|
The NCAM Mission at Jebel Barkal
Timothy Kendall
A. Site Description and
Historical Overview.
Jebel Barkal (18º32’N,
31º49’E) is a small sandstone table-mountain
on the western edge of Karima, about 350 km N of Khartoum
and 22 km downstream from the new Merowe Dam at the fourth
cataract (fig. 1). Situated about 1 1/2 km from the right
bank of the Nile, it rises abruptly from a desert plain
to a height of 104 m and confronts the river with a sheer
cliff 80 to 95 m high and approximately 200 m long. The
mountain’s unusual appearance – its isolation,
sharp profile, and its 75 m high pinnacle – in ancient
times seems to have made it the subject of intense theological
speculation. Probably as early as Year 2 of Thutmose I (ca.
1504-1492 BC), the Egyptians, during their conquest of Kush,
identified Jebel Barkal as the residence of a southern form
of their state god Amun of Karnak. They called it variously
“Pure Mountain” and “Thrones of the Two
Lands,” and gave its sanctuary the same name as Karnak:
Ipet-Sut. The mountain came to mark the official southern
border of the Egyptian empire, and its Amun sanctuary thus
became the most distant from Thebes, 1150 km downstream.
At least as early as the reign of Amenhotep II (ca. 1427-1401
BC), the surrounding town was called Napata (map). For about
four centuries (ca. 1500-1100 BC), the Egyptians occupied
Napata and operated the Barkal sanctuary as an outpost and
Nubian counterpart of Karnak.
Traditionally in Egypt, Creation
was thought to have taken place - and the gods given existence
- by the ancient sun god Re-Atum, who appeared on a mound
at Heliopolis (near Memphis). A major feature of this site
was a stone pillar, called the benben. By the early New
Kingdom, Re-Atum had been conceptually merged with Amun,
so that Amun’s great shrine at Karnak came to be called
“Southern Heliopolis.” Almost simultaneously,
Jebel Barkal had been discovered and proclaimed a southern
Karnak – thus a Nubian manifestation of the Mound
of Heliopolis and birthplace of the gods. The pinnacle on
its cliff suggested the sacred stone of Heliopolis and gave
Jebel Barkal another name: “House of the benben.”
Since the Egyptians equated Creation with a mound as well
as with the life-giving waters of the Nile, since Jebel
Barkal gave tangible form to the mythical Mound, and since
the inundation came from the distant south, it is little
wonder that this Nubian mountain should have come to be
seen as the original home of the Creator god, Amun(-Re-Atum),
who at the beginning of time brought life to the land and
renewed it annually with the inundation.
In Dynasty 20, as the Egyptian central
government weakened and as Lower Egypt was threatened by
invasions of Libyans and Sea Peoples, the Egyptians gradually
withdrew from Kush, leaving Napata and Jebel Barkal politically
adrift and militarily unsecured. During the ensuing two
to three centuries, the Barkal sanctuary and its cult, cut
off from Egypt, apparently ceased to be maintained. But
during the early eighth century BC a family of powerful
local chiefs emerged, whose tombs (and presumed capital)
lay at nearby el-Kurru (13 km downstream from Jebel Barkal).
The earliest members of this dynasty, judging by their sequence
of tombs (dating probably from the early or mid-ninth century
BC), were buried according to Nubian custom, proving their
Nubian origin. Rather quickly, however, their successors
adopted Egyptian funerary customs. Why and how this process
of Egyptianization occurred among them remains unclear,
but external influences – perhaps the appearance on
the scene of émigré Egyptian theologians or
missionaries - may be suspected. By the early eighth century
BC, the Kurru chiefs had clearly adopted Amun as their dynastic
god and began to restore his temples at Jebel Barkal and
the other old Egyptian centers in Upper Nubia (eg. Kawa
[Gem-pa-aten] and Kerma [Pnubs]). By mid-century, they had
also adopted Egyptian writing and language for their formal
inscriptions, had proclaimed themselves the sons of Amun
and heirs of the New Kingdom pharaohs, and had begun to
assume Egyptian royal titles.
From about 780 to 716 BC, these Kurru
chiefs extended their political control northward, first
uniting Kush (Upper and Lower Nubia), then incorporating
Upper Egypt - and reuniting Karnak with Jebel Barkal as
in the New Kingdom. After about 716, they asserted military
control of Lower Egypt, again uniting Upper and Lower Egypt
and establishing their place in history as Egypt’s
25th Dynasty. During their Egyptian hegemony (ca. 716-661
BC), the kings considered Jebel Barkal their premiere cult
center, for its oracle continued to send them advisories,
which they were bound to obey. Following their expulsion
from Egypt by the Assyrians during the 660’s BC, the
rulers, re-establishing their court in Kush, continued,
for nearly another millennium, to use Jebel Barkal as their
primary coronation center. The old sanctuary probably did
not cease as a focus of the Amun cult until the decline
of the Meroitic kingdom in the fourth century AD.
B. Religious Significance of Jebel
Barkal.
It is clear from a complex surviving
iconography and textual record that from the early 18th
Dynasty Jebel Barkal derived its pre-eminent sacred and
political importance from its peculiar shape - especially
the shape of its pinnacle, a natural wonder. Viewed from
different angles at different times of the day, this towering
rock shaft appeared to the ancient onlooker to evoke aspects
of many different gods or symbols, all of which, combined
in the one rock, suggested the equally multifaceted and
“hidden” (=amun) essence of the great god Amun
himself, who incorporated all gods and both sexes within
himself.
Publicly in art the pinnacle on the
cliff face was depicted as a great rearing uraeus. The mountain
was shown in cross-section as a kind of shrine in which
the great god stood or sat enthroned, hidden from mortal
view, sometimes accompanied by a goddess. From the southwest
(i.e. downstream = “north”) side, the “uraeus”
appeared to be crowned with a sun disk, suggesting the form
of the sun god’s uraeus, known as the “Eye of
Re.” From the northeast (i.e. upstream = “south”),
it appeared to be crowned with a white crown, suggesting
the form of the king’s uraeus (symbolic especially
of Upper Egyptian kingship) (fig. 2a-b). Since the uraeus
was the unique emblem of Egyptian kingship, worn on the
crown of both the king and the great god (“king of
the gods”), it is at once obvious why the pharaohs,
probably as early as Thutmose I, identified the mountain
as a source of Egyptian kingship, why they made Jebel Barkal
a venue for their coronations in the distant south, and
why they believed their authority to rule Upper Egypt (symbolized
by their assumption of the white crown) extended to the
upper limits of Upper Nubia.
The uraeus, apart from being a badge
of kingship, was also the serpent form of any and all of
the most powerful goddesses, considered to be at once the
protectors both of the king and the god, his divine father.
Common to all of them was the epithet “Eye of Re,”
the name of a great goddess in legend who for a time exiled
herself in Nubia. Since the pinnacle took the form of the
“Eye of Re” (as a uraeus crowned with sun disk),
Jebel Barkal could be presumed to be the place where the
great goddess – in her many identities - resided.
However, since Amun himself, in his procreative or ithyphallic
form (Atum/Kamutef), was occasionally represented as a uraeus,
it is evident from this iconography that the rock, too,
embodied the god as a phallic symbol (figs. 3, 4). The pinnacle,
as uraeus, thus combined within it both male and female
aspects, just like the god Amun himself, who is once described
as “father of fathers and mother of mothers,”
or his Heliopolitan double Re-Atum, who is called “the
great He-She” in the Pyramid Texts.
Ironically, when the kings of Kush
restored the Barkal temples and cult, they used all these
old Egyptian traditions to justify a Nubiocentric political
agenda. Since Jebel Barkal (by virtue of its “uraeus
with white crown”) had proven to the New Kingdom pharaohs
that they had the divine authority to rule all of Nubia
as an extension of Upper Egypt, it now gave the emerging
Nubian dynasty the authority to rule Upper Egypt as part
of Kush. This was, of course, the political situation at
the start of Piankhy’s campaign, as recorded in his
Victory Stele in Cairo.
A body of newly discovered textual
evidence suggests that the pinnacle had yet another identity.
It was considered a colossal, if “hidden,” image
of Osiris, god of original kingship and fertility, wearing
the white crown (fig. 5a-b). This interpretation is supported
by still another discovery: that Taharqa’s pyramid
at Nuri (9.7 km northeast of Jebel Barkal) was built where
it was because it was the point on the horizon where the
sun rose on ancient New Year’s Day (modernly July
30; anciently August 7), when viewed from the summit of
Jebel Barkal,. Since New Year’s Day was considered
the birthday or resurrection day of Osiris, and since the
subterranean tomb of the pyramid was modeled after the “Osireion”
(the false tomb of Osiris) at Abydos, it appears that Nuri
I was intended by its form and placement to allow the deceased
Taharqa to be reborn annually as the god Osiris, original
king and bearer of fertility (i.e. the Nile Flood). Taharqa’s
efforts to ensure his posthumous union with Osiris through
his tomb’s architecture may explain why he also attempted
to unite himself to the summit of the pinnacle, near the
top of which he placed a small statue (probably of himself)
and created a panel of inscription, covered with gold sheet.
Both the pyramid and the pinnacle apparently worked together
as an enormous calendar circle. If the pyramid, when viewed
from the mountain top, marked the sunrise of the supposed
birthday of Osiris, the pinnacle, when viewed from the pyramid
three and half months later, marked the sunset of the supposed
death-day of Osiris – when the Nile fell and fertility
declined. At that time, in mid-November the sun sets directly
behind the pinnacle, momentarily silhouetting the rock as
a “dying god” (fig. 6).
The text of the Napatan king Nastasen (late 4th century
BC) provides yet another iconographic insight into the meaning
of Jebel Barkal. It describes the mountain as the “ka
(divine image/essence) of the crown of Re-Horakhty.”
This makes sense when the mountain is viewed from the northeast
in the late afternoon, for it then resembles a great head
with uraeus emerging from the earth – the form of
the Kushite “cap crown” (fig. 7a-b). This suggests
that the form of the Kushite crown must have been derived
from the profile of Jebel Barkal, which was believed (locally
at least) to be the shape of the crown of the primeval sun
god. The “cap crown,” thus, was probably intended
to remind the Egyptians that their Kushite overlords possessed
the original kingship that had appeared at the beginning
of time – at Jebel Barkal.
The 25th Dynasty belief in the primacy
of its kingship, given by Amun of Jebel Barkal, was probably
a root cause of the war in 593 BC between Psamtik II (ca.
595-589 BC) of Dynasty 26 and his Kushite counterpart (Aspelta?).
The fact of the extensive destruction of the contemporary
Barkal temples and palace suggests that Jebel Barkal may
have been the main objective of Psamtik’s campaign.
One may suspect that the Egyptian king’s goal was
to put an end, once and for all, to Kushite claims on Egyptian
kingship and to eradicate the Barkal cult, which was believed
(at least by Kushite supporters) to confer it.
Despite the ruination of the Barkal
sanctuary in the early sixth century BC, it was rebuilt
and continued to be used for centuries as a place of the
Kushite royal coronations. Excavated in 1996-97, temple
B 1100, which lay directly in front of the pinnacle/”uraeus”,
was probably the temple called the “Great House”
(of the crown goddess Weret-Kekau), into which the king
went to receive his crown. The earliest level, built of
white sandstone talatat blocks, was associated with Horemheb
(ca. 1319-1307 BC). Over this lay a secondary foundation
of Dynasty 25 or Napatan blocks. Over this lay still more
loose blocks bearing reliefs and inscriptions of the Meroitic
couple Natakamani and Amantore of the first century AD.
The stratigraphy suggests that the Kushite kings for over
eight centuries knowingly re-enacted coronations here that
had been conducted on the same spot by the Egyptian pharaohs
many centuries earlier - apparently believing that the crown
they received from Amun of Jebel Barkal was the same granted
to the Egyptian kings since the beginning of time.
Publications:
T. Kendall, “Why did Taharqa Build his Tomb at Nuri?”
in W. Godlewski, A. Lajtar (eds), Between the Cataracts.
Proceedings of the 11th International Conference for Nubian
Studies, Warsaw University, August 27-September 2, 2006,
Part one: Main Papers [=PAM Supplement Series 2.1], Warsaw
University Publishers: Warsaw 2007, pp. 117-147.
T. Kendall, “Hatshepsut in Kush?” in SSEA Newsletter:
Winter 2007.
C. The Archaeology of
the Site.
Although the urban remains of Napata
have not yet been significantly probed, the rolling rubble
heaps extending from the front of the temples to the line
of palms bordering the riverbank probably indicate the area
of major ancient settlement. The town probably also continued
the remaining ½ km under the palms, down to the Nile
and probably occupied approximately the district now called
Barkal Village. Vestiges of large Napatan and Meroitic houses
have also been found northeast of the mountain, among the
modern houses of Karima.
The Barkal temples extend around
the south and southeast faces of the mountain. These prominent
ruins have been known to the outside world and periodically
probed by excavators since the 1820’s. The first scientific
excavations were undertaken by George A. Reisner, directing
the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston-Harvard University Expedition
between 1916 and 1920. No further work was undertaken there
until 1973, when an Italian expedition of the University
of Rome (La Sapienza), under the direction of F. Sergio
Donadoni, recommenced work at the site. While Reisner had
concentrated his efforts exclusively to the area of the
visible temples (from B 500 to the southwest), Donadoni
began exploring the desert plain to the east and southeast,
where building remains were less obvious. In 1977 he discovered
two previously unknown Meroitic temples (B 1300-1400) and
Meroitic house remains about 600 m southeast of the mountain
at the edge of the palm line. He next discovered the remains
of an enormous square palace (B 1500), belonging to the
joint Meroitic rulers Natakamani and Amanitore. When Donadoni
retired in 1992, he turned the Italian Mission over to his
colleague Alessandro Roccati, and in 2006, the mission received
a new institutional sponsor in the University of Torino.
Widening the excavations around B 1500, Roccati’s
team has recently discovered more palatial structures to
the north and east of B 1500 (B 1900-2200, 2400).
In 1986, the Italian Mission was
joined at Jebel Barkal by a small team from the Museum of
Fine Arts (MFA), Boston, led by Timothy Kendall, whose research
area was restricted to Reisner’s former concession
(250 x 300 m, from B 500 to B 200 [E to W], and from the
Barkal cliff to the road in front of B 500 [N to S]) (fig.
8). Under MFA sponsorship this team worked five short seasons
- 1986, 87, 89, 96, and 97. In 1999, with Kendall’s
departure from the MFA, the expedition temporarily merged,
at Dr. Roccati’s invitation, with the Italian Mission.
Then in 2000, at the behest of Hassan Hussein Idriss, Director
General of NCAM, Kendall’s mission was designated
an official NCAM Mission, with new US sponsorship from Northeastern
University, Boston. This expedition has worked seven more
seasons: 2000, 2002, 2004, 2005(x2), 2006, 2007.
The field objectives of the NCAM
(former MFA) Mission at Jebel Barkal have been: 1) To re-examine
and fully record all of the structures excavated by Reisner
and to prepare final descriptions, measurements, plans,
drawings, reconstructions and photographs of each, 2) to
survey and map the entire temple area, as well as each structure,
both topographically and block-by-block, 3) to survey the
concession area by magnetometry to try to identify structures
not visible from the surface, 4) to collaborate with the
Italian Mission to share data and to map the entire site,
including the excavation areas of both teams, 5) to seek
stratified archaeological evidence of pre-Egyptian and early
Egyptian occupation of the site to determine when the mountain
might first have acquired cultic importance, 6) to explore
the cliff face and to record the ancient evidence for construction
and human workmanship on the pinnacle, and 7) to examine
the textual and iconographic record of Jebel Barkal to better
understand the nature of its cult, its religious meaning,
and its place in history.
The most recent survey and magnetic
data suggests that the Barkal sanctuary included at least
twenty-four important structures (temples and palaces),
of which eleven have been partly or wholly excavated. Neolithic
and rare Kerma sherds have been recovered on the site, out
of context, and two pre-Egyptian graves were found by Reisner
in the embankment in front of B 600, revealing that the
site indeed had a pre-Egyptian past, but no architectural
traces of any pre-Egyptian settlement have yet been identified.
The earliest known buildings on the site date to the mid
Eighteenth Dynasty. Most of the major sacred buildings,
in fact, have Egyptian foundations, which were overbuilt
repeatedly throughout Napatan and Meroitic times.
Taharqa’s construction of his pyramid at Nuri (9.7
km northeast of Jebel Barkal and on the opposite bank) established
Nuri as the major royal cemetery throughout the Napatan
Period (ca. 664-300 BC), just as the kings and queens prior
to his reign were all buried downstream at el-Kurru. Small
pyramids on the west side of Jebel Barkal (fig. 8), however,
indicate that the western flank of the mountain was the
site of an important royal cemetery from the late Napatan
to early Meroitic periods (ca. 300 – 50 BC). Between
1995 and 1997, a team from the Fundacio Clos of Barcelona,
Spain, under the direction of Francesca Berenguer renewed
excavations in the Barkal cemetery and discovered two previously
unknown royal tombs of the later Napatan Period. These are
now thought to be cenotaphs (symbolic tombs) for the kings
and queens buried at Nuri.
Although the Barkal pyramids are
the best preserved royal funerary monuments in the Sudan,
the temples and palaces are in very poor condition owing,
first, to the soft nature of the building stone, second,
to the severity of the local environment (floods and sandstorms),
and, third, to the long-term looting of the site by people
seeking cut stone blocks for use in the lining of graves
of the modern Islamic cemetery, immediately west of the
temples.
D. Brief Guide to the Excavated Buildings
of the Jebel Barkal Sanctuary
Reisner devised the numbering system
which is now used by all archaeologists to designate the
structures in the Jebel Barkal sanctuary. In this system,
each building’s number, prefaced by “B”
(for “Barkal”), increases by one hundred (i.e.
B 100, B 200, B 300, etc.) as each building is discovered.
In this way, its interior rooms can be assigned unique numbers
ascending by ones (i.e. B 101, 102, etc. as rooms in B 100).
In exceptional cases Reisner gave small structures within
or near a major structure (such as the small kiosk in front
of B 500), a number rather like a room designation (“B
551”) but much higher than the number of recorded
rooms in the temple (i.e. B 521). The following list provides
a brief description of all the known structures (not including
the pyramids) in the concession area of the NCAM Mission
(fig. 9):
B 100: an early Meroitic palace, nearly square in plan (about
37 m x 32 m), some 100 m west of the entrance of B 500.
B 200: a partly built, partly rock-cut temple on the south
corner of the mountain, commissioned by Taharqa (690-664
BC), elevated on a natural outcrop, having three parallel
sanctuaries dedicated to Hathor, Tefnut, and a third, whose
name is lost – all goddesses identified with the “Eye
of Re.”
B 300: a partly built, partly rock-cut temple, 25 m to the
right (northeast) of B 200, commissioned by Taharqa and
dedicated to the goddess Mut, merged with forms of Hathor
and Sekhmet – all forms of the “Eye of Re.”
This temple is 30 m left (west) of B 1100, dedicated to
the royal uraeus goddesses, which seems to be part of the
same series of temples associated with the uraeus and placed
directly in front or around the base of the pinnacle.
B 350: the monument of Taharqa erected on the summit of
the pinnacle, about 30 m NE of B 300 and directly behind
and above the rear of B 1100.
B 500, the Great Temple of Amun of Napata. The earliest
part of the visible building dates to the post-Amarna period
(Tutankhamun or Horemheb, ca. 1333-1307 BC); it was next
enlarged by Seti I (ca. 1306-1290 BC) and then by Ramses
II (ca. 1290-1224 BC). This New Kingdom structure (complete
to the second court 502) was then restored by Piankhy (ca.
750-716 BC), who added court 501. It was then embellished
by Taharqa (ca. 690-664 BC), who added the bark stand in
503, and by Tanwetamani (ca. 664-657 BC), who added the
kiosk in 502. The temple was severely damaged by fire (ca.
593 BC) and restored. Its last complete renovation was undertaken
by the Meroitic royal couple Natakamani and Amanitore (first
century AD).
Kiosk 501: erected in the middle of court 501 by Natakamani
and Amanitore.
Kiosk 502: erected in the middle of hypostyle hall 502 by
Tanwetamani..
Kiosk 551: erected just outside the entrance of B 500 by
Amanishakheto (?).
B 560/570/580: Tentative names for three newly-discovered
small Meroitic chapels, located by magnetometry, that flank
and lie perpendicular to the causeway leading to the entrance
of B 500. These have not yet been excavated.
B 600: a small temple, first erected by Thutmose IV (ca.
1401-1391 BC), later partially destroyed by a cliff collapse
and restored in the late Napatan or early Meroitic period
with larger plan and columned portico; thought to be a shrine
to the living king.
B 700: a larger temple beside and to the left (west) of
B 600, which seems to have been dedicated to the Osirian
forms of Amun and to Dedwen and served (apparently) as a
shrine to deceased kings. The temple was founded by Atlanersa
(ca. 650-640 BC), completed by Senkamanisken (ca. 640-620
BC), and was restored in early Meroitic times (probably
contemporaneously with B 600), after a catastrophic rock
fall, which destroyed the rear chambers.
B 800/900: temple of Amun of Karnak at Thebes, parallel
with and west (downstream = “north”) of B 500
but smaller, founded by Alara (ca. 780-760 BC) or Kashta
(ca. 760-740 BC), restored by Piankhy (ca. 740-716 BC),
then again by Anlamani (ca. 620-600 BC) and finally by Harsiotef
(ca. 400-370 BC). The temple appears to have fallen out
of use in the early Meroitic period.
B 1100: remains of a temple directly in front of the pinnacle
(between B 300 and B 700), assumed to be the “Great
House” (i.e. sanctuary of the royal uraeus goddesses,
Nekhbet and Wadjet, and of Weret-Hekau, goddess of the crowns)
and presumed to be temple which the king entered to receive
his crown during coronations. The temple was built and restored
at least three times, In the New Kingdom, in Dynasty 25,
and in the reign of Natakamani. Subsequently it was destroyed
in a rock fall.
B 1150: a temple of stone and red bricks, now destroyed,
that seems to have been built in front of B 1100. Test excavations
in 2002 failed to find a single stone in situ, so at present
the temple remains hypothetical.
B 1200: a Napatan Palace, probably built over an Egyptian
original, that has at least five, possibly six, superimposed
levels: 1) Ramses II, 2) Dynasty 25, 3) Anlamani and Aspelta
[destroyed by fire], 4) later Napatan rebuilding (ca. 500
BC), 5) Harsiotef, and 6) Amanislo. In early Meroitic times
the site of B 1200 ceased to be used and a new palace (B
100) was built in front of it.
E. Activities and Staff of the NCAM
(ex-MFA) Mission, by season.
Season
1: March 18 - April 3, 1986: T. Kendall and Cynthia
Shartzer, with Babiker Mohamed El-Amin (for the Sudan Antiquities
Service [now NCAM]) a) exposed and recorded the surviving
fragments of the Piankhy reliefs in B 500 (courts 501 and
502), b) photographed all preserved relief fragments of
B 800/900 visible on ground, c) examined and mapped the
cliff edge on top of Jebel Barkal, directly opposite the
pinnacle peak, in order to record the line of large chiseled
holes and traces of stone-cutting, which suggested the means
by which ancient sculptors were able to cross the 11 m gorge
from cliff top and pinnacle to carve the panel of inscription
on its S side, which then could only be indistinctly observed
with binoculars from the ground.
Publications:
T. Kendall, Gebel Barkal Epigraphic Survey: 1986. Preliminary
Report on First Season’s Activity (Report to the Visiting
Committee of the Department of Egyptian Art, Museum of Fine
Arts, Boston, May 23, 1986), 36 pages.
Jean Leclant and Gisèle Clerc, "Fouilles et
travaux en Égypte et au Soudan, 1985-1986,"
Orientalia 56 (1987), pp. 368-369.
T. Kendall, “The Monument of Taharqa on Gebel Barkal”
in Steffen Wenig, ed. Meroitica 21: Feldforschungen im Sudan
und in Eritrea, Akten des Symposiums Berlin, 13-14.10.1999.
Berlin: 2004.
Season 2: Feb. 14
-March 30, 1987: T. Kendall (dir.), C. Shartzer (proj. mgr.),
Paul Duval (alpinist), Nathalie Beaux and Lynn Holden (Egyptologists),
with Babiker Mohamed El-Amin (for the Sudan Antiquities
Service [now NCAM]): a) mapped floors and made elevation
drawings of B 700, b) photographed and made drawings of
the fragmentary reliefs and columns in B 700; c) climbed
the pinnacle to observe and photograph the inscribed panel
(which proved to be part of a monument of Taharqa, restored
by Nastasen), and other construction details on the pinnacle
summit, d) discovered and recorded the many cut holes between
the cliff and pinnacle shaft, revealing that a complex framework
of wooden beams had been built between the opposing rock
walls (fig. 10), e) discovered a number of graffiti scratched
in grottoes on the western side of Jebel Barkal, f) excavated
one of the flag niches in the second pylon of B 500, exposing
a bronze disk, approximately 1 m diam, made of overlapping
bands of heavy bronze, that had been nailed to the bottom
of the flag mast. On this bronze plate, lying face down,
were two small bronze plaques in the form of bound enemy
figures, each inscribed in Meroitic, both with nails driven
through them,.
Publications:
T. Kendall, “Gebel Barkal Epigraphic Survey: 1987.
Summary of Second Season’s Activities of the Boston
Museum of Fine Arts Sudan Mission,” Nubian Letters
9 (1987), pp. 7-10.
T. Kendall, “Gebel Barkal Temples, Karima, Sudan.
1987 Season, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston,” in Newsletter
of the Institute of Art and Archaeology (Memphis, Tennessee:
Memphis State University 1988, pp. 10-18).
"Report of the President," in The Museum Year:
1986-87: The One Hundred Eleventh Annual Report of the Museum
of Fine Arts Boston, pp. 16-17.
Jean Leclant and Gisèle Clerc, "Fouilles et
travaux en Égypte et au Soudan, 1986-1987,"
Orientalia 57 (1988), pp. 382-384.
T. Kendall, “The Monument of Taharqa on Gebel Barkal”
in Steffen Wenig, ed. Merotica 21: Feldforschungen im Sudan
und in Eritrea, Akten des Symposiums Berlin, 13-14.10.1999.
Berlin: 2004.
Season
3: Jan. 8 - Feb. 24, 1989: T. Kendall (dir.), Cynthia
Shartzer (proj. mgr.), Susanne Gänsicke (conservator),
David Goodman (surveyor), Paul Duval (alpinist) and Enrico
Ferorelli (photographer), with Babiker Mohamed El-Amin (for
the Sudan Antiquities Service [now NCAM]): a) recorded and
photographed the damage done to the site by a flood the
previous August, b) excavated an area in front of B 500,
exposing the pavement of the sacred way leading into the
temple, and recording the plan and interior decoration of
kiosk B 551, c) photographed and recorded the graffiti discovered
on the western cliff in 1987, d) completed the recording
of the pinnacle monument of Taharqa, e) surveyed the mountain
and temples and made a preliminary overall map of the site,
f) measured and made elevation drawings of all the known
temples in order to try to re-create them in computer model
and to begin construction of an overall 3-D site model (fig.
11). The temple elevations were completed in Boston by Susanne
Gänsicke, and computer reconstructions were completed
there by William Riseman & Associates.
Publications:
T. Kendall, The Gebel Barkal Temples 1989-90: A Progress
Report on the Work of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Sudan
Mission. Seventh International Conference for Nubian Studies.
Geneva, Sept. 3-8, 1990, 35 pages, 18 figs (privately distributed).
T. Kendall and William Riseman, “DataCAD and Archaeology:
Reverse Engineering of 3400-Year-Old Holy Places,”
in 3-D World 4, no. 6 (Nov.-Dec., 1990), pp. 2-6.
T. Kendall, “A New Map of the Gebel Barkal Temples,”
in C. Bonnet, ed. Études nubiennes: Conférence
de Genève. Actes du VIIe Congrès international
d’études nubiennes 3-8 septembre 1990, vol.
2, Geneva: 1994, pp. 139-145.
Jean Leclant and Gisèle Clerc, "Fouilles et
travaux en Égypte et au Soudan, 1988-1989,"
Orientalia 59 (1990), pp. 424-426.
T. Kendall, “Discoveries at Sudan’s Sacred Mountain
of Jebel Barkal reveal Secrets of the Kingdom of Kush,”
National Geographic Magazine 178, no. 5 (Nov. 1990), pp.
96-125.
T. Kendall, “L’Empire des Pharaons Noirs,”
GEO 148 (June, 1991), pp. 24-51.
Season
4: April 5-24, 1996: T. Kendall (dir), Cynthia Shartzer
(proj.mgr.), and Susanne Gänsicke (conservator), with
El-Hassan Ahmed Mohammed for NCAM: a) excavated rooms B
1213-15, 1221-22 in the Napatan Palace B 1200, and discovered
the audience hall of Aspelta, which the team later fully
exposed in 2007, b) sifted and removed a dump of Reisner
that related to B 1200 (rooms 1201-02), and c) probed the
undocumented area in front of he pinnacle and found remains
of a ruined temple (named B 1100).
Publications:
T. Kendall, “The Napatan Palace at Gebel Barkal: A
First Look at B 1200,” in W.V. Davies, ed. Egypt and
Africa: Nubia from Prehistory to Islam (London: British
Museum, 1991), pp. 302-313.
T. Kendall, “Excavations at Gebel Barkal, 1996. Report
of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Sudan Mission,”
in Kush XVII (1997), 320-354.
Season 5:
Jan 1-Jan 20, 1997: T. Kendall (dir.), Cynthia Shartzer
(proj. mgr.), Susanne Gänsicke (conservator), and Alan
M. May (asst.), with El-Hassan Ahmed Mohammed (for NCAM)
and Fa'iz Hassan Osman (representing the Department of Archaeology,
Karima University): a) continued excavations in B 1200 (rooms
1217 and 1218), b) excavated a second (disturbed) flagstaff
niche in B 500 with recovery of more prisoner plaques, all
highly fragmentary, c) commenced excavation of B 1100 and
mapped and recorded all blocks. The latter project resulted
in the recovery of many red sandstone fragments of a small
vaulted chamber, inscribed for Natakamani and Amanitore.
The sides bore registers of repeating images of the two
uraeus goddesses, Nekhbet and Wadjet, depicted as vultures,
with squatting figures of Amun (human-headed) and Mut-headed
fetishes wearing the double crown. The arched ceiling surface
was carved with rows of stars and flying vultures. The vault
fragments lay over older Napatan (or Dynasty 25) sandstone
blocks, some reused, which, in turn, overlay a partial foundation
of talatat blocks, associated with a fragment inscribed
for Horemheb. The stratigraphy suggested a temple in almost
continuous use from the post-Amarna period to the late Meroitic.
The iconography suggested a temple of the uraeus goddesses.
Publications:
T. Kendall, “Report of the 1997 Season at Gebel Barkal”
in Newsletter of the American Research Center in Egypt 175
(1997), pp. 1-12.
Season 6: Feb. 2 –
17, 1999. T. Kendall (dir.) and Cynthia Shartzer (proj.
mgr.), with El-Hassan Ahmed Mohammed (for NCAM): a) continued
excavation of B 1100, recording many fragments of Meroitic
blue tiles and pieces of a lined quartzite Meroitic stela
(text lost, probably originally only painted), and b) began
excavation of the earth embankment behind B 1100 to attempt
to determine if the structure had been connected to the
pinnacle base, had possessed rock-cut rooms, and if these
hypothetical rooms had been buried by an ancient rock fall.
Our working hypothesis was that the temple, like B 200 and
300 immediately to the west, had rock cut inner chambers,
which might have been sealed in antiquity by the rock fall.
Publications:
T. Kendall, “Excavations at Gebel Barkal, Sudan, 1999:
Report of the American Section of the Italian Archaeological
Mission of the University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’
“ Preprint from Kush XVIII (1999). (withdrawn prior
to printing due to unproven hypothesis)
T. Kendall, “Napatan Temples: A Case Study from Gebel
Barkal. The Mythological Origin of Egyptian Kingship and
the Formation of the Napatan State.” Presented at
the Tenth International Conference of Nubian Studies, University
of Rome, Italy, Sept. 9-14, 2002. 95 pages. (withdrawn prior
to printing for the same reasons as the former; text online
at http://wysinger.homestead.com/kendall.doc.)
Season
7: Dec. 4-12, 2000: T. Kendall (dir.) and Margaret
S. Watters (geophysicist), with El-Hassan Ahmed Mohammed
and Ahmed Moussa (for NCAM), and Faiz Hassan Osman (representing
Nile Valley University, Karima): conducted geophysical investigations
at Jebel Barkal, using both magnetometry and ground penetrating
radar: a) surveyed by magnetometry the entire area of B
1150 without finding any legible architecture, and b) surveyed
a sample area northeast of B 500, in which we recovered
the partial plan of an important new structure, named B
1700. This temple, probably Meroitic, is northeast of and
parallel to B 500; it was surveyed more carefully during
the 2007 season.
Season
8: Feb. 6-27, 2002. T. Kendall (dir.), Cynthia Shartzer
(archaeologist) (Feb. 4-15), and Pawel Wolf, Ulrike Nowotnick
(archaeologists), Annett Dittrich, and Diana Nickel-Tzschach
(assts.) (Feb. 15 to 25), with Shadia Abu Rabu Abdel Wahab
(for NCAM): a) continued excavation of the area directly
behind B 1100, without result, b) commenced exploratory
excavation of the area B 1150, also without result. All
the major visible architectural fragments of columns, sandstone
blocks, and baked bricks, suspected to derive from a temple
in front of B 1100 proved to be loose and without context,
and no structural remains were found in situ.
Season
9: March 4-April 3, 2004: T. Kendall (dir.), Pawel
Wolf, Ulrike Nowotnick (archaeologists), and Alexandros
Tsakos (asst.) with El-Hassan Ahmed Mohammed (for NCAM):
a) surveyed the rubble embankment behind B 1100 in order
to create a 3-D computer image of the mountainside, showing
the pinnacle, B 1100, and the neighboring temples B 200
and 300 together (fig. 12), b) created a photographic inventory
and object list of the Jebel Barkal Museum, c) cleaned Museum
and repaired and sealed broken windows.
Season
10: Jan. 4- Feb. 2005: T. Kendall (dir.), Max Farrar
(surveyor), Jeremy Pope (asst.) (Jan. 4-19), Martin Pittertschatscher
(conservator), Silvia Zauner-Mayerhofer (conservator), Alexandros
Tsakos (asst.), with El-Hassan Mohamed Ahmed and Rehab Khidir
al-Rashid for NCAM and Faiz Hassan Osman for the Archaeology
Dept., Wadi el-Nil University: a) hired men with sledge
hammers to break up the large fallen stones lying above
and behind B 1100 in order to start major excavation of
the rubble embankment between that temple and pinnacle,
b) began clearing the inner rooms of B 500, in order to
map them, since they were built exclusively with talatat
blocks, implying remains of earlier construction by Akhenaten
(ca. 1353-1335 BC), c) looked (without result) for traces
of Amarna relief on the talatat blocks in B 500, d) procured
from the provincial governor a plot of land 100 m sq. just
east of the mountain on which to build a new site museum
(if funds become available), e) surveyed and undertook test
excavations on the new museum site in order to confirm that
there were no underlying ancient remains, and f) conservators
prepared a proposal to conserve the wall paintings in B
300.
Season
11: Nov. 8-Dec. 10, 2005: T. Kendall (dir.), Max
Farrar (surveyor), Silvia Zauner-Mayerhofer (conservator),
A. Tsakos (asst.), with El-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed for NCAM:
a) continued a block-by-block mapping of the Barkal Temples
in the pavements of B 300-sub, which proved to be inscribed
for Ramses II (suggesting the date of the founding of that
temple), and B 200, whose heavy pylon blocks, still in situ,
appeared to be reused blocks from a New Kingdom (Thutmosid?)
temple (Some bear traces of 18th Dynasty block patterns).
Season
12: Feb. 3-March 11, 2006: T. Kendall (dir.), Pawel
Wolf (field dir.), Ulrike Nowotnick (archaeologist), Nadejda
Reshetnikova (draughtsperson), Stanislav Vorstrikov (asst.),
Thomas Goldmann, Ronny Wutzler, and Mohamed Abdel Wahab
(geophysicists), with El-Hassan Mohamed Ahmed for NCAM:
a) continued clearing area behind B 1100, without result,
b) commenced excavation of a 10 x 20 sq. m area on northwest
side of B 1200 (not previously excavated by Reisner), hoping
to find the pedestals of the Prudhoe lions in the British
Museum, since many fragments of the lions lay scattered
on the ground there; found a complex of mud brick walls,
corridors and rooms, representing several building phases,
of uncertain chronology, c) commenced (Feb 20-Mar 5), a
new magnetometry survey in area in front and behind B 1200,
discovered major sub-surface structural remains on southwest
side of B 1200, d) discovered (by magnetometry) the northeast
corner of B 100, which had been excavated and reburied by
Reisner in 1916, before he had placed it on a site map,
e) continued the magnetic survey in front of B 500 and found
three small Meroitic chapels perpendicular to the sacred
way, just like those in front of the Amun temple at Meroe.
Season
13: February 18-March 31, 2007:. T. Kendall (dir.),
Pawel Wolf (field dir.), Ulrike Nowotnick (archaeologist),
Thomas Goldmann, Ronny Wutzler (geophysicists), Alexander
Kendall (asst.) (Feb. 19- Mar. 2) Jana Neumann, Judith Heymach,
Lukas Goldmann (assistants) (Mar. 4-15); Max Farrar (surveyor)
(Feb. 18-Mar. 8), with Al-Hassan Ahmed Mohamed for NCAM:
a) continued the magnetometry survey, begun in 2000 and
2006, into the northern and northeast part of the site,
between B 500 and B 1500 (fig. 13), b) excavated, mapped,
and photographed the inner chamber of B 600, recovered gold
foil and amazonite inlay fragments from sockets on podium,
c) cleared inner chambers of 700 to commence block by block
mapping with a robotic total station, d) excavated the large
audience hall of Aspelta in palace B 1200.
Publications:
T. Kendall and Pawel Wolf, “Excavations in the Palace
of Aspelta at Jebel Barkal, March 2007,” Sudan &
Nubia 11 (2007), 82-88, pls. XXXV-XXXVIII.
Figs. Captions.
Fig.1. View of Jebel Barkal
from the air, looking north.
Fig.2a. The cliff and pinnacle of Jebel Barkal, viewed from
the northeast.
Fig.2b. Jebel Barkal and its pinnacle as represented on
the south wall of the great hall, Temple of Ramses II at
Abu Simbel.
Fig.3. The god Amun of Jebel Barkal, represented as a rearing
uraeus. Bronze statuette found in Temple B 700.
Fig.4. Jebel Barkal represented as a box in which the god
sits; its pinnacle is represented as a ram-headed uraeus
supporting flail (as Kamutef), while a human head looks
on. From a graffito on the western side of the mountain.
Fig,5 a. The pinnacle as seen in silhouette from the west.
Fig.5 b. Osiris and Thutmose III in statues at Karnak.
Fig.6. Sunset viewed from the summit of Taharqa’s
pyramid in mid-November, at about the time of the ancient
Khoiak festival, in which the death of Osiris and the end
of fertility was celebrated. Here the pinnacle appears as
the “dying god.”
Fig.7a. Jebel Barkal viewed in profile from the northeast
in late afternoon.
Fig 7b. The Kushite cap crown in profile, showing its remarkable
resembelnce to the silhouette of Jebel Barkal.
Fig. 8. Map of the concession area of the NCAM Mission at
Jebel Barkal, with structures identified.
Fig. 9. The Jebel Barkal pyramids.
Fig. 10. Painting by National Geographic artist James Gurney,
showing the pinnacle monument of Taharqa under construction
(November, 1990).
Fig. 11. Computer model of the Jebel Barkal sanctuary, created
by William Riseman, 1990.
Fig. 12. Computer rendering of temples B 200, 300, and 1100
by Pawel Wolf and Ulricke Nowotnick, 2004
Fig. 13. Magnetic image of structure B 1700, lying northeast
of B 500, by Thomas Goldmann, 2007.
|
|
Fig. 1
Fig. 2a
Fig. 2b
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5a
Fig. 5b
Fig. 6
Fig. 7a
Fig. 7b
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
|