Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
+
+ . This configuration is also posited
by Engel in her transliteration and translation
(above).
Column 1
Finally, for Column 1, Kaplony does not of-
fer a drawn reconstruction apart from adding
the upper portion of to the E.1262 line draw-
ing, nor is a transliteration and translation pos-
ited by Engel. Nevertheless, in examining first-
hand the top-most SGO preserved on the frag-
ment, the horizontal incision as depicted in the
drawing is still visible. Moreover, a small depres-
sion below the right end of the incision can be
discerned, suggesting that this SGO is, in fact,
. Indeed, contemporary labels found in and
around Tomb Q bearing show a Cluster of
four vertically stacked SGOs which include
(Tafel IVV). This Cluster appears as either
+
+
+ or its inverse
+
+
+ .
Given this pattern and the preservation of , I
believe that should in fact be understood as
the lower-most SGO of Cluster
+
+
+
, rather than part of Cluster
+ + .
This leaves the presence of to explain. No
less than 10 incised labels bearing from the
area of Tomb Q contain this SGO in Column 1.
In many instances appears in the upper or
middle part of the column (its repetition in the
lower-most part of the column relates to a dif-
ferent Cluster, e.g. Tafel III lower). When we
consult the parallels in Tafel IVV, B shows
immediately to the right of . However, a
survey of all occurrences of shows that its
positioning is entirely independent of in its
role as a constituent of
+
+
+ .
Once this Cluster is isolated and set aside, analy-
sis shows that is clustering with the following
SGOs: , / , , . The sequence, loca-
tion and constituents of these groupings vary.
62 K. E. Pi quet t e: Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos ZS 137 (2010)
For example, on label A, we see that the Cluster
comprises + + while has not been
included.
Nevertheless, overall comparison suggests
that we should find some variation of Cluster
( )
+ , / , , ( ) in the lower part of
Column 1 on E.1262. Indeed, examination of
the artefact itself reveals the faint remains of
incisions which correspond to this Cluster.
Hopefully most visible to the present reader in
Tafel II are the left-most portions of two verti-
cally stacked occurrences of the SGO. The
downward angle (top right to bottom left) of
both incisions corresponds to the angle of the
left-most portion of as it appears on AC.
Above these, a longer incision is also faintly
visible at roughly the same angle, but descending
to the left a bit more sharply. I suggest this inci-
sion forms the left-most portion of . I be-
lieve it may have been the line forming the
body of this serpent, combined with precon-
ceptions (below) or lack of access to the artefact
during drawing, that led the drawer to see .
Perhaps the handle of was derived from
the curvature of the incision forming the tip of
the serpents tail. Finally, to the right of ,
the even fainter remains of incised parallel lines
or can be observed. Thus, given the
correspondence of the compositional features
(i.e. morphology, position, sequence and direc-
tion) of the faint incisions on E.1262 with the
comparative evidence, I propose that this area
of the label fragment should be reconstructed
according to the corresponding content in Col-
umn 1 of label B on Tafel IV.
So why did Petrie and others see Cluster
amongst the preserved marks in Column 1?
The fractured surface undoubtedly made it diffi-
cult to discern intentional from non-intentional
lines. I also suspect that because and
were aligned on roughly the same horizontal
axis, a meaningful association was assumed be-
cause it met with certain external expectations
concerning royal titles attested elsewhere. It
would have then been relatively easy to make
out the shapes of + in the diamond- or
lozenge-shaped fractures in the laminae of the
ivory. Cluster was already known from
labels bearing the PI of Den. These were, how-
ever, located in entirely different compositional
contexts of a narratival nature, and restricted to
labels dating from the beginning to the middle
of the First Dynasty (e.g. Aml i neau 1904
1905, [T] 124, [P] pl. 37, no. 3; Dreyer et al.
1998: [T] 138139, 166, [D] fig. 29, [P] pl. 5c;
Petri e 1900: [T] 22, [D] pl. 15, no. 16, [P] pl.
11, no. 14). Subsequent occurrences are attested
on labels bearing a PI of Semerkhet where
always co-occurs with right-facing instances of
(e.g. Petri e 1900: [T] 23, [D] pl. 17, no. 26,
[P] pl. 12, no. 1), but these are mutually exclu-
sive with the niched frame motif. The case is
the same for their appearance on labels dated to
the reign of Qaa. For this and the other compo-
sitional reasons discussed, the configuration as
reconstructed by Petrie and Kaplony for E.1262
is therefore untenable.
Beyond this, it only remains to propose that
what may be a Cluster comprised of and
(although the latter is not always expressed or
closely juxtaposed with the former), in the upper
corner of this label type, should be added to the
reconstruction. Thus, apart from the variable
imagery in the lower middle column and based
on the preserved and published label finds to
date, it is possible to propose a contextually
derived reconstruction of E.1262 with possible
variants as presented in Tafel VI.
With regard to the conventional retrospecti-
vely-derived transliteration and translation propo-
sed by Engel, this would be adjusted as follows:
rnp(.t) |m`(`)| nsw(.t) |mdh.wf| bft snd |hrw q`f|- .t sf
hrw (?) |s| tpf h`.t d thnw |mdh mdh(.w) nsw.t| hnw-k`
Jahr: knigliche [Inspektion der beiden Zimmerleute
des] Knigs von Untergypten und (Lieferung) von
Akazienholz [Horus Qa]a, Baumgarten des Palastes
(?) [in? s], beste Qualitt des d thnw ls [Leiter der
Zimmerleute des Knigs von Obergypten] Henuka
Year: royal [inspection of the Double Carpenter of]
the King of Lower Egypt and (delivery) of acacia
wood [Horus Qa]a, arboretum of the palace (?) [in?
s], best quality of d thnw-oil [Chief Carpenter of the
King of Upper Egypt] Henuka
Concluding Remarks
In sum, through this compositional analysis
of selected First Dynasty labels found in and
ZS 137 (2010) K. E. Pi quet t e: Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos 63
around tomb complex Q at Abydos, and in con-
junction with first-hand study, it has been possi-
ble to propose an adjusted reconstruction of
label fragment E.1262 (Tafel VI), as well as dis-
cern and explain possible reasons for oversights
in previous research. This underlines the impor-
tance of reflexivity concerning the epistemologi-
cal processes underpinning (re-)construction
and interpretation. Investigators may see dif-
ferent graphical content or physical features
depending on whether study is based on the
original artefacts or surrogates, and seeing may
also be informed by preconceptions held in the
investigators mind. In developing a less teleo-
logical perspective in the study of early Egyptian
script and image (see Bai nes 2004: 184), I hope
that the micro-level analysis presented here
demonstrates the value of grounding study and
interpretation of graphical imagery in their im-
mediate artefactual, compositional and contem-
porary cultural situation, thus providing a firmer
basis for addressing broader questions of label
function, meaning and other types of socio-
cultural significance.
Acknowl edgements
Portions of the research presented in this article
derive on my doctoral research conducted at the
UCL Institute of Archaeology, supported by the UK
Overseas Research Students Award Scheme and
grants from the Institute of Archaeology Awards and
the UCL Graduate School. I am grateful to the late
Barbara Adams, Gnter Dreyer, Eva-Maria Engel,
Andrew Gardner, Wolfram Grajetzki, Liam McNa-
mara, Roger Matthews, Lutz Popko, Stephen Quirke,
Dietrich Raue, Jeffrey Spencer, John Tait, Claudia
Zehrt and Helen Whitehouse for valuable discus-
sions, image provision and permissions and other
valuable support. My thanks are also due to the ZS
editorial committee.
References
Aml i neau, E. 1905. Les Nouvelles Fouilles dAby-
dos: 18971898 (Deuxime Partie). Paris.
Aml i neau, E. 1904. Les Nouvelles Fouilles dAby-
dos: 18971898. Paris.
Aml i neau, E. 1902. Les Nouvelles Fouilles dAby-
dos: Seconde campagne 18971898. Paris.
Aml i neau, E. 1899. Les Nouvelles Fouilles dAby-
dos: 18951896 Part I. Paris.
Bai nes, J. 2007. Visual and Written Culture in
Ancient Egypt. Oxford.
Bai nes, J. 2004. The Earliest Egyptian Writing:
Development, context, purpose. In Houst on,
S. D. (ed.) The First Writing: Script invention as
history and process, 150189. Cambridge.
Bai nes, J. 1995. Origins of Egyptian Kingship. In
O Connor, D. and Si l verman, D. P. (eds.)
Ancient Egyptian Kingship, 95156. New York.
Bai nes, J. 1989. Communication and Display: The
integration of early Egyptian writing and art.
Antiquity 63: 471482.
Bai nes, J. 1985. Fecundity Figures: Egyptian per-
sonification and the iconology of a genre. War-
minster.
Bard, K. A. 1992. Origins of Egyptian Writing. In
Fri edman, R. and Adams, B. (eds.) The Fol-
lowers of Horus: Studies dedicated to Michael
Allen Hoffman 19441990, 297306. Oxford.
Chat t erj ee, H. J. (ed.) 2008. Touch in Muse-
ums: Policy and practice in object handling.
Oxford.
Coul mas, F. 2003 [1989]. The Writing Systems of
the World. Oxford.
de Morgan, J. 1897. Recherches sur les Origines de
lgypte: Ethnographie prhistorique et tombeau
royal de Ngadah. Paris.
Dreyer, G. 2000. Egypts Earliest Historical Event.
Egyptian Archaeology 16: 67.
Dreyer, G. 1993. A Hundred Years at Abydos.
Egyptian Archaeology 3: 1012.
Dreyer, G., Hart mann, R., Hart ung, U., Hi -
kade, T., Kpp, H., Lacher, C., Ml l er, V.,
Nerl i ch, A. and Zi nk, A. 2003. Umm el-Qaab:
Nachuntersuchungen im frhzeitlichen Knigs-
friedhof. 13./14./15. Vorbericht. Mitteilungen
des Deutschen Archologischen Instituts,
Abteilung Kairo 59: 69138.
Dreyer, G., von den Dri esch, A., Engel , E.-M.,
Hart mann, R., Hart ung, U., Hi kade, T.,
Ml l er, V. and Pet ers, J. 2000. Umm el-Qaab.
Nachuntersuchungen im frhzeitlichen Knigs-
friedhof. 11./12. Vorbericht. Mitteilungen des
Deutschen Archologischen Instituts, Abteilung
Kairo 56: 46125.
Dreyer, G., Hart ung, U., Hi kade, T. and Ml -
l er, V. 1998. Umm el-Qaab: Nachuntersuchun-
gen im frhzeitlichen Knigsfriedhof. 9./10. Vor-
bericht. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archolo-
gischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 54: 78167.
Dreyer, G., Engel , E.-M., Hart ung, U., Hi kade,
T., Khl er, C. E. and Pumpenmei er, F. 1996.
Umm el-Qaab. Nachuntersuchungen im frhzeit-
lichen Knigsfriedhof. 7./8. Vorbericht. Mittei-
lungen des Deutschen Archologischen Instituts,
Abteilung Kairo 52: 1376.
64 K. E. Pi quet t e: Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos ZS 137 (2010)
Dreyer, G., Hart ung, U. and Pumpenmei er, F.,
1993. Umm el-Qaab: Nachuntersuchungen im
frhzeitlichen Knigsfriedhof. 5./6. Vorbericht.
Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archologischen Ins-
tituts, Abteilung Kairo 49: 3343.
Dreyer, G., Boessneck, J., von den Dri esch, A.
and Kl ug, S., 1990. Umm el-Qaab: Nachunter-
suchungen im frhzeitlichen Knigsfriedhof.
3./4. Vorbericht. Mitteilungen des Deutschen
Archologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 46:
5389.
Emery, W. B. 1961. Archaic Egypt. England.
Emery, W. B. 1954. Excavations at Saqqara: Great
tombs of the First Dynasty, II. London.
Emery, W. B. 1949. Excavations at Saqqara: Great
tombs of the First Dynasty, I. Cairo.
Emery, W. B. with the collaboration of Saad, Z. Y.
1939. Excavations at Saqqara (193738): H
.
or-
Ah
.
a. Cairo.
Emery, W. B. and Sa ad, Z. Y. 1938. Excavations
at Saqqara: The tomb of H
.
emaka. Cairo.
Engel , E.-M., 1997. Das Grab des Qaa in Umm el-
Qaab: Architektur und Inventar, IIII. Unpub-
lished PhD dissertation. Gttingen University.
Gi ddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society:
Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley.
Hawass, Z. 2002. Hidden Treasures of the Egyptian
Museum: One hundred masterpieces from the
centennial exhibition. The American University in
Cairo Press.
Hel ck, W. 1987. Untersuchungen zur Thinitenzeit.
Wiesbaden.
Houst on, S. D. (ed.) 2004. The First Writing: Script
invention as history and process. Cambridge.
Kahl , J. 1994. Das System der gyptischen Hiero-
glyphenschrift in der 0. 3. Dynastie. Wiesbaden.
Kapl ony, P. 1963. Die Inschriften der gyptischen
Frhzeit, IIII. Wiesbaden.
Khl er, C. E. 2008. The Helwan Project. In
Smyt h, J. (ed.) Corroboree: 25 Years of co-
operation between Egyptians and Australians in
the field of Egyptology: Catalogue of the special
exhibition in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Feb-
ruary 4March 4 2008. Cairo.
Khl er, C. E. with contributions by Bi rrel l , M.,
Casey, I., Hi kade, T., Smyt he, J. and St.
Cl ai r, B. 2005. Helwan I: Excavations in the
Early Dynastic cemetery. Season 1997/98. Hei-
delberg.
Khl er, C. E. 2004. The 2004 Lecture Series: The
Cairo Museum collection of artefacts from Zaki
Saads excavation at Helwan. Armidale.
Khl er, C. E. 2000. Excavation in the Early Dynas-
tic Cemetery at Helwan: A preliminary report of
the 1998/99 and 1999/2000 Seasons. Bulletin of
the Australian Center for Egyptology 11: 8392.
Krzyszkowska, O. and Morkot , R. 2000. Ivory
and Related Materials. In Ni chol son, P. and
Shaw, I. (eds.) Ancient Egyptian Materials and
Technology, 320331. Cambridge.
Legge, G. F. 1907. The Tablets of Negadah and
Abydos. Proceedings of the Society of Biblical
Archaeology 29: 1824, 7073, 101106, 150
154, 243250.
Macramal l ah, R. 1940. Fouilles Saqqarah: Un
cimetire archaque de la classe moyenne du
peuple Saqqarah. Cairo.
Mat t hews, R. 2003. The Archaeology of Meso-
potamia: Theories and approaches. London.
Morel and, J. 2006. Archaeology and Texts: Sub-
servience or enlightenment. Annual Review of
Anthropology 35: 135151.
Morel and, J. 2001. Archaeology and Text. Lon-
don.
Newberry, P. E. 1912. The Wooden and Ivory
Labels of the First Dynasty. Proceedings of the
Society of Biblical Archaeology 34: 279289.
Qui bel l , J. E. 1923. Excavations at Saqqara (1912
1914): Archaic mastabas. Cairo.
Pet ri e, H. 1927. Egyptian Hieroglyphs of the First
and Second Dynasties. London.
Pet ri e, W. M. F. 1925. Tombs of the Courtiers and
Oxyrhynkos. London.
Pet ri e, W. M. F. 1902. Abydos. London.
Pet ri e, W. M. F. 1901. The Royal Tombs of the
Earliest Dynasties, Part I. London.
Pet ri e, W. M. F. 1900. The Royal Tombs of the
Earliest Dynasties, Part II. London.
Pi quet t e, K. E. 2008. Re-Materialising Script and
Image. In Gashe, V. and Fi nch, J. (eds.), Cur-
rent Research in Egyptology IX: Proceedings of
the ninth annual symposium, which took place at
the KHN Centre for Biomedical Egyptology,
University of Manchester, January 2008, 89107.
Bolton.
Pi quet t e, K. E. 2007. Writing, Art and Society: A
contextual archaeology of the inscribed labels of
Late PredynasticEarly Dynastic Egypt. PhD
dissertation. University of London.
Redf ord, D. B. 1986. Pharaonic King-Lists, Annals
and Day Books: A contribution to the study of
the Egyptian sense of history. Mississauga.
Rose, G. 2001. Visual Methodologies: An introduc-
tion to the interpretation of visual materials.
London.
Rummel . U. (ed.) 2007. Meeting the Past: 100 Years
in Egypt. Deutsches Archologisches Institut
Kairo 19072007, Catalogue of the Special Ex-
hibition in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo (19th
November, 2007 to 15th January, 2008). Cairo.
Saad, Z. Y. 1969. The Excavations at Helwan: Art
and civilization in the First and Second Egyptian
Dynasties. Norman, OK.
Saad, Z. Y. 1951. Royal Excavations at Helwan:
19451947. (Supplment aux Annales du Service
des Antiquits de lgypte 14) Cairo.
ZS 137 (2010) K. E. Pi quet t e: Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos 65
Saad, Z. Y. 1947. Royal Excavations at Helwan:
19411945. (Supplement aux Annales du Service
des Antiquits de lgypte 3) Cairo.
Saad, Z. Y. 1942. Preliminary Report on the Royal
Excavations at Helwan. Annales du Service des
Antiquits de lgypte 41: 405409.
Senner, W. N. (ed.) 1989. The Origins of Writing.
Lincoln, NE.
Shanks, M. and Ti l l ey, C. 1996. Re-constructing
Archaeology: Theory and practice. (2
nd
ed.). So-
merset.
Spencer, A. J. 1980. Catalogue of Egyptian Anti-
quities in the British Museum V: Early Dynastic
objects. London.
Wei l l , R. 1961. Recherches sur la I
re
Dynastie et les
temps prpharaoniques. Cairo.
Wi l ki nson, T. A. H. 2001 [1999]. Early Dynastic
Egypt. London.
Summary
The case study presented in this article takes a
compositional approach to the reconstruction of an
ivory label fragment (Ashmolean E.1262) discovered
over a century ago by Flinders Petrie and his team at
the Abydos tomb complex ascribed to Qaa, the last
ruler of the First Dynasty. Previous methods applied
to the study of labels and other early inscribed
objects and the modes used for their reproduction in
printed media are discussed and critically assessed. I
argue that the pitfalls presented by anachronistic and
de-contextualising approaches can be avoided by
anchoring analysis in the artefact in tandem with
detailed comparative study of contemporary gra-
phical culture. Previous reproductions and recon-
structions are thus reviewed and an adjusted re-
construction of the label fragment is proposed from
this grounded perspective.
Keywords
Abydos Qa-a Oxford, Ashmolean Museum,
E. 1262 writing, development of inscribed label
compositional analysis reconstruction
TAFEL I
Plaque BM EA 35513, from Abydos, elephant ivory, W 6.6 cm, H 3.1 cm, TH 0.7 cm. Above: Composite photo-
graph showing all sides (authors photographs, courtesy BM). Below: Original published photograph (Petrie 1901:
pl. 3, no. 1, courtesy EES) and drawing presumably based on it (Emery 1961: 53, g. 13, courtesy Penguin Books)
(zu Piquette, Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos).
TAFEL II
Label fragment Ashmolean Museum E.1262, from Abydos, ivory (probably elephant). W 3.8 cm, H 3.73.75 cm,
TH 0.30.32 cm. Above: Composite photograph showing all sides (authors photographs, courtesy the Ashmolean
Museum, Oxford). Below: Original photograph and line drawing (Petrie 1900: pl. 11, no. 12 and pl. 17, no. 28,
courtesy of the Egypt Exploration Society )
(zu Piquette, Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos).
TAFEL III
Reconstruction of upper half of E.1262 (Kaplony 1963: pl. 145, g. 847B, OA-a d, courtesy Harrassowitz)
(zu Piquette, Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos).
Incised label Ab K 1445, from Abydos (Engel 1997: 455-456, g. 221 [3], with authors permission).
Ivory. W 3.55 cm, H 3.1 cm, TH 0.20.25 cm
(zu Piquette, Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos).
TAFEL IV
A: Label Ab K 1630, R 340, from Abydos (photograph: Dreyer 1993: 10; drawing: Engel 1997: 446, g. 218 [2]).
Ivory. W 2.9 cm, H 3.15 cm, TH 0.35 cm
(zu Piquette, Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos).
B: Label Ab K 1631, R 341, from Abydos (Engel 1997: 446, g. 218 [3]). Ivory (?).
W 3.65 cm, H 3.05 cm, TH 0.250.3 cm
(zu Piquette, Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos).
TAFEL V
C: Label Ab K 1442, R 255 = JE 99161, from Abydos (photograph: Rummel 2007: 74, no. 54;
drawing: Engel 1997: 446, g. 218 [1]). Elephant ivory.
W 3.9 cm, H 3.5 cm, TH 0.30.4 cm (zu Piquette, Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos).
TAFEL VI
Adjusted reconstruction of label fragment E.1262 with range of possible reconstructions for missing upper
portion. Authors drawing (after Kaplony 1963: pl. 145, Abb. 847B, OA-a d; Engel 1997: 446, g. 218 [1, 3])
(zu Piquette, Inscribed Label Fragment from Abydos).