Time flies as the wise ones say, and for sure we wonder where the last three weeks did disappear to. Our last blog post was a “report” half-way into the season, and we believed that more would come each week, but hey, better late than never.
|View of Silsila East's sphinx protector|
As we entered the last week of this spring season we looked back at the past period and the wealth of information that we have achieved by continuing our observations and documentation. From the demotic, hieratic and Greek inscriptions, incorporating also our first Latin text (!), to the discovery of the various huts, workshops, causeways and ramps that facilitated the removal and transportation of the stone to the edges of the Nile where the awaiting flotilla of boats once stood waiting to carry blocks to their respective destinations within Upper Egypt…: the last three weeks on site were filled with exciting information and findings.
|One of the many quays|
Quarries are not everyone’s cup of tea, and for some a quarry conjures images of piles of stone and huge machinery that can grab, lift and deposit huge amounts of stone in one swift movement, but what Silsila offers us is an insight and moment in time where man had only his hands and his brute strength to accomplish the task, and then could get help of his bovine friends to haul the finished product. This season’s work has included a much more detailed study of the extraction process including the “infrastructure” that was built into the living rock such as rope holes, foot holes and post holes that would have facilitated the movement of the stone and also the scaffolding that was required to allow the quarrymen to work at such heights without the fear of falling. The documentation of these small but significant details have also allowed us to begin building a picture of what the quarries may have looked like and how they were managed. Thus, we have considered the ancients’ management of time and manpower among the quarrymen, and how important this management would have been to the further development of the site.
John’s study of the spoil heaps is one example and it reveals not only topographic information, but more importantly the ancients’ forward thinking: deposits of unwanted spoil were placed in strategic locations were the heaps would not interfere with subsequent quarrying that would need to take place to take advantage of quality stone, and the placement of spoil was clearly included in the overall planning and development of the quarry.
Epigraphically this season has allowed a deeper insight into the latter phase of quarrying at Silsila as we have come to know some of the ancient individuals in more detail. The Egyptian Tutu, or Totoes as he was called by the Greeks, worked in one of Silsila’s quarries during the time of Tiberius, but he was neither the first nor the last in his family to work here as we have recorded also his father, grandfather, and indeed also his son! This season has also revealed more information concerning the complex quarry marking systems, and we can now understand that the systems changed over time, developing in function, meaning and intention in line with the socio-religious changes that Egypt experienced (at least) between the 18th dynasty and the Roman period. Thus, we have documented examples of Pharaonic quarry marks with a more practical function, such as traditional identity marks, as well as marking systems with an evidentially symbolic significance, alluding to a more superstitious ritualistic function.
Additionally we have learnt more than we could have ever hoped for in terms of the ancient extraction process itself by studying in detail the various tell tales on the vertical quarry faces as well as the more informative ledges and thinner shelves. Together these details provide us with standardized block size (or the lack of such!), tool size, working direction, if the workers followed the natural strata or if they forced their way in regardless, if they quarried in closed gallery-style like in the limestone quarries, in open galleries, or possibly both with one ruler destroying a previous’ work… Distinct differences in quarrying technique were noted not only from one kingdom to another, or between the dynasties, but sometimes from one ruler to the next!
|Spoil heaps around the Rameside quarries|
|The famous stela of Amenhotep IV|
There are still many questions to be answered, details that require further analysis, such as where and how the quarrymen lived while at the site, if they were a group of highly skilled craftsmen or just a handful of hefty built laborers who lacked the refinements of grace and social interaction; were they slaves, prisoners of wars and battles who were set to live the remainder of their lives as forced labor, etc.? We ask ourselves if it is possible at all to answer these questions in general terms, and acknowledge the importance of recording even the slightest difference when dealing with different time periods. Of course, there are written records of quarrying process elsewhere, especially during the Ptolemaic and Roman periods, but so far there are no documented informative ostraca, papyri or other administrative records that provide us detailed information about the work organization at Silsila during its various ancient visitors. The records that we do have at Silsila that actually mention quarrying, such as the commemorative stelai of Amenhotep III, Seti and Ramses, are likely overdramatic in their figures, glorifying respective pharaoh when exaggerating the numbers of workers and especially the soldiers that accompanied them. Day by day Silsila reveals bits of information that enable us to build up an idea of this organization, but like so many other sites around Egypt, Silsila’s continuation of usage often complicates an archaeologist’s work in interpreting the material.
|The fallen stela of Ramses II|
Every archaeologist and/or surveyor knows too well that the juiciest bits of information are revealed too often in the last week or even the last day; so was the case also for us as we moved on from the Roman quarries into the Ramesside quarries with some sneak peeks in the quarries of Amenhotep III and IV as well as a quarry area that was extracted by a so far unidentified pharaoh. However, the findings, our dear followers, will remain as a cliff hanger for our autumn season!
Writing a blog is akin to emptying ones thoughts and theories upon a page without the usual recourse and obligatory rules and regulations that should accompany any paper. However, it also allows us to accomplish the desire to share with you, our readers, the experience of what has taken place; in a small and yet confined space it allows us to take you there and, hopefully by doing so, bring to your attention the importance of Silsila from our perspective. During the past few weeks we have shared with you some of our insights by posting images “live” using today’s wonderful social networking instruments (twitter, instagram, facebook, etc.), which have allowed us to remain in contact with those who follow our work closely. We hope that these tools, although frowned upon by some, have brought the site to life, spreading its importance within the rich tapestry of Egypt’s history from the Prehistoric period through the Dynasties and into the age of integration with Greek and Roman colonists.
Although the spring season is now completed there is no rest for the wicked and we will return out in field again in September: we hope to have you by our cyber-side also then!
Until next time, thank you for following us, for your support and encouragement!
So, in ancient style we perform our proskynema and bow down with gratefulness to “Madam Silsila” and her animal inhabitants for keeping us safe and protected during our visit; and while uttering words of thankfulness we acknowledge how truly honoured and blessed we are to work in such an amazing site!
Maria and John
|Horus of Silsila|
|Baby bat with very cute feet|
The Gebel el Silsila Survey Project Team owe their deepest gratitude to the members of the Permanent Committee for giving us permission to work at Silsila. Our gratefulness is directed also to the inspectorates of Kom Ombo, especially Ahmed Saeed and Mohamed Ngar, and Director Abd el Moniem Said, and equally to the General Directors of Aswan Mr. Abd Elhakim Haddad and Mr. Fathy Abuzied, and to the inspectors assigned to our project, Mr. Mohamed Ahmed Abdullah and Mr. Mohamed Mohsen Mohamed, as well as to the local guardians at Silsila, in particular Mr. Ibrahim and Mr. Ashraf.
The team owe equal thankfulness and recognition to Lund University and the following foundations:
Kungl. Vetenskapsakademin – Enboms stiftelse, Kungl. Vitterhetsakademin, Mangus Bergvalls stiftelse, Helge Ax:son Johnsons stiftelse, Birgit and Gad Rausings stiftelse, and Vetenskapsrådet, which each and everyone has enabled the continuation of the surveying of Silsila and the study of its quarry marking systems!
|our floating survey home|
|Mr. Mohamed Abdullah copying a Greek text|
|Adrienn's friends ;-)|