Identity, Burial Practice, and Social Change in Ptolemaic Egypt

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Identity, Burial Practice, and Social Change in Ptolemaic Egypt IDENTITY, BURIAL PRACTICE, AND SOCIAL CHANGE IN PTOLEMAIC EGYPT by Thomas Peter Landvatter A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Classical Art and Archaeology) in the University of Michigan 2013 Doctoral Committee: Professor Sharon C. Herbert, Co-Chair Professor Terry G. Wilfong, Co-Chair Professor John M. O’Shea Professor Janet E. Richards © Thomas Peter Landvatter All Rights Reserved 2013 for my parents ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I have many to thank for helping me through this dissertation. I would like to thank, first of all, my doctoral committee for all of the help and guidance they have given me during my time at Michigan. With their help, I have grown immeasurably as a schol- ar, intellectually and professionally. I thank especially my co-chairs, Terry Wilfong and Sharon Herbert, for their guidance. Terry was always there with advice, encouragement, and willing share his exhaustive knowledge of Egyptian history and material culture. I thank Sharon for her challenging critiques of my work, pushing me to do better. I also thank her particularly for my two seasons at Kedesh; it was there under Sharon’s direc- tion that I learned to be the field archaeologist that I am today. I owe a great deal to Janet Richards, who has been a mentor to me throughout my graduate career, for introducing me to the site of Abydos and allowing me to conduct my two seasons of fieldwork under the aegis of Michigan’s Abydos Middle Cemetery project. I also want to thank John O’Shea for making me appreciate both archaeological theory and its importance, and the complexities and difficulties of archaeological data. His critiques have always been use- ful, and have pushed me to become a better archaeologist. I also thank here Traianos Gagos, who was part of this project at its beginning, and who was my mentor and close friend during my formative years at Michigan. His friendship helped me grow both as a scholar and a person. He is missed more than words can say. My thanks also goes to the curators and staff of the Kelsey Museum and the facul- ty of Classical Studies, who have always been helpful and have inspired me to be inter- iii disciplinary in my work. I thank particularly Arthur Verhoogt, who has provided com- ments on my dissertation work, and has always encouraged me in my study of the papy- rological evidence for Graeco-Roman Egypt from an archaeological perspective. To Alex Zwinak I also owe a great debt, for always being there to help me navigate graduate school and university bureaucracy. I owe many for my research abroad. My work in Alexandria, Luxor, and else- where in Egypt was made possible with a fellowship from the American Research Center in Egypt, and I thank the Ministry of State of Antiquities (MSA) of Egypt for allowing me to conduct my photographic work. My time living in Cairo and visiting mortuary sites was invaluable, and I greatly appreciate the help of the ARCE staff in Cairo. I would like to thank the MSA inspectors assigned to me as a fellow: Mr. Mahmoud el-Dafrawy in Alexandria; Mr. Ahmed Mousa Mustafa Demerdash in Khargeh; Mr. Abdullah Mu- hammed Nasir in Dakhleh; and Mr. Sayed Gomaa, Mr. Yasser Abd el-Razik, and Mr. Mohammed Selim in Luxor. I would also like to thank Professor Steven Snape and Ms. Patricia Winker of the Garstang Museum of Archaeology at the University of Liverpool for allowing me to view the archives of John Garstang’s excavations at Abydos. For my dissertation fieldwork, I owe many people a debt of gratitude. I thank the Ministry of State of Antiquities of Egypt and its then-director Dr. Mohammed Ibrahim, and Dr. Mohammed Ismail Khaled, director of foreign missions. I also thank the Univer- sity of Michigan’s Abydos Middle Cemetery (AMC) project for allowing me to conduct this research under the AMC project’s aegis. This fieldwork would not have been possi- ble without the support of a National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Im- provement Grant (BCS Proposal 1038765), an International Research Award from the iv International Institute at the University of Michigan, and a Graduate Student Research Award from the Rackham Graduate School at the University of Michigan. I would like to thank again Professor Richards, as well as Seth Button; Claudia Chemello; Henry Col- burn; Geoff Compton; Suzanne Davis; Christian Knoblauch; Peter Lacovara; Beth Platte; Heather Tunmore; and Korri Turner, who all participated in the project. I would also like to thank the MSA inspectors assigned to the AMC project for the 2011 and 2012 seasons, Mr. Sayyed Mohammed Abd el-Rahim and Mr. Mahmoud Mohammed Amer. I would not have been able to do this without my close friends. I first of all thank my cohort – Joanna Schmitz, Angela Commito, and Charlotte Maxwell-Jones – without whom I would not have been able to survive graduate school, and without whom it would not have been nearly as much fun. I also thank Ryan Hughes, Dan Diffendale, Colin Quinn, Henry Colburn, and Seth Button, for being great friends and colleagues, and for always being willing to talk archaeology for hours on end. Of course, I would not be where I am without my family, my parents Scott and Edith, and my sister Bronwyn. I thank my parents for their unwavering love and support over the years, and for allowing me to follow my passion for archaeology. Your trips out to Michigan were always a welcome respite, and your enthusiasm for what I do has al- ways driven me forward. Lastly, I thank my wife, Beth. I cannot imagine having gotten through the last two years without your love and support. From Cairo to Luxor, to Aby- dos, and back to Ann Arbor, you have been there by my side always supportive and al- ways loving; I am a better person because of you. Thank you, and I love you. Thank you all. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Dedication ii Acknowledgements iii List of Tables ix List of Figures x List of Appendices xiv Chapter 1 – Greeks and Egyptians 1 1.1 – Introduction 1 1.2 – The “Two Societies” and the Ethnicity Problem 3 1.3 – Models of Identity, Ethnicity, and Cultural Interaction 10 1.4 – Archaeology, Identity, and Ethnic Interpretation 18 1.5 – Testing for Ethnicity 22 Chapter 2 – Archaeological Approaches to Mortuary Analysis 28 2.1 – The Archaeological Study of Mortuary Variability 28 2.2 – Mortuary Analysis and State Level Societies 40 2.3 – Ethnicity and Mortuary Practices 47 vi 2.4 – Methodology 52 2.5 – The Case Studies 56 Chapter 3 – Alexandria: Immigrants and Identities 58 3.1 – Introduction 58 3.2 – The Alexandrian Funerary System 63 3.3 – Communal Hypogea 97 3.4 – Cremation Practice in Alexandria 104 3.5 – Conclusions 109 Chapter 4 – Thebes: Reuse and Repurposing 110 4.1 – Introduction 110 4.2 – Background: Foundations of the Funerary System and 113 the Choachytes. 4.3 – Spatial Organization: the Funerary Landscape of Western Thebes 118 4.4 – Funerary Structures 120 4.5 – Burial Assemblages 135 4.6 – Body Treatment and Bioarchaeological Data 139 4.7 – Synthesis and Conclusion: the Purpose of Repurposing 142 Chapter 5 – Abydos: Landscape and Identity 148 5.1 – Introduction 148 5.2 – The Ptolemaic Funerary Landscape 152 vii 5.3 – Effort Expenditure: Structures, Assemblages, and 163 Post-Funerary Activity 5.4 – Spatial Organization and Development 194 5.5 – Body Treatment and Bioarchaeological Data 200 5.6 – Synthesis and Conclusions 203 Chapter 6 – Conclusions and Future Directions 210 6.1 – Summary of Results 210 6.2 – Future Directions 219 Appendices 223 Bibliography 278 viii LIST OF TABLES 2.1 – Types of Identity Distinctions 43 2.2 – Social Distinctions and their Archaeological Correlates 55 3.1 – Object Types 74 3.2 – Incidences of Qualitative and Quantitative Variables 75 3.3 – Incidences of Qualitative Object Combinations 76 3.4 – Incidences of Vessel Type Combinations 78 3.5 – Qualitative Object Groups with Associated Vessel Type Combinations 80 3.6 – Number of tombs in which a quality-type appeared 82 3.7 – Type of body treatment according to qualitative object group 85 4.1 – Summary of important choachyte documents 125-126 4.2 – Summary of tombs with well-recorded Ptolemaic reuse 130-131 4.3 – Documents relating to collective tombs 133-134 4.4 – Summary of the occupants of collective tombs 135 4.5 – Summary of evidence for Ptolemaic burial assemblages 138 4.6 – Presence of object types by tomb type 139 4.7 – Age, sex, and MNI for Ptolemaic period chambers in TT 32 141 ix LIST OF FIGURES 3.1 – Map of Alexandria with locations of major cemeteries 64 3.2 – View of Shatby cemetery as it exists today, focusing on Hypogeum A 66 3.3 – Plan of Shatby cemetery 68 3.4 – Schematic map of the Hadra cemetery 69 3.5 – Dendrogram of Grave Categories based on Qualitative Variables 76 3.6 – Known Vessel Types /Grave vs. Number of Vessels / Grave 81 3.7 - Known Types vs. Quantity of Vessels, High Quality Marked 84 3.8 – Known Types vs. Quantity of Vessels, Cremation Marked 86 3.9 – Stepped funerary monument 88 3.10 – Single interment hypogeum 89 3.11 – Shatby Hypogeum A 90 3.12 – Map of the Abukir section of Hadra 92 3.13 – Map of the Ezbet el-Makhlouf section of Hadra 93 3.14 – Plan of Mustafa Kamel tomb 1 98 3.15 – Plan of Anfushy tomb 2 101 3.16 – Sphinxes in the courtyard of Mustafa Kamel tomb 1 102 3.17 – Painting in the entrance of Anfushy tomb 2 102 3.18 – Relief in the main tomb of Kom esh-Shoqafa 103 4.1 – Labeled map of Theban Necropolis 119 x 4.2 – Section of Wilkinson’s 1830 map of western Thebes 119 4.3 – Ptolemaic period tomb from Winlock’s excavations 123 4.4 – Ptolemaic
Recommended publications
  • Newsletter Eng7 SEL.1-18 Film
    À ™ ª ∞ TheÀ™ª∞ Acropolis Restoration News À ¶ ¶ √ À¶¶√ 7 ñ July 2007 The Propylaia and its surroundings from the level of the Parthenon metopes. Photo S. Mavrommatis, June 2007 Ch. Bouras, Theoretical principles of the interventions on the monuments of the Acropolis ª. πoannidou, 2000-2007, The restoration of the Acropolis by the YSMA F. Mallouchou-Tufano, ∂. Petropoulou, Public opinion poll about the restoration of the Acropolis monuments D. Englezos, Protective filling of ancient monuments. The case of the Arrephorion on the Athenian Akropolis ∂. Lembidaki, On the occasion of the new restoration of the temple of Athena Nike. Looking back at the history of the cult statue of Athena Nike C. Hadziaslani, I. Kaimara, A. Leonti, The new educational museum kit “The Twelve Olympian Gods” F. Mallouchou-Tufano, News from the Acropolis F. Mallouchou-Tufano, The restoration of the Erechtheion: 20 years later Theoretical principles of the interventions on the monuments of the Acropolis* 3 Under the circumstances, we were obliged small to large scale. The type of the peripter- lated outlook of Alexandria and Rome. ies and works. The Charter satisfactorily same monument, “syn-anastelosis” a simul- monuments for public purposes. During to manage and to perform interventions of al temple was crystalized, while, from the The boundaries standards set by the Athe- responds to a set of values that the western taneous anastelosis of remains of more than the decades of the 70’s and 80’s, the reuse great importance on monuments of unique standpoint of morphology, a ceaseless perfect- nian monuments will never be surpassed.
    [Show full text]
  • In Ancient Egypt
    THE ROLE OF THE CHANTRESS ($MW IN ANCIENT EGYPT SUZANNE LYNN ONSTINE A thesis submined in confonnity with the requirements for the degm of Ph.D. Graduate Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civiliations University of Toronto %) Copyright by Suzanne Lynn Onstine (200 1) . ~bsPdhorbasgmadr~ exclusive liceacc aiiowhg the ' Nationai hiof hada to reproduce, loan, distnia sdl copies of this thesis in miaof#m, pspa or elccmnic f-. L'atm criucrve la propri&C du droit d'autear qui protcge cette thtse. Ni la thèse Y des extraits substrrntiets deceMne&iveatetreimprimCs ouraitnmcrtrepoduitssanssoai aut&ntiom The Role of the Chmaes (fm~in Ancient Emt A doctorai dissertacion by Suzanne Lynn On*, submitted to the Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations, University of Toronto, 200 1. The specitic nanire of the tiUe Wytor "cimûes", which occurrPd fcom the Middle Kingdom onwatd is imsiigated thrwgh the use of a dalabase cataloging 861 woinen whheld the title. Sorting the &ta based on a variety of delails has yielded pattern regatding their cbnological and demographical distribution. The changes in rhe social status and numbers of wbmen wbo bore the Weindicale that the Egyptians perceivecl the role and ams of the titk âiffefcntiy thugh tirne. Infomiation an the tities of ihe chantressw' family memkrs bas ailowed the author to make iderences cawming llse social status of the mmen who heu the title "chanms". MiMid Kingdom tifle-holders wverc of modest backgrounds and were quite rare. Eighteenth DMasty women were of the highest ranking families. The number of wamen who held the titk was also comparatively smaii, Nimeenth Dynasty women came [rom more modesi backgrounds and were more nwnennis.
    [Show full text]
  • G:\Lists Periodicals\Periodical Lists B\BIFAO.Wpd
    Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale Past and present members of the staff of the Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Statues, Stelae, Reliefs and Paintings, especially R. L. B. Moss and E. W. Burney, have taken part in the analysis of this periodical and the preparation of this list at the Griffith Institute, University of Oxford This pdf version (situation on 14 July 2010): Jaromir Malek (Editor), Diana Magee, Elizabeth Fleming and Alison Hobby (Assistants to the Editor) Clédat in BIFAO i (1901), 21-3 fig. 1 Meir. B.2. Ukh-hotep. iv.250(8)-(9) Top register, Beja herdsman. Clédat in BIFAO i (1901), 21-3 fig. 2 Meir. B.2. Ukh-hotep. iv.250(4)-(5) Lower part, Beja herdsman. Clédat in BIFAO i (1901), 21-3 fig. 3 Meir. B.2. Ukh-hotep. iv.250(8)-(9) III, Beja holding on to boat. Salmon in BIFAO i (1901), pl. opp. 72 El-Faiyûm. iv.96 Plan. Clédat in BIFAO i (1901), 88-9 Meir. Miscellaneous. Statues. iv.257 Fragment of statue of Ukh-hotep. Clédat in BIFAO i (1901), 89 [4] El-Qûs.îya. (Cusae) iv.258A Block of Djehutardais, probably Dyn. XXX. Clédat in BIFAO i (1901), 90 [top] Text El-Qûs.îya. Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Statues, Stelae, Reliefs and Paintings Griffith Institute, Sackler Library, 1 St John Street, Oxford OX1 2LG, United Kingdom [email protected] 2 iv.258 Fragment of lintel. Clédat in BIFAO i (1901), 92-3 Cartouches and texts Gebel Abû Fôda.
    [Show full text]
  • Disclosure Guide
    WEEKS® 2021 - 2022 DISCLOSURE GUIDE This publication contains information that indicates resorts participating in, and explains the terms, conditions, and the use of, the RCI Weeks Exchange Program operated by RCI, LLC. You are urged to read it carefully. 0490-2021 RCI, TRC 2021-2022 Annual Disclosure Guide Covers.indd 5 5/20/21 10:34 AM DISCLOSURE GUIDE TO THE RCI WEEKS Fiona G. Downing EXCHANGE PROGRAM Senior Vice President 14 Sylvan Way, Parsippany, NJ 07054 This Disclosure Guide to the RCI Weeks Exchange Program (“Disclosure Guide”) explains the RCI Weeks Elizabeth Dreyer Exchange Program offered to Vacation Owners by RCI, Senior Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer, and LLC (“RCI”). Vacation Owners should carefully review Manager this information to ensure full understanding of the 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32821 terms, conditions, operation and use of the RCI Weeks Exchange Program. Note: Unless otherwise stated Julia A. Frey herein, capitalized terms in this Disclosure Guide have the Assistant Secretary same meaning as those in the Terms and Conditions of 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32821 RCI Weeks Subscribing Membership, which are made a part of this document. Brian Gray Vice President RCI is the owner and operator of the RCI Weeks 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32821 Exchange Program. No government agency has approved the merits of this exchange program. Gary Green Senior Vice President RCI is a Delaware limited liability company (registered as 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32821 Resort Condominiums
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeology and History of Lydia from the Early Lydian Period to Late Antiquity (8Th Century B.C.-6Th Century A.D.)
    Dokuz Eylül University – DEU The Research Center for the Archaeology of Western Anatolia – EKVAM Colloquia Anatolica et Aegaea Congressus internationales Smyrnenses IX Archaeology and history of Lydia from the early Lydian period to late antiquity (8th century B.C.-6th century A.D.). An international symposium May 17-18, 2017 / Izmir, Turkey ABSTRACTS Edited by Ergün Laflı Gülseren Kan Şahin Last Update: 21/04/2017. Izmir, May 2017 Websites: https://independent.academia.edu/TheLydiaSymposium https://www.researchgate.net/profile/The_Lydia_Symposium 1 This symposium has been dedicated to Roberto Gusmani (1935-2009) and Peter Herrmann (1927-2002) due to their pioneering works on the archaeology and history of ancient Lydia. Fig. 1: Map of Lydia and neighbouring areas in western Asia Minor (S. Patacı, 2017). 2 Table of contents Ergün Laflı, An introduction to Lydian studies: Editorial remarks to the abstract booklet of the Lydia Symposium....................................................................................................................................................8-9. Nihal Akıllı, Protohistorical excavations at Hastane Höyük in Akhisar………………………………10. Sedat Akkurnaz, New examples of Archaic architectural terracottas from Lydia………………………..11. Gülseren Alkış Yazıcı, Some remarks on the ancient religions of Lydia……………………………….12. Elif Alten, Revolt of Achaeus against Antiochus III the Great and the siege of Sardis, based on classical textual, epigraphic and numismatic evidence………………………………………………………………....13. Gaetano Arena, Heleis: A chief doctor in Roman Lydia…….……………………………………....14. Ilias N. Arnaoutoglou, Κοινὸν, συμβίωσις: Associations in Hellenistic and Roman Lydia……….……..15. Eirini Artemi, The role of Ephesus in the late antiquity from the period of Diocletian to A.D. 449, the “Robber Synod”.……………………………………………………………………….………...16. Natalia S. Astashova, Anatolian pottery from Panticapaeum…………………………………….17-18. Ayşegül Aykurt, Minoan presence in western Anatolia……………………………………………...19.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ptolemies: an Unloved and Unknown Dynasty. Contributions to a Different Perspective and Approach
    THE PTOLEMIES: AN UNLOVED AND UNKNOWN DYNASTY. CONTRIBUTIONS TO A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AND APPROACH JOSÉ DAS CANDEIAS SALES Universidade Aberta. Centro de História (University of Lisbon). Abstract: The fifteen Ptolemies that sat on the throne of Egypt between 305 B.C. (the date of assumption of basileia by Ptolemy I) and 30 B.C. (death of Cleopatra VII) are in most cases little known and, even in its most recognised bibliography, their work has been somewhat overlooked, unappreciated. Although boisterous and sometimes unloved, with the tumultuous and dissolute lives, their unbridled and unrepressed ambitions, the intrigues, the betrayals, the fratricides and the crimes that the members of this dynasty encouraged and practiced, the Ptolemies changed the Egyptian life in some aspects and were responsible for the last Pharaonic monuments which were left us, some of them still considered true masterpieces of Egyptian greatness. The Ptolemaic Period was indeed a paradoxical moment in the History of ancient Egypt, as it was with a genetically foreign dynasty (traditions, language, religion and culture) that the country, with its capital in Alexandria, met a considerable economic prosperity, a significant political and military power and an intense intellectual activity, and finally became part of the world and Mediterranean culture. The fifteen Ptolemies that succeeded to the throne of Egypt between 305 B.C. (date of assumption of basileia by Ptolemy I) and 30 B.C. (death of Cleopatra VII), after Alexander’s death and the division of his empire, are, in most cases, very poorly understood by the public and even in the literature on the topic.
    [Show full text]
  • Ptolemaic Foundations in Asia Minor and the Aegean As the Lagids’ Political Tool
    ELECTRUM * Vol. 20 (2013): 57–76 doi: 10.4467/20800909EL.13.004.1433 PTOLEMAIC FOUNDATIONS IN ASIA MINOR AND THE AEGEAN AS THE LAGIDS’ POLITICAL TOOL Tomasz Grabowski Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Kraków Abstract: The Ptolemaic colonisation in Asia Minor and the Aegean region was a signifi cant tool which served the politics of the dynasty that actively participated in the fi ght for hegemony over the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea basin. In order to specify the role which the settlements founded by the Lagids played in their politics, it is of considerable importance to establish as precise dating of the foundations as possible. It seems legitimate to acknowledge that Ptolemy II possessed a well-thought-out plan, which, apart from the purely strategic aspects of founding new settlements, was also heavily charged with the propaganda issues which were connected with the cult of Arsinoe II. Key words: Ptolemies, foundations, Asia Minor, Aegean. Settlement of new cities was a signifi cant tool used by the Hellenistic kings to achieve various goals: political and economic. The process of colonisation was begun by Alex- ander the Great, who settled several cities which were named Alexandrias after him. The process was successfully continued by the diadochs, and subsequently by the follow- ing rulers of the monarchies which emerged after the demise of Alexander’s state. The new settlements were established not only by the representatives of the most powerful dynasties: the Seleucids, the Ptolemies and the Antigonids, but also by the rulers of the smaller states. The kings of Pergamum of the Attalid dynasty were considerably active in this fi eld, but the rulers of Bithynia, Pontus and Cappadocia were also successful in this process.1 Very few regions of the time remained beyond the colonisation activity of the Hellenistic kings.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading G Uide
    1 Reading Guide Introduction Pharaonic Lives (most items are on map on page 10) Bodies of Water Major Regions Royal Cities Gulf of Suez Faiyum Oasis Akhetaten Sea The Levant Alexandria Nile River Libya Avaris Nile cataracts* Lower Egypt Giza Nile Delta Nubia Herakleopolis Magna Red Sea Palestine Hierakonpolis Punt Kerma *Cataracts shown as lines Sinai Memphis across Nile River Syria Sais Upper Egypt Tanis Thebes 2 Chapter 1 Pharaonic Kingship: Evolution & Ideology Myths Time Periods Significant Artifacts Predynastic Origins of Kingship: Naqada Naqada I The Narmer Palette Period Naqada II The Scorpion Macehead Writing History of Maqada III Pharaohs Old Kingdom Significant Buildings Ideology & Insignia of Middle Kingdom Kingship New Kingdom Tombs at Abydos King’s Divinity Mythology Royal Insignia Royal Names & Titles The Book of the Heavenly Atef Crown The Birth Name Cow Blue Crown (Khepresh) The Golden Horus Name The Contending of Horus Diadem (Seshed) The Horus Name & Seth Double Crown (Pa- The Nesu-Bity Name Death & Resurrection of Sekhemty) The Two Ladies Name Osiris Nemes Headdress Red Crown (Desheret) Hem Deities White Crown (Hedjet) Per-aa (The Great House) The Son of Re Horus Bull’s tail Isis Crook Osiris False beard Maat Flail Nut Rearing cobra (uraeus) Re Seth Vocabulary Divine Forces demi-god heka (divine magic) Good God (netjer netjer) hu (divine utterance) Great God (netjer aa) isfet (chaos) ka-spirit (divine energy) maat (divine order) Other Topics Ramesses II making sia (Divine knowledge) an offering to Ra Kings’ power
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 17
    University of Birmingham A question of substance Olabarria, Leire License: None: All rights reserved Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (Harvard): Olabarria, L 2018, 'A question of substance: interpreting kinship and relatedness in ancient Egypt', Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, vol. 17, pp. 88–113. <https://egyptianexpedition.org/articles/a-question-of- substance-interpreting-kinship-and-relatedness-in-ancient-egypt/> Link to publication on Research at Birmingham portal Publisher Rights Statement: Olabarria, L. (2018). A question of substance: interpreting kinship and relatedness in ancient Egypt. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, Vol. 17 (March 2018). Retrieved 26 Sep. 2019, from https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/jaei/article/view/22031/21396 General rights Unless a licence is specified above, all rights (including copyright and moral rights) in this document are retained by the authors and/or the copyright holders. The express permission of the copyright holder must be obtained for any use of this material other than for purposes permitted by law. •Users may freely distribute the URL that is used to identify this publication. •Users may download and/or print one copy of the publication from the University of Birmingham research portal for the purpose of private study or non-commercial research. •User may use extracts from the document in line with the concept of ‘fair dealing’ under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (?) •Users may not further distribute the material nor use it for the purposes of commercial gain. Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Terminologies
    FISH TERMINOLOGIES Monument Type Thesaurus Report Format: Hierarchical listing - class Notes: Classification of monument type records by function.
    [Show full text]
  • País Região Cidade Nome De Hotel Morada Código Postal Algeria
    País Região Cidade Nome de Hotel Morada Código Postal Algeria Adrar Timimoun Gourara Hotel Timimoun, Algeria Algeria Algiers Aïn Benian Hotel Hammamet Ain Benian RN Nº 11 Grand Rocher Cap Caxine , 16061, Aïn Benian, Algeria Algeria Algiers Aïn Benian Hôtel Hammamet Alger Route nationale n°11, Grand Rocher, Ain Benian 16061, Algeria 16061 Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Safir Alger 2 Rue Assellah Hocine, Alger Centre 16000 16000 Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Samir Hotel 74 Rue Didouche Mourad, Alger Ctre, Algeria Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Albert Premier 5 Pasteur Ave, Alger Centre 16000 16000 Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Hotel Suisse 06 rue Lieutenant Salah Boulhart, Rue Mohamed TOUILEB, Alger 16000, Algeria 16000 Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Hotel Aurassi Hotel El-Aurassi, 1 Ave du Docteur Frantz Fanon, Alger Centre, Algeria Algeria Algiers Alger Centre ABC Hotel 18, Rue Abdelkader Remini Ex Dujonchay, Alger Centre 16000, Algeria 16000 Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Space Telemly Hotel 01 Alger, Avenue YAHIA FERRADI, Alger Ctre, Algeria Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Hôtel ST 04, Rue MIKIDECHE MOULOUD ( Ex semar pierre ), 4, Alger Ctre 16000, Algeria 16000 Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Dar El Ikram 24 Rue Nezzar Kbaili Aissa, Alger Centre 16000, Algeria 16000 Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Hotel Oran Center 44 Rue Larbi Ben M'hidi, Alger Ctre, Algeria Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Es-Safir Hotel Rue Asselah Hocine, Alger Ctre, Algeria Algeria Algiers Alger Centre Dar El Ikram 22 Rue Hocine BELADJEL, Algiers, Algeria Algeria Algiers Alger Centre
    [Show full text]
  • Burial Crypts and Vaults in Britain and Ireland: a Biographical Approach
    19—43 Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Archaeologica 35(2020) https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6034.35.02 Harold Mytum https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0577-2064 Burial Crypts and Vaults in Britain and Ireland: a Biographical Approach Various types of burial chamber in Britain belonging to the period from the Ref- ormation until the 19th century have long been investigated archaeologically, but their frequency was only appreciated with the extensive investigation of St. Au- gustine the Less, Bristol, for which unfortunately there is still only an interim report (Boore 1986). The initial classification of both coffins and burial spaces was produced by Julian Litten (1985), and the variability in coffin design was greatly expanded by the investigation of the communal crypt at Christ Church Spital- fields, London (hereafter Spitalfields) during 1984–1986 (Reeve, Adams 1993). The original classification and dating sequence for burial structures proposed by Litten (1985: 10) is still valid, and it is set out in Table 1. Mainly concentrating on elite burial spaces, Litten defined four categories of burial space in 1999: large dynastic vault, family vault, brick grave and extensive private and public vaults (Litten 1999: 115). This study defines the range of types that are most frequently encountered and the form of the evidence normally surviving in these burial spaces, building on these pioneering studies. This study considers for the first time the biography of the coffin, and of the various types of burial spaces, both in terms of successive interment and some of the subsequent taphonomic processes that subsequently affect the location of the coffins within these burial spaces.
    [Show full text]