Aston 1996: 264, fig. 162, 277, fig. 175.A3, 324, fig. 222.a; Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pl. 70 D4.5; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 2000: 5A–C; Spencer, A.J. 2003: pls 13–14; Wod´zinska 2009a: LP11). It is likely that these are residual sherds, as although there is one parallel with a 4th century bc date (Herbert and Berlin 2002: 100); this would be much later than the rest of the material in these contexts. Smaller variants of ribbed neck storage jars (C2145 [Fig. 118], C2146 [Fig. 118]12) have late Third Intermediate Period to 5th/4th centuries bc parallels (Aston 1999: 220–1 pl. 67, fig. 1961; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 2000: 5D-F; Smoláriková 2008: C088, C165, C330, C384; Wod´zinska 2009a: 248, LP70, LP71) and may also be residual. Phoenician and Palestinian amphorae A number of Phoenician amphorae (C3141–3142 [Fig. 118]) were found: neckless (C2003, C2070 [Fig. 118], C2094 [Fig. 118], C2174, C2231, C2382 [Fig. 119], C2419 [Fig. 119], C2439 [Fig. 119], C2554, C2998 [Fig. 119]) with small handles (C2354, C2566 [Fig. 119], C2567 [Fig. 119], C3081 [Fig. 119], C3151 [Fig. 119]) at their carinated shoulders and either torpedo or biconical bodies tapering to a simple spike (C2210 [Fig. 119]13), or flattened base (C2058, C2427). One variant has an internal lip (C2075 [Fig. 119]), with mid-6th/5th centuries bc parallels (Heidorn 1992; Aston 1999). They are most common from the Third Intermediate Period to the 3rd century bc, though

Ceramics from the Saite occupation (Citadel) variants continue into the Roman Period (French and Ghaly 1991: 20–1; Heidorn 1992: 22 [d], 23 [a, c, e]; Spencer, A.J. 1996a: pl. 170 [E1–2; E2.15, E3.9]; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 1998: 68–9; Aston 1999: pl. 72 [2010, 2045, 2007]; Brissaud and Zivie-Coche 2000: 7A-K; Hartung et al. 2003: 226; Redford 2004: pl. XIX.1–2; Reynolds 2005: pl. 12 figs 84–7; Bourriau and French 2007: 118; Wod´zinska 2009a: LP25, LP30, LP31, LP32, LP33, LP147; Defernez 2001: nos 236, 242; Jacquet-Gordon 2012: fig. 117 [p. 1207]). A late Saite or Persian date is most likely for these vessels, as the forms become particularly common in the mid-6th to 5th century bc, both in Egypt and the Levant (Heidorn 1992; Bettles 2003; Aston 2007; Bourriau and French 2007: 118). Phoenician amphorae, including a type with a squared-off base, have been found at Defenna and Buto, dating to the 9th to 6th centuries bc (Petrie 1888: 336, 342; Hartung et al. 2003: 226). The majority were imported from the Levantine coast (Bettles 2003: marl fabric 1A), although a large number from Gaza were also represented in Kom Firin (C2003, C2128, C2058, C2070, C2174, C2230, C2231, C2338, C2302, C2354, C2427, C2439, C2554, C2566, C3081, C3141, C3142) in silt fabric 2B (Bettles 2003).14 Palestinian amphorae are similar to the Phoenician examples, with small handles at their carinated shoulders and with torpedo or biconical bodies tapering to a simple spike. They come in a gritty, pale grey and orange-banded fabric. There are two different types represented at Kom Firin: the earliest form has a tall and straight neck with a bulbous rim (C2062 [Fig. 120], C2415 [Fig. 120]), dated from the late 8th or early 7th/6th centuies bc (Aston 1999: 236 pl. 74, fig. 2062; 2008, who suggests these may continue into the 4th century; Bourriau and French 2007: 117, 130, fig. 1.1). The second variant has a high folded ‘S’-shaped rim with a groove (C2147 [Fig. 120], C2469 [Fig. 120]15) and is dated from the late 8th to 6th centuries bc (Bourriau and French 2007: 117–18, 130, fig. 1.2; Aston and Aston 2010; Jacquet-Gordon 2012: 117 [p. 714]). Greek amphorae Chian amphorae are well represented in the Citadel (C2148, C2180–2181, C2183 [Fig. 120], C2260–2262 [Fig. 120; Pl. 595], C2307 [Fig. 120; Pl. 595], C2308 [Pl. 595], C2378 [Fig. 120; Pl. 595], C2489–C2490 [Fig. 120], C2508, C2541 (Pl. 411), C2545 [Fig. 120; Pl. 595], C2559 [Fig. 120], C3039 [Fig. 120], C3205 [Fig. 120], C3209 [Fig. 120]), with a hard, gritty red-brown or light brown fabric (5YR6/6–7.5YR6/6), sometimes with a black core. The fabric features mica, quartz, limestone, grey and black inclusions (