HA 355A Summer 2012 Assignment 7 Types of Tombs As We've Seen
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
HA 355A Summer 2012 Assignment 7 Types of Tombs As we’ve seen, tomb design could vary quite a lot. While I’ve tried to suggest there was a traceable development in form, it is also true that there was more variation than we might expect from a conservative culture. One type of tomb would become standard (e.g. mastaba, pyramid) and then someone would decide to do something quite different (step pyramid, mastaba). Write a 2-3 page response to the issues raised by this point. How does the introduction of these atypical forms change your understanding of ancient Egypt? You may also want to speculate: what do you think might be the reasons behind the design of Shepseskaf’s tomb? (see below) DUE: Monday, May 28, before 10:30 AM In the secure chronicles, the last king of the 4th dynasty is Menkare’s son Shepseskaf (c2472-2467). Shepseskaf’s name is associated with the site of Giza, as he carried out substantial completion work on Menkare’s pyramid complex. For his own tomb, however, Shepseskaf not only chose a different location (partway between Saqqara and Dashur), but a very different building style. Shepseskaf’s tomb resembled a mastaba, one which very clearly reflected parallels with a large sarcophagus or Buto shrine. The shrine shape has been determined by the recovery of the limstone casing blocks which originally encased the rougher core blocks we see in photos today. Known in modern times as the Mastabat Far’un (Pharaoh’s Mastaba), this seemingly small and modest structure (in comparison to the Giza pyramids) is actually quite large in size (327 x 244 feet for just the tomb proper). The tomb and the funerary temple on the east were encircled by a substantial mudbrick enclosure wall. A second encolosure all created a large courtyard in which were found fragments of relief sculpture and statues of the king. A causeway linked the funerary temple to the valley temple, half a mile to the east. Shepseskaf’s seemingly unusual choices are debated by scholars. Some feel that the building reflects an economic downturn and loss of control over the necessary resources. Others believe that this choice of design was influenced by Shepseskaf’s personal religious preferences and/or a reaction against the power of the solar cult of Heliopolis. This would not be the only time in Egyptian history when such an event is reflected in the material culture, as we saw with the serekh designs of Peribsen & Khasekem(wy). But if this latter is the case, it was temporary. The kings of the fifth dynasty not only reverted to the pyramid form, but many of them proved their (superior?) devotion, by building those pyramids and sun temples in close proximity. (see textbook for 5th dynasty at Abusir). Note: in Shepseskaf’s period, the existing structures would only have been those of the 3rd dynasty (Djoser, Sekhemhket) Reconstruction drawing showing original shaping, funerary temple, enclosure walls and part of the roofed causeway.