ORIENTALIA LOVANIENSIA ANALECTA 214

ANCIENT MEMPHIS
Enduring is the Perfection
Proceedings of the International Conference held at Macquarie University, Sydney on August 14-15, 2008

edited by

LINDA EVANS

UITGEVERIJ PEETERS en DEPARTEMENT OOSTERSE STUDIES LEUVEN PARIS WALPOLE, MA 2012

CONTENTS

FOREWORD .

. .

. . . .

. .

. .

. .

. .

. .

. .

. .

. .

VII

ABSTRACTS Non-contributing speakers . Rehab ASSEM Hathors cult in Memphis .

Miroslav BRTA Equal in rank, different in the afterlife: Late Fifth and late Sixth Dynasty burial chambers at Abusir South . . . . . Susanne BINDER Let me tell you what happened to me: Memphite officials and the Gold of Honour . . . . . . . . . . . . V.G. CALLENDER Some notes concerning Reisners royal family history of the Fourth Dynasty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Christopher J. DAVEY Old Kingdom metallurgy in Memphite tomb images . . . .

27

45

63 85

Katherine EATON Memphite, Theban, and Heliopolitan gods of rule in the New Kingdom: Memphite perspectives on their relationships . . 109 Abeer EL SHAHAWY Thebes-Memphis: An interaction of iconographic ideas . . 133

Beatrix GESSLER-LHR Pre-Amarna or post-Amarna? The tomb of the Gods Father Hatiay at Saqqara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Michelle HAMPSON A princely find: The lost scenes of craftsmen in the tomb of Khuenre at Giza . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 Yvonne M. HARPUR The Scene-Details Database and the Egypt in Miniature series of the Oxford Expedition to Egypt (OEE) . . . . . 205

VI

CONTENTS

David JEFFREYS Climbing the White Walls: Recent experiences of the Memphis Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 Naguib KANAWATI The Memphite control of Upper Egypt during the Old Kingdom: The cases of Edfu, Abydos, and Akhmim . . . . . . . 237 Lesley J. KINNEY Butcher queens of the Fourth and Fifth Dynasties: Their association with the Acacia House and the role of butchers as ritual performers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 Christian KNOBLAUCH The Memphite area in the late First Intermediate Period and the Middle Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267 E. Christiana KHLER The orientation of cult niches and burial chambers in Early Dynastic tombs at Helwan . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 Audran LABROUSSE Recent discoveries at the necropolis of King Pepy I . . . . 299 309

Angela Sophia LA LOGGIA Architects, engineers, and builders in Early Dynastic Memphis

Lisa MAWDSLEY The foundation and development of Tarkhan during the Naqada IIIA2 Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331 Ann MCFARLANE Occupied carrying chairs at Memphis in the Old Kingdom . 349 Boyo G. OCKINGA Evidence for New Kingdom tomb structures in the Teti Pyramid Cemetery North: Insights from the Macquarie excavations . 371 Adela OPPENHEIM The north and south walls of Senwosret IIIs North Chapel at Dahshur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 Alain ZIVIE Amenhotep III et lOuest de Memphis . . . . . . . . 425

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES Christopher J. DAVEY

La Trobe University

The crucible shape depicted in Old Kingdom tomb images was significant enough to become the hieroglyphic sign associated with metal workers and copper. The metal working tomb scenes raise a number of questions that have been resolved with the discovery of comparable crucibles at the Old Babylonian site of Tell edh-Dhibai. This technological understanding in turn contributes to an appreciation of the images themselves, their artisic form, and the technological practices they represent. This review concludes that the earliest depictions are in part eyewitness records of Memphite metallurgical activity and that three artistic styles are identifiable. The metal working scenes depict the production of luxury objects and may have had a didactic purpose for the benefit of the tomb owner in the afterlife. Introduction A vital resource of Old Kingdom culture was the large volume of copper based metal that was available for utensils and tools. Some of the objects survive and provide an opportunity to study the metallurgy of the period. A number of ancient Near Eastern coppersmiths workshops and implements have been discovered in archaeological excavations providing additional metallurgical information.1 It is Egyptian tombs with images of metalsmiths at work, however, that potentially offer a unique insight into the metallurgical practices of the 3rd millennium BCE. Many scholars have disregarded the images, believing them to be stylistic and not a representation of reality. MALEK has observed that there is no evidence that the tomb images were intended to be a record

1 For example, P.P. BENTANCOURT, The Chrysokamino Metallurgy Workshop and its Territory (Hesperia Suppl. 36; Athens, 2006); L. AL-GAILANI, Tell edh Dhibai, Sumer 21 (1965), 33-40.

86

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

of contemporary Egyptian society.2 There is no doubt that religious scenes were governed by formal artistic principles and mythology, however, when tackling what ROBINS calls more mundane subjects, the artist could produce scenes full of vitality and life.3 This paper examines Old Kingdom metal working scenes with the aim of understanding the processes involved, to see if they offer the kind of evidence that MALEK needs. The stylising practices of Egyptian artists were described comprehensively by SCHFER.4 BAINES introduced the English translation of SCHFERs book by claiming that underlying his work was the belief that Egyptian artists construct their representations according to mental images which, in their view, summarise the essential physical character of the objects depicted as opposed to their appearence...5 SCHFER sought to explain why objects are shown in a particular way in Egyptian art,6 describing the principles of spatial distibution employed by Egyptian artists and the methods by which they depicted nature and the human form. His analysis identified particular graphic techniques, such as see-through/x-rays (false transparencies), sections, ground plans, vertical and horizontal layering, a form of plan and section, and flexible viewing directions.7 Many of these conventions are similar to technical drawing practices used by modern engineers and draughtspeople who are familiar with exploded drawings, cut-aways, plan and section, sequential diagrams, and so on. Geometrical projections, however, such as isometric and axiometric drawings, were not specifically used by Egyptian artists, although the absence of foreshortening common in most projections is a feature of their art. Evaluating artistic approaches is not necessarily straightforward. Where the human form or natural image is concerned, everyone has a feel for reality, but this is not always true for industrial processes, especially those that ceased in antiquity. Archaeology and existing industrial knowledge may nevertheless provide insights about the equipment used and essential processes when studying such industrial scenes.

2 3 4 5 6 7

J. MALEK, Egyptian Art (London, 1999), 128. G. ROBINS, Egyptian Painting and Relief (Aylesbury, 1986), 57. H. SCHFER, Principles of Egyptian Art, trans. J. Baines (Oxford, 1974). ibid., xi. ibid., xiv. ibid., 121-205.

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

87

It should also be acknowledged that tomb images from the Fifth Dynasty had related inscriptions giving information about the people depicted and their activity. This feature may support the view that the images are intended to convey information about the activity represented and are not works of art in any modern sence.8 The following paper hypothesises an industrial process on the basis of excavated objects, experimental data, and the images found in one tomb. The plausibility of the hypothesis is then discussed in relation to metal working scenes in other tombs. The hypothesis Metal working scenes have been the subject of much conjecture, especially amongst German scholars.9 The discussions have been inconclusive, however, because the processes being applied have not been clear from the two-dimensional images. The crucibles depicted are particularly enigmatic. Complete examples of Old Kingdom style crucibles have been found at the Old Babylonian site of Tell edh-Dhibai and these have subsequently been identified as the same as those portrayed in the Sixth Dynasty tomb of Mereruka at Saqqara (see below).10 Furthermore, the operation of the crucibles has been researched and replicated revealing that the Mereruka depictions are generally accurate.11 The Tell edhDhibai crucibles have consequently provided significant information about the crucibles depicted in Old Kingdom tomb scenes, including their three-dimensional geometry, and that: the seat of the fire was inside the crucible, the crucibles were used repeatedly until they failed, the crucibles failed by breaking horizontally across the lower portion, the crucibles were made from a refractory and insulating, but weak, clay mix,
C.J. DAVEY, forthcoming. A. ERMAN, Reden, Rufe und Lieder auf Graberbildern des Alten Reiches (Berlin, 1919), 62; H. JUNKER, Die Hieroglyphen fr Erz und Erzarbeiter, MDAIK 14 (1958), 89-103; R. DRENKHAHN, Die Handwerker und ihre Ttigkeiten im alten gypten (A 31; Wiesbaden, 1976); B. SCHEEL, Studien zum Metallhandwerk im Altern gypten I, Handlungen und Beischriften in den Bildprogrammen der Grber des Alten Reiches, SAK 12 (1985), 117-177. 10 AL-GAILANI, Sumer 21; C.J. DAVEY, The metalworkers tools from Tell edh Dhibai, BIAUL 20 (1983), 169-185. 11 C.J. DAVEY & W.I. EDWARDS, Crucibles from the Bronze Age of Egypt and Mesopotamia, Proc. Royal Soc. Vic. 120/1 (2007), 146-154.
9 8

88

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

Fig. 1. A: a drawing of a Tell edh-Dhibai crucible with a barrier inserted; B: melting cross-section; C: casting cross-section.

new crucibles were fired lightly to 600-700o C, or were made from a thicker sun-dried fabric, and the crucibles had common internal dimensions indicating that they were made over a horn-shaped pattern. The experimental findings concurred with Egyptian depictions by showing that molten metal may be retained in the crucible by a barrier partially covering the hole in the side of the crucible, and that a cover hastened the temperature rise in the crucible (fig. 1). The amount of material that could be melted in each crucible was probably limited to about 50 ml and so to produce most copper objects, the crucible melting process may have been duplicated or repeated many times. The experiments also demonstrated that the technology associated with the operation of the crucible was moderately sophisticated. The operation of the barrier was not straightforward; if the crucible fabric contained a fluxing agent, such as iron oxide, its surface would vitrify, causing the barrier to be welded to the crucible, making its removal impossible. Suitable clays were therefore essential. Metal working in the tomb of Mereruka The metal working scene in the tomb of Mereruka (fig. 2) is one of the most complete and explicit of the 27 known Old Kingdom examples. It depicts four activities: weighing, melting, casting, and hammering in a chronological sequence from left to right. The process involves the melting of copper to produce sheet copper, which is then used to fabricate the types of metal vessels depicted along the top of the register. The melting scene shows six men with blowpipes in a layered configuration, which may indicate that they formed a circle around the two

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

89

Fig. 2. The metal working scene from the tomb of Mereruka. From: P. Duell, The Mastaba of Mereruka 1 (OIP 31; Chicago, 1938), pl. 30.

crucibles between them.12 Scenes in other tombs often arrange the blowpipe operators differently, however the Mereruka artist used this configuration because it shows that the blowpipes are directed at what we now know is an opening above the temporary barrier partly blocking the hole in the side of the crucible. The crucible shapes are portrayed in profile, back-to-back, with what appears to be a lid on them and a small amount of charcoal around the hole. The casting scene shows the crucible being carried with the aid of two wads of wet clay, or some other suitable insulating material, to a worker who pokes it to allow the molten copper to pour forth onto a flat surface. The arms of the crucible-carrier are depicted frontally, while the crucible is in profile, so that the process and equipment are clear. It is the position of the blowpipes and the poking depiction that provide the essential information needed to recreate the operation of the Tell edh-Dhibai crucibles. This scene has been the subject of much speculation. The crucibles from Tell edh-Dhibai were made from an insulating fabric and revealed that the external temperature around the sides and rear did not exceed 700o C. Carrying such crucibles in the manner shown is therefore possible. Those who have questioned this have often been under the misapprehension that the crucibles were heated externally; such a process would have increased the surface temperature above the melting point of copper (1080o C) and produced too much radiant heat to be picked up without iron tools. The second issue has been the implausibility of pouring the molten metal into the sprue of a mould from such a height; however no such
12 H. BALCZ, Symmetrie und Asymmetrie in Gruppenbildungen der Reliefs des Alten Reiches, MDAIK (1930), 137-152; SCHFER, Principles of Egyptian Art, 185.

90

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

funnel is involved. To make a copper sheet, the molten copper was poured onto a flat surface and the energy of such a high discharge meant that the metal spread out so that it could be hammered flat as it cooled. Old Kingdom casting scenes in addition to Mererukas all show a similar discharge height. The hammering scene depicts four men layered in two groups working on the same piece of copper. This number of workers would facilitate a rapid beating of the metal into a sheet. As copperwork hardens quickly, making it brittle and impossible to shape mechanically, beating it in a hot state would mean that annealing may have been unnecessary. Comment on the hypothesis The idea that the fire was seated inside the crucible is not logical for most non-metallurgists who understandably think that to melt material it is best put it in a pot on a heat source. In the Bronze Age, tools did not exist to successfully manipulate objects, such as crucibles, with temperatures greater than 1000o C, so other methods were adopted. The normal practice in the Near East prior to the Iron Age was to put fire inside or on top of the crucible.13 Crucibles known from Egypt include those from Buhen,14 First Intermediate Period Qau,15 Second Intermediate Period Tell el-Daba,16 and New Kingdom Serabit el-Khadim, Sinai,17 and elAmarna.18 These crucibles all have slag or indications of severe heating on their internal surfaces, revealing that the fire was inside, not outside, the crucible. Indeed, the tomb of Rekhmire actually depicts crucibles under fires.19

13

R.F. TYLECOTE, The Prehistory of Metallurgy in the British Isles (London, 1986),

97.
14 W.B. EMERY, H.S. SMITH & A. MILLARD, The Fortress of Buhen: The Archaeological Report (London, 1979), 122, 176, pls 43, 69. 15 G. BRUNTON, Qua and Badari I (BSAE 44; London, 1927), 36, 67, pl. 41; C.J. DAVEY, Crucibles in the Petrie collection and hieroglyphic ideograms for metal, JEA 71 (1985), 142-148. 16 G. PHILIP, Tell el-Daba, Metalwork and Metalworking: Evidence of the Late Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period (Wien, 2006). 17 W.M.F. PETRIE, Researches in Sinai (London, 1906), 162, pl. 161; C.J. DAVEY, JEA 71. 18 M. ECCLESTON, Metal working at Amarna: A preliminary report, BACE 19 (2008), 29-48. 19 N. DE G. DAVIES, The Tomb of Rekh-mi-re at Thebes (New York, 1943).

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

91

CURTO has commented on the nature of the crucibles that appear in Old Kingdom reliefs, referring to those found by PETRIE in Sinai and Guy BRUNTON at Qau.20 Both of these crucibles are different in profile to those depicted in Old Kingdom tombs.21 CURTO believed that objects found at Deir el-Medina by SCHIAPARELLI and BRUYERE gave rise to the hieroglyphic sign, Gardiner N34 , but again the profile of these vessels is significantly different, making such an identification highly unlikely. The hieroglyphic sign does, however, match the profile of the crucibles portrayed in the tomb of Mereruka and those found at Tell edhDhibai. While the shape has been a mystery since the 2nd millennium BCE, the creator of the metal working tomb scene knew that contemporary observers would be familiar with the depicted object. The scene was therefore constructed so that the crucible profile was unambiguous and, by outlining the two crucibles back-to-back, Gardiner sign W13 was recognisable. DRENKHAHN has already made this identification.22 This approach to Egyptian art has been described by WILKINSON for many other hieroglyphic signs.23 The chronological and geographic separation between the tomb of Mereruka and Tell edh-Dhibai may appear to make the connection tenuous. Lawrence GARNNE-MAROT has discussed the proposed association, pointing out the lack of evidence from Syria.24 I have argued, however, that crucibles of this shape will have been used until they disintegrated and that in a fragmentary state they would not be immediately recognisable as Old Kingdom style crucibles.25 In fact, this crucible type may have been fairly common during the Early and Middle Bronze Ages in the drier regions of the Near East. The crucible shape identified as Pottery Type 188 at Buhen is indeed similar to the Mereruka and Tell edh-Dhibai shapes and is currently the only occurrence of the shape in an Egyptian context.26

S. CURTO, Postille circa la Metallurgia Antico-Egiza, MDAIK 18 (1962) 59-69. DAVEY, JEA 71, 142-148. 22 DRENKHAHN, Die Handwerker, 39. 23 R.H. WILKINSON, Reading Egyptian Art: Hieroglyphic Guide to Ancient Egyptian Painting and Sculpture (London, 1992). 24 L. GARNNE-MAROT, Le travail du cuivre dans lgypte pharonique: daprs les peintures et les bas-reliefs, Palorient 11/1 (1985), 85-100. 25 DAVEY & EDWARDS, Proc. Royal Soc. Vic. 120/1, 151. 26 EMERY et al., Fortress of Buhen, 176, pl. 69.
21

20

92

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

Other metal working scenes including casting In addition to Mereruka, there are four tombs depicting metal working scenes that include both melting and casting or crucible carrying: Nebemakhet, Wepemnefert, Ty, and Pepyankh: Heny-kem (fig. 3). The Fifth Dynasty tomb of Iymery at Giza also had such scenes, but the lower portion of the register where the crucible was represented is missing.27 They are, however, the earliest known metal working scenes with an accompanying text. Photographs of the scenes in Wepemnefert28 and Ty29 confirm published drawings. The crucible shape and the use of bare hands depicted by LEPSIUS in the carrying scene of Nebemakhet seem to cast doubt on the hypothesis. HASSANs publication of the tomb omits the upper portion of the worker carrying the crucible,30 but James BURTON, who was in Egypt between 1824 and 1839 and who was an excellent draughtsman, drew the scene clearly showing a carrying pose and a crucible shape similar to that portrayed in Mereruka (fig. 4). The crucible profiles shown in the carrying-casting scenes of Nebemakhet and Wepemnefert are identical to the Mereruka shape. The Wepemnefert scene also portrays the pour in profile and clearly shows objects in the hands to assist in the carrying of a hot crucible. The crucible in the Ty casting scene is depicted obliquely, rather than in profile, so that the molten metal is shown being poured partly toward or away from the observer. This perspective is unusual in Egyptian art. The crucible shape here is consistent with the Tell edh-Dhibai crucibles when viewed from the same perspective. I suggest that an artist could not have made this variation without a visual knowledge of the process. The crucible shape shown in the provincial tomb of Pepyankh is different, but evidence from Tell edh-Dhibai may possibly account for this apparent change in design. An essential feature of the Tell edh-Dhibai crucibles was their consistent internal profile. It seems that two slightly different horn shapes were used to make the six crucibles found there

27 K.R. WEEKS, Mastabas of Cemetery G 6000. Including G 6010 (Neferbauptah); G 6020 (Iymery); G 6030 (Ity); G 6040 (Shepseskafankh) (GMas 5; Boston, 1994), fig. 30. 28 S. HASSAN, Excavations at Gza 1930-1931 2 (Cairo, 1936), pl. 74. 29 G. STEINDORFF, Das Grab des Ti 2 (Leipzig, 1913), pl. 134; L. KLEBS, Die Reliefs des alten Reiches (2980-2475 v. Chr.). Material zur gyptischen Kulturgeschichte (Heidelberg, 1915), fig. 67. 30 S. HASSAN, Excavations at Gza 1932-1933 4 (Cairo, 1943), fig. 81.

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

93

Fig. 3. Scenes of melting and casting or carrying from the tombs of Nebemakhet, Wepemnefert, Ty, and Pepyankh: Heny-kem. Reproduced from the following publications: C.R. Lepsius, Denkmler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien Text 2 (Leipzig, 1904), pl. 13 (Nebemakhet); S. Hassan, Excavations at Gza 1930-1931 2 (Cairo, 1936), fig. 219 (Wepemnefert); H. Wild, Le Tombeau de Ti 3: La chapelle (MIFAO 65; Cairo, 1966), fig. 173 (Ty); A.M. Blackman & M.R. Apted, The Rock Tombs of Meir 5 (ASE 28; London, 1953), pl. 16 (Pepyankh: Heny-kem).

and their different external sizes and shapes were the result of variable wall thicknesses.31 The crucibles made from the thickest clay displayed the characteristics of a sun-dried fabric. Once it is accepted that it is the internal shape that is diagnostic, the external profile of the crucible ceases to be so important.

31

DAVEY & EDWARDS, Proc. Roy. Soc. Vic. 120/1, 150.

94

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

Fig. 4. James Burtons drawing of a crucible being carried in the Fifth Dynasty tomb of Nebemakhet at Giza. From: J. Burton, British Library, MSS. 25621 (1824-39), 87. Courtesy of the British Library.

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

95

Odd-shaped crucibles depicted in tombs such as Pepyankh may therefore represent vessels with thick walls of sun-dried clay and proportionately larger internal dimensions, but which are otherwise consistent in form with the Mereruka crucibles. Such vessels could be picked up with bare hands as depicted, even though they contained molten metal. The other departure in Pepyankh is the person with a water jar who, according to the text, is ready to sprinkle water, probably onto the casting to quench it. This may have been necessary because a larger volume of molten metal was being cast. These two unique aspects of the Pepyankh image indicate that the artist in provincial Meir observed and illustrated a local adaptation of the standard technology. Artistic Styles These five scenes show both technical consistencies and artistic variations. The Nebemakhet, Wepemnefert, and Ty furnaces are depicted differently even though their adjacent scenes show Mereruka type crucibles. While the artists used different spatial conventions to depict multiple blowpipe operators, it is clear that the blowpipes in each scene are directed at the side of the crucible where we now know there was a partly blocked opening; indeed, one of the main subjects of the accompanying texts is the direction of the air being blown into the crucibles. The scenes also make it clear that there was no significant fire under the crucibles. The Wepemnefert furnace is an accurate image of what these structures actually looked like. The back-to-back crucibles are supported by surrounding charcoal and the blowpipes point to the top of the charcoal where the openings into the crucibles were located. The crucibles are also filled with charcoal to fuel the internal fire. The blowpipe operators are arranged as they would have appeared to an observer situated slightly off-centre; the nearest workers on both sides of the furnace are offset to the left. This contrasts with the layered arrangement of the Mereruka scene. The hammering scene shows one worker striking the copper sheeting while the other workers arm is raised in a ready position. The workers will have hammered alternately, so the view is again visually authentic, a real-time image. Apart from the depiction of the arms holding the crucible in the casting scene and the legs of the blowpipe operators, the Wepemnefert images are visually accurate. A realistic representation was intended here. The Nebemakhet furnace has a similar profile to that of Mereruka, which consists of two back-to-back crucibles without any supporting

96

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

material alongside. The Nebemakhet furnace also has a height extension. The Mereruka furnace has a lid and it is possible that the profile represented in Nebemakhet includes something on top of the crucibles that limited the release of gases and heat. Experiments have shown that such a restriction hastens the temperature rise; it would also have protected workers to some extent from radiant heat and fumes. The hammering scenes in both Mereruka and Nebemakhet show all workers with arms raised, however workers could not have struck the copper sheet simultaneously without causing injury. The scene has been adjusted to indicate the stroke of the hammering and hence its intensity. The hammering scene in Wepemnefert could be interpreted to indicate that one workman was tapping rather than hammering, but those in Mereruka and Nebemakhet make it clear that they were all hammering. The scenes in these tombs have details omitted and images adjusted so that the technical aspects of the process can be understood. These are consequently technical representations. The artist in the tomb of Ty depicts the profile of the crucibles backto-back, but adds what appear to be flames. If there were such a fire, the blowpipe operators would have needed to be much further away. The flames coming from around and inside the crucibles instead indicate that they are hot inside. The images were intended to convey the sensations associated with the process, the heat, and the noise. The artist has illustrated what is happening by means of a naturalistic representation. The Pepyankh furnace is the crucible itself, probably largely as it would have appeared and there are no flames to indicate heat. The hammering scene is similar to Wepemnefert and the final product is shown in the hands of a workman, rather than diagrammatically at the edge of the register. The Pepyankh artist had the same rationale as the Wepemnefert artist to illustrate things as they were observed; the Pepyankh scenes thus belong to the realistic style. The depiction of the blowpipe operators in Ty and Pepyankh show the visual order of the upper and lower portions reversed. This is reminiscent of a servant girl in the tomb of Rekhmire, whose feet are orientated differently to her body.32 It is not a common pose in Egyptian art and may possibly be used here to indicate that the workmen were actually arranged around the crucible at the same distance from it.

32

SCHFER, Principles of Egyptian Art, 264.

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

97

These scenes clearly do not support the idea that there was a patternbook of metal working images that was overseen by a supervisor. The processes depicted are accurately portrayed, but the artists have used their own ways of representing the activity. The resulting differences do not in any way diminish the accuracy of the images when they are considered in the context of the applied conventions. It would seem unlikely that the artists created these interpretations without a firsthand appreciation of the processes and the equipment. There are also a number of technical variations that could not have been depicted without a visual knowledge of the processes. It is therefore proposed that the artists actually witnessed the metal smiths at work and may have sketched what they saw and incorporated those sketches into the tomb images. Scenes of metal melting Casting scenes clearly show crucibles of the Mereruka shape and reveal that the corresponding furnace depictions can vary significantly. This provides a basis for interpreting the scenes where no explicit crucible shape is shown. There is also a question about the end product and whether or not the scenes depict the production of sheet copper to be used in the fabrication of metal vessels. Hammering scenes, images of the metal vessels, and accompanying texts comparable to those from other tombs that depict metal vessels, are three features that may indicate the manufacture of sheet metal. These may not be entirely diagnostic, as hammering, welding, and annealing were also part of the metal vessel fabrication process. Tombs with hammering scenes include those of Meresankh, Nebemakhet, Iymery, Wepemnefert, Tepemankh, Kaemrehu, Ty, Niankhkhnum and Khnumhotep, Unas Causeway, Mereruka, Ankhmahor, Mehu, Ptahshepses, Ibi, Hemre, Pepyankh, Kahep, and Hesimin. The images in Serfka, Niankhpepy: Khnumhotep-heti, Zau, Shepsipumin, Unasankh, Khenty, and Ihy are incomplete and may have had such a scene. Tombs that have nearly complete scenes and comparable texts include Wepemnefert, Kaemrehu, Niankh-khnum and Khnumhotep, Mereruka, Ankhmahor, Ibi, and Pepyankh. Incomplete scenes that appear to have similar texts include Iymery, Ty, Senedjemib, Mehu, and Hemre. The last two tomb scenes have an indication that gold is also involved. The scenes that have images of vessels indicating the end product of metal working include Iymery, Ptahshepses, Serfka, Mereruka, Unas, Kahep, Hemre, Pepyankh, Hesimin, and Shepsipumin.

98
Tomb Owner Meresankh [III] Nebemakhet 34 Tepemankh [II] Iymery36 Ptahshepses37 Wepemnefert:Wep38 Ty40 Kaemrehu41 Serfka42 Hesimin (M 22)
43 35 33

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

Date IV.6 IV.6-V.1 V.5-6? V.6 V.6-7 V.6-8? V.7-8E V.8 V.8-9E V.8-VI.1 V.9 V V -VI VI VI

Site Giza Giza Saqqara Giza Abusir Giza Saqqara Saqqara Saqqara Sheikh Said el-Hawawish Giza Saqqara Saqqara Giza Darsheh

Style Realistic Technical Realistic Technical Realistic Realistic Naturalistic Naturalistic Realistic Naturalistic

Scenes MH M* C* M* H* T* P* W* M* C*? H T P M (F?) H T P MCHT MHFT W *? M* C H WMHTP MG H* T* P* WMFT

Niankh-khnum & Khnumhotep39 V.6L-7

Senedjemib: Mehi44 Unas Causway45 OK 4246 Ka-em-ankh47 Intj

48

Technical

WMHFT M* T* M F* W*

33 D. DUNHAM & W.K. SIMPSON, The Mastaba of Queen Mersyankh III. G 7530-7540 (GMas 1; Boston, 1974), 12, fig. 5. 34 C.R. LEPSIUS, Denkmler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien Text II (Leipzig, 1904), 13; HASSAN, Excavations at Gza 4, 140, fig. 81. 35 S. HODJASH & O. BERLEV, The Egyptian Reliefs and Stelae in the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, Moscow (Leningrad, 1982), 38; W.S. SMITH, The origin of some unidentified Old Kingdom reliefs, AJA 46 (1942), 516f, fig. 6. 36 WEEKS, Mastabas of Cemetery G 6000, 35, fig. 30, pl. 13. 37 M. VERNER, Abusir I. The Mastaba of Ptahshepses. I/1 Reliefs (Prague, 1986), 52-56, fig. 27. 38 HASSAN, Excavations at Gza 2, 192f, fig. 219, pls 74, 76. 39 A.M. MOUSSA & H. ALTENMLLER, Das Grab des Nianchchnum und Chnumhotep, Old Kingdom Tombs at the Causeway of King Unas at Saqqara (AVDAIK 21; Mainz, 1977), 135ff, pl. 64. 40 H. WILD, Le Tombeau de Ti 3: La chapelle (MIFAO 65; Cairo, 1966), fig. 173; STEINDORFF, Das Grab des Ti 2, pl. 134; KLEBS, Die Reliefs des alten Reiches, fig. 67. 41 M. MOGENSEN, Le Mastaba gyptien de la Glyptothque Ny Carlsberg (Copenhagen, 1921), 41f, figs 40-42; W. WRESZINSKI, Atlas zur altaegyptischen Kulturgeschichte 1 (Leipzig, 1923), Tomb 402. 42 N. DE G. DAVIES, The Rock Tombs of Sheikh Sad (ASE 10; London, 1901), 13, pl. 4. 43 N. KANAWATI, The Rock Tombs of El-Hawawish. The Cemetery of Akhmim 4 (Sydney, 1983), 22, fig. 14. 44 E. BROVARSKI, The Senedjemib Complex 1: The Mastabas of Senedjemib Inti (G 2370), Khnumenti (G 2374) and Senedjemib Mehi (G 2378) (GMas 7; Boston, 2001), 148, fig. 116b; LEPSIUS, Denkmler Text II, 75a. 45 SMITH, AJA 46, 509-531, fig. 8. 46 H.D. SCHNEIDER, The Memphite Tomb of Horemheb, Commander-in-Chief of Tutankhamun 2: A Catalogue of the Finds (EES EM 60; Leiden, 1996), 88, pl. 94. 47 H. JUNKER, Giza 4: Die Mastaba des Kjmnh (Kai-em-anch) (Wien, 1940), 72-75, pl. 10. 48 W.M.F. PETRIE, Deshasheh 1897 (MEEF 15; London, 1898), 8, pl. 13.

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

99
Scenes M* T* WMCHTP WMHT WT M* WMHT M* MCHTP M* H* WMH M* H* M* H* T* P* M* H* T* P* M* H*

Tomb Owner Kagemni: Memi

49

Date VI.1E-M VI.1M VI.1L-2E VI.2

Site Saqqara Saqqara Saqqara Saqqara

Style Technical Technical Naturalistic

Mereruka: Meri50 Ankhmahor: Sesi Kairer52 Mehu54 Ihy55 Pepyankh: Heny-kem Khenty57 Ibi58 Zau
59 56 51

Niankhpepy: Khnumhotep-heti53 VI.2? VI.3-4 VI.4-5 VI.4-5 VI.4E VI.4L VI.5-6 VI.6 VI.6 VI.7

Zawyet el-Maiyetin Realistic Technical Realistic Naturalistic Naturalistic el-Khokha Meir el-Khokha Deir el-Gebrawi Deir el-Gebrawi el-Hawawish el-Hawawish el-Khokha Deir el-Gebrawi Naturalistic

VI.2M-3? Saqqara

Kahep: Theti-iker60 Shepsipumin: Kheni61 Unisankh

62

Hemre: Isi63

WMHTP

Table 1: Old Kingdom tomb metal working images. Scenes: W weighing, C casting or carrying, M melting, H hammering, F fabrication, T texts, P pot images, * incomplete.64
F.W. VON BISSING, Die Mastaba des Gem-ni-kai 1 (Berlin, 1905), 7, pl. 30. P. DUELL, The Mastaba of Mereruka 1 (OIP 31; Chicago, 1938), pl. 30. 51 A. BADAWY, The Tomb of Nyhetep-Ptah at Giza and the Tomb of Ankhmahor at Saqqara (Berkeley, 1978), 11f, fig. 32, pls 35-37. 52 K.A. DAOUD, Unusual scenes in the Saqqara tomb of Kairer, EA 10 (1977), 6-7; J.-P. LAUER, Saqqara. The Royal Cemetery of Memphis. Excavations and Discoveries since 1850 (London, 1976), 77, pl. 68. 53 A. VARILLE, La Tombe de Ni-Ankh-Pepi Zouyet el-Mayetn (MIFAO 70; Cairo, 1938), 16, pls 7, 9. 54 H. ALTENMLLER, Die Wanddarstellungen im Grab des Mehu in Saqqara (AVDAIK 42; Mainz, 1998), 146f, pl. 42. 55 M. SALEH, Three Old-Kingdom Tombs at Thebes 1: The Tomb of Unas-Ankh no. 413, 2: The Tomb of Khenty no. 405, 3: The Tomb of Ihy no. 186 (AVDAIK 14; Mainz, 1977), 25, pl. 15. 56 A.M. BLACKMAN & M.R. APTED, The Rock Tombs of Meir 5 (ASE 28; London, 1953), 25, pl. 16. 57 SALEH, Three Old-Kingdom Tombs at Thebes, 20, fig. 41, pl. 11. 58 N. DE G. DAVIES, The Rock Tombs of Deir el-Gebrwi 1: Tomb of Aba and Smaller Tombs of the Southern Group (ASE 11; London, 1902), 20, pl. 13. 59 N. DE G. DAVIES, The Rock Tombs of Deir el-Gebrwi 2: Tomb of Zau and Tombs of the Northern Group (ASE 12; London, 1902), 35f, pl. 10. 60 N. KANAWATI, The Rock Tombs of El-Hawawish. The Cemetery of Akhmim 1 (Sydney, 1980), 21, fig. 9, pl. 6. 61 N. KANAWATI, The Rock Tombs of El-Hawawish. The Cemetery of Akhmim 2 (Sydney, 1981), 23, fig. 19. 62 SALEH, Three Old-Kingdom Tombs at Thebes, 14, fig. 6, pl. 3. 63 DAVIES, Rock Tombs of Deir el-Gebrwi 2, 24, pl. 19; N. KANAWATI, Deir el-Gebrawi 1 (ACE Reports 23; Sydney, 2005), 51f, pls 19, 48. 64 Dating is that proposed by the Oxford Expedition to Egypt, http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/ catalogue/archive/oee_ahrc_2006/queryThemes.cfm (accessed 20 January 2009).
50 49

100

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

Scenes that may depict a different process include the el-Khokha tombs of Unasankh, Khenty, Ihy, and Niankhpepy: Khnumhotep-heti. It is possible that Tepemankh and Ptahshepses also display other procedures associated with the production of metal vessels. The furnaces or hearths that appear in Old Kingdom tomb scenes are arranged in approximate chronological order in fig. 5. It is interesting to note that the earliest scenes are found in tombs in the north and the latest are in the vicinity of Thebes. It can be observed that with the possible exception of Kahep, all blowpipes are aimed at the side of the furnaces, and not the base. Comments made above about the shape of the Nebemakhet furnace that it is actually two crucibles back-to-back also apply to Kagemni and Mehu. Stylised flames of heat depicted in the tomb of Ty are similarly apparent in Niankh-khnum and Khnumhotep, Serka, Hemre, and Kahep. The Meresankh image is difficult to analyse as it is fragmentary and there are no accompanying inscriptions. The adjacent scene is one of hammering or at least tapping. This is not an unambiguous portrayal of sheet copper production. The beehive images from Ankhmahor and Ibi are mysterious. The text associated with Ankhmahor (and possibly Ibi) is similar to those of copper sheet production scenes. The shape may be intended by the artist to represent the furnace as a globule of heat. The stirring of the coals (or maybe poling of the copper) in the Ankhmahor image is unique in Old Kingdom metal working scenes, but is seen in the New Kingdom tomb of Rekhmire. Poling is a practice associated with refining. The Tepemankh hearth may be a Mereruka shape crucible, but the image does not display the full profile. The Ptahshepses hearths definitely do not have anything resembling a crucible. Both tombs display a realistic style and may instead represent the vessel fabricating process, which would have involved a certain amount of annealing and welding. Kaemrehu and the Unas Causeway may depict gold working, according to the accompanying texts, but the technology seems nevertheless to be related. Niankhpepy appears to be a large, single crucible, similar to Pepyankh, but with supports. No charcoal is depicted under the crucible. The scenes in Mehu and the Unas Causeway also show forms of support for the crucibles.

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

101

Fig. 5. Furnace representations. Drawings are reproduced from the publications listed with Table 1 (see text for details), except Niankh-khnum and Khnumhotep and Ptahshepses, which have been re-drawn from published photographs. Kagemni and Ankhmahor were re-drawn from photographs taken by the author.

102

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

Fig. 6. Sketch of a metal worker from the tomb of Ka-em-ankh, Giza. Photograph from: H. Junker, Giza 4: Die Mastaba des Kjmnh (Kai-em-anch) (Wien, 1940), pl. 10.

The tower shapes of Serfka, Hemre, and Kahep are unusual, as are those of Unasankh, Khenty, and Ihy.65 In all these instances, the furnace cannot be an open fire as it would be too hot for the metal workers, not to mention very wasteful of fuel. The el-Khokha scenes are very similar and may represent a local tradition of tomb decoration or technology, or both. The artists do not convey any detail about the furnace construction. The scenes from Serfka, Hemre, and Kahep are more informative. They would appear to be associated with the production of sheet copper. There may be a modification of crucible shape or size used in these

65

The Khenty and Ihy scenes are fragmentary and have not been illustrated in fig. 5.

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

103

cases or, more likely, the crucibles are held in a supporting framework that elevates them. The metal working scene in Senedjemib: Mehi does not depict a furnace and has no depictions of casting or hammering. The text is similar to other metal working scenes of the time and the fabrication scene shows that it represents the making of metal. The scene does not illustrate the equipment accurately or convey the technical detail or atmosphere of the process, so it does not suit the styles identified herein. The images display a variety of content and style. The realistic style seems to include images in the tombs of Meresankh, Wepemnefert, Tepemankh, Kaemrehu, Ptahshepses, Pepyankh: Heny-kem, and Niankhpepy: Khnumhotep-heti. The technical style is apparent in Nebemakhet, Unas Causeway, Kagemni, Mereruka, and Mehu, while the naturalistic style is found in Ty, Niankh-khnum and Khnumhotep, Serfka, Ankhmahor, Ibi, Hemre: Isi, and Kahep: Theti-iker. Doubt has been cast on the use of blowpipes in the Old Kingdom because bellows can deliver greater amounts of air. CRADDOCK has suggested that the scenes represent artistic conservatism.66 He does, however, concede that blowpipes offer accuracy in directing a blast of air, and it is this accuracy that was essential to make the technology work. The accompanying texts repeatedly give instructions about pointing the blowpipes to the seat of the fire. Melting operations required far less ventilation than smelting, which was the context of CRADDOCKs discussion, and charcoal ventilated by jets of air from a blowpipe can quickly reach the required temperature. Drawing in the tomb of Ka-em-ankh A sketch from the burial chamber of the Giza tomb of Ka-em-ankh is revealing (fig. 6).67 It depicts a single metal worker with a blowpipe ventilating an upright crucible that appears to be of a Mereruka shape. The blowpipe is directed toward the front of the crucible. The simple outline conveys the appearance and atmosphere of the scene; its energy can almost be felt. It is the oblique perspective, however, that is especially significant. Tomb images generally combine

P.T. CRADDOCK, Early Metal Mining and Production (Edinburgh, 1995), 178. G4561, Sixth Dynasty. See B. PORTER & R.L.B. MOSS, Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs and Paintings III, Part 1: Memphis. Abu Rawash to Abusir (Oxford, 1974), 131 (18).
67

66

104

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

frontal views and profiles, but this figure is pictured from the forequarter. It therefore does not appear to be copied from a pattern-book and was most likely the product of a drawing made on location. There is no direct indication that the scene was associated with the fabrication of metal vessels, although there is a traditional metal working inscription in an adjacent register.68 Other scenes in the same register depicted carpentry activity using an axe and an adze. Discussion HARPUR found that basic agricultural and marsh scenes depicted during the Fourth Dynasty were then developed with greater detail later in the Fifth Dynasty.69 During the Sixth Dynasty, there was a return to simplicity in the southern provinces by artists who were aware of Memphite tomb decoration.70 The metal working scenes have a different presentation depicting a full array of subject matter with two artistic styles, realism and technical, from the end of the Fourth Dynasty. A third style, naturalism, began later in the Fifth Dynasty. Sixth Dynasty provincial tombs at el-Khokha and Deir el-Gebrawi do show a simplifying of the images, while at Meir, the tomb of Pepyankh has a detailed scene of a technological development not seen elsewhere. HARPUR was able to trace similarities in style and scene content in tombs situated near each other.71 This can not be done for metal working scenes. The identification of three artistic styles realistic, technical and naturalistic is new for the analysis of Egyptian tomb art. SCHFERs approach, in which representations summarise the essential physical character of objects according to the artists mental images, effectively classified Egyptian art as technical or naturalistic. These constructions had a purpose other than conveying a visual record. The realistic style, which may also be apparent in three-dimensional art, represents the first stage of metal working portrayal and is likely to be the result of onlocation observation and sketching. MALEK has noted that although there are hundreds of decorated Egyptian tombs, no two are identical.72 While there are less of them, the same
JUNKER, Giza 4, pl. 9. Y. HARPUR, Decoration in Egyptian Tombs of the Old Kingdom: Studies in Orientation and Scene Content (London, 1987), 288. 70 ibid., 280. 71 ibid., 231. 72 MALEK, Egyptian Art, 131.
69 68

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

105

applies to the metallurgical scenes discussed in this paper. The variations can be understood as attempts by the artists to portray metal working activities more explicitly. If artists were bound by a pattern-book, variations would be limited to artistic style and the images may appear formal or stylised. When discussing artistic variations in early Egyptian palettes, DAVIS identified three factors purpose of the palettes, artist education, and regional differences as reasons for differences.73 He did not attribute variation to independent observation. The earliest metal working scenes are found in related geographical and chronological contexts, eliminating the last two reasons; the purpose of the scenes may consequently be more significant. Egyptian tombs were prepared by the owners during their lifetime and are therefore different from tombs in other societies. The tomb owner may have selected the content of tomb scenes, but the purpose of the content has been a matter for discussion. KANAWATI has developed the concept of the tomb as a house for eternity enabling the owner continued existence on earth and in the Netherworld.74 He believes that some of the decoration records the tomb owners achievements and was intended to be a monument on earth. KAMRIN argues that tombs, in part at least, were a schematized representation of the Egyptian cosmos.75 She views the scenes from daily life as illustrations of order triumphing over chaos, ensuring the eternal survival of the tomb owner and the proper functioning of the Egyptian world. The metal working scenes are didactic in that they depict the stages of the process, from the weighing of pieces of metal to the production of sheet metal for the fabrication of splendid metal vessels. The associated texts of reported speech focus on the important details of the depicted activity. The conventions adopted by the artists also aid the understanding of the technology. This methodology does not easily serve a memorialising function. While they could indicate that the tomb owner once exerted control over such industry and was therefore important, this could have been established in more convincing ways. Old Kingdom tomb scenes depict metallurgical processes associated with the making of sheet metal. During this period, there would have

W. DAVIS, The Canonical Tradition in Egyptian Art (Cambridge, 1989), 153ff. N. KANAWATI, The Tomb and Beyond: Burial Customs of Egyptian Officials (Warminster, 2001), 1. 75 J. KAMRIN, The Cosmos of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan (London, 1999), 2.
74

73

106

CHRISTOPHER J. DAVEY

been other metal working practices producing tools, especially those used by masons for the construction of tombs, temples, and pyramids. This would have been a major industry and much of it would have been located in the vicinity of the Memphite necropolises. Indeed, some of the artists equipment must have been produced by this industry. Although the tomb artists may have walked past this activity regularly, it is the production of sheet metal for prestige objects that they represented. Stone vessels were previously the prestige vessels of the Egyptian elite, but it seems that during the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties, metal vessels were the objects of choice.76 No tomb depicts the manufacture of chisels or the construction of funerary architecture. This would appear to imply a focus on the eternal afterlife where the construction of mortuary facilities was not necessary and when the tomb owner was aiming to ensure personal success without reliance on the king. The tomb owner needed to be legitimately installed in the afterlife while maintaining the cosmic order. The tomb images may possibly indicate that the tomb owner knew how to manufacture luxury metal vessels from raw materials and was therefore someone of knowledge and power. Alternatively, the scenes may have been intended to remind the owner, or those who would work for him in the afterlife, how the more complex activities of a successfully ordered society were to be carried out. The development of artistic styles beyond the portrayal of visual reality appears to be driven by the need to explain the processes being undertaken. Crucible shape, its configuration as a furnace, and the nature of the beating of the sheet metal are all given greater explanation by the adoption of the technical style. Features indicating heat in the naturalistic style further explain the process. At each stage, however, the artist needed some visual and technical knowledge of the metal working process. There are only 17 known metal working scenes dating from the Fourth to the Sixth Dynasty (a period of 150 years) in the Memphite necropolises. Metal working scenes are therefore somewhat peripheral to Egyptian Old Kingdom tomb art, although the information they provide for modern research into metallurgy is important. With this low level of application, it may be expected that artists would have needed to refer to real life to obtain or refine their images. Styles associated

76

J. BAINES, Visual and Written Culture in Ancient Egypt (Oxford, 2007), 306.

OLD KINGDOM METALLURGY IN MEMPHITE TOMB IMAGES

107

with the subject matter of metal working scenes would not have developed into a self-contained canon, and the images would have remained comparatively unsophisticated. Direct observation may thus have remained essential. Conclusions The metal working images in Old Kingdom Memphite tombs are technically consistent in the way they depict weighing, crucible configuration, blowpipe function, metal casting, and the beating of sheet metal. When considered in conjunction with the associated texts and the archaeological discoveries at Tell edh-Dhibai, the technology is comprehensible. The arrangement, content, and style of the scenes reveal a didactic purpose, which was meant to assist the tomb owner in the afterlife. They do not appear to have had a memorialising intent. SCHFERs principles of Egyptian art are pertinent to the artistic styles identified as technical and naturalistic in this paper. While these styles can be detected in many scenes, there are a significant number of earlier images deemed to be realistic or visually accurate. It is possible that the Memphite necropolis metal working scenes demonstrate the genesis of a motif type that, had it continued, would have become uniform and eventually conformed to SCHFERs observations. The reason why this development was slow may be due to the relative unpopularity of such scenes. No two metal working tomb scenes in the Memphite necropolises are the same and yet within the context of artistic styles and conventions, the images convey accurate information about the technology of the process. Indeed, the variations appear to be driven by the artists knowledge of the actual processes and their desire to make the technology more explicit. Prior to the adoption of computer-aided drawing, technical draughts-people aimed to accurately convey essential information about objects and processes in drawings explicitly, efficiently, neatly, and, if possible, aesthetically. The artists depicting metal working in Old Kingdom Memphis achieved most of these aims and have the added distinction that their images still successfully communicate technical information after four millennia.