Some thoughts on an abandoned early Naqada III household on the Eastern Kom at Tell el-Farkha

Vessels

Vessels from room EN.395 are big and medium-sized storage jars (tab. 1). Two of them (16 and 17) were found close to each other and belong to the same vessel type (fig. 5, b). They are Petrie’s R84 medium-sized jars with a flat base, an elongated belly, narrow shoulders, and a wide orifice. Another vessel from the room (14) is probably the same type as jars 16 and 17, but with its upper part missing it cannot be clearly identified. Also, two other vessels (18 and 19) similar in shape were found near each other. They are big storage jars with a narrow base, an ovoid belly, and wide shoulders (fig. 5, c). Unfortunately, the upper part of vessel 18, consisting of the belly, the shoulders and the rim, is missing. However, the shape of the preserved body is similar to that of vessel no. 19, featuring a short narrow neck and a lip-rim.

Potsherds

The number of sherds collected in the room is limited. All sherds are made of Nile clay and as many as 99.58% of them are rough ware (tab. 2). In terms of shapes, all the forms found in room EN.356 were also identified here. The assemblage contains fragments of big storage vessels, medium-sized storage jars, different types of small and medium-sized bowls, and bag-shaped jars. Additionally, a few fragments of lemon-shaped jars were collected as well (tab. 3).

Vessels

The group of complete or almost complete vessels from room EN.396 features a bag-shaped jar and big storage jars (tab. 1). The bag-shaped jar (13) is smaller than most vessels of this type (fig. 4, c). It is made of fine Nile clay (IC1) and its smoothed surface is covered by a brown slip. Another complete vessel, a big storage jar (15), has a narrow and flat base, an ovoid belly, a short neck, and a lip-rim, and is similar to the other vessels in terms of fabric, shape and dimensions (fig. 6, a). Comparable vessels include nos. 2, 7, and 24 from room EN.356 and nos. 18 and 19 from room EN.395.

Potsherds

A relatively low number of potsherds were collected in room EN.396. Most of them are made of Nile clay tempered with fine to medium organic temper and fine to medium mineral temper, and a vast majority are rough ware (99.51%; see tab. 2). A few fragments have smoothed surfaces and two fragments are covered by a yellow wash. The group of diagnostic sherds includes fragments of big storage vessels, medium-sized jars, and a few small and medium-sized bowls. Flat base fragments are also well represented (tab. 3).

Courtyard

The exploration of the structure’s courtyard yielded no complete vessels and a fair quantity of pottery fragments, greater than in rooms EN.395 and EN.396, although lower than in room EN.356. The courtyard assemblage is mostly made of Nile clay (IC2-3) and rough ware accounts for 98.65% (tab. 2). Interestingly, one fragment with long fibrous organic temper was identified as well. Its external surface is covered by a reddish-brown slip and burnished, and it is characterized by very tiny impressions of fibrous temper. Traces of yellow wash were found on another fragment. In addition to local pottery, two fragments of Levantine origin were recorded. Their fabric is similar to that of the fragment found in room EN.356.

The vessel types identified in the courtyard are consistent with those found in the rooms. The big storage jars with a wide orifice as well as medium-sized storage jars are particularly well represented. Another remarkable fact is the high number of Petrie’s R84 rim fragments and bases. Pottery sherds discovered in the small annex are not numerous and represent similar forms as those in the other parts of the structure (tab. 3).

Chronology

The assemblage from rooms EN.356, EN.395, EN.396 and the courtyard has been dated to phase 3 of the Tell el-Farkha settlement, corresponding to the end of the Naqada IID2 and the very beginning of the Naqada IIIA1, and to the Buto IIC phase.¹¹ The vessel types identified in the structure are known from layers of the same chronology in other parts of the site.¹² The presence of Petrie’s R84 jar and a limited number of narrow bases belonging to Petrie’s L30 slender jars confirm the transition between Naqada II and III periods.¹³ The presence of a sherd with impressed semicircular decoration, a fragment of wavy rim and fragments of lemon-shaped jars implies that the assemblage may be still closely linked to phase 2 and the Lower Egyptian pottery tradition. These elements in fact disappeared during phase 3.¹⁴ The less pronounced wavy handle (Petrie’s W-class) found in room EN.356 is also typical for the period in question.¹⁵

The vessel types found in the structure were recorded in assemblages from other settlements dated to the end of Naqada IID2 and the beginning of Naqada IIIA1 in Lower Egypt, such as Buto (phase IIC) and Tell el-Iswid in Lower Egypt.¹⁶

Function of the assemblage and conclusions

Due to the high groundwater level, and the poor state of preservation, only part of the vessel assemblage was collected. Almost all of the large jars were broken or crushed, and some parts were missing. For the smaller vessels, the state of preservation was also very poor with numerous losses. As their state of preservation does not allow for detailed specialist analyses of their contents or traces of use, the determination of their function is based on their technological and typological features, which may have been related to their use in specific activities.¹⁷ In addition, existing and published interpretations were also taken into account in the research.¹⁸

Most of the vessels identified in the rooms were probably used to store goods or liquids. There are three types of storage vessels – big pots with a wide orifice, medium-sized jars with an ovoid belly and a narrow orifice and Petrie’s R84 jars. The big storage jars were the least common, as only 3 of them were found (20, 22 and 26). Their big size makes them particularly useful for storage. Moreover, the wide orifice makes the contents easily accessible, for instance using another, smaller vessel. Medium-sized vessels (2, 7, 15, 18, 19, 24, and 25) are similar in shape and size and could also be used as storage containers. Their narrow orifices were easy to close with a lid or stopper to protect their contents. In fact, vessel 25 from room EN.356 was found with a stone lid (made of a quern fragment) resting in its orifice. The numerous fragments of conical or hemispherical bowls identified in the rooms could be also used as storage jar lids. Among the medium-sized vessel, 4 Petrie’s R84 jars were found as well, and interpreted as early beer containers.¹⁹ As this form is also well represented among potsherds collected all over the structure (rims and bases), R84 jars must have been commonly used containers.

The small vessels found in the structures could be used to extract contents from bigger storage pots. Two small globular vessels found in room EN.356 easily fit inside the biggest vessels with a wide orifice. Some of the small vessels were found close to bigger storage jars, which seems to confirm this mode of use. The small globular jar no. 6 was found beside vessel no. 2 in room EN.356. The opening of vessel 2 is sufficiently large to comfortably accommodate jar 6 for extracting its contents. Similarly, two bag-shaped jars (1 and 10) could be used to extract contents from big vessels 26, 23, 24, 25, and bag-shaped jars 3 and 9 could be used with bigger storage vessels 27 and 28. As the bag-shaped jars were probably used for short-term storage of small amounts of liquids, the contents of medium-sized vessels (e.g. beer jars) with narrow orifices was probably poured into the smaller containers.

Although the semi-spherical bowls could also be used to extract contents from the storage jars, traces of burning and scratch marks seem to indicate that they were used as a kind of lamp. The scratch marks may have been left while cleaning the residues of a flammable substance.

A careful analysis of the vessels’ location in the room reveals an intentional grouping of pots. For instance, in room EN.395 where 5 vessels were found it seems probable that they may have been clustered in 2 groups. 3 beer jars were found along the wall, while the two medium-sized storage jars of the same type were placed next to each other in a corner of the room. It is possible that the vessels were grouped by their contents.

Some hints implying vessel grouping were also found in room EN356. However, due to the greater number of vessels their distribution here is not as clear as in room EN.395. Only three vessels of the same type (24, 25, and 27) were placed near to one another. Another possible intentional group of three vessels includes two of the biggest pots (20 and 22) by the western wall of the room. Unfortunately, the third vessel (21) was smaller and its poor state of preservation made it impossible to reconstruct its shape. Judging by the shape of the belly found in situ, it could be a medium-sized storage jar, such as vessels 24 or 25.

The stratigraphic observation of the vessel positions indicates that the bigger pots were probably dug into the room floor in order to stabilise the rather narrow bases. Moreover, the structure’s owners or users took some effort to keep the vessel orifices in a similar position, probably to facilitate the storage operations. It is likely that the position of the smaller vessels is related to the presence of some furniture or shelves made of organic material that organised the space inside the rooms and made it possible to keep the small vessels close to the bigger ones.

Unfortunately, the vessel arrangement is difficult to study, not only because of the state of preservation and the high groundwater level adversely affecting the conditions during the exploration. The presence of many potsherds inside the rooms could indicate that some activity took place inside the structure before its abandonment. In other storage structures located on the Central Kom (rooms CW.57 and CW.94) and dated to phase 3, only a limited number of potsherds were collected. It seems that the function of the structure impacted or even limited other activities that could cause vessel breakage inside it.²⁰ As the structure on the Eastern Kom is not far from the monumental edifice interpreted as a mastaba dated to Naqada IIIA2-B, the plans of for the construction of the latter may have impacted the structure and its use.²¹ If the household had to be vacated by its owners or even destroyed to enable the construction of the monumental edifice, some vessels could have been removed to other locations. However, some of them could break in the process or be left behind or buried. It seems probable that the arrangement of the surviving vessels only partly reflects their original arrangement. Nevertheless, this hypothesis still needs to be verified, also by analysing the stratigraphic relations between the structure and the monumental mastaba.

Bibliography

Bajeot, J. and Buchez, N., (2020): “The Evolution of Lower Egyptian Culture During the Formative Stages of the Egyptian State at Tell el-Iswid: The Contribution of Ceramic Technology”, African Archaeological Review, 38, 113-146 [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10437-020-09421-7].

Ciałowicz, K. and Dębowska-Ludwin, J. (2013): “The origin of Egyptian mastabas in the light of research at Tell el-Farkha”, Études et Travaux, XXVI, 153-162.

Chłodnicki, M. and Ciałowicz, K. (2007a): “Polish excavations at Tell el-Farkha (Ghazala) in the Nile Delta. Preliminary reports 2004-2005”, Archeologia, 59, 71-128.

Chłodnicki, M. and Ciałowicz, K. (2007b): “Tell el-Farkha (Ghazala). Season 2005”, Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, XVII, 143-154.

Chłodnicki, M. and Ciałowicz, K. (2010): “Polish excavations at Tell el-Farkha (Ghazala) in the Nile Delta, Preliminary report 2006-2007”, Archeologia, 61, 81-150.

Chłodnicki, M. and Ciałowicz, K. (2015): “Tell el-Farkha. Excavations 2012-2013”, Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 24/1, 173-197.

Chłodnicki, M. and Ciałowicz, K. (2016): “Tell el-Farkha: Archaeological fieldwork 2014-2015”, Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 25, 227-255.

Chłodnicki, M. and Ciałowicz, K. (2020): “Tell el-Farkha Archaeological fieldwork 2018-2019”, Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 29/2, 59-82.

Chłodnicki M. and Mączyńska, A., (2018): “Central storage devices from the Central Kom at tell el-Farkha”, in: Ciałowicz, K.M., Czarnowicz, M. and Chłodnicki, M. ed.: Eastern Nile Delta in the 4th millennium BC, Kraków-Poznań, 81-90.

Ciałowicz, K. (2012): “Lower Egyptian settlement on the Western Kom”, in: Chłodnicki, M. Cialłwicz, K. and Mączyńska, A., ed.: Tell el-Farkha I. Excavations 1998-2011, Poznań-Kraków, 149-162.

Ciałowicz, K. (2021): “A few remarks on the origin of the Egyptian mastaba”, in: Köhler, E.C., Kuch, N. and Jeske, A.-K., ed.: Egypt at its Origins 6, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference “Origin of the State. Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt”, Vienna, 10th-15th September 2017, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 303, Leuven-Paris-Bristol, CT, 121-131.

Ciałowicz, K. and Dębowska-Ludwin, J. (2013): “The origin of Egyptian mastabas in the light of research at Tell el-Farkha”, Études et Travaux, 26, 153-162.

Hartmann, R. (2021): “Local Aspects of the Pottery in the Later Lower Egyptian Context at Tell el-Fara’in/Buto”, in: Köhler, E.C., Kuch, N. and Jeske, A.-K., ed.: Egypt at its Origins 6, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference “Origin of the State. Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt”, Vienna, 10th-15th September 2017, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 303, Leuven-Paris-Bristol, CT, 211-232.

Hartung, U., Hartmann, R., Kindermann, K., Riemer, H. and Stähle, W. (2016): “Tell el-Fara’in/Buto 12”, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Kairo, 72, 73-126.

Hartung, U. (2024): “Some Notes on the Stratigraphy of Early Buto”, in: Tristant, Y., Villaeys, J. and Ryan, E.M, ed.: Egypt at its Origins 7. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference “Origin of the State. Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt”, Paris 19th-23rd September 2022, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 323, Leuven-Paris-Bristol, CT, 254-263.

Hendrickx, S., Faltings, D., Beeck, L., Raue, D., and Michiels, C. (2002): “Milk, beer and bread technology during the Early Dynastic period”, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo, 58, 277-304.

Hendrickx, S. (2006): “Predynastic – Early Dynastic chronology”, in: Hornung, E., Krauss, R. and Warburton, D.A., ed.: Ancient Egyptian Chronology. Handbook of Oriental Studies. Section One, The Near and Middle East, 83, Leiden, 55-93, 487-488.

Hendrickx, S. (2011): “Naqada IIIA-B, A Crucial Phase in the Relative Chronology of the Naqada Culture”, ArchéoNil, 21, 65-80.

Jucha, M. (2005): Tell el-Farkha II. The Pottery of the Predynastic Settlement (Phases 2-5), Kraków-Poznań.

Köhler, E. C. (1998): Tell el-Fara’in/Buto III, Mainz.

Mączyńska, A. (2004): “Pottery tradition at Tell el-Farkha”, in: Hendrickx, S., Friedman, R.F., Ciałowicz, K.M. and Chłodnicki, M. ed.: Egypt at its Origins. Studies in memory of Barbara Adams. Proceedings of the International Conference “Origin of the State. Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt”, Kraków, 28th August-1st September 2002, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 138, Leuven-Paris-Bristol, 421-442.

Mączyńska, A. (2016): “Naqadan-Lower Egyptian interactions during the 4th Millennium B.C. A comparative study of pottery dated to Naqada II period from the sites at Adaïma and Tell el-Farkha”, in: Adams, M.D. ed.: Egypt at its Origins 4, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference “Origin of the State. Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt”, New York, 26th-30th July 2011, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 252, Leuven-Paris-Bristol, CT, 83-108.

Mączyńska, A. (2018): “On the transition between the Neolithic and Chalcolithic in Lower Egypt and the origins of the Lower Egyptian Culture: a pottery study”, in: Kabaciński, J., Chłodnicki, M., Kobusiewicz, M., and Kabacińska-Winiarska, M. ed.: Desert and the Nile. Prehistory of the Nile Basin and the Sahara. Papers in honour of Fred Wendorf, Studies in African Archaeology 15, Poznań, 261-28.

Mączyńska, A. (2023): “Onset of the Lower Egyptian cultural complex at Tell el-Farkha in the context of the emergence of beer technology in the Nile Delta”, in: Society and Subsistence in the Prehistory of Northeastern Africa. Papers in honor of Romuald Schild, Studies in African Archaeology 17, Poznań, 47-72.

Mączyńska, A. (2024): “Pottery in Lower Egypt: Organisation and development of production in the 4th millennium BCE. A preliminary model from Tell el-Farkha”, in: Tristant, Y., Villaeys, J., and Ryan, E.M., ed.: Egypt at its Origins 7. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference “Origin of the State. Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt”, Paris 19th-23rd September 2022, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 323, Leuven-Paris-Bristol, CT, 445-468.

Rice, P. (2005): Pottery analysis. A sourcebook, Chicago-London.

Sobas, M. (2012): “Pottery from the Western Kom”, in: Chłodnicki, M., Ciałowicz, K.M. and Mączyńska, A., ed.: Tell el-Farkha I. Excavations 1998-2011, Poznań-Kraków, 181-197.

Sobas, M. (2018): “Settlement pottery from the Western Kom at Tell el-Farkha. Seasons 2014-2026”, in: Ciałowicz, K.M., Czarnowicz, M. and Chłodnicki, M., ed.: Eastern Nile Delta in the 4th millennium BC, Kraków-Poznań, 107-114.

von der Way, T. (1997): Tell el-Fara’in. Buto I. Ergebnisse zum frühen Kontext. Kampagnen der Jahre 1983-1989, Mainz.

Wang, J., Friedman, R. and Baba, M., (2021): « Predynastic beer production, distribution, and consumption at Hierakonpolis, Egypt”, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 64, 101347, 1-16.

Wodzińska, A. (2009): A Manual of Egyptian Pottery. Volume 1: Fayum A – Lower Egyptian Culture, Boston.