Borrowed Legacy Royal Tombs S9 and S10 at South Abydos by dawn mccormack
fter the 12th Dynasty reigns of Senwsoret III (1878–1841 BCE) and Amenemhet III (1858–1812 BCE) the political and economic power of the Egyptian state began to decline. During the 13th Dynasty (1800–1650 BCE), Aover 50, often unrelated, pharaohs occupied the throne in little more than 150 years. Archaeologists have so far discovered only six of their tombs in the Memphite region near modern Cairo—two pyramids at South Saqqara, two pyramids at Mazghuna, and a funerary complex and a shaft tomb at Dahshur. Although these royal tombs feature a complex, sub- terranean design (first seen in Amenemhet III’s complex at Hawara), they are significantly less magnificent than those from the height of the 12th Dynasty. At South Abydos, to the north of Senwosret III’s tomb, two structures known as S9 and S10 display the same architectural components as those found in the Memphite pyramids. In 1901–1902 Arthur Weigall was the first person to excavate tombs of this type. Although Ernest Mackay noticed in 1912 that S9’s sarcophagus was almost identical to one from the Structures S9 and S10 are placed close to Senwosret III’s tomb southern pyramid at Mazghuna, subsequent scholars have not enclosure. included S9 and S10 in their consideration of the royal funer- ary architecture of this period. In 2003, we re-excavated a por- tion of S9 to recover additional data that might shed light on Dynasty (and possibly the late 12th Dynasty). The mortuary its relationship to the Memphite tombs. establishment of Senwosret III at South Abydos probably functioned in a similar manner for the building of S9 and S10. REVISITING S9 TO UNCOVER ITS SECRETS The proximity of these structures to Senwosret III’s tomb is also significant because it symbolically links the reigns of the In at least one case, a preexisting Middle Kingdom royal funer- two later pharaohs to his legacy. ary complex and its associated installations may have served as Near the cliffs of the Mountain-of-Anubis architects con- k c a
m headquarters for later tomb construction during the 13th structed S9 upon the natural terrain, which slopes noticeably r o C c M n w a D
www.museum.upenn.edu/expedition 23 blocked entrance,and(E)thesarcophaguschamber. wall, (B)thesinusoidalwall, (C)thepossiblecultstructure, (D)the 24 the of pyramid Could thatthetomb itbe thenatural used simply pyramid. suggests buta thatS9 had nocurrent evidence limestone, encased in by amud-brickpyramid surmounted typically Comparable late MiddleKingdom are structures pretation. but hegave thisinter- to support noevidence “bench”) tomb, amastaba(Arabic to bricks form then covered askinof with and sandanddebris gested were thatthesewalls with filled Weigall sug- rounding tomb inthecenter. thesubterranean dimensions (averaging 54.5minlength on each side) sur- s d surf Plan ofthe20 ap f a to capitsymbolically? did, ormed an outer courtyard. These unusual walls, which also which Theseunusual walls, anouterormed courtyard. re aervae u-rc nlsr alo uneven haveurvey revealed amud-brickenclosure of wall o w eri ewoe I’ obecoue may have inSenwsoretpear tempo- been III’s tomb enclosure, w I ace elementsofthetomb.R ieahd sinusoidal (wavy) thatmay mud-brickwall have hitewashed, n n volume 48, number 2 expedition number volume 48, rn fthetomb enclosure we uncovered to thenortheast front of war d t 03 excavations ofS9,including Weigall’s sketch ofthesub- o war Mountain-of-Anubis d h otws.Excavations andsubsurface the northwest. ecent w ork includes(A)theenclosure asSenwosret III’s tomb , v section oftheenclosureandloomingnatural pyramid The sinusoidalwall ofS9isintheforeground, withasmall isible inthebackground.
Dawn McCormack Dawn McCormack e the r T e d was r d Thelack of occurred which here. theactivities about building’s remains evidence does notprovide further this theshallow nature of Unfortunately, monies. cere- andburial mummification during rituals It may alsohave provided sacred space for pharaoh. the that itmay have achapelfor been thecultof thetomb enclosurecophagus within suggests buried on the sameaxisasthesar- thisstructure of location The bricks. represented today course by asingle of arectangular building, theeastside of intersects with M least o e ar x he seeminglyendlesscleansandwhic xp lements and to subsequent human activity. ownward-sloping to exposed itswalls the terrain ebris from mayebris walls fallen indicate thisstructure ca emphite such region surrounded walls theentire complex. y ertecnrlai fS,thesinusoidal wall S9, Near axisof thecentral y e v nse) o ations in1 st ma azed soonafter or thatthesite’s funeral the r ne lat uc y tur ha f se v es t e 90 e par p 1–1 M o r o at idd k 902 dwarfs the50workers attempting toremove itin2003. v ing z e id psn wyfo osrcinaes or ep sandaway areas, from construction le K ed economicaled and time means(inboth nsaon h obecoue In at ones around thetomb enclosure. ing d o m h filled thesubstructure ofS9after Weigall’s funerary complex inthe funerary A section ofthequartzitesarcophagusbecamevisibleduringourexcavations. q t s s a o uperstructure? up uar mb st f oundat e r tzit st r r e uc uc c io tur tur o b W w thiswork During thesarcophagus. of section r f the cr atSouth Mazghuna. structures are assimilar located inthesamebasicpositions above cultbuildingand thepossible mentioned theopening intheenclosure wall Interestingly, atthe tomb.administer pre-burial activities suggests thatthisareafound nearby to wasused Unused sealingclay created level. atahigher a newbeen floorhad closed, been had doorway After the entrance. through theformer passed we discovered plaster floorwhich adistinct plug, Beneaththismud-brick plaster andwhitewash. alater layer with thewall of to of like look apart enclosure we found ablocked disguised entrance rtebra hme.R-xaaigti ra we Re-excavating thisarea, chamber. or theburial n mvd56mo sandbefore reaching thetop emoved 5-6mof mp ur e e. Could this be evidence thatS9didhave Could evidence thisbe a e. e es t Inside thetomb enclosure we encountered themaintomb Near corner of thenortheast ig ial pito f o o f al ound b o ne r ater Weigall excavated had hissearch during www.museum.upenn.edu/expedition p l, ped by a pyramid such brickworkprovides by apyramid ped ar nts o that ma c hes thats r se r h acpau.In comparable thesarcophagus. f r ic v y k e ha d as aplat st v e r uc up he tur ottewih fthe of theweight port ld ba f es, orm to lowerorm thelarge ck thesandfrom the not recorded by 25 One thing that did become clear during our excavations While the excavations at S9 and S10 have not yet revealed was the deliberate nature of the tomb’s destruction. The body the identity of the pharaohs buried within these tombs, we of the deceased and his funerary furnishings were smashed hope that future excavations to fully explore them will provide into tiny fragments. Burned bandages and small pieces of some additional clues. Past researchers have often ignored late inscribed, gilded plaster that originally formed the mummy’s Middle Kingdom royal tombs, with their small size and mask and case lay strewn among the debris outside of the wrecked condition, and new data is needed from these sites to enclosure wall. We also found countless pieces of wood and further our understanding of the numerous royal figures and faience inlays from unidentified funerary furniture, as well as their circumstances during this perplexing era. fragments of stone jars, beads, and bone needles.
WHO BUILT S9 AND S10?
The reigns in which these structures were built remain a mys- tery. Although the architecture of S9 resembles that of South Mazghuna, the owner of that northern tomb is also unknown and thus does not provide insight into the identity of the pharaoh in S9. Similarly, while the remains of S10 can be com- pared to a tomb model discovered at Amenemhet III’s aban- doned funerary complex at Dahshur, this pharaoh’s burial in his pyramid at Hawara precludes him from having been interred in S10. All that can be suggested at the moment is that S9 and S10 may have been constructed by pharaohs who reigned soon after Amenemhet III. dawn mccormack is a Ph.D. candidate in Egyptology in Penn’s Department of Near Eastern Languages and Leslie Warden and Kei Yamamoto patiently reconstruct pottery vessels from Civilizations. minute fragments that came from one of two small foundation deposits outside the enclosure wall. Other objects included rope, jar stoppers, and For Further Reading animal bones. Dodson, Aidan. “From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga: The Decline & Fall of the Royal Pyramid.” KMT 5 (1994):25-39.
Dodson, Aidan. After the Pyramids: The Valley of the Kings and Beyond. London: Rubicon Press, 2000.
Lehner, Mark. The Complete Pyramids. London: Thames & Hudson, 1997.
McCormack, Dawn. “The Significance of Royal Funerary Architecture in the Study of Thirteenth Dynasty Kingship.” In The Second Intermediate Period (13th-17th Dynasties), Current Research, Future Prospects, edited by W. V. Davies, pp. ???. London: British Museum Press, 2006.
Ryholt, K. S. B. The Political Situation in Egypt during the k c
Second Intermediate Period c. 1800-1550 B.C. Copenhagen: a m r
Tusculanum Press, 1997. o C c M n w a D
26 volume 48, number 2 expedition