Cartouche of the Last Pharaoh of Egypt Found at Illegal Dig Under Home in Abydos

Ancient Origins

A team of Egyptian archaeologists found a cartouche of the last native Egyptian pharaoh under the home of a man in Abydos, Egypt. The man and his accomplices were doing an illegal excavation underneath the old mud-brick home.

 A cartouche or carved stone relief gives the name and epithets of ancient Egyptian kings. In this case it was King Nectanebo II, who ruled during the very end of the 30th Dynasty, 360 to 342 BC.

The team found the cartouche under the home in the Beni Mansour area of Abydos during an inspection. The archaeological committee is from the Al-Belinna inspectorate.

Agents of the Tourism and Antiquities Police have confiscated the home until the committee can complete its investigation, Hani Abul Azm told AhramOnline. He is the chief of Upper Egypt’s Central Administration for Antiquities. He said the cartouche, which is a stone block, could have formed part of the king’s royal shrine or been the extension of a temple wall constructed on the king’s orders.

AhramOnline says Nectanebo II is famous for his construction undertakings in Abydos.

Egypt prospered under the Nectanebo II’s reign. His artists’ distinctive style was unique during the Ptolemaic kingdom. Nectanebo II was inspired by many cults of Egypt’s gods. He left his mark on more than 100 sites, including beginning the huge temple of Isis.

A relief from the time of Nectanebo II’s reign showing gods carrying flowers and drinks for the pharaoh. (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License)

After authorities expropriate the house, archaeologists will undertake more excavations under it, according to Abul Azm.

It’s hard to say if the cartouche, which is partly submerged in water underground, is part of a shrine or temple wall, said Ashraf Okasha, the director-general of Abydos Antiquities. He said the block is 1.4 by 40 cm (0.55 by 15.75 inches).

The archaeological committee found the illegal excavations underway, with a 4-meter-deep (16 ft) pit dug under the home, he said. It was at the bottom of this hole that the cartouche was discovered

The Metternich Stela, another stone monument from the time of the reign of King Nectanebo II. Photo Source: ( CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 )

Earlier this year, Ancient Origins reported on the spectacular Metternich stela, also created during the reign of King Nectanebo II. Details related to the origins of the artifact remain unknown. It is a part of a group of stelae known as ''Cippus of Horus''- a collection of stelae used to protect people from dangers like snake or crocodile attacks. However, this particular stela is one of the largest of its kind. It also has some of the best-preserved magical text from its time.

The stela has magical recipes to heal poisons, mostly animal poisons. Legends also say the stela itself has magical powers. Ancient doctors would pour water over the stela and collect it to give it to a person who had been poisoned. The spells discuss different animals, but they especially focus on cats and reptiles. Cats were believed to be animals of gods and goddesses, so they were thought to have the ability to heal every poison. The spell against reptile poison was connected to the serpent demon Apophis. It was thought to force the serpent to vomit when the priest was chanting the spell. At that point the sick person would also vomit - relieving him or herself of the poison. The stela also describes some stories related to deities. In fact, most of the text is dedicated to the story of Horus - who was poisoned but cured.

 Top image: The bottom of the cartouche is presently submerged in water. It was found in an ongoing illegal excavation at the bottom of a 4-meter pit in a home in Abydos. Credit: Ministry of Antiquities

By Mark Miller

Over 100 Rare Leather and Wooden Artifacts Found in Oxford Dig

Archaeologists excavating in Oxford have found  a stockpile of wonderfully preserved medieval leather and wooden artifacts, which is as good as gold in their eyes. They expect to uncover many more objects between now and this year's deadline in December.
Though they have only been excavating for about a month, they have uncovered at least 50 leather shoes, a complete leather bag, wooden posts, and a wooden bowl. These artifacts have all been well-preserved due to the Thames floodplain area being below the water level at the site. The incredible preservation of the artifacts has helped in dating the leather goods to approximately 700 years ago.

Wooden bowl found at the Westgate site, Oxford, England (Oxford Archaeology)

Oxford Archaeology project director Ben Ford has told BBC news that  "These finds are as rare as gold and often as informative...they tell us about the everyday people, their lives, the objects they made and the clothes they wore."

• British Archaeologists Find First Ever Evidence of Cremation in Mesolithic era
• Numerous skeletons of sexually perverse Nuns discovered in Oxford
• Researchers Explore Mysteries of Medieval Graffiti in England
• Discovery of Medieval Boat in England Hailed ‘Rare and Important’

Project Officer, Rebecca Peacock has interpreted some of the finds for the Oxford Mail. She told the newspaper that, “The artifacts that we have found tell us an awful lot about how the people of Oxfordshire have been living over the past 700 years...From the shoes, pots and bags that we have found, we can see that Oxford was a small scale industrial town and that there has always been a lot of trade and work in the area.”

Some of the artifacts previously found at the Westgate site are currently on display in a 'Pop-Up Museum' located near the site. (Oxford Archaeology)

Ms Peacock also told the Oxford Mail that these artifacts suggest that there was a high quality of life and wealthier people have chosen to settle in the area for many centuries. However, some poorly made pottery also suggests that there was likely a large working-class in the area for centuries as well.
The location of the current Westgate Shopping Centre excavation was previously the site of the Greyfriars religious order's friary. The Greyfriars are a Franciscan religious order that constructed their friary just outside of the Oxford city walls in 1224.
This year's Westgate Excavations will complete in December. The Westgate development project is set to be completed in 2017, therefore there is still much time for new discoveries.
Archaeologists are keen to find more, as Ms Peacock told the Oxford Mail, “While we haven’t found any early settlements yet, we are hoping that we might find some houses and signs of life from the Iron Age."
If the current number of artifacts are any indication, archaeologists may be correct in their belief that 100s more are still waiting to be unearthed at the site.
Featured Image: Medieval leather shoes found at the Westgate site, Oxford, England (Oxford Archaeology)


Ancient Origins

Following the success of the Richard III excavation, is it time to dig up other famous skeletons?

History Extra

Emma McFarnon

 

Rarely, in recent weeks, has archaeology been out of the history headlines: the coffin-within-a-coffin in Leicester that was found to contain a woman; the medieval bodies discovered underneath a Paris supermarket; and, of course, the countdown to Richard III’s reinterment at the end of March

The remains of Richard III © the University of Leicester

These discoveries offer unique insights into the lives of individuals and populations past, helping us to understand where, when and how people once lived. British Museum curator, Alexandra Fletcher, last year wrote that human remains “advance knowledge of the history of disease, epidemiology and human biology…. [and offer] valuable insight into different cultural approaches to death, burial and beliefs.”
As in the case of Richard III, exhumations can also help to answer burning questions such as how the last Plantagenet king died (by two blows to the head and one to his pelvis), and from what conditions he suffered (scoliosis, malnutrition and a roundworm infection). We even know his probable hair colour (blonde, with blue eyes), and that he enjoyed a diet of swan, crane and heron!
What’s more, we are, as historian Dan Jones argued late last year, “better equipped to study historical remains than ever before”. Is it time, then, in pursuit of knowledge, to dig up other famous skeletons? Look inside, say, the urn in Westminster Abbey containing the supposed remains of the princes in the Tower; place a camera inside Elizabeth I's tomb?
There are, of course, a number of ethical issues to consider. As Mike Parker Pearson, Tim Schadla-Hall and Gabe Moshenska state in their 2011 paper ‘Resolving the Human Remains Crisis in British Archaeology’: “Given the powerful emotional, social and religious meanings attached to the dead body, it is perhaps unsurprising that human remains pose a distinctive set of ethical questions for archaeologists.” Likewise, Dan Jones points out that despite living in a “relatively secular age… we are so squeamish and prissy about meddling with the dead”.
Of particular importance is the treatment of human remains: as archaeologist Grahame Johnston writes, whereas in centuries past “the remains of native people and their artefacts were torn from their locations and displayed in foreign museums or sold to high-bidding collectors with little thought for the living descendents… [today] a more respectful approach of dealing with human remains has entered into the academic stream. It is now not uncommon to have a Rabbi, at least on-call, if not on-site, on major archaeological excavations in Israel.”
The issue is often complicated further by the fact people of varying traditions and faiths may prefer to treat remains differently. As The Economist explained in 2002: “However scientifically respectable their methods, archaeologists have been forced to acknowledge that they do not operate in a vacuum, and must take the values of others into account.” The British Museum echoed this sentiment when, last year, curator Alexandra Fletcher wrote: “There is no justification for the voyeuristic display of human remains simply as objects of morbid curiosity. As in storage, displays of human remains must acknowledge that the remains were once a living person and respect this fact.”

_{Queen Elizabeth I's tomb and monument by Maximilian Colt, 1603, in Westminster Abbey. © Angelo Hornak / Alamy}
A second consideration, illustrated by the battle between the University of Leicester and the Plantagenet Alliance over where Richard III’s remains should be reburied, is ownership: to whom do newly discovered human remains – and artefacts – ‘belong’? The Economist writes: “Around the world, the general question of who has the first claim on buried items – local people, the descendants of the original owners or archaeologists – is deeply controversial.”
We ought also to consider whether there is sufficient justification for disturbing the resting places of famous skeletons. According to the ethical guidelines drawn up by the British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology: “No burial should be disturbed without good reason. Archaeological excavation of burial grounds is normally carried out as a response to a threat to the cemetery due to modern development. Disturbance of unthreatened sites should only be contemplated if it is essential to an adequately funded, peer-reviewed research project orientated toward specific and well-justified research aims.”
And while we might be, in the words of Dan Jones, “better equipped than ever to glean new information from… long-dead bones”, surely future generations will be better prepared still? As the Council for British Archaeology states: “In many cases, it is better to wait, to leave objects and other evidence in the ground where it has been lying safely for hundreds or thousands of years. As long as it remains safe then it is better to leave the evidence for future generations to investigate with better techniques and with better-informed questions to ask.”
It is, says The Economist, “a central paradox of archaeology… discovery involves destruction; investigation requires intrusion. Where should archaeologists draw the line when deciding how much of an important site to excavate, if they are not to hinder future investigations?”