Methods & Aims in Archaeology

by W. M. Flinders Petrie

The Greeks in Egypt.

Fig. 57. Graeco-Egyptian vases. Abydos, XVIII Dyn.

XVIIIth Dynasty paintings.

We now turn to the great group of dating of the XVIIIth–XXth Dynasties; and as the nature of the evidence is our present consideration we shall classify it according to the kind of source of the evidence. The most certain dating is that of offerings painted on the walls of tombs, as it is always agreed that such represent objects which were in current use when the tomb was decorated; they therefore are not older than the tomb, nor can the paintings have been added later. Of this class are the paintings of vases in the tomb of Rekhmara, under Tahutmes III in the XVIIIth Dynasty; these vases are shewn as being brought in by the Kefti foreigners, and strongly resemble the vases found in Cyprus, Mykenae, and other Greek sites. Here the connection of Egypt in the XVIIIth Dynasty with people who made such vases is certain; but the vases might be older than the scene, or such vases might continue to be made to a later time, hence the connection with any given epoch on Greek soil is only a strong probability but not absolute. Another dated painting is that of stirrup vases (to use a more convenient word than “pseud-amphorae,” “false-necked vases,” or “bügel kanne”) among the offerings in the paintings on the tomb of Ramessu III of the XXth Dynasty. That such forms were familiar at that date is absolute; but they might be older vases preserved in the Royal Treasury, or might be imitations by Egyptians of older foreign forms, like English repetition of Chinese patterns.

Burnt groups.

The next class of evidence is that of objects which have been placed in such conditions that they cannot have been disturbed after a given date. This evidence is given by several deposits of groups of vases, clothing, etc., which were burnt in pits sunk in the floors of houses, and then earthed over. Such groups cannot possibly have been disturbed later on to insert objects, as the charcoal and ashes are undisturbed, and the foreign objects are likewise burnt. Hence the evidence of the Egyptian objects if clearly dated must carry the foreign objects to the same date. Several such groups have been found at Gurob. In one were many Egyptian objects all agreeing well to the date of Amenhotep III, as fixed by a glazed pottery kohl tube; in another a group agreeing with the date of Tutankhamen, which was shewn by some fragile pendants which could not have long survived in use; another group agrees to the age of Ramessu II, who is named on a pendant of glazed ware; and a fourth group agrees to the rougher style of Sety II, which is dated by a dish with his name. The character of the Egyptian objects thus points to each of these dated objects being contemporary with the rest of their group, and therefore truly dating the group. Now in these groups were first, five well-made globular stirrup vases (see [Fig. 59]); second, pieces of several stirrup vases of a later form; third, the neck of a later and coarser stirrup vase; and fourth, two much later coarse and unpainted stirrup vases. Here the changes in the character of the vases agree with the relative dates given by the Egyptian objects. The stirrup vases might be all older than the Egyptian dates, but that is very improbable by the regular degradation of them according with the dates; and the groups cannot be later than the dated objects as they agree well with the date of such Egyptian things fixed in other cases. It is then extremely improbable that the stirrup vases should not belong to the periods of the Egyptian kings whose names are found with them. Variation in either direction is prohibited by these limitations.

We may add that there are two other burnt groups without kings’ names, and the connection of stirrup vases with Egyptian objects in these agrees well with the connection shewn by the other groups. Another such grouping was in a burial in open ground at Abydos; there several examples of Graeco-Egyptian ware ([Fig. 57]), two figures and a ring vase with pomegranates and lotus flowers, were found with Egyptian pottery and beads of the XVIIIth Dynasty.

Rubbish mounds.

A somewhat similar grouping is afforded by the rubbish mounds of the palace of Akhenaten at Tell el Amarna. There the palace was entirely deserted after the reign of his successor, about 1360 B.C., and the town ruined finally by Horemheb, 1330 B.C. It seems then impossible to suppose anything later being mixed up with the rubbish heaps, which contained nearly a hundred dated objects, none later than 1360 B.C. The supposition has even been suggested that some unknown people, who left no other traces, have at some later time come laden with hundreds of potsherds, and dug over the rubbish mounds to mix them together. Such are the wild fancies which must be resorted to if the evidence is to be upset. The rubbish mounds consist of some thousands of tons of potsherds and dust; and among these, entirely mixed with them, were found nearly a hundred rings and objects of Akhenaten and his successor, and over 1300 pieces of Aegean pottery, representing probably 800 vases. The palace, which was deserted after 1360 B.C., also contained several pieces of the same pottery. Here the great quantity of the material of all kinds precludes all the suppositions that might be made about isolated specimens. The mounds are too large for later material to be mixed with them; the dated objects are too many to be accidental, or to have been older than the mounds; and the Aegean vases are too many to have been preserved from earlier times. The whole conditions prove that all the objects were in common use contemporaneously.

Houses.