Hendrickx 2002 Libre

7/23/2019 Hendrickx 2002 Libre

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hendrickx-2002-libre 1/44

HessaN,

F.A.

(ed.)

Droughts,

Food

and

Culture.

Ecological

Change

and Food

Security

in Africa's

Later

Prehistory.

New

York:

Kluwer

Academic

/ Plenum

Publishers

2002

1 6

BOVINESN

EGYPTIAN

PREDYNASTIC

ND EARLY

DYNASTIC

CONOGRAPHY

S. Hendrickx

INTRODUCTION

Theearliest ossible

vidence

or the

symbolic mportance f bovines

ates o the

terminal

Palaeolithic.

n a

few

Qadan

tombs at Tushka, he

deceased

were

accompanied

y horncores,

hich

obviousiymusthavehadsymbolic

ignificance

(Wendorf,

1968,p.

875). n

two cases, n almostcomplete

orncorewas

placed

directly

over he skeletons,

ear he head.A thi rd examplewas

near he head

of a

burial. Furthermore,

ovine

boneswere

scattered ver the surface.The

excavators

suggest

hepossibility

hat hehorncores

erved s

grave

markers.

The

importance

f bovines or Neolithic

subsistenceardly

needsany

explanation.

With regard to

the Egyptian case, domesticated

attle is

most

probably

lready

ttested

n the Western

Desert rom about

9300cal BC

onwards

(Gautier,1984;Wendorf and Schild, 1995).The recent ind at NabtaPlayaof

buried

cattle

bonesdating

o the

middle and ate Neolithic

(McKim

Malville

er

a/.,

1998)

strongly onfirms

he mportance

f cattle,not only from

the economic

point

of view,

but especially

s an element

f

great

eligious mportance.

his

is

particularly

well

illustrated

y the cattle umulusE-94-1 at

NabtaPlaya,

dated o

647O

-

270

bp, where

a

young

cow was

buried in a roofed, clay-lined

chamber

(McKim

Malville

et aI., 1998,

p.

a88).

t

seems

bvious hat

for the Neolithic/

Ceramic

cultures

n

the Western

Desert a very important nterdependence

xisted

between

man and cattle

(see,

for

example,

Close, 1996), which

was also

religiously

xpressed.

This

strong elationship

may have

becomesomewhatessmarked

with

the

introduction

of agriculture,

which can be attested or

the first time with

the

Fayum

Neolithic

culture,about

5000 cal BC. Through ts lithic

technology,

he

FayumNeolithicshowsstrong esemblanceso the ate Neolithicof the Westem

Desert,

ut agriculture,

ntroduced

most

probably

rom the Levant,was

obviously

the

basis

of subsistence.

Cattle are attested at the

Neolithic settlements

rom

Lower

Egypt at Merimde

Beni

Salama

von

den Drieschand Boessneck,

985),

Maadi

Boessneck

t al., 1989)andButo

(Boessneck

nd

von

denDriesch,

1997).

The

presence

f a number

of

pottery

figurines

of bovines n all layers

at Merimde

seems

o

support heir

mportance ther

han

ust

economically

Eiwanger,

1984,



S. Hendrichr

pp.

53-54,

able

63, i988,

p.

40, table41,

t992,

p.

60,

tafel

89-90).Au

of

these

hgurines

show

linle

detar

and the homs

always

stand

out as the most

important

chaÍacteristic.

AIso,

it is remarkable

hat no

other

animals

but bovines

occur

arnong

the

pottery

frgurines

from

Merimde

(Eiwanger,

1992, p.

60).

It

is

less

obvious whether

similar figurines

also

occurredat

Maadi

(Rizkana

and

Seeher,

1989,

p.

11-12,

late

1) andButo

von

derWay,1997,

.I12,

tafel56).

The

Predynastic

equencen

Upper Egypt

started

with

the

appearance

f

the Badarian

culture,

attested

with certainty

for the

period

between 4400

and

4000

BC,

but which

probably

already existed

before that rime. A few

bovines

have

been found

buried

among the human

burials in Badarian

cemeteries,

illusradng

their

socio-religious impcrrtance

Brunton

and Caton-Thompson,

1928,p. 12, tombs 5422, 5434).Strangely, igurarive represenrarionsf bovines

aÍe not

attested or

the Badarian.

Most

probably

his

is

only a consequence

f

ouÍ

limited

lcrowledge

of this

period.

More

information is available

for

the

subsequent

Nagada

units,

which

are subdivided nto

severalsub-units

Hendrickx.

1989,1996).

REPRESENTATIONS

OF BOWNES

Representations

of

bovines in Predynastic

artr are frequently

attested

from

Nagada

I

times

onwards.

We will lrst

turn

our

attention to

the more realistic

images,

altbough

a cleaÍ

distinction

between

'realistic'

and

'stylized'

is not

always

possible.

As will

be

discussed

urther,

stylized elementsmay

be combined

with

overall

realistic

representations.

he earliestexamples,

probably

all

cf them

bulls, occur on White Cross-linedpottery, typical of Nagada IA-IIA times.

Because

f

the rarity

of White

Cross-lined

pottery

with hgtnative

decoration, t is

not

surprising

that

the corpus

of

examples

s limited

(Appendix

A, nos.

1-5).

Modeled

figurines

of

bulls were

also attached o the rims

of White

Cross-lined

pots (Appendix

A, nos.

6-8).

Although

one could still claim that

the fundamental

reason

or

the

depiction

of bovines s

to

be

found in the economic

mpcrunce

of

the

animals,

hese

are evidentlynot

merely representations

llustrating

economic

wealth.

hdeed,

animals

suchas the bippopotamus

nd the crocodile

hgure more

frequently

on

rJy'hite

ross-lined

pottery

than

bovines, and exceptionally

even

n

combination

with

them. Although

crocodile

and hippopotamus

could have

been

hunted

or

their meat,

hey aÍe

not

of economic mportance o farmers,

but on

the

contrary

extremely

harmful

for their

crops.Therefore,

a

mtre

symbolic,

probably

religious

and/or

sociological nterpretation

or the

bovines

must

be

taken

into

consideration.Contemporaneousith the White Cross-linedpottery,a numberof

clay figurines

of bovines s

also srown.

The examples ound

at el-Amra

(Maclver

and

Mace,

1902,

plates

V, IX) are from

a funerary

context and date mainly

to

the

Nagada

and

early Nagada

I

period.

Many

of

óese

figurines represent

cows

and

calves

and are

probably

not.

of

great

relevance

or the

present

study,

which

will

place

the

emphasis

on bulls.

A

clay

statuette f a bull has recently

been

ound

in

the

elite

tomb

U-235 at Abydos

(llarrung,

1998,

p.

83,

tafel 4,

c). A very

nice

example

rom

GebelTarif

(Quibell,

1905,no.

14709) s

unfortunarelyundated.

At

lust

view,

these

statuettes ould

be considered

ubstitutes or real

animals

wbich



Bovines in Egyptian

Predynastic

and

Early Dynutic

iconography

would

be at

the

disposal

of the deceased

n his

eternal ife.

This is

however

contradicted

by the

presence

f similar figurines

of,

for

example,hippopotamus

in

other tombs

of

ttre

same

period.

once again

a slmbolic meaning

or

at least

a

number

of

these

statuettes

an

be

supposed.

On

the Decoratedpottery,

characteristic

of

Nagada

IC-D,

bovines

are

extremely

rare;

only two

examples

are

known

to

me

(Appendix

B),

although

other types

of animals

are frequently

depictedon this type

of

pottery.

There

are

important

conographic

and compository

differencesbetween

white

Cross-lined

and Decorated ottery.

The

absence

f bovines

on

Decorated

ottery

must

refer

to

the

particular

intention

at which

the decorative

schemesof these vessels

are

aimed.

Since

tbis is

still a much

debated opic

(for

recent

nterpretations,

see

Adams, 1988,pp. 48-53;el-Yahky, 1985;Midant-Reynes, 992,pp. 180-182;

Smith, 1993),

or

which

by

no

means

a consensus

xists, t

will not

be

brought

into

consideration

ere.

t bas however

been

suggestedhat the

cult

of a

goddess

related

o the

cow

could

be

recognized

on

the Decorated

ars

in

the

women

with

raised

arms and

some ypes

of standards

Baumgartel,

1955,

p.

81, 1960, pp.

146-

147; Adams,

1988,

p.

48;

Ilassan,

1992). A number

of these

srandards

ertainly

represent

bovine homs

(Petrie,

1920,

plxe

XXIIL

5,

3-8;

Newberry,

1913).

On

one

occasion,

he complete

igure

of a bull

is

depicted

on

a

standard,nscribed

on

a

pottery

ragment

rom

the region

of

Asfun

el-Mata'na

Weigall,

1907,

p.

49).

Among

the figurative

grafFrti

occurring

occasionally

on

pottery,

bovines

seem

o

be

presenr e.g.,

Petrie,

189ó,

plate

LI, 14-15;

petrie

and Mace,

1901,

plate

XX,28;

Quibell,

1905, o.

11733;

Brunton,lg4g, late

XXII,2),

but

their

ntmrber

ernains

imited

and the little

detail

given

in this kind

of

representadon

makes

hem

unsuitable or thepurposeof thepresent tudy.

Another

mportant

ype of

object

frequently

ound

in

predynastic

tombs

are

the

greywacke

or

mudstonepalettes,

many

of

them

animal

shaped.

Bovines

however

seem

o be very

rare among

hem, he

most frequently

occurring

animals

being

fish,

different

kinds

of

birds and tortoises.

urthermore,

he dentification

of

certain palettes

rs representing

bovines s

debatable,

ecause

of the

simplihed

manner

n

which

the animals

are rendered.

An important

characteristic

or

the

representation

f bulls is

thehump

(cf.

Grigson,

1991: rgure

1c),

which

probably

allows

us to recognize

a

number

of

rather

uncharacteristic

nimal

shaped

palettes

also

as bovines

Appendix

C).

On

óe wall

painting

from

Hierakonpolis,

omb 100,

dating

to Nagada

IIC,

bovines

can

most

probably

be recognized n

one of the labels

referring

to

power

and

control,

which are located

below the row

of

boats. The

label in

question

shows

a man

overtirowing

a bull,

of which the feet

have

been tied

together. n this case, he power of the bull is used o reinforce he importanceof

the

overthrower.

Here,

the animal is

probably

to be taken iterally

and not

as a

symbol.

A

similar

phenomenon

an also

be observed

with

regard

o the lion.

On

the

Battlefield

palene,

the lion represents

he victorious

king,

while

on

tbe

Hunter's

palette,

he ion is

hunted

by

man.

In

general,

t

can

be said that

representations

f bovines

can

only

be

found

very

exceptionally

on objects found

in Predynastic

cr Early

Dlnasric

tombs.

Therefore,

t

can

be

conjectured

hat the syrrbolic

meaning

of bovines,

and

especially

of the

bull, had

no

direct relalionship

with

the

rrneral

world.



S. Hendrichr

cattle are

frequently

epresented

n

rock

art. However,

iese

will

not

be

discussed

extensively

bere

given

the

difhculties in

dating

and

other

specific

problems

related

to rock

art,

such as

the difficulty

in defining

the

absence

r

presence

of relationships

between ndividual

drawings. n

genaal,

it

seems

hat

the representations

f

bovines are mainly

to

be

placed

chronologically

during

the

Nagada

rI

period

and

the old

Kingdom. At Elkab,

none

of the represenrations

f

bovines could

be dated prior

to the Nagada

II

periol

(Huyge,

1995,

2001).

This

is

all

the more

remarkable

ecause

he florescence

f

the rock

art in

upper

Egypt,

and

probably

also

n Nubia,

s

ro

be

placed

during

Nagada

i and

II.

ttre

Nagaoa

III

rock

art

at Elkab

is characterized

by

numerous

mages

referring

to

royal

ideology,

among

them

the

'vicrorious'

bull

(Huyge,

1995, 2001).

However,

Huyge

regards

he majority

of bovinesdaring o theold Kingdom as representrnssacrificialbeasts,

elated

o

the

temple

cult.

Bulls

occur

frequentty,

among

many

other

animals,

on the

well

lsrown

group

of late

Predynastic,presumably

mainly

Nagada

IIA-8,

ivory

and

bone

carvings,

for

which

unfortunately

the

provenance

is

generally

unlorown

(Appendix

D),

and

on the

'ivories'

from

the main

deposit

at Hierakonpolis

(Quibell

and Petrie,

1900, plate

XlI,1-2,

XII| XVII;

Adams,

1974a, pp.

O0_A\

no.

326). These

epresentarions

eemstrongly

related

o those

on the

decorated

palettes,

dating

probably

also mainly

from

the

same

period.

Bulls

appear

on the

Hunter's

palette,

he

Oxford

palette,

he Louwe

palette,

he Narmer palene

and

the

Libyan palene (cf.

cialowicz,

1991).

on all

of these

objects,

the

bull can

appear

either

ndividually

or as

one of the

animals

occurring

n the

characteristic

rows

of

animals.

with regard

o the latter,

the

bull does

not

stánd

out among

he

other

animals.

The meaning

of these

animal rows

is not

totally

clear,

although

they most probablyrepresent he ideaof order being mposedby socio-religious

powers

which,

however,

are nor

clearly

idenÍfied

(cf.

Kemp,

1989, pp.

46-53;

Baines,

1995,p.

111).

obviously rhe

representarion

f individual

bovines

are of

greater

nterest

or

the

present

tudy.

On

the Narmer palette

and

the Louwe

palette,

as well

as

on

the Koptos

colossi

(Dreyer,

1995),

the bulls

are clearly

meant

ro

be

'victorious

bulls',

representing

he king

as

triumphant

(cf.

Srórh 1984,

col. 25g;

Davis,

1992,

p.

169).

A

number

ofbovines can

also

be found

on a

group

of objects

which are,

in

general,

a little

more recent,

at Nagada

rIB-C2,

than

the

previous group.

On

these

objects,

bovines

seem o appear

n

a

religious

context"

he

exact meaning

of

which

remains

unfortunately

most

problematic.

on

the Narmer

macehead

(Cialowicz,

1987, pp.

38-41; Friedman,

199ó)

rhe

figure

of

a

bull is used

or

identifying

400,000

pieces

of cattle

among

the captured

booty, but

tie

image

of

two bovines, possibly a cow and a calf, within some kind of enclosure s

obviously

more

interesting,

but far

more

diffrcult

to explain.

The

animals

seem

related

to

the carrying

chair

and irs

occupant,

above

which

they are located.

However,

t

remains

unclear

whether

hey identify

tie

person

concerned n

some

manner

or merely

indicate

his

provenance

or

some

other circumstance.

The

related

depiction

of a

bull

in

what

might

also

be

some kind

of

enclosure,on

a

tablet

from

the

time

of Hor-Aha,

found

in

romb B 18-19

[Nagada

Its-Cl]

ar

Abydos

(Petrie,

1901, plate

X, 2),

suggesrs

a

locality.

This

is

conhrmed

by

another

ablet rom

cemetery

B

dating

also

to the reign

of Hor-Aha,

on whicb

the



Bovine in Egyptian Predynmtic and Early Dynastic iconography

hgure of a

bull

is

used or

the

identification

of

a building

(Petrie,

1901,

plate

XI,

1).

On a tablet ftom

the

tomb of

Hemaka

[Nagada

IIC2]

frnally,

a standard with

a bdl is carried n

a

procession

@mery,

1938,

plate

18).

The religious

context of the bull

is

also

conf,rrmed

y a

few

statuettes

found

in the earliest

temple

levels at Abydos. These

nclude

pottery

statuettes

from the

Osiris temenos

(Petrie,

1902,

p.

26,

plate

LIII, 4042),

and an ivory

(Petrie

1903,

p.27,plateIX,2M)

andaquarrzstaruene

Petrie,

903,

.

25,plate

VI,

63), found respectively

n tbe rooms M

64

and M ó9 of the temple area.The

proverunce

of Early

Dynastic statuettes

n

de

Kofler-Truniger

Sammlung is

generally

also considered

o have

been

he earliest emple

evels

at Abydos,

but

this has

been contradicted

by Dreyer

(1986,

pp.

54-55).

Among

thesestatuettes,

there

is

one of a bovine

(I-uzem,

SammlungKofler-Truniger K 9&3 J, cf.Miiller, 1964,p.22,

A18, colorphotographnWildung,

1981,Abb.39).

On a

fragmentary

vory

tablet from the tomb of

Den

at

Abydos

[Nagada

IIIC2],

a bull,

who is most

probably

hunted

by

the king,

is

depicted

on the symbol

for mountains

(Dreyer,

1998b,

p.

163,

tafel

12, e).

This is

probably

not

to be

considered

as a reference

o the location

of

the hunt but

rather

as an indication

that a wild

bull is meant. Discounting

he detail

from the Hierakonpolis

painting

discussed

reviously,

his is tbe

oldest

epresentation f the wild bull hunt, which

was

o becomea classic

element

of

the royal iconography.

Finally,

the very

beautiful drawing of a bull on

an

ostrakon from the

tomb

of Hemaka

[Nagada

iIC2]

must

be

mentioned

(Emery,

1938,

p.

40,

no.

431,

plate

19D).

It is

generally

consideredas

an artist's sketch,without

further

implications.

The

stylistic manner n which

bovines

are rendered

differs

in no

way

from the rest of the Predynastic and Early Dynastic aÍt. This means that two

dimensional

images

are always

shown

in

prohle,

while

three dimensional

representations

are

symmetrical and in the majority of

cases

do not attempt

to

suggest

movement

or any kind

of

action. Tbe horns of the animals

are

always

prominently

repres€nted,

and

certainly functioned as

an

obvious

characteristic

for

identifying

the

animals. Nearly all

of

the

bovines

have incurved

homs, turned

towards

the spectator,

as became typical for

Dynastic Egyptian

art. In a few

exceptional

cases,

he

homs

are renderedmore or

less n

perspective.

be most

obvious

examples are

the White Cross-lined cup

from Naqa

ed-Deir

(cf.

Appendix

À

no.

2) and he Libyan

palene.

n

only

a few cases,yre-shaped orns

occur,

but it is

also

possible

hat the hartebeestwas being

represented

nd not

the

bull. The

most remarkable

examples are to be

found

on the Carnarvon lnife

handle

(see

Appendix D,

no.

4),

a decoratedostrich egg

(Oxford

1895.990;

Payne,

1993,

p.253,

no. 2104,

hgure 85; Friedman,

1995,

p.

60,

'gazelles

or

hartebeest') rom tomb 1480 at Nagada(Nagada C) and a figurative flint of

unrecorded provenance

(Berlin

157'14;

Scharff,

1929,

no. 97,

plate

21,

'Kuhaatilope',

Boessnech

1988, figure 10

'KuhanÍilope';

Osbom and

Osbomov4

1998,

p.

4,

'hartebeest').

However, he actual

horns

of bulls which are

known

for early

Egypq and especially the large

number

of them which were

found

around

mastaba

S 3504 at Saqqara

Nagada

IIC2, reign

of

Djed)

show us

that

there

was a

grea.t

ariability in

shape

Emery,

1954,

pp.

8-9,

plate

,

VI-VID.

Therefore,

the rendering

of

the homs in Predynastic and

Early

Dynastic

aÍt

has

clearly

become idealizrd

and uniformed. Although this

is

a

normal

feature for



S, Hendrich

Egyptian

art, even

at

this

ea-rly tage,

his can

also

imply

that the incurved

shaoe

of the horns rad

symbolic

value,

especially f

one considers

he emphasis

whiêh

is

placed

upon hem

n

the representations.

A

most

particular

rendering

of

the

bull

is

the so-called

'double

bull'

found

on the Hunter'spalette

Cialowicz,

1991,

pp.

55-56;Baines,1995,p.

151).

The

'double

bull' clearly

relates

o the building

next

to it,

tie meaning

of

which

unfortunately

emains

open for discussion. aines

(1995,

p.

112)

suggests

he

group

of the

building

and the

'double

bull'

represent oyalty

with

a device

that

later

disappeared,

ut

he

also leaves he

possibility

open that

the

'double

bull'

could dentify

the

building. Whatever he nterpretation,

he

symbolic

significance

of the

double

bull' cannot

be denied.

The importanceof bovines is also illustrated by the burial of a small

group

of them at

Hierakonpolis,Locality

ó,

tomb 7, dating

probably

o

the

EaÍly

Dynastic

period (Hoftorar

et al., 1982,

pp.55-56,

Adans, 2000,

pp.

33-34).

The

burial

of these

animals has

been considered

by the excavators,

n

a very

speculative

manner,

o represent

...either a royal

bull and its family

or Hathor

and her

family''

(idem;

seealso Adams, 1996,

pp.

6-1).

REALISTIC

REPRESENTATIONS

OF

BOVINE FEATURES

We will now

turn our attention

o the realistic representations

f

paÍts

of bovines,

among

which homs,

heads

and egs are he most mportant.

The

detailed

mage

of

a

bull's head

can

be found

on a small

block of

limestone

rom

the Early

Dynastic

temple

at Hierakonpolis

London

UC.14859.

Quibell

and Petrie,

1900,p.

7,

plate

II; Adams,T974ap.4,no.313,plate3, 3). Several endantsn theshape f bull's

heads

are srown.

They are most

probably

to

be considered s

amulets

and can be

compared

with

the more

complex

bull's head amrrletswhich

will

be discussed

later.

In the

samemanner

a

macehead

decorated

with two foreparts

of bulls, from

the

main

deposit

at Hierakonpolis

(Quibell

and Petrie, 1900, plate

XIX,

3),

is to

be compared

with

maceheads

decoratedwith

bull's head

amulers

still to be

discussed.

Of

particuiar

nterest

aÍe thÍee vory

doublebull's head

amulets,

said

o

come

from

Abydos

(Bmssels

8.3381a-c;

ex

Hilton Price

Collection

no.

4551;

Price,

1897,

no.

890;

Price,

1900;

Capart,1904, hgure

139, 1905,

hgure 154;

Figure

16.1),

which

can

be

related

to the

double bull

mentioned previously,

although

heir

shape s also related

o the

so-called

pelta'

palettes cf.

infra).

A most nteresting

mage

occurson a decorated ippopotamus

usk

fÍom

the main

deposit

at

Hierakonpolis

(Quibell

and Petrie, 1900: plate

XIV; Adams,

1974a,

p.75,

no.

384, Universify

College 14875),

on

which

can

be seen

he

typical facadeof a nichedbuilding of the type which is generally nterpretedasa

palace,

but

which

could

also

epresent

he

enclosurewall

of a temple.

Above each

of

the

doors

hangs

a bull's hea{

or

more probably

a bucranium,

with

the

homs

curving

downwards.

Obviously these are meant

as

an

identification

of

tie

building,

or

as a

general

ndication

of

its importance.

A row

of

strongly

stylized

bull's heads

or

bucraniaon an unpublished

ar

presewed

at Brussels

(E.

6400)

may

have

had

a similar meaning.

The

provenance

f the

ar

is

not known,

but

it

belongs

to Petrie's

Predynastic

ype L

36

(Petrie,

1920,

plates

)OVil-)OVIID,

and

therefore probably

dates o the

beginning of the Nagada

II

period.



Bovines in Egyptian Predynastic and Early Dynrotic iconogmphy

Figure

16.1.

'Double

bull's head Íunulets'. Abydos

(?),

formerly

Hilton-Price

collection

Brussels

.3381a-c).

cale

1:2.

Actual

horns

of bulls

have

been

found in

a limited number

of

Predynasticombs.The bestdocumented xamplesarefrom Naqa ed-Deir (tomb

7097

(Nagada

ID?),

tomb 7174

(dzte

unlcrown), tomb

7525

[Nagada

IC-Dl?]

Lythgoe

and Dunham,

1965,

pp.

53-54,

igure ZIU

p.

100,

igure41h,

pp.

339-

341, figures

151-152).

Because

he

horns had

been

emoved

rom the

skull, they

were

not intended

as

food

offerings,

but

must have had

symbolic meaning.

A

most

interesting

object

in

this

respect s

a

pottery

horn from tomb 20

at

Gqza

(SD

58

=

Nagada

IC-D?), which is terminated

by a

realistic

head

of

a

bovine,

most

probably

a bull

(Petrie

el al., 1912,

p.

23,

plate

VII,

13). Alrbough

this

object s

clearly

symbolic,

ts

exactmeaning s,

onceagain,unclear.

Standards

with different types of emblems can

be seen on the large

majority

of the

boats

iguring

on

Decorated

pottery.

Among them,

standardswith

bull's horns

occur frequently

Petrie,

1920,

plate

XXI[, 5,

4-8;

Newberry,

1913).

Two

main

types can

be

distinguished.The fust

type shows two

pairs

of

homs,

one within the

otherl the second type show

a

number

of

homs

attached to

some

kind of pole. It is very tempting to recognize n some standardsof the hrst type at

the

same time

a schematized

human

hgure with

raised

amrs, although

it is

impossible

to

prove

this.

Nevertheless,

hese standards

clearly

ilustmte

the

religious,

and

perhaps

alreadyÈe

political,

relevance f

the

bull's homs.

An irdisputable expression

of the

symbolic

importance

of bovines are

the legs

of chairs,

beds and otber fumiture

shaped

as bovine legs, most

probably

bulls. The

earliest example can

be dated

to

Nagada IIIA2 and

comes from

Hierakonpolis

Hk.6

tomb

11

(Adams,

1996,

p.

13,2000,

pp.

109-111,

plates

xxxiiib-xxxivb).

Most examples known

aÍe

from

he

royal

tombs

at

Abydos



S.

Hendrich

(Amélineau,

1899,

plate

XXX[, 1904,

plate

XIV; Petrie, 1900, plates

XII,

XXVII,

1901,

plates

XXXII,

XXXry,

XXXVI-)OD

and the mastabas

of

the

highest

fficialsat

Saqqara

@mery,

1938,

p.

40, plate

79, 1939,

pp.

63-64,1949,

pp.

57-59,1954,

pp.

38-55,

plates

XXVI-XXVI, XXX,

1958,

p.

84,

plare

102,

1961,

plate

48, figure

130).

Similar objects

are qrown from

Nagada

de

Morgan,

1891,p.189;

Quibell,

1905,

CG

14045-14051; ahl andEngel,2001,

Abb.

17),

Tarkhan

(Petrie,

1913, plates

VIII-X, XIV),

Helwan

(Saad,

1969,

plate

45)

and

Abu

Roash

Klasens,

1959,

p.

60,

hgure 10).

Nearly

all of them have

been ound

in

elite

tombs

and

it is

most

obvious

that furniture in

the fi:nerary

equipment

illustrates

he high

social status

of

the tomb

owner.

There

are

however

also

a

few

examples rom

the main

depositat Hierakonpolis

Quibell

and

Green,7902,plate

XVI). During more recentperiodsof Egypt's history,besides ull's legs, hoseof

lions

were

also

frequently

used or

furniture.

There

can hardly

be any doubt

that

these wo

impressive

and

powerful

animals have

been chosenas

protectors,

oÍ

originally

perhaps

even as

personifications

f the

ndividuals

using

his furniture.

^A

strange

greywacke

bull's

leg

with three

perforations (Brussels

8.6154',"

Figure 1ó.2)

cannothave

been usedas a

palette

and

was

probably

some

sort

of amulet.

Figure

16.2.

Bull's leg

amulet.

Provenance

ot

recorded, ormerly

MacGregor

collection

Brussels

.6154).

Scale

1:2.

As

was the case or

the

inrage

of

the

whole animal,

the

bull's

head

may

also have been used as an identification for the king during the early Nagada II

period.

In

tomb

U-j at Abydos, dated

to Nagada IIIA1,

inscriptions in ink

on

Wavy-handled

ars

have

been

ound

which reprèsent

a bull's head,

or

once

again

more p'robably

a

bucranium, on a

pole

(Dreyer,

1998a

pp.

65-67).

A

large

number

of

similar

inscriptions

has

been

found in

tomb

U-j, each time

showing

an

animal in

combination

with a

plant.

These nscriptions

have

been nterpreted

by

Dreyer

(1995,

1998a

pp.

84-86) as royal

domains,

where

fie animals,

cr

once

a

shell, are

the names

of

late Predynastic

ings. This

explanation

s however

ess

obvious for

the

inscription

with

the

bucranium, which

is

of

particular

intaest

(o

O



Bovins in Egyptian Predynutic and Early DynxÍic iconogmphy

because

n

that

case

he

plant

s

absent.

AIso,

the

head

or

bucranium

on a

pole

is

not a living

animal,

in

contrast to

the other

representations.

ecently

another

example

of

the same

emblem

has

been

ound

as a

part

of a laÍge

rock

aÍt tableau

at Gebel

Tjauti

(Darnell

and

Darnell, 1995-1996,

.

66, hgure

8),

on the

desert

road which

cuts

the

bend

of the Nile between

the

Luxor

and Abydos

areas

(Darnell

and Damell,

1997).

This

tableau

has

been

nterpreted

as related

to the

victory

of a

king

from

Abydos, probably

even

the Scorpion

of tomb

U-j,

over

another

Upper

Egyptian

king, who

is

probably

o be

ooked

or

at

Nagada

because

of

the

location

of

Gebel

ïauti

(Friedman

and Hendrickx,

in

press).

On this

tableau,

he

bucranium

on a

pole

occursbetween he victorious

king,

who has

a

macehead

n front

of

him,

and a

bound

prisoner.

Unfortunately, t is

not

obvious

whetha the bucranium dentifiesthe king, the prisoner,c'r represents n idea in

itself.

STYLISTIC

REPRESENTATIONS

Besides

he easity

recognizable,

more

or

less

realistic representations

Appendix

E),

there

are also far

more

complex Predynasticmages

which include

bovines

or

some

of thek

most

important

characteristics. key

document n

this regard

s a

very

delicately worked

flint

(Brussels

E.6185a;Figure

16.3) from

a small

cache

of flints

in

the

so-called

royal

mastaba'

at Nagada.

This

piece

was

found

in

1904-1905

by Garstang

1905)

and unril now

only a

photograph

of it has

been

published

(Charron,

1990,

p.

87, 105, no. 432).

The

date of the

object is less

obvious

han ts

provenance

might

suggest.

Among

the other

lints from

the

cache

aÍe two very hne rhomboidal crives (Hendrickx 1994, pp. 52-55), which are

generally

considered

to

date to

the

Nagada I

and early Nagada

II

period

(BaumgaÍtel,

1960,

p.

32).

Furthermore,

despite

he

fact

thaÍ

the

objects have

been

ormd

n

situ, all of them are

damaged, nd t is rherefore irite possible

hat

they

predate

óe reign

of

Hor-Aha

during whose eign

the tomb

at Nagada

was

constructed

Kahl

and Engel, 2001).

n that case, hey

would have

been ncluded

in

the

funerary

equipment as beirlooms

referring

to tradition,

a custom

which is

not

unleown

for Early Dynastic

Eglpt

(Sowad4

1999). At

fiÍst view

the

piece

under

discussion

strongly

resembles

he

well

lnown human

figurines

from the

Nagada

-iI

period

(Ucko,

1968). Mosr

of the known figurines

aÍe female,

although

male

examples

also exisl

On the Decorated

pottery,

the figures with

raised

arms

are

always female, while

on the extremely rare

White

Cross-lined

pots

with

burnan

representations

here are

only

male figures

with raised

arms

(Hendrickx,

1994;

1995,1999; Kóhler,

1998).

The ftint

objecr rom Nagada

can

alsoeasilybe considered o representa bull's head. ndeed, t obviously s not a

human

figure

because here

s

no head

and, from the finishing

of

the

piece,

it can

be

seen

hat there

has

never been

one.

The

delicate craftsmanship

of

the

piece

shows

hat

the

artisan who

produced

t was

defrnitely capable

of adding

a

head, f

he

had wanted

to. Most unfortunately

the

ends

of the homVarms

are

broken off

and

therefore

it is

impossible

to

identify

whether they are horns

or arms.

However,

this

problem

is

probably

irrelevanl

because

t is

quite

obvious

that

characteristics

from

both

human

and

bovine

representations

are combined.

The

head

of

the

bull can

also

be

regarded

as the trunk

of a

htman

(female)

body, the



S.

Hendrich

Figure 16.3. Figurative flint. Nagada" 'royal tomb', formerly

MacGregor

collection

Brussels

.6t85a).

Scale

ndicated.

horns

as

aÍms and hnally the triangularextension

on troth

sides

as the

eyes

of

the

bull

or ttre

brreasts f a

woman.

When compared o the modeled

bull's

heads

around

mastaba

S 3504 at

SaqqaÍ4

t is indeed ikely

that the extensions epresent

the eyes

of the

bull

and not his

ears.The interchangeability

etween be

eyes

of

bovines

and female

breasts

will

also

be

recognized n

a

number

of objects

still

to

be discussed.

t

seemsobvious that this confusion was

a deliberateaim.

The

bovine

element n the flint

object

from

Nagada

s

conhrmed

by another

flint,

unfortunately

without

provenance,

howing a

bull's

head with nah:ralistic

homs

but also

with the triangular extensions

underneath the homs

(I-ondon

BM

E4.32124: Capart,1905, igure 115).

Admittedly,

the described lint hgure remains urique

and is also

made

using

a very

particular

techniquewhich certainly had its restrictions.'

There

are,

however,

otier

documents

which show he combination

of stylized elements

tom

different

contexts.With

regard

o the combination

of elements epresenting

oth

a

bull and

a

tr/oman,

he case

of

tie

so-called bull's

head

amulets s tbe

most

remarkable.

This

type

of

pendant

s tbe most coÍnmon

one during Predynastic

times

and

continues to

be

used until the Early Dynastic period.

On

a

few

occasions,

ull's

head

amulets

have

been

ound

as

parts

ofnecklaces

Stanton

and



Bovines

in Eg3ptim Predynmtic and Early Dynastic iconogmphy

Hoftoran,

1988,

p.

82,

no.

70;

Payne,

1993,

hgure 12, no. 1713).

Petrie

already

recognized

both the

chronological mportance

as

well

as the formal

evolution

of

this type

of

objects,and

according o

him

they were

"the

oldest

orm

of

amulet. r

begins

at

S-D.

4ó

or earlier,

and

continues n use till

S.D. 67,

when

it is very

degraded"

Petrie

and Mace,

1901,

p.

26). This

correspondswith Nagada

IC

(or

earlier)

to

the beginning

of the

Nagada III

period,

which

should certainly

be

expanded

unril Nagada

IIC2

(cf.

Appendix F).

Most of the

exampleskoown

come

rom

tombs,

but they have

also been ound

n living

areas, he

earliest evels

of the temples

at Abydos

and Hierakonpolis and even at

sites

in Palestine

(Appendix

D.

Tbere

are

also a few

objects

which

show a close relation with

the

bull's head

amulets.The

shapeof the amulet has been used

on two stone vases

from

the main

deposit

at Hierakonpolis

(I-ondon

UC.15010,

Quibell

and

Green,

1902, plate )OVIlIa; Adams, 7974u p. 22, no. 109, plate 15; Cambridge,

Fitzwilliam

Museum

E.13.1898,

Quibell

and Petrie, 1900,

plate

XVII; Vassilika,

1995a, p.

12-13)

and a few maceheads,

ne

rom

tomb 1051

at

Abusir

el-Meleq

(Nagada

IC?;

Cairo

JdE

38143,Scharff,

1926,

p.49)

and anorher

probably

rom

Badari

(Berlin

15142,

Scharff,1931,

pp.

80-81,

no. 152,

Abb. 21,

tafel

8,

152).

For

two

other examples

he

provenance

s unknown

(Scharfl

1926,

p.

49,1931,

pp.

80-81). Furthermore,

here s a

unique exampleof a stonevase

of unrecorded

provenance

esembling

uchan amulet

Oxford

1948.18; aumgartel,

960,

plate

VI,

3;

Payne,

993,

.

144,no.1201,

igure

57).

Tbe

general

appearance

f the

bull's

head

amulets s very

characteristic

and consists

of two

parts

Figue

16.4).The lrst is

a

'disc',

which is

tbe

front

part

of the

objects

and

is

delineated

by

the downwards curved

'horns',

while the

second s

a

'cylinder'

which

comesout of the

back

part

of the disk and

servesas a

'foot'

to the object. The manner n which both parts are integratedcan differ

greatly,

from

an almost

complete

sepaÍation o an

integration

nto

a new

shape,

more

or

less

oval with a

straight base.

Perforations

have

always

been made

through

the upper

paÍt

of

the

'cylinder',

showingcleaÍly that this is

the

back

part

of

the

objects.However,

at least

wo typescan

be

distinguished,

which

also have

cbronological

mplications.

They

show an evolution towards

a

more

oval shape

and

stÍonger

ntegration

between he two

parts

distinguished

efore

(Figure

6.5).

In

some cases,

he

'homs'

are detached rom

the body

of

ttre

objects,

but this

is

probably

merely

a matter

of the

quality

of

the craftsmanship.

These

amulets were

originally identified

by

Petrie

(1914,

p.

M,

plate

X)OíVIiI,

2ï2a-m)

as

representing

Írm's heads.

Baumgarrel

1960,

pp.

13-74)

was

the ilrst

to

note

the ambiguouscharacter

of

the

objects,with

both

human

and

bovine

characteristics,

but

considered

he arnulets hemselves

o represent

he

mother

goddess,

while Hoffoian

(1989,

p.

321)

hesitated

etween

a bucranium

or

an elephantamulel Most recently, an identification as an elephantamulet has

also

been

presented

y

Van

Lepp

(1999).

Needler

198a,

pp.

317-318)considered

tbe

amulet

o refer

to the

protot)?e

of a

bull

god

or

cow

goddess.

She

ejected

he

identification

by Baumgartel

of a

mother

goddess

ecause,

such

an

abstraction

would

be

unprecedented

nd inconsistent

with

the

prehistoric

artist's

unfailing

preference

or

easily recognized orms"

(Needler,

1984,

p.

318), an

interpretation

which

of course s not

shared

at all in

tbe

presenr

rticle.

Both

Adams

(1995)

and

Vassilika

(1995b)

recently

described

his type

of

amulet

purely

as

slmbolizing

bulls

or bovines n

a more

general

sense.

The

identification

as a ram's

headnever



S,

Hendrickx

Figure 1ó.4.

'Bull's

head'

amulet.

Provenance

ot recorded

Brussels

.2335).

Scale3:4.

@ 0

Figure

1ó.5.

'Bull's

head'

amulet, ate

type.

Provenance

ot. ecorded,

ormaly

Scheurleer

ollection

Brussels

.7126).

Scale :4.

gained general

acceptance

nd is most

unlikely because here

are no related

depictions

of rams known

for

this

perio(

but

it is nevertheless

till accepted

y

Otto

(1986,

p.

1a0). It is

also most improbabte

that

the amules ÍepÍesent

elephants,

he

horns'

being he elephant's

usksand the cylindrical

paÍr

hii

trunh

because

he cylindrical

part

is

on the

back of the object and especially

because

this

part

is

very

short

and

nconspicuous

or the earlier type

of amutets.Also, for

a number

of amulets,

the cylindricai

paÍt

ends n a circular

thickening

which

can

also

be found

at the

snoutof

somebovine shnped

palenes,

but never

at fhe

trunk

of elephant

shaped

alettes.

The identification

of the

bull's

head

amulet as

bovine is

strongly

supported

by an

unpublished ock

drawing at Gebel

Faradi,

about

8

lan

south

of

Elkab,

which

shows

a bucranium

with the horns curved

downwards.

Considering

the

surrounding

drawings,

he bucranium s

to be dated

to the Early Dynastic

period (Huyge,personal ommunication).

A

frnal argument

or the dentihcation

of

the

bovine element

n the bull's

head

asurlet is to

be found in

the

bucrania surrounding mastaba

S 3504

at

Saqqara,

ating to the

time of

Djed.

This

mastabawas surrounded

y a

low bench

on

which

had

been

placed

about

300

bull's

headsmodeled n

clay, with real

homs

sticking

out

of them

€mery,

1954,

pp.

8-9,

plates

i, VI-WD.

The remarkable

point

is that

the beads

have been modeled,

but

unfortunately

t is not

clear

from

the excavation

eport

f

the

actual

skulls

are

present

under

he

clay modeling.

The

shape

of the

heads

showsa strong resemblance

o the more

or

less

oval type

of



Bovins in Eglptian Predynmtic and Early Dynastic iconography

bull's head

amulets

with

a straight base, but with, of course,

the notable

difference

hat the

horns

are

pointing

outwaÍds.Nevertheless,

he

general

outline

of the heads,

as

well

as the

position

and

shapeof the eyes, which

are in reality

small bulbs

of clay, leave

no

doubt

concerning heir relation

with

the bull's head

amulet.

The

bucrania

around

mastabaS

3504

can herefore

be considered

definite

proof

of

the fact

that the

bull is indeed he animal

behind he

bull's

head

amulet.

The human

elements

distinguishedby Baumgartel

or the

bull's head

amuletsare

most

obvious

f

one

compares hem

to a

paÍticulaÍ

tlpe

of statuette

representing

women

with their

arms curved underneath heir

breasts

(Appendix

G).

The

manner

in

which

the arms, and especially

the hands,

are curved

is

physically

impossible.

AIso

the handshave never

been worked in

detail;

on the

contlary, the arms are generally inisbedby blunt points.The manner n which

the

'hands'

are curved

nwards

can

be

found identically

on the already

mentioned

hrmran

stahrettes

witb raised

arms

(Ucko,

1968). t is to

be

noted

that no

male

statuetÍes

with

the

arms n front

of the

chest

are oown.

The combination

of arrns

and

heasts

seems

herefore essential or

these statuettes.

Also.

the heads

are

never

shown in

much

detail,

and

it is

clear that these

statuettes

do

not

aim at

depicting

he ndividuality

of

some

particularperson.

For

all of these easons

nd

also

for the

fact

tbat

the upper legs

are

represented

n

a

manner

which places

emphasis

on the

pubic

area,Baumgartel's nterpretation

as fertility

hgures

s not

illogical.

Nevertheless,

he

fact that

the arms have been

shaped n

a manner

allowing

them

o

be considered

s

horns

also remains

obvious.

The limited

amount

of

information

available

does not allow

us to make

chronological

distinctions

in

the

statuetÍes

with raised

or lowered

arms.

Both

already

occur

during

tbe Nagada

I

period.

The very

well krown

ivory Badarian

statuetterom tomb 5107at Badari (.ondon BM 8A.58648; Bruntonand Caton-

Thompson,

1928,

plates

XXW, 2, XXV,

34; Ucko, 1968,

pp.

2, 1-0)

already

shows

he

arms

below

the breast.However,

as

the

relative

position

of the

arms

and

breasts s

not identical

to the Nagada

ulture examples,

his statuette

will not

be taken

into

consideration

here. It is therefore

mpossible

to

say whether

the

statuetres

with

the arins tmderneath

he

breasts are an adaptation

of the

type with

raised

arms,

u directly inspired

by

tie shapeof the

horns

of a

bull. Anyhow,

this

question

is

not

of

great

importance

because he resemblance

o the horns

is

clear

in

both cases.

All in

all,

there seems

o be little doubt that the

bull's head

amulet s

a

combination

of

female

elements,

with the emphasis

on fertility,

and tie

bull.

Another

example

of this

combination

can

probably

be

found

in a few

jars

with

applied

decoration,

which

are at

present

in

the Ashmolean Museun

at Oxford

(1895.1220, agadaomb 1449,Payne, 993,no. 105;8.3195,Abadiya omb B

101,

Payne,

1993, o.

106;8.2952,

Hu,

romb V 179,Payne,

993,no. 107).

This

was

already

recognized

by Baumgartel

(1960,

pp.

3l-32, see however

Midant-

Reynes,

1992, pp.

169-f

7

1).

The

bull's head

amulet disappears

uring the Early Dynastic period,

and

its

shape

was

at that

moment

so

much

degraded hat the

original meaning

may

already

have

been lost.

There is no

trace

of

a

similar

type

of amulet

during

the

Old

Kingdom,

but there

aÍe two

possibilities

for the

bull's

head

amulet

having

been

ntegrated

nto

formal Egyptian

art as defrnedby Kemp

(1989,

pp.

19-107).



S. Hendrich

First

there s

the intriguing formal Íesemblance

etween he

bull's

head

amulet

and the repÍesencation

f

the

false

beard as a

hieroglyphic

sign,

such

as

that found

on a

very nicely

worked tablet from the tomb of Djed

at

Abydos

(Petrie,

1900,

plates

X,9,

XiU, 2;

Schou,

1951,

p.

27,Textabb.3;

see

also

Kahl

1994,

p.

120, s 26).

The

sign continues

o

be usedduring the Old Kingdom

and

s

supposed

o represent

he deified royal beard. Very

little

is kr:own

of the

origin

and meaning

of the false

beard,althoug.h

Wildung

(1984,

p.

973), when

rÍying

r0

explain

the white

crown

of

Upper

Egypt through a visual

similarity

with

the

Imiut-emblem,

suggested rela[ion

with

the

uil of a calf hanging rom

the

Íniut-

emblem. However,

he formal

relation

between he

Lniut-emblem

and

the

white

crown

is far from

evident,

especially or the Early Dynastic representations

f

these wo objects, which are far more different from each other than they are

during mue recent

imes.This

can easily

be seenby

comparing

he white

crown

on

the

Scorpion macehead

Oxford

8.3632,

see most recently

Gautier

and

Midant-Reynes,

1995;

Cialowicz, 1997) with the Imiut-emblem

on

a rabler

rom

Abydos

(Philadelphia

9396, Logan, 1990).Also, Wildrmg's

explanation

does

not

take into

account

bat the king

also wears the

false

beard

with the red

crown.

Therefore,

t

seems ogical

to consider he false beard as an independent

ymbol

and not

merely

as sometiing

which

goes

with the white crown. Even

though

he

words

àósw.r

(beard)

and

hbs.t

(animal

tail) are closely related

(Wildtmg,

1984,

pp.913-914),

it cannot

be denied hat there s little formal resemblance

erween

the

tail

of

a calf

and the false

beard of the king. Finally,

another reference

o

bovines might

have

been at the

origin of

the false

beard. In a

very

tentative

manner, t

could

be

suggestedhat the

purpose

of the false

beard

was

to

createan

innge

of the king

as

a

personification

of the

bull's

head amulet. n

that

case, he

most importantelementwould not havebeen he beard tself, but the stringsby

which it

was attached,

mitating

the

homs/arms

of

the amulet.

The

second

element

s

the emblem

of

the

goddess

Bat,

several

examples

of

which

are

known

from tbe Nagada tr

period

(Appendix

ID. The

homs

of

Bat

show

a very

strong curve, tbe tips reaching

back almost to the

top

of

her head.

The

curve is completely

similar to that

of

tie hornVarms

of the

bull's

head

amulets,

but upwards nstead

of downwards.Also, the round

face

of

Bat is

very

similar

to the

shapeof the arnulets.

Obviously

Bat,

as a cow

goddess,

its

very

well

with the

above

proposed

nterpretation

of

the

bull's

head

amulets being

a

combination

of

human

and bovine

elements.

In

the

end

one

c:n

only try to

point

out

a few

elementswhich may

be

related

to the meaning

of the

bull's

head

amulets.

Their

use

as

pendants,

n

combination

with their nrrmeric

imputance, and to

a certain extent also

the

attitudeof the femalestatuetteswith the arms

'supputing'

the breasts,point to a

general

prophylactic

charactaistic

of the

bull's

head

amulet.

This

is

also

confirmed

by the

great

symbolic mpmtance

of the bull, and especiallyhis

borns,

referring

to

power

and

strength

n

general,

as alreadydiscussed. inally, there

s

the female

element

n the

bull's

head

amulet,

which doesnot

necessarily

efeÍ

to

fertility

only, but could also indicate

the

regeneration

of

life.

Tentatively,

the

prophylactic

value

of the bull's

head

amulet

can

be situatedwithin

the context

of

the

power

and

strengthneeded or

the regeneration f

life

after death.



Bovines n Egyptian Predynastic and Early Dynastic iconogmphy

BOVINES

ANDBIRDS

Another

combination

occurring

n Predynastic

aÍt

is

that between

he

bull and

a

bird, which

often

has

a long

neck and

originally

may

bave

been an

ostich.

For

the

large

majority

of these

birds, their

exact

dentity

seemsof little

importance

because very

little

detail is

given

in the representations.

he

most

obvious

examples

showing

a combination

of

bovine

and

bird elements

are

two

palettes

FiguÍe

16.ó),

rmfortrmately

both

of

them without

provenance Brussels

8.4992,

unpublished;private

collection

Kilcbberg,

Switzerland,Page-Gasser

nd Wiese,

1997,pp.30-31,

no.

12),

where

he

necks

and heads

of birds, n

a

shapewhich

also

occurs

separately

s an amulet

(Appendix

I; Figure

L6.7),

are

used or

the

legsof bovines.Similarly,on anotherpaletteof unrecorded rovenance,he horns

of a

bovine have

been replaced

by the

bird

amulet

(Leipzig

2886,

Onasch

and

Steinmann,

1997,

p.2l\,

for

which

a

theriomorph

imestone

vase

of equally

unrecordedprovenanceCairo

JdE 6éf,28,

Saleh

and

Sourouzian,

986,no.

6) can

be

mentioned

as a

parallel.

An

element

of

great

mportance

s

the

shape

of the

horns

and

ears

of the animals

on the

hrst

two

palettes,

which

can also

be

found

on

several

of the

other

bovine

shaped

alettes

cf.

Appendix

C). The

tips

of the homs

are curved

outwards,

while

the ears

aÍe of a

particular

triangular

or tÍapezoidal

shape.

This

type

of horns

and ears

also occurs or

other animal

sbaped

palettes

and

other

objects,

e.g.,

Payne,1993,

nos. 1808, 1903,

1904)

and

should herefore

rather

be considered

s a

standardized

lement han

a

naturalistic

endering.

The

horns

wirh

curved

tips

show a

great

resemblance

with the heads

and

necks

of

birds

of the

type

just

mentioned.

This relationship

can

be elaborated

urther

through

he non-figurative

anr:lets

which will

be discussedater. For

a

number

of

them hebtd-hke shapeof the hornsseems eyonddiscussion.

The

combinatiqr

of the bovine

and the bird can most probably

also

be

recognized

n

the

so-called

pelta-palene'.4

Two

general

classes

f

pelta

palettes

are

to

be distinguished.

The

first

one

(Petrie,

1920,

plate

XLIV,

tlpe

30-32),

which

is not

of

interest

or

the

present

study, most

probably

efers

o

boats,

some

of

thesr

with

bird

shaped

prows.

These

palettes

have

also

been dentihed

as bats

(Tupinier,

1984;

Osborn

and

Osbornova 1998,

p.

30),

which

is, however,

most

unlikely

because

of

the asynrmetric

shape of

many

examples,

among

other

reasons.

he

second

group (Petrie,

1920,

plate

XLIV,

rype 100-101;

Appendix

J;

Figure

16.8)

shows wo

birds' heads

and necks n

such a manner

hat

they

also

resemble

a

pair

of outward

curved horns.

The relationship

o

bovine

horns

can

be

made

not

only

because

f

the

general

shape,but also

by the already

mentioned

amulets

of

pelta

shape

with

bull's

heads

FïguÍe

16.1).

Furthermore,

here

s

an

exampleof a pelta paletteon which the animal bead,unfortunately rokenoff, but

apparently

of the normal

bird type, s

surmountedwith the

typical horns

ending

n

bird

heads

Appendix

J, no. 19). t has

beenargued hat the

boat type

pelta palette

was

the

earliesg

and the

origin of the

second ype

(Vandier,

L952,

pp.

38a-388),

but

fre chronological

evidence

only

allows

us to say hat

both types

occuÍ mainly

during

Nagada

IA-IIB.

There is,

on the

other

hand, limited

evidence

hat the

pelta

palette

witb

only

one

bird's

head

(Petrie,

1920:

plate

XLIV,

type 100;

Figrrre

16.9),

of which

all datedexamples

can be attribured

o Nagada

IA,

could

be

the

origin

of the

type with two

bkds'

heads

(see

alsoRegner,

1996, plate

21).



S, Hendrics1

Figure

16.ó.

Palette

n

the

shape

f bovid

with

bird amulet

as eg.

provenance

or

recorded

Brussels

.499D.

Scale1:3.

Figure

16.7. Bird

amulet.

Provenance

ot

recorded

Brussels

.21'lg).

Sca]e

1:2.



Bovine in Egyptim Predynastic and Early Dynastic iconography

Figure

16.8.

'Pelta'

palette

with two

bird beads.

(Brussels ,.421). cale1:2.

hovenance

not recorded

Figure 16.9. 'Pelta' palette with one bird head. Provenancenot recorded

(Brussels

8.422).

Scale1:2.

This

can

be

regarded

as evidence,

be it inconclusive,

or

tbe

suggestion

already

made

that

the iconographic

elements

concerning

boyines,

birds

and humans

originally

developed ndependently.

This kind

of direcr relationship

between he bull

and

the bird remains

nevertheless

are and,

admittedly,

some

examplesare

still

open for

discussion.

Both

animals,

however,

can

be

linked

with hrmran rgures,

as was

demonstrated

above

for

the

bull.

The

relationship

between he

bird

and

human

figurines is

obvious

from

the female

hgrnines

already mentioned

several

tjmes,

which

oft.en

have

heads

shaped ike

those

of birds. This

however

will not

be discussed n

detail here, because t falls beyond the aims of the present study. It should

nevertheless

be mentioned

that the

bird

occuning

so

frequently

on

Decorated

pottery

(Hendrickx,

2000)

and

palettes

during

the Nagada

II

period,

and

especially

during

Nagada IIC-D,

would

gradually

be replaced

by

standardized

representations

of falcons,

typical

for Nagada

IiI.

Once

again,

the

original

iconography

of the

birds wÍrs not

assimilated nto

formal

Egyptian

arl The image

of the falcon,

on the contrary,

probably

already had

its formal

shape

by the very

end

of the Nagada

r

period

and

certainly rom

the

beginning

of tbe Nagada

II

period.



S. Hendrich

DEYELOPED

SYMBOLS

The

type of art discussed

o

far combines

nto

one

image

two

or

more

highly

stylized elementswhich

originally must

have epresentedndividual deas.

n

this

manner,hunan

representations

ith

raised

arms,

he homs

of a bull and the

necks

and heads

of

birds

are combined.Next, we will

see

hat the

shapeswbich

were

obtained

by

combining

different hgurative elements

an also

be

used

as

synrbols

on their

own,

without

furtler figuratrvecontext, mplying that tbese

shapes

ad

a

recognizable

cognitive

value

of

their own.

A few

of the

most

remarkable

examples

will

be

presented

ere.

There exist a number

of

rhomboidal

palettes

Petrie,

1920,

plate

XLIV,

1921,plate LVIII, type 91 T-I-Dwhich, on one of theiÍ pointedends,all havea

similar

decoration

Appendix

K). It

consistsof

a

ring which

is not closed

at its

top,

clearly representinghorns,

undemeath which

aÍe

two small, horizontally

protruding

riangles.Two typescan

be distinguished.

or

the flÍst

type,

the horns

consist

of one continuousunbrokencurve with tipped ends ndicated,

while

the

ends

of tbe

second ype are

incurved.

The relationship

witb

the flint

bull's

head

from Brussels

Figwe

16.3),

especially

or

the second ype

with

the

particular

type

of horns and

ears

mentioned

above,

s

extremely

pertinent.

The relationship

with

the

bull

is

fi:rthemrore confirmed

by a

rhomboidal

palefie

of

unknown

provenance,

n top

of

which two antithetic

bull's

heads ould

originally

be found

(Brussels

8.2182:

Figure 16.10).Another

nteresting

examplewithout

provenance

clearly

shows he interchangeability

f the

homs

and the bird's heads

Cairo

CG

14112,

Quibell,

1905,

p.

226). T\e

rhomboidal shapeof the

paleues,

however,

does not

show figurative resemblance

nd occurs

very

frequently without

this

decoration.

Similar

decorations, oth

with homs in

one continuous

curve and with

homs

with incurved

ends,

alsooccur on other ypesof

palettes

and

different

kinds

of objects n

bone and

ivory.

It is impossible

o

differentiate

he examples

with

horns in

one

curve

(Appendix

L; Figure 16.11) chronologically rom

thosewith

incurved

homs,

the large rnajority

of them dating to

Nagada

and

early Nagada

II, and

in

at

least

one case hey

occur

together

on the sameobject

(Appendix

L,

no.

6). Another interesting

example is a

palene

on top

of

which

a similar

decoration

can

be

found which, however,

hrough he addition

of a

line

separating

the horns

from

the

palette

tself,

shows

sÍong

resemblance

o the Bat emblem

(Appendix

L,

no. 25; Figure 16.12). This resemblance

was

already noted

for

a

number

of

other objects

with horns n

one unb'roken urve

by Scharff

(1926,

p.

53, no.

339,

1929,

p.

1,10-141,o. 270, 1931,

p.

263,no.

854; AppendixL,

nos.

2,8,14) and heir shapedentifredas

'llathorkopf

.

The examples with incurved homs however

arc fu more

nrmerous

(Figure

16.13),althoughnot

all of them have he triangular

extensions

Appendix

M;

Figure 16.14).As

previously

stated,nearly

all of

them

date to Nagada

and

early Nagada

I,

but

the most recent

example dates o Nagada

IIA2. The

large

number

of objects ndicates he importance

of

this type

of symbol, while on

the

other hand

the wide typological variety

of objects ndicates hat

the

symbol

was

not

dependent

n

a

particrÍar

type

of object as regardscontent,

but had

a

meaning

by

itself.

It

should

also be

mentioned

hat a few of the amulets

Petrie,

1920,

plate



Bovines n Egyptim Predynastic and Early Dynrtic iconogmphy

Figure

16.10.

Rhomboidal

palette

decorated

with double

(?)

bull's head.

Provenance

ot recorded

Brussels

.2182).

Sca]e

1:3.

[IV;

type 103

C, H; Figure

i6.13)

are decorared

wirh inlayed

eyes/breas$,

confirming

the relationship

with

the bull's head

and

probably

at

the

same ime

also

with

the female igurines.

On

the objects mentioned

slight

individual

differences

can

be recog-

nized

in

the combination

of

the

'horns',

triangular

extensions,

eyes/breasts'.

Apparently,

their

significancewas

so familiar

that they

could

be adapted

with

decorativepurposes.

The manner

n which

theycan

be

combined

s,

for example,



o

Figure

16.11.

Greywacke

eedle.

Scale :3.

S,

Hendrich

C C O

Provenance

ot recorded

(Brussels

E.2l87)

Figure

1ó.12.

Palette

with

simplihed

Bat

emblem. Provenance

not

recorded,

formerly Scheurleer ollection BrusselsE.7129).Scale1:2.

also

clear

in a

double

bird

head palette

or

which

the

pÍovenance

has

not been

recorded,

showing be triangular

extensions

which

in

themselves

were

apparently

considered

sufficient as reference

o the

bovine

element

Brussels

E.2886; Figure

16.15).

There

seems to

be little

doubt

that tbese

symbols are

prophylactic

because

hey

occur on

objects

suchas

pendants,

hair

combs

and

needles,

which



Bovins in Egyptian Predynastic and Early Dynastic iconogmphy

Figure 16.13. Amulets: a- provenancenot recorded (Brussels E.2882); b.

provenance

ot recorded

Brussels

8.2880);

c. Ballas-Zawaida

bough$,

ormerly

MacGregor

collection

(Bnrssels

E.6188b).

Scale

3:4.

were worn

or

meant

o be clearly visible,

and whici

are n

a

general

manner

most

suited or

such

a

purpose.

But

since

we

find here

the sarre

basic elements

as for

the bull's

head

amulets, they may

refer, in

more

or

less

the

same manner, to

'power'

and eventually

to

regeneration

n

the afterlife.



S. Hendrich

Figure 1ó.14. Amulets:

a.

provenance

not recorded

(Brussels

E.2881);

b.

provenance

ot

recorded,

ormerly

MacGregor

collection

(Brussels

E.6188e);

c.

Ballas-Zawaida

bought),

ormerly

MacGregor

collection

(Brussels

E.6188c);

d.

unidentified

Petrie

excavation

Brussels

E.1231).

Sca]e3:4.

CONCLUSIONS

In

this article

it has

been argued

hat an important

part

of Predynastic

and Early

Dynastic

art

used

stylized representations

ith

syrrbolic

values.

This

srylizarion

was

by no means

he result,

f

inadequacy

mong

tie early Egyptian

artisans.On

the contrary,

if

one

looks

at the

astonishing craftsmanship

with

which

some

objects

were

decorated,5

t is

quite

obvious that these

artisans were

capableof

producing almost any kind of representation desAed. Therefore, if a

representation

s

stylized it

should

be regarded

as

intentional.

one

of the

most

important

reÍrsons

or

the

stylization

would

certainly

have

been that the

artisans

did not

want

to render

the

exact image

of one

individual

animal

but,

on

fhe

contrary,

the

general

dea

and characteristics

f the animal. Indeed,

we

aÍe

not

dealing

with

a kind

of art which

tÍies

to iuustrate

particular

moments

or even$

in

a realistic

unnner.

Another

reason

for

this mode

of

representation

was

to allow

multiple

interpretations,

r more

exactly

o

combine

originally

independent

deas

into

new

syrnbols.

They

would

become

a

kind

of

label,

which could

be used

in



Bovines n Egyptim Predynmtic and Early Dynastic iconography

Figure

1ó.15.

'Double

bird

head'

palette.

Provenance ot recorded

(Brussels

8.2886).

Scale

1:3.

different contexts,

both

political

and

religious, which

are always intimately

related

n

Egyptian

culture.

Because

of

this

stylization,

zoological identihcations

of the animals

depicted

a-ren many cases

a

perilous

undertaking.

Not

only are the anirnals

often

rendered

with little

detail, but one

also has to take into

consideration that

characteristic

lements

of different

animalsmay bave

been amalgamatednto

one

representation.

The

shape of

the horns, which is

so

often

used for the

identification

of animals,

was

of

great

symbolic

importance

and

seems o

have

becomehighly standardized.

This mode

of

representaLion

ccurs

from

the very

beginning of the

Nagada period

and

continues

throughout

the whole of Predynasticand Early

Dynastic

culture.

Changes

will certainly have

occurred during

tbis

poiod

of

nearly

a thousand

years,

but a

number

of

basic

conographic

elementscontinued

to

be used. Some of them were

integrated

into formal Eglptian

art, others were

not

and disappearedrom

the artistic

record.

As

for the

subject

discussed n

the

present

article, a close

relationship

can

be observed

betweenbovines

principally

the bull), birds

(originally

probably



S. Hendrick

the

ostrich

but from

the

Nagada

II

period

onwaÍds

mainly the falcon),

and

human

beings

provided

with

'strength'.

During

thehistorical

period,

this is reflected

n

the dentihcation

of

the

Eglptian

kings

with

both

the falcon

and be

bull.

The emergence

f

kingship

from

the Nagada IC

period

onwards

brought

about

the

development

of a

standardued

art with the religious

and

political

conhrmation

of divine

kingship

as

the main

objective.

A number

of

previously

existing

iconographic

elements

became

ntegrated nto

formal Egyptian

art

but

many

others

disappeared

rom

the

repertoiÍe.

As

already mentioned,

the

bull's

head was

probably

used or

the formal

representation

f

the

goddess

Bat

from

the

very

beginning

of the Nagada

II

period

onwards. Apparently,

Bat

was

a

very

important goddess

during the

early

period

of

Egypt's history

(Fischer,

1962,

1975).She was the principal goddess f rhe seventhUpper Egyptian nome, bur

her

position

in

tbe Egyptian pantheon

was,

from

the beginning

of the

Middle

Khgdom,

to

be taken

over

by

}lathor

(llaynes,

199ó).

Conceming

oyal

titles

and iconography, t has

long

been attested

hat

the

bull

is

one

of

the

favorite

animals

with which the king identifies

himself.

Among

the

most mportant

itles

of

the kings

can be found

'Strong

Bull,

Great

of

strength'

and

'Bull

of Horus'.

The most

characteristic conographic

element

s

the

bull's tail

auached

o theking's

girdle

(Jequier,

918;

Sraehelin, 982,

p.

ó15,

no.

34), as can

already

be

seen

on

the Narmer

palette.

NOTES

The

present

article

is

part

of a lilger

study on

hedynastic art

which

is still

in

progress-

The objects

used for illustrations are from rhe Egyptian collection of the Royal Mueums for Art and History in

Brusels.

I wish to

thank

Luc Lime, curator

of the collection,

for

permission

to publish

these

aÍtifacts;

Ilona Regulski

for

inking the drawings

of these

objects and Frangoise

Roloux

for making

the

drawing

of E.6i85a

(Figure

16.3).

Mostuseful comments

and information

on

various

subjects were

fumished

by Barbara

Adams,

Renée Friedman,

Achilles Gautier,

Dirk Huyge, Dagmar

Kleimgiitl and

Wim

Van

Neer.

(1)

The word

'art'

is not used

here

io its modem sense, where tbe

artist himself

decides about

the

subject,

style

etc. of

his

work,

but more in

the

sense of aíisanat

(see

Davis, 1983;

Junge,

1990).

(Z)

This

piece

has been anribured

by Baumgartel

(1970,

plate

LVD

to tomb

l75g at Nagada

because

of an ink

inscription

on

the

object. However, the

same number

can be found on

three

more

palettes

from Brussels

@.6155,8.6186A-8)

and

refers

to the

number

rhey

origilally

had

in the

Maccregor collection.

The

provenance

of these palettes

reÍmins

unklown.

(3)

'With

regard to

the technical possibilities

of the

Nagada flint kaappers,

see however

the

extremely

fine

figure of an

hippopotamus

found

at

Hierakonpolis

(Friedman

and Ada$s,

1992, p. 68) and nrore genenlly the well known ripple flake knives (Midant-Reynes,

r987).

(4)

'Pelta',

Latin,

'small

crescentshaped

hield'.

The name

was

given

by Petrie

when

looking

for foreign

relations

between

Egypt

and

he Mediterraneanworld.

(5)

See,

or example, he

ivory

foagments iscovereda

few

years

ago at

Abydos, tomb

U-12?,

which

date

s back to the

Nagada

ID

period

(Dreyer,

1993, able

6). Similar

objects are

oot

k-nown

or Nagada

I and euly

Nagada

I, but for

those periods great

crafismanship

s

evident

n

the production

of basaltvases

or some of the animal shapedpalettes.



Bovines n Egyptian Predynctic and Early Dynastic iconogmphy

REFERBNCES

299

Adams,

B.

(19742).

Ancient

Hierakonpolis,Aris and

Phillips Ltd,

Werrunster.

Adams, B.

(I974b).

Ancient

Hierakonpolis,

Supplercnt, AÀs and Phillips

Lrd,

Warminsrer.

Adams,

B.

(1988).

Predyretic

Egypt,

ShireEgyptology 7, Aylesbury.

Adaru, B.

(1995).

Bull's

Had. In Phillips,

T.

(ed.),

Africa. TheArt oÍ a Continent,

oyat Aademy

ofArts,

London,

p.

ó3.

Adam, B.

(1996).

Elite

tombs

at Hierakonpolis.

n Spencer,A.I.

(ed.),

Aspectsof

F.arlyEgypt,Britísh

Museum

Press, ondon,

pp.

1-15.

Adam,

B.

(2OOO).

xcnatiorc in the

Locality 6 Cenetery at Hierakonpolis

1979-1985,

Egyptian

Studies

Association

Publication no. 4, British Archaeologial

RepoÍts Internatinal

Series

903, Archaeopress,

Oxford.

Amélineau,

E.

(1899).

Les NouvellesFouilles d'Abydor 1,

1895-1896),

ErnestLeroux,

Pris.

Amélinau,

E.

(1904).

zs NouvellesFouilles d.'Abydos

//,

(1

897-1898),EmestLeroux, Faris.Ardelkovic,

B.

(1995).

The Relations

Between urly BronTeAge I Carunites and

Upper

Egyptíot,

Centre

or Archamlogial

Research, elgrade.

Ayrton,

E.R., and

Loat, W.L.S.

(1911).

Pre-dyretic Cerctery at

El-Mahasna,

Egypt Exploration

Fund

31,

Londoo.

Baines,

.

(1995).

Origins

of Egyptian ingship.

n

O'Comor,

D.,

and

Silveman,

D-P.

eds.),

ncrerr

Egyptian

Kingship. Problerc der

Ágyptologie, Bd.

9,

E. J. Brill,

Leiden,

pp.

95-1

56.

Baumgrtel,

E.l.

(1955).

The Cultures

of Prehistoic ÊgJptI, Oxford

University Press,

ondon.

BaumgaÍel,

E.J.

(1960).

The Cultures

oJ Prehbtoic EgyptlI, OxÍord

University Press,

ondon.

Baumgartel,

E.J.

(1970).

Petrie's

Naqada

Excavation:A

Supplerrent,

Bernud

Quritch,

London.

Boessneck,

.

(1988).

Dra Tiemelt des

Alten Àgypten,

Verlag

C. H. Beck,

Miinchen.

Boessneck,

., and von den

Driesch, A.

(1997).

Tierknochenfunde. n

von

der Way,

T.,TelI el-Fara'ín

-

Buto

I. Ergebnisse

7um

friihen

Kontext. Kanpagnen der Jahre

1983-1989,

AV 83,

Philipp von

Zabern,

Mainz"

pp.

206-216.

Boessneck,

., von

denDriesch,

A.,

aDd

Ziegler,R.

(f989).

Die

tieresre

von

Maadiund dem

Friedhof

am Wadi

Digla In Rizkana,

.,

and

Seeher,

.,

Maadi III. The

Non-Lithk SruII

Find.sand

the

Structural Remirc

of

the

Predyretic Settlemnt, Philipp von

Zabern, Mainz am

Rhein,

pp.

87-128.

Boilret,

C.

(1991).Le

gror:pe

A et le

pré-Kerma.

n Wildung,

D.

(ed.),

Soudan,Royaumcs

sur e Nil,

Flammion,

Paris,

pp.

36-47.

Brunton,

G.

(1927).

Qau

and Badari

l, British School of Archaeology

in Egypt and

Eglptian

Research

Account 44, Bernard

Quaritch,

London.

Brunton,

G.

(1937).

Mostageddaand the

Tasinn Culture,Bernxd

Quarirch,

London.

Brunton,

G.

(1948).

Maírcr, Bernard

Quaritch,

London.

Brunton,

G., and

Caton-Thompson,

G.

(1928).

The Badarian Civilisation and

Prehístoic

Reruins

near

Badaà, British

School of Aróaeology in

Egypt

and

Eglptian

ResearchAccount 46.

London.

Burgess,

E.M., and

Arkell,

A.J.

(1958).

The reconstruclionof the Hathor

Bowl. Jouml of

Egyptinn

Archaeology

44:.6-ll.

Capart" .

(79M).

Débuts de I'Art en

Egypte,Yromtt and Co.,

Brussels.

Capart,J.

(19O5).

Primitive

Art in Egypt, Grevel, London.

Chantre,

E.

(1907).

La nécropole memphite de Khozan

( íaute

Egypte) et l'origine

dc Egyptiens.

Bulletin de Ia

Société

d'Anthropologie

de

Lyon 26'.729-246.

Charron,

A.

(1990).

L'époque thinite.

In L'Egypte des Millércires

Obscurs, Hatier et

Musées de

Marseille,Paris, pp. 77-98.

Churcher,

C.S.

(1984).

Znological study of the ivory

knife handle rom

Abu Zaidan. In Needler, W.,

Predywtic and

Archaic Egypt in the Brooklyn

Museum, Brooklyn

Museunq Brooklyn,

pp.

152-169.

Cialowicz,

K.M.

(1987).

Les têtes de massues es périodespÍédynastique

t

archa'ique ans

a

vallée

du

Nil. Prace Árc heolo

g

cTne 4l:.

7

-68.

Cialowicz,

K.M.

(1991).

Lcs PalettesÊ,gyptiennes ux Motifs

7-nomorphes

t saw Décoration.

Etudes

de

I'Art PrédywÍrqaa,

Studies n Ancient Art and

Civilization 3, Uniwersytet

Jagiellonski,

Krakow.

Cialowicz,

K.M.

(1992).

La

composition,

Ie sens et la symbolique

des

scènes zoomorphes

prédynmtiques

en relief.

Les

mnches de coutmux.

In Friedman,R-, and

Adam, B.

(eds.),



300

S. Hendrick

The

Followers

ol

Horus. Studies

Dedicated

to

Michael Allen Hoffirun

1944-1990,

Eglpt ian Srudies

Associat ion

Publiat ion

2, Oxbow Monograph

20,

Oxford, pp.247-259.

Cialowicz,

K.M.

(1997).

Remarques

sr

la

têre

de masse du roi Scorpion. In Sliwa,

J.

(ed.),

Studies

in

Ancient Art

and

Civil izat ioa 8,

Prace Archeologicue

59:

l l-Z'1.

Cleyet-Merle,

J.-J. ,

and Valler,

F.

(1982).

Egypte. In Beck, F., Cleyet-Merle, J.J. ,

Duval,

A.,

Mohen.

J.-P.,

and Vallet,

F., Archéologie

Conqarée. Afique, Europe

Occidentale et

Orientale.

Catalogue

Somire

lllustré des

Collections

du

Musée des Antiquités

Natiomles

de

Sainr

Geruin-en-Laye,

l, Edit ions de

la Réuoion des musées nat iooaux,

Paris,

pp-

68-165.

Ctose,

A.E.

(199ó).

Carry

that

weight:

The use atrd traDsportation

of stone tcx)ls.

Current

Anthropology

31 :

545-553.

Darnell, J.C.,

and

Damell,

D.

(1995-199ó).

The Theban

Desert

Road

Survey

(fhe

Luxor-Farsh0t

Desert

Road Survey),

7he

Oriental lrctitute 1995-1996 Anmal

ReporÍ,

The

Orienral

Institute,

Chiago, pp.

62-7

O.

Darnell,

J.C.,

and Dunell,

D.

(1997).

Er.ploring the

'nanow

doors' of the

Theban DesÍÍl.

Egtptian

Archaeology lO:24-26.

Davis, W.M.

(1983).

Artiss

and

parrons

in Predynastic and early

Dynaslic

Egypt.

Studien

7ur

Alkigyptischen

Kuln r l0: I

19-1 39.

Davis, W.M. (1992).

Masking

the

Blow, The Scene of

Representation

in

Late

Prehistoric

Egtptian

Ár(

University

of California

hess, Berkeley /

Los Angeles.

de

Morgan,

J.

(1896).

Recherches

sur les

oigines de I'Egypte. I.

L'age

de

la Pierre

et des

Métaux,

Ernest Leroux,

Puis.

de

Morgan,

J.

(1897).

Recherches

sur les

Oigines de I'Egypte

I1. Ethnographie

préhbtoàque

et

Tombeau

Royal de

Negadaà,

Ernest

Leroux, Paris.

Dreyer,

G.

(1986).

Elephantine

WII. Der Tempel der

Satet. Die Funde der

Friihzeit unà

des

Aben

Reiches,

AV 39, Phil ip von

Zabern, Mainz am Rhein.

Dreyer,

G.

(1993).

Umm

el-Qub.

Nachuntersuchungen

im

fri. ihzeit l ichen Kónigsfriedhof.

5./ó.

Vorbericht-

Mitteilungen

des Deutschzn

Arcfuiolngischm rctituts,

Abteilung

Kairo

19:23-

62.

Dreyer,

G.

(1995).

DieDatierung

der

Min-statuenaus

Koptos- aDeutsches

Archtiologisches

nstítut

Abteilung

Kairo,

Kurct des

Alten Reiches-

Symposium m

Deutschen

Arcfuiologischen

Irctituts,

Abteilung

Kairo

am 29. und

30. Oktober

1991, Deutschen

Archàolcgischen

Instituts,Abteilung Kairo Sonderschrift28, Mainz am Rhein,pp. 49-5ó.

Dreyer,

G.

(1998a).

Um

el-Qub

I. Du

Prtidyrnstische Kónigsgrab

U-j und

seine

friihen

Schirtzeugnbse,

AV 86,

Philipp

von

Zabern,

Mainz

am

Rhein.

Dreyer,

G.

(1998b).

Grab des

Dewen. n

Dreyer,G., Harrung,

U., Hikade,

T., Kóhler,

E.C., Um el-

Qaab.

Nachunterschungen

im

friihzeitlichen Kónigsfriedhof

9./10.

Vorbencht.

Mitteilungen des

Deu*chen

Arcfuiologischen

nstituts,

Abteilung Kairo

54:

14I-164.

Drruot-Richelieu.

(199ó).

collection Jean-Maie

Talleu, Antiques,

Mercredi 6-Jeudi ?

décembre

1996,PaÍis.

Eisenberg,

J.M.

(1995).

Árr of the

Ancient

tilorld,

F.oyal-Athena

Galleries n"

?1, January

1995, New

York.

Eiwanger, J. (1984).

Merimde-Benisal,ánu

.

Die Funde der Urschicht,

AV 4?,

philip

von Zabern,

Mainz am

Rheio.

Eiwanger,

J.

(1988).

Merinde-Benisaláme11.

Díe Funde

der

Minleren Merimdekultur,

Av 51,

philip

von

Zabero,

Mainz am

Rhein.

Eiwanger,

.

(7992).

Merimde-Benisaláru

lIl. Die Funde

der Jiingeren

Merimd.ekubur,Av

59,

Philip

von

Zóern,

Mainz am Rhein-

el

Yahky,

F.

(1985).

ClariÍicaiions

on

the

Gerzean Boat Scenes.

Bulletin de

I'lnstitute

Francaise

d'A rchéologie O ienale 85 187-195.

Emery, W.B. (7938).

The Tomb of Hemka.

Excnations

at Saqqara,

Governnenr

press,

Cairo.

Emery, W.B.

(1,939).

Hor-Aha.

Excdvatiorc at

Saqqara

1937-1938,Government

hess,

Cairo.

Emery,

w.B. (1949\.

Great

Tombsof the

First

Dynasty

. Excnations at saqqara,

covernmenr

press,

Cairo.

Emery, slB. (1954).

Great

Tombs

of

the

First

Dynasty Il.

Excnations

at

Sakkara,

Egypt Exploration

Smiety46,

London.

Emery, W.B. (1958).

Great

Tombs of

the

First Dywty

ll7- Excoatiorc at

Sakkara, EEWI

Exploration

Society

47,

London.

Emery, W.B.

(1961).

ArchaX

Egypr,

Harmondsworrh,

England.



Bovins

in Egyptian

Predynastic

and

Earty

Dynrotic iconography

301

Fkth,

c.M.

(1912).

The

Archaeological

suruey

of Nubia:

Report

Íor

lg0g-lg0g,

Govemment

press,

Cairo.

Ffth,

c.M.

(1915).

The

Archaeological

suruey

of Nubia:

Report

for

1909-

gl0,

Govemmenr

press,

Cairo.

Fischer,

H.G. (1962).

The s.rlt

and the

nome of the

Goddess Bat. Joumal

of the

American

Research

Center in

Egypt

l:

7

24.

Fischer,

H.G.

(1

975). Bat. lzxicon

de r

À

gyp to

ogie

|

: col.

630-632.

Foner,

R.

(1901\.

Ueber

Stein2eit

f]66p"rtriiber

zu

Acfunir+

Naqada etc. in

Ober

Ágypten und

uber

Europaílchz

Parallelfunde,

Achmim

Studien

i,

Verlag

Karl J.

Triibner,

Strubourg.

Friedmn,

R.F.

(1995).

Decorated

ostrich

egg. ln Phillips,

T.

(eó.),

Africa.

The Art

of

a

Continent,

Royal

Aademy

of

Arts,

Loodon,

pp.

52, 54-58, 60-62,64-65.

Friedman,

R.F.

(1996).

The ceremonial

centre ar

Hierakonpolis loolity

HK 29A.

In Spencer,

A.J.

(ed.),Aspects

of

Early Egypt,

Brit ish

Museumpress,

London,

pp.

16-35.

Fnedman,

R.F.,

ard

Adams,

B.

(eds.)

(1992).

The Followers of

Horus. studies

Dedicated to

Michael

Allen Hoffnnn 1944-1990, Egyptian Srudies Assciarion publier.ion

2,

Oxbow

Monograpb

20,

Oxíord.

Friedman"

R.F.,

and

Hendrickx,

s.

(in

press).

A hotodynmtic rabl%u

ar

Gebel

' I laut i.

In, Dmell,

J.C.,

aod

Danell,

D.

(eds.),

Theban

Desert Road

Suruey, Volurc

I,

The Rock

Inscriptions

of Gebel

Tjauti

in the

Theban Westem

Desert,TlteOnenral

lDsritute,

Chiogo.

Gilstatrg,

J.

(1903).

Mahásm

and Bêt

KuIIaí,

Egyptian

Research Accont 7,

London.

Gastang,

J.

(i905).

The

so-alled

romb of

Mena at Negadeh

in upper

Eg1pt.

British

Association

lor

the

Advancercnt

of

Science,

Report of the

74th MeeÍing,

Cambridge,

/904,

London,

pp.

7

I_'712.

Gautier,

A.

(1984).

Archaeozoology

of

the

Bir Kiseiba region,

Eastem

sahara. n wendorf,

F., and

Schild'

R.

(ass.),

lose,

A.E.

(ed.),

cattle-Keepers

of the

Eastemsahara:

The Neolithic

of

Bir

Kiseiba.

Southern

Methodist

University

press,

Dallas,

pp.49-72.

Gautier,

P., and

Midant-Reynes,

B.

(1995),

La

tête de

massue u

roi scorpion.

Á rchéo-Nil

s:

g't-121.

Gophna"

.

(1980).

Excavarions

r En

Besor, 976.Ariqot14:9-16.

Grigson,

c.

(1991).

An

Afrian origin

for

AÊi€tr caule? Some

archaeologial

evid,ence.

fican

Arc hae

ological

R* iew 9:

I 19

744.

Hartung,

U.,

and

Friedhof

U.

(1998).

n Dreyer,

G., Hartung,

U., Hikade,

T., Kóhier,

E.C.,

Umm el-

Qaab. Nachuntersuchungen im friihzeitlichen Kónigs6:iedhof 9./10. Vorbericht.

Mitteilungen

des

Deutschzn

Archiiologischm

lrctituts,

Abteilung

Kairo 54:19_100.

Husan,

F.A.

(1992).

Primeval goddess

to

divine kiog.

The myrhogenesis

of power

io the

erly

Egyptian state.

n

Friedman,

R., and Adam,

B.

(eds.),

The Followers

of

Homs.

Studies

Dedicated

to

Michael

Allen

Hoflircn,

Egyptian Studies

Associarion

Publiation

2,

Oxbow

Monograph

20,

Oxford,

pp.

3O'7-322.

Haynes,

.L.

(1996).

Redating he

Bar €piral

in the

Museum of

Fine Arts, Bostotr.

n der

Manuelian,

'

P.

(ed.\,

Studies n

Honor of lVillim

Kelly

Simpson,vol-

I., Museum

of Fine

Arts,

Boston,

pp.

399-408.

Hendrickx,

s.

(1986).

hedynastische

objmren uit

Naqada en

Diospolis

pma

(Boven

Egpte).

Bulletin des

Musées

Royauxd'Art

et

d'Histoire

S7

2):

3144.

Hendrickx,

s.

(1989).

De Grafuelden der

Naqada-cultuur

n

zti.d-Egypte,

ct

Bijzondere

Aandacht

voor

het

Naqada

III Grafveld

te

Elkab. Inteme

Chronologie

en

Sociale

DiÍerentiatie,

Ph.D. dissertation,

euven.

[unpublished]

Hendrick4

s.

(1994).

Antiquités

Préhistoriques

et Protodyrcstiquesd'Egwte,

Guides

du Département

Egyptien

8, Muséc

Royaux d'Art

et d'Histoire,

Bruxelles.

Hendrickx,

s-

(1995).

vase

decorated

wirh victory

Scene. n

phillips,

T.

(ed.),

Afàca.

The Art of a

Continent,Royal Aademy ofArts, London, pp. 59-60.

Hendrickx,

S.

(1996).

Ttre

relative chronology

of

the

Naqada mlnrre: problems

and possibilities.

n

Spencer,

A.J.

(ed.),

Áspac* of Fnrly

Ëgypr,

British Museum

press,

London,

pp.

36_69.

Hendrickx,

S.

(1999).

Paux

d'animaux

comme

symboles

prédynastiques-

propos

de quelques

Íeprésentations

ur c

vases

White

Cross-lined-Chroniqued'Egypte

74: ZO?.-230.

Hendrickx,

S-

(2000).

Autruc*res

et flamants

les oiseaux

eprésentés ur

la céramiqueprédynastique

de

a ca égorie

Decq^red,.

Cahízrs

Caribéerc d'Egyptologie

:21-52.

Hoffman,

M.A.

(1989).

A stratified Predynastic

sequence

rom Hierakonpolis (Upper

Egypt). In

Krzyzanizk,

L., and

Kobusiewicz,

M.

(eds.),

bte Prehisnry

of

the

Nile Basin and

the

Saha

a, P

oznanArchaeologi

al

Mu

seu

n, Poaan,

pp.

3 'l

-323.



302

S. Hendrich

Hoffman, M.A.,

Lupton, C., and

Adams, B.

(1982).

Exavat ions

at Locality 6. In

Hoffman,

M.A.,

?1re

Predynast ic of Hierakonpolis.An

InterimReporÍ, Macomb, I l l inois,

pp.38-6i.

Huyge, D.

(7995).

De Rotstekeningen van

Elkab

(Boven-Egypte):

Registratie,

Seriatie

en

Inte rp retatie,

Ph.D.

dissertation, Leuven.

[unpubtished]

Huyge,

D.

(2001).

Cosmology,

ideology, and

personal

rel igious

pract ice

in aucient

Egypt iatr

ro€k

arr.

In Friedman,

R- F.

(ed.),

Egypt

an dNubia:

Gifts

oÍ

the

Desert, British

Museum

hess,

London.

Jequier,

G.

(1918).

La

queue

de

Laurau

insigne des rois dEglpre- Bulletin de l'lrctitute

Frangaise

d'Archéologie

Orientale 15:

165-168.

Junge,

F.

(1990).

Versuch

an

einer

àsthetik der àgyptischen kunst. In Eaton-Krauss,

M., and

Graefe,

E.

(eds.),

Srudiez

zur

dgyptischzn

Kunstgeschichte, Hildsheimer Agyptologische

Beitige

29,

HildesheinL

pp.

1-38.

Junker, H.

(1912).

Bericht

Ober

die

Grabungen der Kaiserlichen Akadamie der Wissercchafien

in

Wien,

auf dem Friedhof in

Turah. Winter 1909-1910, Denlschriften der

Akademie

der

Wissenschaften n Wien 56, Wien-

Kahl, J.

(1994).

Du System der

Àgyptischen Hieroglypheuchift in

der

0.-3.

Dymstie,

Cónioger

Orientforschungen,

IV,

Reihe

Àgypten, Band 29,

Wiesbaden.

Katrl, J., and

Engel, E.

-M.

(2001).

Vergraben,

verbrannt, verkannt uud vergessen-

lt Funde aus

dem

"

Menesgrab",

MUnster.

Kemp,

B-J.

(7989).

Ancient

Egypt.

Amtomy of

a

Civilization, Routledge, London-

Klasens, A.

(1958).

The exavations

of

the

Leiden Museum of

Antiquities at

Abu-Rouh:

Report

of

the Íirst seson

1957. Part 11. Oudheidkundige Mededelingen uit het

Rijksruseum

yan

Oudheden te

lzi.den 39:20-31.

Khens,

A.

(1959).

The exevations

of

the

Leiden Museum of Antiquities at

Abu-Roroh: Report

of

the second

secon

1958, Paí II. Cemetery 4OO.

Oudheidkundige Mededelingen uit

het

Rijksmaseum van

Oudheden te

lziden

40:

4l-61.

Kóhler,

E.C.

(1998).

Fruhe keramik. In

Dreyer, G., Hartung, U., Hikade, T., KóNer,

E.C., Umm

el -

Qub.

Nachunterzuchungen

im

fri.ihzeitlichen

Kdnigsfriedhof

9./10.

Vorbencht.

Mitteilungen des

Deutschzn

Arcfuiologischm Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 54:100-1

15.

Kroeper,

K., and Wildun8,

D.

(1985).

Mirchat Abu Omr. Miinchner

Ostdelta

-

Expedition.

Vorbeicht

1978-.1984, Schriflen aus der

Àgyptischen

Samrnlung

3, Munich.

Kroeper, K., and Wildung, D. (2000). Miwhat Abu Omar II, Ein vor- und Friihgeschichtlicher

Friedhof im

NiUelra,

GriÍber, Philipp von

Zabern, Mainz,

pp.

115-204.

Logan, T.J.

(1990).

The Origins

of

the

Jmy-wt

Fetish.

JoutróI

oíthe Arerican Research

Center in

Egypt ?JI:61-69.

Lythgoe,

A.M., and

Dunharry

D.

(1965).

The Predynastic

Ceretery N7000. Naqa-ed-Dár,

Part IV,

University of

Califomia Publications,

Egyptian Archaeology 7, Berkeley

/

Los Angeles.

Mclver,

R.D., and

Mace,

A.C.

(79O2).

EI Amrah and Abydos. 1899-1901,

Egypt

Exploration Fund

23,

London.

McKim

Malvil le, J. , Wendor{

F; Mazar, A.A., and

Schild, R.

(1998).

Megaliths and

Neolithic

astronomy

in southern

Egypt. Nature 392:488491.

Midant-Reyns,

B.

(1987).

Contribution à l'étude de

la société

prédynastique:

le cas du coureau

'ripple-flake'.

Sadien

zur

Altàgyptischen Kultur 14: 185-224.

Midant-Reyues,

B.

(1992).

Préhistoire de I'Egypte.

Des Premiers Hommes aux

Premiers Pharaorc.

Armnd

Colin, Puis.

Mond,

R.L., and

Myers, O.H.

(193?).

Ceruteries of Arunr

I, Egypr Exploration

Smiety

42,

London.

Mtiller, H.W.

(196q.

Ágyptische

Kurctwerke,

Keinfunde

und

Glas in der Sammlung

E.

und M.

Kofler-Truniger,l.uzem,

MUnchner

Àgyptologische Studien 5, MÈnchen.

Needler, W. (7984). Predyretic and Archcic Egypt in The Brooklyn Museum, Vr'ilbour Monographs

9, Brooklyn.

Newberry,

P.E.

(1913).

List of vases

with cult-signs.

Liverpool Annals of

Archaeology

anl

Ant hrop ology S

13'I

-142.

Nordstróm,

H.A.

(19'12).

Neolíthic and

A-Group

Sites. Scandirwian Joint

Expedition to Sudanese

Naáz 3, Scandinavian

University Books, Stockholm.

Onasch,

A., and

SteinÍnann, F.

(1997).

Die friihdynaSische

zeit.

um

29ó0-2ó40

v.

Ctu. In Krauspe,

R.

(eL),

Das

Àgyptische Museum

der

Ilniversittit

lzipzig, Philipp von

Zabern,

Mailu,

pp.22-

t )-

Osborn,

D.J., and

Osbornov4 J.

(1998).

The

Mamls oÍ Ancient Egypt, Arts

and Phillips,

rly'aminster-



Bovine

in

Egyptian

Predynastic

and

Early

Dynastic

iconogmphy

303

Ono,

B.

(1986).

Der

nanative

und der

hierographische

sril im

friihen

Ágypten und

im

ZweisEomenland

ln Actes

du Congrès

Symrctie',

Darmstadt,

pp.

131-149.

Page-Gasser,

M., and

wiese,

A.B.

(eds.)

(1991).

Àgypten.

Augenblicke der

Ewigkeit.

unbekznnte

Scfuitze

aus Schweker

Privatbesitz,

Philipp von

Zabern,Mainz.

Payne,

J.C. (1993).

Caalogue

oí the

Predyretic

Egyptinn Collection

in the

Ashmolean

Museum,

Oxford

University

hess, Oxford.

Petrie,

W.M.F. (1896).

Naqada

and Ballas,

Bertud

euaritc*r,

London.

Perie,

W.M.F. (l9OO),.

The Royal

Tombs

of

the

First

Dynuty, Parr

I, Egypr

Exploration

Fund

18,

Kegan

Paul,

Trench,

Triibner and

Co., London.

Petrie'

w-M.F. (l9ol).The

Royalrombs

of

the

hrliest

Dywties,

paÍ

II,

Egypr

Exploration

Fund

21,

Kegan

Paul,

Trench, TrÈbner

and Co.,

London.

Petie,

Vr'.M.F. (19O2).

Abydos,

Part

I, 1902,

Egypt Expluation

Fund

22,

Trtibner

and

Co.,

London.

Petrie, W.M-F. (1903). Abydos, Part II, 1903, Egypt Explorarion Fund 24,

Triibner

and

Co.,

London.

Kegan

Paul,

Trench,

Kegan Parl, Trench,

Petrie,

W.M.F.

(7913).

Tarkhan

I and

Memphis V,

Brirish Sóoot

of

Archamlogy

in

Egypt and

Egyptian

Research

Account

23,

London-

Petrie,

W-M.F.

(7974).

AtruleLr,

Consrable,

ondon.

Petie,

W.M.F. (1920).

Prehistoic

Egypt,

British School

of Archaeology

in Egypt and

Egyptian

Research

Acco:nt

31, London-

Petrie,

w.M.F. (1921).

corpus

of Prehbtoic

Pottery and

palettes,

British

School of

Aróaeology

in

Eg)?t

and

EgyEian

Reseach

Accounr 32,

London.

Petrie,

w.M.F. (1925).

Tombs

of

the

courtiers and

oxyrhynkhos,

Brirish

school of

Archaeology

n

Egypt

and

Egyptian

Reswc*r

Account

3?, London.

Petrie, w.M.F.,

and

Mace,

A-C.

(1901).

Djospolis

parva.

The cemcteies

of Abadiyeh

and

Hu.

j89g-

1899,

Egypt

Exploration

Fund

20, Kegan

paul,

Trencfi,TrUbneratrd

Co.,

London.

Petie, W.M.F.,

Wainwright,

G.A., and

Mackay,

Ê,.

(1912).

The labyinth,

Cezeh and

MaTguneh,

British

School

of

Archaeology

in

Egypt

and

Eg)?tian Resach

Accdnt

21,

Benard

Quarirch,

London.

hice,

F-G.H. (1897).

Á

Catalogue

of

the

Egyptim

Antiquitics n the

Possession

f

F.G.

Hilton Pice,

Bmard Quritch, London.

Prie,

F.C.H.

(190O).

Some

vories

from Abyd,os.

roceedingsoí the

Society

f Biblical

Archaeology

22:

160-161-

Priese,

L-H.

(ed.)

(1991).

Ágyptische

Museum.staattiche

Museen

zu

Berlin.

Ágyptisches

Museum

und

Papyrussarnlung,

hilipp von

Zabern,

Mainz am

Rhein.

Quibelf,

J.E. (19o5).

Canlogue

cénéral des

Antiquités

Egyptiennes.

os.

I 1.001

-

i2.000 et

I4.o0I

-

14.754.

Archaic

Oàjecrs,

Goverment Press,

Cairo.

Quibetl,

J-8., and

Gren,

F.W.

(1902).

tie rakonpolis

I,

Eglptian Research

ccount

5,

London.

Quibeu,

J.E.,

and

Petrie,w.M-F. (1900).

lierakonpotis

l,Egyptian

Resmch

Accounr

4,

London.

Regner,

C

(1996).

Schminkpclanez,

Bonner

Sammlungvon

Aegyptiaca

2,

Wiesbaden.

Reisner,

G.A.

(1908'),

The

Early Dyretic

Cercteies

at Naqa-ed-Dêr,

Part

I, University

of California

Publiations,

Egypian

Archaeology

2, LeipÁg.

Reisner,

G.A.

(l9lo).

The Archaeological

sumey of

Nubia,

Report

for

1907-1908,

vol.

I,

Archaeological

Report, National

Printing

Deputment,

Cairo.

Rizkana,

., and

Seeher,

.

(1989).

Maadi III.

TheNon-Lithk

SmIt Finds

and

the Structural

Reruirc

of thc

Predyretic

Senlemcnt,AY

80, Philipp von

Zaban, Mainz am

Rhein.

Sa(

Z.Y.

{1951).

lRoyal

Excavatiorc at

HeIw

(1945-1947),

Annales du

Service

des

Antiquités de

I'Egypte, supplément ahier 14, Cairo.

Su4

ZY.

(1969).

The

Excnatiorc at Helwan:

Art

and Civilization

in the

First and

Second Egyptian

Dynastizs,

University

of Oklahoma

Press,Oklahonra.

Salet\

M.,

and sourouzian,

H.

(198ó).

Die Hauptwerke

m Ágyptischen

Museum

Kairo, verlag

philip

von

Zatrern,Mainz

am Rhein.

Schiifer,

H.

(1896).

Neue alt€rttimer

der

'new

race'aus

Negadeh.

Ttitschrift

fiir

Ágyptische

Sprachz

und

Abcrarrckund

e

3:

158-l 6 1.

Schtrff,

À-

(1926).

Du Vorgeschichtliche

Grdberleld von

Abusir

el-Mekq,

Wissenschaftliche

Vaóffentlichung

der

DzurschenOrieur

Gesellschaft

9, Leipzig.

Scbarff,

A.

{1929).

Die ÁItertitmzr

der Vor- und

Friihzeit

ÁgJpterc.

I . Bestanung,

Kurct,

Arulette

und

Schmck,

Gerdte

zur

Kórperpflege,

Spiel- und Schreibger.ite,

Schnitzereien

aus HolT



304

S.

Hendrick

und

Elftnbei, Verschiedenes,

Staarliche Museen z: Berlin,

Mitteilungeo

aus

der

Àgyptischen

ammlung

,

Berlin.

Scharff,

A.

(1931).

Die

AIteniircr der Vor-

und

FrÍihzeit Ágyptens. .

'lYerkTeuge,

Waffen,

Gefcisse,

Staatliche

Museen

zr Berlin.

Mitteilungen ausder àgyprischenSammlung

4, Berlin.

Schlógl,

H.

(ed.),

(1978).

Geschenk des

NiIs. Ágyptische Kunstwerke aus

Schweizer

Besitz,

Schweizerischer

ankverein,

Basel.

Schott, S.

(7957).

Hieroglyphen:

Untersuchungen

um

tlrsprung der

Schift,

Abhandlungen

der

Akademie

erWissen-schaften

n

Mainz

24,

Mainz

Srdth,

A-L.

(1993).

dentifi€tion

d'un

potier

prédynastique.

rc

héo-Nil 3:23-33.

Smith,

W.S. (1960).

Ancient

Egypt u

Representedn the

Museum

of

Fine

Arts, Baslon,

Museum

of

Fine Arts,

Boston.

Sowada"

K.N.

(1999).

Black-toppedware

n euly

Dynasric contexts. ournal of

Egyptian

Archaeology

85: 85-102.

Spencer,A.J.

(1980).

Catalogue of

Egyptian

Antiquities

in the

British Museum Y.

Early

Dyustic

Oá7ects,ritishMuseumPubliations,London.

Staehelin,

E.

(1982).

Ornal In Helck, W.,

and Westendorf , W.,

Izxikon der

Ágyptologie,

Band

V.

Otto Hmssowitz,

Wiesbaden,

ols.613-ó18-

Stager,

L.E.

(1992).

The periodization

of Palestine rom

Neolithic

through

early Bronze

times.

In

Ehrich, R.

(ed.),

Chronologies

n

OLd

World

Archaeolog), 3rd revised editiotr,

UniveÍsity

of Chiago

hess,

Chiago,

pp.2Z4l.

Stanton,

E.8., and

Hoffman,

M.A.

(1988).

Description

of

the exhibition aÍrifacts.

In

Hoffman,

M.A.,

Willoughby,

K.L., and

Stanton,

E.B.

(eds.),

The

First

Egyptians,

University

of South

Crolina,

Columbia, p.

59-112.

Stórk,

L.

(1984).

Rind. In Helck,

W., and Westendort,W.,

Lexikon

der

Àgyptologie,

Band V.

Ono

Hmxsowitz,

Wiesbaden,

cols.

251

263.

Tupinier,

D.

(1984).

Plaque à

fad de l'Egypte prédynastique

epresentant ne chauve-souris.

ulletin

Mercuel

de Ia

SociétéLinnéennede

Lyon 9:296-299.

Ucko,

P.J.

(7968).

Anthropomrphic

Figures of

Predynastic Egypt and Neolithic

Crete

wíth

Conparative

Material

írom

the

Prehistoic

Near East

and

Mainland

Greece,

Ployzl

Anthropological

nstitute,

Occasional

Papers 4, London.

Vandier,

.

(1952).

Manuel d'Archéologie

Ê,gyptieme.l.

Les Époques

de

Formation,

A. Jean

picwd,

Pais-

Van

Lepp, J.

(1999).

The misidentification

of the

Predynasic bull's head

"mulea-

Gijttinger

Miszellen

1 6 8 : 1 0 1 - 1 1 1 .

Vassilika,

E.

(1995a).

Egyptian

Án, Fitzwilliam

Museum Handbooks,

Cambridge.

Vassilik4

E.

(1995b).

Bull's had-

In Phillips,

T.

(e.d.),

fnca.

The

Art of

a Continent,

Royal Academy

of Arts,

London,

p.

63-

von

den

Driesch, A., and

Boessnrck,

J.

(1985).

Die

Tierknochenfunde us der neolithischm

Siedlung

von

Merimde-Beni

SaIáru

m Westlichen

Nildelta,

Institut fiir

Palaeoanatomie,

Domestikatioosforschu

g und

Gestichteder

Tiermedizin, Mu nich.

von

der

riy'ay,

T.

(1997).

Tell el-FaraTn

-

Buto I.

Ergebnisse

zum

Frtihen

Kontext. Kenpagnen

der

Jahre

1983-1989,

V 83, Philippvon

Zabern,Mainz

Weigall,

A.E.P.

(1907).

A report

on some objects

recently found in

Sebakh and

orher

diggings.

Prehistoric

drawing

from Maala.Ánmles du

Semicedes

Antiquités

d.e

'Egypte 8: 49-50.

Welsby,

D.A.

(1995).

Femle

figurine. In

Philtips, T.

(ed.),

Afica. The Art of a

Continent,

Royal

Academy

of Arts,

London,

pp.

104-105.

Wendorf,

F.

(1968).

Late Paleolithic

sites n Egyptian

Nubia. In Wendrf,

F.

(ed-),

The

prehistory

oJ

Nubia,

vol.

II,

Fort Burgwin

Reswch

Centre and Southern

Methodist University Press,Dallas,pp.'I9l-953.

Wendorf,

F., and

Schild,

R.

(1995).

Are the

Early

Holocene cattle in the

Eastern Saharadomestic

or

vàld?

Jourml

of Evolutlonary

Anthropology

3:

118-128.

Wildung,

D.

(1981).

Ágypten vor

den

\ramiden,

MÈnchner

Ausgrabungeo n

Àgypten, Mainz

am

Rhein.

Wildung,

D.

(1984).

Zur formgeschichte

der

landeskroten.

l^ Studien

7ur

Sprache und Religion

Ágyptens.

Band 2: Religion,

Fs. Westendorf.

Gdttingsn,

pp.967-980.

Wildung,

D.

(ed.)

(1997)-

Soudm,

Royaumcs

ur le Nil,

Flammrion, Paris.



Bovines

in

Egyptian

Predynrotic

and

Early Dynmtic iconography

APPENDD(

A.

White

Cross-lined

ottery

with representations

f bovines

Painted

Decoration

(1)

Mahasna,

omb

H

97 Nagada

C. Type

C 53

(London

BM

EA.49025),

Ayrton

and

Loat, 1911,plate

xiv, 1

(2)

Naqa

ed-Deir,

romb

7014

Nagada

C.

Tlpe

C

49

(Berkeley),

Lyrhgoe

and

Dunham,

965,

figure

3, d-e

(3)

Provenance

not

recorded

[date

un]crownl.

Type

C

6

L

(I_ondon

UC.15331),

Petrie,

1920,

late

XVI,

66

(4) Provenancenot recorded [date un]i:nownl.Type C 96 L (London

UC.15334),

Petrie,

920,

plate

XVI,

69

(5)

Provenance

not

recorded

[date

unknown].

Type

C

95

(London

UC.15335),

etrie,

1920,

plate

XVI,

70

Applied

Decoration

(6)

Nagada

?)

ldate

unlcrown].

Type

unlcrown,

oose

rgure

(Berlin

13g05),

Scharff,

929,p.39,

o.60, igure

13;

Priese, 991, p. 4-5

(7)

Provenance

ot

recorded

ldate

unkrown].

Type

C 75

(Genève,

Roland

Cramer),

Page-Gasser

nd Wiese,

1997,

pp.24-25

(8)

Provenance

ot

recorded

[dare

unlrrown].

Type

C 79

@oston

M1914),

Smith, 1960,p.

19,

ptate

2

APPENDD(

B. Decorated

ottery

with representations

f

bovines

(1)

Dakka,

cem.

102,

. 140

Nagada

IC-D?].

Type

D

(Miincben

ÀS.272S),

Firth,

1915,

p.

65; Wildun

g,

1991

p.

43,

no.

34

(2)

Provenance

not

recorded

[date

unlarown]. Type

W 19

(Cako

CG

T1133),

Quibell,

1905,

p.

149

APPENDX

C.

Palenes

epresen[ing robable

ovines.

After

petrie,

1920,1921

(1)

el-Arnra

tomb A

63

[date

unlnown].

Palefte

ype

3

D

(not

located),

Petrie,

1921,

plate

LII

(2) Balas North Town (?)

[date

unknown].

Fragmenr

of a

palette (Oxford

1895.870),

ayne,

993,

o.

1807

(3)

Gebel Tarif,

tomb

unknown

dare

unlcrown].

Paletre

f.

ry?e

4

N

(Cairo

CG 14145),

Quibell,

9O5,p.?23

(4)

Hu,

tomb

U 247

ISD

39

=

Nagada

IA-B?1.

palette

type

4 k

(nor

located),

Petrie

and Mace, 1901,

plate

XI, 1;

petrie,

i921,

plate

Ltr

(5)

Khor

Bahan,

cemerery

17,

tomb

56

[Nagada

B-IIA].

palene

type 4

J

(not

located),

Reisner,

1910,

I,

pp.

t20-121,

tr,

plate

63b, 10;

petrie,



S.

Hendrick

192I, plate

LII

(Petrie,

1920,

p.

37

identifres he animal

as hartebeest,

which

however

seems ighly

unlikely)

(6)

Nagada,

omb 241

[Nagada

IA]. Paiette

ype

4

S

(London

UC.424]).

Petre,192Í,

plate

LII;

Baumgartel, 970,

.

X

(7)

Nagada,

omb 271

[Nagada

IA]. Paleue

ype 9 D,

rorroise

wirh

rwo

bovid beads

Oxford

1895.841),

etre,192I,

plate

LII;

Payne,

993,

p.

222,no.7809

(8)

Nagada,

tomb

1515

[Nagada

IIA]. Romboidal

palette

type

92

d,

decorared

with

incised

bovid

(Oxford

1895.825),

petrie,

1896,

plate

LI,

15a;

Payne,

1993,

p.

227,

no. 1868

(9)

Nagada,

omb

T

4

[Nagada

IB]. Pateue

ype 3

D

(not

located),

petne.

1921, lare II

(l0)Nagada

(?)

[date

unlcrown].

Paleue type 4 N

(Bmssels

E.6187).

Hendrickx,

1994,

pp.

44-45

previously

denrified

as sheep)

(ll)Provenance

not recorded

[date

unlcrown]. Palette

type

3 J

(London

UC.15769),

Petrie,1920,plate

)t-iII,

3

J

(l2)Provenance

not recorded

[date

unlarown]. Palette

type 4

N

(London

UC.15770),

Petrie,

920,plate

XL[I,4 N

(13)Provenance

ot recorded

date

unlarown].Realistic palette

of

a

bovine,

eventually

a

cow

(previously

in

private

collection in

Switzerland),

Eisenberg,

1995,

no. 226

(14)Provenance

ot recorded

date

unlcrown]. Palette

not

located),

Drouot-

Richelieu.

1996.

no. 21

4

APPENDD( D. Ivory and bonecarvingswith representationsf bovines

(bibliography

cf.

Cialowicz,

1992)

(1)

Abu 7,eida\,

tomb

32

[Nagada

IIIB?].

Knife handle

@rooklyn

09.889.i

18),

Chr.ncher,

984

(2)

Abydos,

tomb

U-127

[Nagada

IDI].

Iftife handle

(Abydos

sroreroom),

Dreyer,

1993,

afel6,

f

(3)

Sheikh

Hamada

(?Xdate

unlcrownl.

Pitt-Rivers

lorife handle

(London

BM

EA.ó8512)

(4)

Provenance

not recorded

[date

unlorown].

Carnarvon

krife handle

(New

York

1926

Q6.7.1281)

(5)

Provenance

ot

recorded

date

unlrrown].

Davis

comb

(New

york

1915

(30.8.224)

(6)

Provenance

not recorded

[date

unlnown].

Fragment

of ivory

plaque

(LondonBM EA.66953),Spencer, 980, o. 451

(7)

Provenance

ot recorded

date

unlarown].

Shell

plaque

(Berlin

13j91),

Scharff,

1929,

p.

83, no.

113,

tafel 22

(It

is

strongly

questionable

whether

this

object

really

dates to the

Early Dynastic

period,

its style

being considerably

different

from the

otheÍ decorated vories)



Bovines

n

Egyptim

Predynstic

and

Early

Dynastic iconogmphy

APPENDD(

E.

Naturalistic

bovine

beads,

mainly

amulets

(t)

Abydos,

Royal

tombs

[Nagada

IiC-D]. Fragmenr

located),

Amébneau,

19M,

plate

XXV

of

a statuette?

not

(2)

Gena,

tomb 205

ISD

64

=

Nagada

ID2-IIIA2?].

Whire

limestone

(not

located),

Pevie

et al., 1912,

plate

V

(3)

Hemaniy4

tomb

1809

[Nagada

IIIA2]. Btack

steatire

(not

located),

Brunton,

L927,plate

XVII

(=

Adams,

1988,

.

44,

g)

(4)

Hierakonpolis

date

un]nownl.

Pouery

@rooklyn

09.889.327),

Needler,

1984,pp.

364-365, o.

291

(5)

Mannar,

tomb

2001

[Nagada

IIIA2).

Black limestone

(not

located),

Brunton,1937,plateXXII, 30

(6)

Nagada,

tomb

1289

[Nagada

IIIA2].

Camelian

(not

located),

petrie,

1896,

plare

LVI[,

1289,

nor

menrioned

n

Baumgartel,

1970)

(7)

Nagada,

omb 1759

[Nagada

C].

Glass

(sic;

nor

located),

petrie,

1920,

p.

43,

platn

X, 47

(not

menrioned

n

Baumgarrel,

970)

(8)

Nagada

Qought)

[date

unlcrown].

Pottery

@erlin

13810),

Schtifer,

1g96,

p.

160;

Scharfl

L929,pp.39-40,

o.

61,

rgure

13

(9)

Turah

south,

no

romb number

[Nagada

IIB?].

Unidenrihed

srone

not

located),

Junker,

1912,

Abb.86,

rafel L.

b

(l0)Provenance

not

recorded

[date

unknown].

Limestone

(London

BM

EA.3Z\34),

Spencer,

980,

o.

560,

plare

59

(11)Provenance

ot

recorded

?)

ldate

unlcrown].

Green

serpentine

London

UC?),

Perrie,

1914,

.19,

ptate

V,

no.

62d

APPENDX

F.

Catalogue

of bull's head

aurulets

with a nown provenance

Tombs

(1)

Abadiya

tomb

B

378 B

ISD

52

=

Nagada

IC-D?].

Serpentine

Oxford

E.E.34),

Payne,

993,

p.210,

no. t7t3,figure72

(2)

Abusir

el-Meleq,

tomb

60 d

7

[date

unlo:own].

Limestone

(Berlin

18663),

Scharff,1926,p.57,

no.

369

(3)

Abusir

el-Meleq,

tomb

60

k

6

[Nagada

IC-[].

Ivory

(Berlin

i9620),

Scharff, 1926,p.

57, no.

370

(4)

Abusir

el-Meleq,

tomb 4

d

2

[Nagada

IC-III].

Ca_lcite

Berlin

19266),

Scharff

1926,

p.

57,n"

311

(5) Abusir el-Meleq, tomb C [Nagada IJ/0T. Unidentified srone(Berlin

19617),

Scharff,

1926,p.

51, no.

3j

2

(6)

Abydos,

tombs

of rhe courriers,

omb

618

[Nagada

IIIC1,

Djer].

No

description

not

ocated),

Peuie,

1925,

plate

XX

(7)

Ballas,

tomb

Q

709

[date

un]crownl.

Serpenrine

not

located),

petrie,

1896,p.

45,

prate

LVIII,

Q709/5

(8)

Debod

cemerery

23,

tomb 47

fNagada

IIA-B].

Unidentihed

stone

(nor

located),

Reisner,

1910,

,

p.

158,

I,

plate

Au

B



S. Hendrich

(9)

Gerza, tomb

229

ISD

47-57

=

Nagada IIC-IID2?].

Gypsum

(not

located),

Petrie

el al., 1912,

plate

V

(l0)Helwan,

tomb

597H5

[Nagada

IIC-D].

Green diorite

(Cairo),

SaaO,

1951,

p.

36,

plates

(LI, )C.trI

(11)Hemamiya

tomb

1620

Nagada

IIC2]. Black limestone

not

located),

Brunton,

1927,

plate

XVII

(12)Hemamiya,

omb

1629

[Nagada

I]. Limestone

not

located),

Brunton

and

Caton-Tbompson,

928,

plate

)fl-IX

(13)Hemaniy4

tomb 1773

[Nagada

II-IIIA].

Limesrone

(not

located),

Brunton

and Caton-Thompson,

928,

plate

)O-IX

(14)Hu,

tomb

U 379

ISD

ó7

=

Nagada IIAl-ItrA2?]. Two

examples

stone

and ivory) paÍ of a necklace l-ondon UC.10834-8),Stanronand

Hoffrnan,

1988,

.

82,

no.

70

(15)Mannar,

omb 23ó

[Nagada

IIA2].

Amethyst

(not

located),

1948,

late

XXtr,31

(ló)Matmar,

tomb

5109

[Nagada

IC]. Malachite

(not

located),

1948,

late

XV,2

Brunton,

Brunton,

(l7)Mediq,

cemetery

79,

tomb 76

ldate

un*nown].

Serpenrine

?)

(not

located),

trh,

1912, ,

p.

136, I,

plate

31u71

(18)Mediq,

cemetery

9, tomb 117

[Nagada

IIAI-IIIA2].

Green

srone

not

located),

irth,

1912, ,

pp.

139-140,I,

plate

31u

16

(l9)Minshat

Abu

Omar. Kroeper

and Wildung, 1985,

p.

90, Abb.

308.

Several

exampleshave

been found

at.

Minshat

Abu

Omar

(no

details

have

been

publishedyet),

all in tombs

of

children.

(20)Nagada,

omb 1788

SD

34-46

=

Nagada C-IIB?].

Elephant vory,

eyes

filled in with blackpaste Oxford1895.908), etrie,1896,plateLXI, 4;

Baumgartel,

960,

late

VI, 2; Payne,1993,

p.

207,

no. 1693,

igtne

72;

Adams,

995,

.63,

no.

1.16b

(21)Nagada,

omb 1788

SD

34-46

=

Nagada

C-IIB?]. Hippoporamus

vory

(London

UC.6005),

Adams,1988,

p.

51,

1995,p.

63,

no.

1.16a;Petrie,

1920,

platelX,4

(22)Naqa

ed-Deir,

omb N

3031

[2nd

dyn. according o Reisner].

Limesrone

(Berkeley?),

eisner,

908,

p.

76,

plateT3c

(23)Shellal,

cemetery

7, tomb

317

[Nagada

IIJLZ?).

Green

steatite

(not

located),

Reisner,

910,

L

p.23,

ll,

plate

70a,7

(24)

Sialy, cemetery40,

tomb 14

[Nagada

rIA-B].

Greensrone

not

located),

Reisner,

1910,

,

p.

236, II,

plate

7

A4

2

(25)Tarkhan,

tomb 1256

[Nagada

IIA2-IIIC2].

Green

serpenrine

I-ondon

UC.15236),

Petrie,1

9

14,

p.

44,

plate

XXXVIIL 2 12d

Living Sites

(26)Hemamiy4

North

Spur

[1

ft. to 1

ft. ó

in.

=

Nagada IC-IID?]. White

limestone

(not

located),

Bn:nron and

Caton-Thompson,

1928,

p.

108,

plate

LXXI, no.

63

(27)Hierakonpolis,

Nekhen

town, 10N5W, level

3

[=

Nagada

II-IIIA2].

Diorite

(Hierakonpolis

store

oom),

Hoffrnan,

1989,

p.

327,

figure 1,2



Bovina in Eglptim Predynxtic and

Early

Dynastic iconography

309

(28)Hierakonpolis,

Nekhen

town, 10N5W,

level

3

[=

Nagada

II-IIA2].

Serpentine

Hierakonpolis

rore oom),

Hoffinan,1989,

p.

32I,

ftgre

7,

^

Temple

Sites

(29)Abydos,

Osiris temple.

Green

serpentinire

not

located),

Petrie,

1902,

p.

23,

platr.LI,4

(30)Abydos,

Osiris temple.

Green

serpenrinite

not

locared),

petrie,

1902,

p.

23,

plate

LI,

5

('probably

underMena')

(31)Abydos, Osiris temple, evel 177. Unidentifiedstone (not located),

Petrie,

1903,

.

30,

plate

XIV,

28i

('lst

dynasty')

(32)'Abydos,

Osiris temple'

(?).

Graywacke

(Luzern,

Sammlung Kofler-

TrunigerK9646

A), Miiller,

1964,p.29,

A30;

Scblógl, 978,p.27,no.

80

(33)Hierakonpolis,

Main

Deposit.

Limesrone

London

UC.15002),

euibell

and Green,

1902,

plate

)il-VIIIb;

Adams,

1974a,

p.

22,

no. 110,

plates

15,17;

Adams

7914b,pp.6,132;

tantonandHoffman,

988,

.

83,

no .

7 l

Palestinian

Sites

(34)Azor,

omb.

unpublished,

f.

Gophna, 980,

.

15,

no.13.)

(35)En Besor, stratum III. Carbonate rock, metamorphic

located),

Gophna 1980,

p.

15, rgure

5,

plares

1, 4;

Stager,

7,68;

Andelkovic,

995, igure

11,18

(36)Tell

el-Asawir,

tomb.

Unidentified

stone

(not

locared),

1995,

.

27,frgure3,3

marble (not

1992, frgure

Andelkovic.

APPENDIX

G. Female

statuettes ith

armscurved

underneath

he

breasts

(1)

Halfa

Degheim,

site

2ll,

tomb 168

[Nagada

IID2-IIIAU.

ponery

(Khartoum,

Sudan Narional

Museum

SNM

13729),

Nordstróm,

1972,

pp.

27, 127,

plates

56, 3, 197;

Welsby, 1995,

p.

105,no.

1.74;

Boruret,

1997,

pp.

4047.

(2)

Nagada,

omb 1ó11

SD

36-38

=

Nagada

A-IB?].

Baked

clay

(Oxford

1895.125),cko,1968, p.28-30,89,o.38;Payne, 993, o.39

(3)

Nagada

or Ballas

[date

unlcrown].Baked

clay

(Oxford

1895.126),

etrie,

1896,

late

VI,4;

Ucko,1968,

p.

22-23,85,

o.

30;Payne,

993, o.

38

(4)

Provenance

not recorded

[date

un]crownl. Baked

clay

(London

UC.15156),Petrie,

1896,

plate

XXXVI,

96,

t920, plate

tV,

5;

Ucko,

1968, .

l40,no.172

(5)

Provenance

not

recorded

[date

unknown].

Clay

(-ondon

UC.15153),

Petrie,

1920,

plate

V,

9; Ucko, 1968,

.

t39,no.

tl l



S.

Hendrich

(6)

Provenance

not

recorded

ldate

unlcrown]. Baked

clay

(I-ondon

UC.15160),

Petrie,

1920,

plate

V, 10, V,

6,

plate

VI;

Ucko,

1968,

p.

141,

o.

17 5

(7)

Provenance

not

recorded

[date

un]nownl. Baked

clay

(I-ondon

UC.15162),

Petrie,

1920,

iate

V,4-5,

plate

VI; Ucko, 1968,

p.

146,

no.

18 7

(8)

Provenance

not recorded

[date

unloown].

UC.15813),

cko,1968,

.

147, os.190,414

(9)

Provenance

not

recorded

[date

unknown].

UC.15814),

cko,1968,

.

148, os.

191,475

(10)Provenance

ot

recorded

dare

unlarown].

Clay

(New

York

0'r.228.71),

Ucko,1968, . 155, o.2M

APPENDD(

H.

Objects

decorated

wittr

the

head

of

Bat

(examples

with lcrown

provenance

nly)

Abydos,

tomb

O

[Djer,

Nagada

IICI]. Fragmenr

of an ivory

vase;

probably

samevase

as ollowing

(not

located),Petrie,1901,

lateVI,22

Abydos,

tomb

O

[Djer,

Nagada

IICI].

Fragment

of an ivory

vase;

probably

samevase

as

previous (Berlin

18140),

Scharff, 1929,

pp.

BZ-

83, no.

112,Abb.

58,table22

Abydos,

tomb

X

[Adjib,

Nagada

lll?} Ivory

tablet

(not

located),

Petrie,

1900,

plate

XXVII,

71

Abydos

(?)

[date

unknown].

Sraruetre

f

Bat

(?)

in the

sanctuary

of the

goddessRepit Q-uzern,Kofler-TrunigerK 9643 R), Mtiller, 1964,p. 29,

431;

Schlógl,1978,.27,

no.

81

Abu

Roash,

omb

389

[Nagada

IICI]. Fragment

of ivory

box

(Cairo?),

Klasens,

958, p.53,

igure

20,y,platexxV,2

Gerza,

tomb

59

ISD

4]-77

=

Nagada

IIC-ilCl?1.

'Gerza

palene'

(Cairo),

Peuie

et aI.,1912,

plate

VI,

7

Hierakonpolis,

Temple

area

[date

unlnown]. Fragments

of stone vase

(Oxford

8.132,

E.3&5

and London

UC.1ó245),

Quibell

and

petrie,

1900,

plate

XVtrI,21;

Quibell

and

Green, 1902,ptateLtX,4-7;

Burgess

and Arkell,

1958;

Adams,

1974u

p.

50,

no.27%31

Ilierakonpolis,

Main

Deposit.

Namrer

palette

CaAo,

CG 14i16)

Nagada,

tomb 218

[date

unlarown].

'Pot

mark'

(not

located), Petrie,

1896,plate

LIII,

116

(l0)Nagada

tomb 584

[Nagada

IIAI].

'Pot

mark'

(nor

located),

petrie,

1896,plateLlI,77a

(11)Naqa

ed-Deir,

tomb N

1532

Nagada

IiD].

Gold

pendant

of a bull

with

the Bat

amulet

at its neck

(Cairo

CG

zC/'Al),

Reisner,1908,

plate

6, 9

Baked

clay

fl-ondon

Baked

clay

(-ondon

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(e)



Bovines in Egyptian

Predynastic

and

Earty

Dynastic

iconography

APPENDD(

L BiÍd

amulers,Petrie,

1920,

pl.

)OtV,

102 N-p

(examples

with

known

provenance

only)

(1)

el-Mahasna,

omb H 25

fNagada

IA]. Ivory,

3

examples

not

located),

Ayrton

and Loat,

1911,

plate

XV, 2

(2)

el-Mamariya,

tomb

unlmown

[date

unlarown].

Greywacke,2

examples

(Brooklyn

07.447.615-616),

eedler,

1984,

pp.

98-99

(3)

Matmar,

cem.

3000

[date

unlnown].

Greywacke

(Oxford

1932.894),

Brunton,

1948,plate

XVI, 23;

Payne,

993,

.24A,

no.

1985,

igure

82

(4)

Maunar,

tomb

3123

[Nagada

IIB]. Ivory,

2

examples

(Cairo

JdE

57433A-B),

Brunron,

1948, late

X\II,2t-22, plate

XVII,

70-71

(5) Nagada tomb 146 [date unlarown]. Greywacke (-ondon UC.5667),

Petrie,

1920,

plates

)CtV,

)(LV,

37, 1914,

plate

XL[

25le

Baumgartel,

970, .

VI

(6)

Nagada

tomb

1590

Nagada

A].

Greywacke

London

UC.4121),

petrie,

1920,plates

OIV,

)0V,38

(7)

Nagada

tomb 1781

ISD

47

=

Nagada

IC?].

Greywacke,

3

examples

(London

UC.5664-5666),

petrie,

1896,

plate

LXIV,

90,

19t4,

plate

)OII,

251d,

L920,ptate

CLV,

34-36;Baumgartel,

1970,

LVII

(8)

Nagada

(?)

[date

unlarown].

Greywacke

(Cairo

CG 14156),

euibell,

19O5, .2'2A

(9)

Naqa

ed-Deir

7453

[Nagada

IC?].

Greywacke

Berkeley),

Lythgoe

and

Dunham,

1965,

p.

277,

frgtre 123,

APPENDD( J. Pelta palenes, ypesaft.erPetrie,1920, l. )O-IV (exampleswith

known provenance

only)

(1)

Abadiya

tomb

B

51

ISD

40?

=

Nagada

IIA-trC?].

Type

100

D, 2

examples

not

located),

Petrie

and Mace,

1901,

plate

VI, II,

35-36

(2)

Abadiya"

tomb

B 109

ISD

44?

=

Nagada

IIA-IIC?].

Type 100,

2

examples

not

located),

Petrie

and

Mace,

1901,

plate

VI,

XII,

37-39

(3)

Abusir

el-Meleq,

romb

4

d

2

[Nagada

IIC-tr .

Type

(not

located),

Scharff,

1926,p.51,

afel51,

315

(4)

Akhmim

[date

unkrown].Type

100

(Strasbourg?),

orrer,

1901,

p.

33

(5)

el-Amra

[date

unkrown].

Type

100

D, 2

examples

(St.

Germain-en-

I-aye,

77 705p1),

Cleyet-Merle

and Vallet,

1982,

p.

116

(6)

ArmanE

cem. 1400

[date

unlcrown].

Type 100

D

(Oxford,

eueens

College Loan

I2?Á),

Mond

and Myers,

1937

plate

X:t

,

2;

payne,

1993,

p.239,no. 1981, igure82

(7)

Badari,

tomb 1967

[date

un_krown].

ype

101

G

(not

located),

Brunron

and

Caton-Thompson,

1928,

plate

LlI,

Zl

(8)

Badari,

tomb

3844

[Nagada

IA].

Type

100 D,

2 examples

not

located),

Brunton

and Caton-Thompson,

928,

plate

XXXIV,

4,Ln,

Z0

(9)

Badari,

Town

group

3L67

[date

unlcrown].

Type

101

S

(not

located),

Brunton

and

Caton-Thompson,

1928, plate

)OVIL

5

(10)Balas

lZawuda

[date

un]nownl. Type

101 F

(St.

Gernain-en-Laye,

77.749w),

Cleyet-Merle

and Vallet,

1982,p.

148

311



312

S,

Hendrick

(11)Balas

lZawuda

[date

untnown].Type

100

D

(Sr.

Germain-en-Laye,

11.109w),

Cleyet-Merle

ndValtet,

1982,

p.

148

(iZ)Gebel

et-Ta-rif

date

un],rnownl.

Type 101

(Cairo

CG 14148),

euibell,

1905,

.223

(13)Gebel

et-Tarif

date

unlorown].Type

00 D

(Cairo

CG

14150),

euibelt,

t905,

p.223

(14)Gebel

et-TaÍif

[date

untmown].

Type

100

(Cairo

CG 14151),

Quibel,

1905,

.223

(15)Khozam

[date

unlcrown].Type

100 D

(not

locared),

Chanre, 1901,

p.

231,

figre

4

(16)Khozarn

[date

unkrown].Type

100 D

(nor

locared),

Chantre,190l.,

p.

231, igure5

(17)Mahasna

date

unlcrown].

Type

100D

(Cairo

CG t4I49),

Quibelt,

1905,

p .223

(18)Matnrar,

tomb 2644

[Nagada

IIA].

Type 100 D, 2

examples

(not

located),

Bnmron,

1948,

plate

XV,

36

(19)Mamrar,

tamb

Tl20

[Nagada

IA]. Type 100

with

double bird

arruler

(London

BM

EA.63415),

runton,1948,

late

Xl/,3'l

(20)Matmar,

tomb

3123

[Nagada

iB]. Type

101 H, 2 examples

Cairo

JdE

57431A-B),

Brunton,

1948,

late

XV,

35

(21)Mustagedda,

cem.

1800

[date

unloown].

Type 100 D

(not

locared),

Brunton,

1937,

plate)CIIL

1

1

(Z2)Naeada

tomb

8

(?)

[date

unlcrown].

Type 101 T

Q-ondon

UC.4414),

Petrie,

1920,

plate

)OIV,

(not

n BaumgaÍtel,1970)

(23)Nagada,

omb

10

(?)

[Nagada

ID2]. Type 101

R

(I-ondon

UC.4518),

Petrie,1920,plate)(-W (not n Baumgartel,1970)

(24)Nagada,

omb

185

Nagada

IC]. Type 101

S

(not

locared),

petrie,

1920,

plare

XLry

(not

n

Baumgartel,

1970)

(25)Nagada

tomb

325

[date

unlnown]. Type

101 h

(Manchester

2378),

Baumgartel,

1970,

p.

XIV

(26)Nagada

tomb

325

[date

unlorown].Type

101 h

(Berlin

12874),

Scharfl

1929,

pp.

9l-92, no.

127,

tzfet 24

(27)Nagada,

tomb 461

[date

unlcrown].

Type

101 f

(London

UC.54ó9A),

Baumgartel,

1970,

p.

XIX

(28)Nagada,

omb 1419

[Nagada

IB].

Type 101 H

(Oxford

1895.864),

Petrie,

1896, lare

OIX,64;

payne,

1993,p.239,no.l9B3

(29)Nagada,

omb

1419

[Nagada

IB].

Type 101

H

(Oxford

1895.364),

Petrie,

1896:

plate

XLIX,64;

Payne

993,p.239,n"

1983

(30)Nagada,

tomb 1419

[Nagada

IIB].

Type 101

H

(London

UC.5368),

Petrie,1896,plate)OIX, &,1920, plateXLIV, )(LV, 21

(3l)Nagada,

tomb

1865

[Nagada

IIB].

Type 101

c

(London

UC.4345),

Petrie,

1914,

plate

XLI

251f,1920,

plate

)OIV

(32)Nagada

omb

1870

date

un]crownl.Type

101

(Bonn,

Àgyptologisches

Seminar

329),

Regnea

1996,

p.

66

(not

in Baumgartel,

1970)

(33)Nagada

tomb

unkrown

[date

unlnown].

Type 101 L

(not

located),

Petrie,

1896,

plate

)OIX,

62

(34)Nagada.

tomb

unlsrown

[date

unlcrown]. Type

101 G

(not

located),

Petrie,

1896,

plare

0IX,

63



Bovines n Eglptian Predynastic and Early Dynastic iconogmphy 313

(35)Nagada.

tomb

unlmown

ldate

unloown]. Type

101 H

(not

located),

Petrie, 1896,plate

)CIX,

66

(36)Nagada.

omb unlflown

[date

unknown]. Type 101

(not

located),

Petrie,

1896,

plate

)(LIX,

67

(37)Nagada,

omb

unlÍrown

[date

unkrown]. Type

101

(not

locared),

Petrie,

1896,

plate

OIX,

68

(38)Naqa

ed-Deir

7008

[Nagada

IA?]. Type

101,

2

exarnples

Berkeley?),

Lythgoe

and Dunham, 1965,

p.

5,

hgure

1,

o

(39)Naqa

ed-Deir

7509

[Nagada

IB?].

Type 101,2

examples

Berketey?),

Lythgoe

and Dunham, 19ó5,

p.

323,

hgure

143,k

(40)Qaw

el-Kebir,

tomtr 136

[Nagada

IA].

Tlpe 101

G,

2

examples

(not

located),BruntonandCaton-Thompson, 928,plateLIl, 22-23

APPENDD(

K. Rhomboidal

paleues

of type 91 T-U

(petrie,

1920,

plare

)il-IV,

1921,plate

LVIII;

examples

with

known provenance

nly)

(1)

Abadiya,

tomb B 101

[Nagada

rA].

Type

91

(nor

located) Peuie

and

Mace, 1901,

plate

V

(2)

Abadiya,

omb B

102

SD

33-41=

Nagada

C-IIB?].

Type

91

(Cairo

JdE

34220),Petrie

and

Mace,

1901,

plate

V. Ir is not

clear f this

palette

s an

example dentical

to the

previous

or if

there

s

an

error

in

the

publication

and that in reality

there s

only one

palette.

t

should

be

noted

that tiis

palette

is firrthemrore

decorated n

carved relief

with the

symbol

of

the

two

horns

(3) el-Amra tomb a 97 ídateunknownl. Type 91 U (Cambridge,University

Museum),

Baumgartel,

1960,

plate

VI,

1

(4)

el-Amra tomb

a

10i

[date

unlcrown]. Type

91

U

(not

located),

Petrie,

1921,

plare

LVIII

(5)

Badari,

tomb

3829

ISD

4148

=

Nagada

IA-IIC?].

Type

91

T

(nor

located),

Brunton

and Caton-Thompson,

928,

plares

XXXII,

XXXN,

J

(6)

Dakka

cemetery

99, tomb

3

[Nagada

IA-B?].

Type 91

(not

located),

Firth,

1915,

p.

47,

frgwe 17

(7)

Dehmit,

tomb 22

[Nagada

IC-D?].

Type

91

(not

ocared),Reisner,

1910,

Í,p.248,

tr,

plate

63,b, 15

(8)

Mahasna, omb

unlnown

ISD

41-48

=

Nagada

IA-IIC?]. Type

91

T

(not

located),Petne, 1921,

plate

LVtrI

(9)

el-Mamariya,

tomb 35

[date

unknown].

Type

91

07.447.6m), Needler,1984,pp. 99,320-321

(l0)Mustagedd4

tomb

1825

[Nagada

IIA]. Type

91 U

E4.63066),

Brunton, 1937,

plate

III,

3

T

(Brooklyn

(I-ondon

BM

(11)Mustagedda

omb 1832

date

unl,mown].

Type

91

(not

located),Brunton,

1937,

plate

CIII,4

(l2)Nagada,

tomb

1440

[SD

41-51

=

Nagada IA-IIC?].

Type

91 U.

(not

located),

Petne, 1921,

plate

LVII

(not

mentioned

n Baumgartel,

1970)

(13)Nagada

omb 1497

Nagada

C]. Type

91

U

(Oxford

1895.854), etrie,

7921,

plate

LVI[; Payne,

1993,

p.

227,

no. 1867



314

S. lendrich

(14)Nagada,

tomb

1904

[date

un]urownl. Type 91 T

(Manchester

2375).

Baumgartel,

970,

p.

LXI

(15)Nagada

[date

unknown].

Type

91

plate

XLW

(16)Nagada

[date

unknown].

Type

91

plate

XLIV

U

(London

UC.6026),

Petrie,

1920,

T

(I-ondon

UC.6025),

Petrie,

1920.

APPENDIX

L.

Objects

with

horns

n

one unbrokencurye

(1)

Abadiya,

tomb

B 414

[d^te,

unlcrown]. Greywacke

amulet

(not

located),

Petrie

and

Mace,

1901,

plate

XII, 41.

In this romb,

an amulet

with

horns

with curvedendshasalsobeen ound

(2)

Abusir

el-Meleq,

tomb

60 d 7

[date

unknown].

Bone

spoon

(Berlin

18664),

Scharff,

7926,p.53,

no.

339

(3)

Ballas,

tomb

Q

23

fdate

un]nownl. Bone

pendanr (Oxford

1895.894),

Petrie,

1896, late

LVII

Q23;

payne,

1993,p.208,no.

1699,

igxeT2

(4)

Ballas,

tomb

Q

132

[Nagada

e. Ivory

(?)

comb

(not

located),

petrie,

1896,

plate

LXIII,

57

(5)

Ballas,

tomb

Q

709

[date

unlcrown].

Two

stone amulets

(not

located),

Petrie,

1896, lateLVIIL

ej09t7,9

(6)

Hu,

tomb

U

119

ISD

37

=

Nagada C?]. Ivory

(?)

amulet

(not

located),

Petrie

andMace,

1901,

plateK,

z

(7)

Minshat

Abu

Omar,

omb

882

[Nagada

lDz?].

Bone

amulet,

2 examples

(Cairo),

Kroeper

and

Wildung, 2000,p.

721,

zfel36,

6

(8)

Mustagedda

tomb

320

[Nagada

C-IIA?].

Bone

comb

(Berlin

22982),

Brunton,1931,plareK-II,47; Scharfi 1931,p.263,no. 854

(9)

Nagada,

omb

3

[Nagada

ID2].

Copper

(?)

needle

not

located),

petrie,

1896,piate

LXr/,22

(1O)Nagada,

omb

10

[Nagada

rD2]. Bone

amulet

(Oxford

1895.919),

Petrie,

1896,

plate

LXIV,

80;

payne,

1993,

p.

206,

no.

16g3,

figure

72

(l1)Nagada,

tomb

149

[date

unknown].

Ivory

amulet

(Oxford

1895.922),

Petrie,

189ó, late

LXIf

37;payne, 993,

p.

Z4t, no.1997,

igure

g3

(12)Nagada,

omb 259

ISD

51

=

Nagada

IC-IID?].

Ivory

(?)

comb

(London

UC.4400

or

4401),

Petrie,

1896,

plate

LXIV,

70

(l3)Nagada,

tomb

632

[Nagada

IC]. Noble

serpenrine

pendant

(London

UC.5100),

Perie,

1920,

late

XXIII,6

(14)Nagada,

omb 1417

SD

35-41

=

Nagada

C-IIB?].

Bone

comb

(Berlin

12854),

Perrie,

1896,

plate

LXI[,

57;

Scharff, t929,

pp.

14G141,

no.

2'to

(15)Nagada tomb 1517 [dare untilown]. Bone (?) pendant (Oxford

1895.918),

etrie,1896,plate

LXIV,

79;

payne,

1993,p.207,

no. 1690,

figure

72

(ló)Nagada,

tomb 1774.

[Nagada

C] Bone

(?)

hairpin

(Oxford

1995.952),

Petrie,

1896,

plateLXIV,

82;

payne,

1993,p.229,no.1ggg,

igure

77

(l7)Nagada

tomb

1852.

[Nagada

IC]

Bone

comb

(Oxford

1895.938),

Petrie,

1896,

plate

LXII

57A; Payne,

993,

p.

231,no.190g,

igure78

(l8)Provenance

not recorded

date

unlarown].

patertÊ

ype 104

D.

(London

UC.162't2),

petrie,

1920,plare

XLIV,

)OVI, 1g



Bovines n Egyptian Predynastic and Early Dynmtic iconography 31 5

(19)Provenance

otrecorded

the

nscription'a26'

which

can

be seenon the

published

photograph

could refer

to el-Arrrra,

romb

a

26)

fdate

unlnownl. Palette

ype 104

G

(not

located),Petrie,

1920,

plates

XLIV,

)0vI ,19

(2O)Provenance

ot recorded

date

unlrnown]. Palette

ype 104

L

(-ondon

UC.16273),Petrie,1920,

plates

C-IV, )g.VI,

20

(2l)Provenance

not recorded

[date

un]rrownl.

Ivory

(?)

imitation

dagger

Q-ondon

UC.16274),Petrie,1920,

plare

CVI, 21

(22)Provenance

ot recorded

date

unlcrown].

Unidentihed

bone and

metat

object

I-ondon

UC.16281),

etrie,1920,

late

VI,

37

(23)Provenance

not recorded

[date

unkrown].

Unidentif,red

lint

object

(London

UC.15173), erie,

1920,

plat€

Vtr, 11

(24)Provenancenot recorded

[date

unlrrown].

Greywacke

hairpin

(?)

(Brussels

.2187),

Unpublished

@gure

16.11)

(25)Provenance

ot

recorded

date

unl,rrown].

Greywacke

palette (Brussels

E.7

129),

Unpublished

(Figure

16.12)

(26)Provenance

not recorded

[date

unlcrown]. Two

palettes

ype 1M L

(Berlin

14294),

Scharfl 1929,p.91,no.

126

APPENDIX

M.

Objects with incurved

homs

(examples

with lnown provenance

only)

(1)

Abadiya,

tomb B

51

ISD

40?

=

Nagada IA-trC?].

Ivory

(?)

comb

(not

located),

Petrie

and Mace,

1901,

plate

VI

(2)

Abadiya, tomb B 102 ISD 3341

=

Nagada IC-IIB?]. Bone comb(Oxford

E.1011),Petrie

and Mace,

1901,

plate

V,

LX,22: Payne

1993,

p.232,

no.

1918, igure

8

(3)

Abadiya,

tomb B 106

ldate

unlcrown].

Greywacke

amuler

type 103, 2

examples

not

located),

Petrieand Mace,

1901,

plate

XII,

39-40

(4)

Abadiya,

tomb B

109

ISD

44?

=

Nagada

IA-IIC?].

Greywacke

amuler

fype 4 m, 2

examples

not

located),

Petrie

and Mace,1901,plate

VI, Xl

2_3

(5)

Abadiya,

tomb B 414

ÍdatÊ

unlcrownl.

Greywacke

amuler ype

103

(not

located),

Petrie

and Mace, 1901,

plate

XII, 42

(6)

el-Amra

tomb A 88

[SD

36-39

=

Nagada

B-IC?].

Greywacke

amuler

type 103,2

examples

not

located),

Mclver

and Mace,

1902,

p.

16,

plate

VII .2

(7)

el-Amra

[date

unlcrown]. Amulet

fype 103,2

examples

St.

Germain-en-

Laye 11 705p3-p4),Cleyet-Merleand Vallet" 1982,p. 176

(8)

Badari,

cem. 1600

[date

unlcrown].

Limesrone

amuler

(not

located),

Brunton

and

Caton-Thompson, 928,plate

LIIL

50

(9)

Badari,

omb

3759

Nagada

IC].

Ivory

amrrler, examples

not

located),

Brunton

and Caton-Thompson,

928,plate

XXXN, 4,LfrI,49

(10)Badari,

tomb 3844

[Nagada

IA]. Bone

comb

(not

located),

Brunron

and

Caton-Thompson,

928,

plate

XXXfV,

,LLII,3l

(11)Ballas

Zawuda

[date

un]nownl.

Greywackeamulet

type 103

@russels

E.6188b),

Unpublished

Figure

16.13 )



316 S. Hendrick

(12)Ballas

zawuda

[date

un]crownl.

Greywacke mulet

ype

103

@russels

E.6i88c),

Unpublished

Figure

16.14

)

(13)Hu,

tomb

U lM

ISD

43

=

Nagada

IA-IIC?].

Ivory

(?)

amuler

not

located),

Petrie

nd

Mace,1901,

late

X, 11

(14)Hu,

tomb

U 161

[d^tÊ

unlcrown].

Ivory

(?)

comb

(not

located),

petrie

and

Mace,

1901,

late

X,

3

(15)Hu,

tomb

U 161

ÍdatÊ

unlorownl.

Ivory

(?)

needle

(not

locared),

pet.ie

and

Mace,

1901,

late

X, 10

(16)Hu,

tomb

U 284

ISD

43

=

Nagada

IA-IIC?].

Ivory

(?)

comb (not

located),

Petrie

and

Mace, 190i, plate

X,

3

(17)el-Mahasna,

romb

H 49

[Nagada

IC]. Ivory

(?)

comb

(nor

locared).

Ayrton

and

Loar, 1911, late

XVIII,

4

(18)el-Mahasna, emereryL (= Beith Allam / Atawniya), tomb 229

tSD

36_

43

=

Nagada

B-IIC?1.

Bone

amuler

not

ocated),

Garsung,

1903,

p.

5,

plate

V

(19)el-Mamariya

[date

unknown].

Greywacke

amulet

(Brooklyn

01 447.614),

eedler,

984,

p.

98-99,no.

63

(20)Matnar,

tomb2622

NagadaIIB].

Bone

comb,2

examples

not

ocated),

Brunron,

1948, late

XVI,

3,

plate

XVII,41

(21)Matrrar,

tomb 2626

[Nagada

IB].

Bone

comb

(not

located),

Brunton,

1948,plate

XVI,

5,

plate

XVII,

35

(22)Maturar,

tomb

2640

[Nagada

IA].

Bone

needle

not

located),

Brunton,

1948,

plate

XYI,2, plate

XVII,

28

(23)Maturar,

tomb 2646

[Nagada

IA].

Ivory

amulet

(not

located),

Brunton,

1948,plate

XVI,

12,

plate

XVII,

54

(24)Mafinar,

tomb

3092

[date

unrmown].

Bone

needle

(not

located),

Brunton,1948,plateXVI, 4

(25)Matrrar,

omb

3113

Nagada

C-IIB].

Bone

comb

not

ocated),

Íunron,

1948,

plate

XVI,4

(26)Mannar,

tomb

3133

[date

unlnown].

Greywacke

arrulet

type

T03, 2

examples (Oxford

7932.896-897),

runton,

194g,

plate

XVt,

lO_tt;

Payne,

993, .240,

no.

1988-1989.

isuÍe

g2

(27)Mustagedda,

cem.

1800

[date

un]nównl.

Bone

comb

(not

located),

Brunton,

1937,

plate

0II,

51

(28)Mustagedda

tomb

1867

[date

unlnown].

Bone

comb

(not

located),

Brunron,

7937, plate

0II,

54

(29)Mustagedd4

omb

1174i

ISD

37?

=

Nagada

C-IIC?].

Greywacke

- _

amulet

ype

103

Q

(not

ocated),

runron,

1937,plate){J-III,14

(30)Nagada,

romb 149

[date

unktown].

Hippopotamus

vory

(?)

amulet,

2

examples

Oxford

1895920-9Zt),

petrie,

1896,

plate

LXII, 3g;

payne,

1993,p. 240,no.1986- 987,rgure82

(3l)Nagada,

tomb

293

ISD

61-72

=

Nagada

trD2-tItA2?].

Ivory comb

(London

UC.4523),

Petrie,

1896,

plare

LXII

56; Baumgartel,197},

p.

XIII

(32)Nagada,

tomb

884

[date

un]arownl.

Greywacke

amuler

type 103

N

(London

UC.4738),

BaumgaÍel,

7970,p.

XXXII

(33)Nagada

tomb

1251

ISD

40

=

Nagada

A-UC].

Greywacke

amulet

rype

103,

2

examples

Oxford

1895.868-869),

etrie,

1g96,

plate

LXII,

42;

Payne,

1993,p.

240,

no.

1990-1991,

rgure

82



Bovines n Egyptian Predynastic and Early Dynastic iconography

(34)Nagada,

omb 1348

[Nagada

IB].

Greywackeamuler

rype 103 F

(nor

located),

Petrie,

1896,

plare

LXII, 40,1920, plare

XLIV, )(LV,

41

(35)Nagada,

omb

1468

[Nagada

C].

Greywacke

amr:let

rype 103 DlH,

z

examples

@erlin

12853,

12852),

Scharff,

1929,

p.90,

no.

123-124,

afel

24

(36)Nagada,

omb

1480

[Nagada

C]. Ivory

(?)

comb

(not

located),

petrie,

1896,

plate

LXI[,

58

(not

n BaumgaÍel,

1970)

(37)Nagada,

omb

1497

Nagada

C]. Ivory

(?)

comb

(not

located),

petrie,

1896,

plate

LXIII,

56

(not

n

BaumgaÍel,

1970)

(38)

Nagada,

omb 1503

Nagada

C]. Ivory

comb

(London

UC.4l80),

petrie,

1896,

plate

LXIII,

56, 1920,

plate

XXIX, 12:

Baumgartel,

1970, p.

)(LVII

(39)Nagadatomb 1503 [Nagada C]. Ivory (?) comb (London UC.4178),

Petrie,

1896,

plate

LXIV,

86, 1920,

plare

XXIX,

7;

Barungarrel,

1970,p.

)(LVT

(40)Nagada,

omb 158ó

Nagada

B]. Bone

comb

Oxford

1895.937),

etrie,

1896,

late

XI[,

58;Payne,1993,

.232,

no.

1917,

igure

78

(41)Nagada

tomb 1621

(?)

[Nagada

A].

Greywacke

amulet type

103 J

(London

UC.4495), Petrie,

1920,

ptate

)O.fV,

)(LV,

2

(not

in

Baumgartel,

970)

(42)Nagada,

tomb 1646

[Nagada

C].

Greywacke,

amulet

rype 103 T, 2

examples

London

UC.4725-4126),

Petrie,

1896,

plate

LXIV,

89,

petrie,

1920,

plate

)0tV, )0V,

3

(43)Nagada,

omb 1675

[Nagada

C].

Greywacke

amulet

type 103

(Oxford

1895.867),

etrie,

1896,plate

LXII

43;

payne,

1993,

p.

240,

no. 1992,

figure

82

(44)Nagada, omb 1678 ISD 31-56 = Nagada A-IID?]. Bone hairpin

(Oxford

1895.958),

etrie,1896,

plate

LXIV,

74; Payne, 993,

p.229,

no.

1885, gureTT

(45)Nagada,

tomb 1757

[date

unloown].

Greywacke

amulet

type I03, Z

examples

(London

UC.5451-5452),

petrie,

1896,

ptate

LXII, 42;

Baungarrel,

1970,

p.

LVI

(46)Nagada

tomb

1871

[Nagada

IIA].

Greywacke

amr:ler

rype 103

J,

2

examples

London

UC.4495-M96),

Baumgartel,

1970,

p.

LX

(47)Nagada,

tomb 1871

[Nagada

IIA].

Greywacke

amulet

type 103

J

(Brussels

8.1231), Hendrickx,

1986,

p.

40.

figure

14 d

(48)Nagada,

tomb B 72

ldate

unknownl.

Greywacke

amuler

tlpe 103

(London

UC.4739), BaumgaÍrel,

1970,

p.

LXIV

(49)Nagada,

tomb T 24

ISD

424]

=

Nagada

IIB-IIC?1.

Bone

amulet

(Oxford

1895.917),

errie,1896,

plare

LIX, 9;

payne,

1,993,

p.23g,

no.

1963, igure81

(50)Naqa

ed-Deir 7150

[Nagada

IC?].

ivory

comb

(Berkeley?),

Lythgoe

and

Dunham,

1965,

p.

87, hgure

35,

g

(51)Naqa

ed-Deir

7634

[Nagada

IC?].

Greywacke

amulets

type

103,

2

examples

@erkeley?),

Lythgoe

and Dunham,

1965,

p.

417, hgure

188,

b

(52)Qaw

el-Kebir,

tomb 136

[Nagada

IIA].

Ivory hairpin

(not

located),

Brunton

and

Caton-Thompson,

928,

plate

LIII,24

(53)Saghel

el-Baghliya

[date

unknown].

Ivory

comb

(Cairo

CG 14478),

de

Morgan,

1896,

p.

148,

igure

343;

Quibell,

7905,

p.

272



31 8

ABBREVIATIO}IS

Berkeley

Berlin

Brooklyn

Brussels

Boston

Cairo

London

BM

London

UC

Manchester

Miinchen

New

York

Oxford

St.

Germain-en-Laye

Strasbourg

S. Hendrich

Phoebe

Apperson Hearst Museum

of

Anthropology

and Archaeology

Agyptisches

useum

Brooklyn

Museum

Royal

Museums or Art

and

History

Museum

of Fine Arts

Egyptian

Museum

British

Museum

Petrie

Museum

of

Egyptian

Archaeology,

University

College

ondon

ManchesterMuseum

S

aatliche

Sammtung

Àgyptischer

Kunst

Metropolitan

Museum

Ashmolean

Museum

Musée

des Antiquités

nationales

Institut

d' Egyptologie

Documents

Hendrickx 2002 Libre