باستان‌شناسی و زمین‌شناسی سنگ‌های باستانی مصر (باستان‌شناسی آرکئوپرس)

Cover Title Page Copyright page On Writing a Reference Work Contents Page List of Figures and Tables Chapter 1 Table 1.1: Ancient Egyptian and Sudanese chronologies. Chapter 2 Figure 2.1: The rock cycle. Figure 2.2: Spectrum of igneous rock occurrences. Figure 2.3: Visual comparator for porphyritic igneous rocks. The illustration simulates the appearance of a rock with an aphanitic matrix and phenocrysts—the large white rectangles—constituting exactly 20% of the area within the square. Figure 2.4: IUGS mineralogical classification of plutonic (phaneritic) igneous rocks with the feldspathoid-bearing rocks omitted. Figure 2.5: IUGS chemical classification of aphanitic (extrusive volcanic and intrusive subvolcanic) igneous rocks with the feldspathoid-bearing rocks omitted. Figure 2.6: Spectrum of sedimentary depositional environments. Figure 2.7: Spectrum of metamorphic rock occurrences. Figure 2.8: Drawing of the Turin papyrus map (redrawn from Harrell and Brown 1992a: fig. 3, 1992b: fig. 2). The map fragments are lettered according to their sequential arrangement (from left to right) as currently displayed in Turin’s Egyptian Museum. Th Chapter 3 Figure 3.1: Generalized bedrock geology map of Egypt and northern Sudan. Adapted in part from Harrell (2021a: fig. 2) and based on information from DOS (1974), EGSMA (1981), GMRD (1981), and GRAS-RRI (1988). Geological contacts are inferred where covered Figure 3.2: Generalized surficial geology map of Egypt and northern Sudan. Adapted in part from Harrell (2021a: fig. 3) and based on information from EGSMA (1981), GMRD (1981), and Vail (1978: fig. 8). The graphic scale is exact only for the middle porti Figure 3.3: Generalized topographical map of Egypt and northern Sudan. Adapted in part from Harrell (2021a: fig. 1). The elevations come from a 30 arc-second (i.e., ~900 m ground resolution) digital elevation model (DEM GTOPO30) available from the U. S. G Figure 3.4: Geological map of cataracts and rapids along the Nubian reach of the Nile River in southern Egypt and northern Sudan. For rock types represented by the map patterns see the legend in Figure 3.1. Adapted from Harrell (2021a: figs. 2 and 4). Figure 3.5: Rotated blocks caused by an earthquake in the unfinished 12th-Dynasty sandstone temple of Qasr el-Sagha in the northern Faiyum Desert. This is probably the same 12th-Dynasty earthquake that did significant damage at Dahshur 55 km to the northe Figure 3.6: The northern Memnon Colossus at Kom el-Hetan (the Amenhotep III mortuary temple) on the Luxor West Bank. Visible is the late 2nd- or early 3rd-century AD Roman repair of earthquake damage (the cut and fitted blocks in the torso) to what was or Figure 3.7: Wooden dovetail clamp joining two sandstone blocks in the 18th-Dynasty Montu temple at Karnak. The length of the exposed part of the clamp is 24 cm. Photograph courtesy of V. Max Brown. Figure 3.8. Multiple mortises with wooden dovetail clamps in a pavement of sandstone blocks in the Ptolemaic Opet shrine in the Karnak temple complex. The roughened patches are the recessed footings for other sandstone blocks. Photograph reproduced from L Figure 3.9: Luxor Temple with the lower halves of the columns in the Colonnade of Amenhotep III buried under sediment deposited by Nile floods. The Mosque of Abu el-Haggag is visible at left. Photograph by Frank M. Good taken between 1856 and 1860 (courte Figure 3.10: Damage by river erosion to the Sobek temple of Ptolemaic and Roman age at Kom Ombo. The temple sits atop an outer, cut bank of the Nile River. Photograph by Antonio Beato taken between 1860 and 1906 (courtesy of the 19th-Century Architectural Figure 3.11: View of Deir el-Bahri from the top of the cliff that overlooks it. The temples visible are, from left to right, those of Hatsepshut, Thutmose III, and Mentuhotep II. View looking east. Figure 3.12: The Sheikh Abd el-Qurna slump block with the Theban escarpment, from where it slid, at left. View looking northeast. Chapter 4 Figure 4.1: Broken dolerite pounder (the lower part is missing) with a narrowed neck for hafting a wooden handle from the Predynastic-Early Dynastic section of the Wadi Hammamat quarry complex for metagraywacke. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divis Figure 4.2: Scene from a relief in the 5th Dynasty tomb of Ti at Saqqara showing workmen using hafted stone pounders to sculpt a statue. Adapted from a drawing in Wild (1966: pl. 173). Figure 4.3: Dolerite pounders from a New Kingdom (possibly 19th Dynasty) granite quarry for a colossal Osirid statue (no. 1 in Figure 17.1 and Table 17.1; see also Figure 17.11) in south Aswan. Hammer is 27 cm long. Figure 4.4: Pounders, as deposited by excavators, of mostly dolerite from the 18th-/19th-Dynasty section of the Unfinished Obelisk quarry for granite in Aswan. Figure 4.5: Dolerite pounder 30 cm across in the Middle Kingdom Wadi el-Hudi mining complex for amethyst (found on the floor of the pit in sub-complex B). Note the smooth (crushed) surfaces at upper left that were produced by impacts. Hammer is 28 cm long Figure 4.6: Scene from a painting in the 18th-Dynasty tomb of Rekmira in Thebes showing workmen using stone tools—spherical pounders in the central panel and rubbing stones in the left and right panels—to carve two colossal statues (painted red in the ori Figure 4.8: Angular pieces of pounder-size dolerite, as stockpiled in antiquity, in the Dynastic but otherwise undated Gebel el-Granite quarry for dolerite in south Aswan. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 4.10: Granite bedrock that has been worked with pounders to produce Aswan’s Unfinished Obelisk of 18th- or 19th-Dynasty date. Figure 4.9: Silicified sandstone bedrock that has been worked with pounders in the New Kingdom section of the Wadi Abu Aggag quarry complex near Aswan. Hammer is 27 cm long. Figure 4.11: Crushing (at left) by a pounder along a natural fracture in volcanic tuff in the Early Dynastic Gebel Manzal el-Seyl quarry complex. Pencil (in the fracture’s shadow) is 14 cm long. Figure 4.12: Rod-like metagraywacke tools from a Predynastic-Early Dynastic section of the Wadi Hammamat quarry complex. The tool on the far right is probably a punch. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 4.13: Chisel-like marks on a cosmetic palette blank of metagraywacke from a Predynastic-Early Dynastic section of the Wadi Hammamat quarry complex. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 4.14: Chisel-like marks on metagraywacke bedrock in a Predynastic-Early Dynastic section of the Wadi Hammamat quarry complex. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 4.15: A series of pointillé pits in a block of metagraywacke in a Predynastic-Early Dynastic section of the Wadi Hammamat quarry complex. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 4.16: A series of pointillé pits in a block of metagraywacke in a Predynastic-Early Dynastic section of the Wadi Hammamat quarry complex. Note that the rock split along the line of pits. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 4.17: Tracks cut by an iron chisel in dolerite porphyry in the 30th-Dynasty to early Ptolemaic Rod el-Gamra quarry. Pencil is 14 cm long. Figure 4.18: Remaining halves of two primitive wedge holes (below the hammer) cut for iron wedges in dolerite porphyry in the 30th-Dynasty to early Ptolemaic Rod el-Gamra quarry. Hammer is 28 cm long. Figure 4.19: Remaining half of a primitive wedge hole (to the left of the pencil) cut for an iron wedge in dolerite porphyry in the 30th-Dynasty to early Ptolemaic Rod el-Gamra quarry. Pencil is 14 cm long. Figure 4.20: Remaining half of a primitive wedge hole (below the pencil) cut for an iron wedge in metaconglomerate in a probable 30th-Dynasty section of the Wadi Hammamat quarry complex. Pencil is 14 cm long. Figure 4.21: Remaining half of a primitive wedge hole (below the pencil) cut for an iron wedge in tonalite in the Ptolemaic Wadi Abu Bokari quarry complex. Pencil is 14 cm long. Figure 4.22: Linear groove cut across a tonalite boulder in the Ptolemaic Wadi Abu Bokari quarry complex. Pencil is 14 cm long. Figure 4.23: Roman wedge holes in granite bedrock cut along the bottom of a shallow trough in Aswan’s Unfinished Obelisk quarry. Figure 4.24: Wedge holes of probable Meroitic age cut along the bottom of a shallow trough in a granite/granodiorite gneiss boulder in quarry B of the Tumbos quarry complex in northern Sudan. Figure 4.25: Roman wedge holes cut in metaandesite/dacite porphyry bedrock in the West Quarries sub-complex at Mons Porphyrites. Geologist V. Max Brown posing. Figure 4.26: Close-up of wedge holes in Figure 4.25. Note the wedging-induced fracture running along the line of holes. Hammer is 28 cm long. Figure 4.27: Two Roman wedge holes (one completed and the other just started) cut into metagabbro in the Wadi Maghrabiya quarry complex. Hammer is 28 cm long. Figure 4.28: Wedging of Meroitic or early medieval Christian age in a granite/granodiorite gneiss boulder in quarry D of the Tumbos quarry complex in northern Sudan. Hammer is 40 cm long. Figure 4.29: V-shaped groove cut along the base of a block in the Roman Mons Claudianus quarry complex for tonalite gneiss. Note the faint remains of wedge holes on the block’s side that were used to shape it into a column. Figure 4.30: Close-up of the basal groove in Figure 4.29. Figure 4.31: Lever hole of Meroitic or early medieval Christian age cut on one side of a wedge-induced fracture in granite/granodiorite gneiss bedrock in quarry A of the Tumbos quarry complex in northern Sudan. Hammer is 40 cm long. Figure 4.32: Wedge holes and larger, roughlysquare Lewis holes for wooden posts in tonalite gneiss in the Roman Mons Claudianus quarry complex. Hammer is 28 cm long. Figure 4.33: Line of pointillé pits cut in tonalite in the Ptolemaic Wadi Abu Bokari quarry complex. Hammer is 28 cm long. Note that the rock split precisely along the line of pits. Compare with the very similar-looking, but much earlier, example in Figu Figure 4.34: Line of pointillé pits in tonalite cut along the bottom of a shallow trough in the Ptolemaic Wadi Abu Bokari quarry complex. Pencil is 14 cm long. Figure 4.35: Wedging and pointillé techniques used together in metagraywacke in a Ptolemaic or Roman section of the Wadi Hammamat quarry complex. Pencil is 14 cm long. Figure 4.36: Basalt block with saw cuts on two sides. This is one of many sawn blocks in the pavement of the Khufu pyramid temple at Giza. Pencil (in the center of the cut at right) is 14 cm long. Figure 4.37: Flat saw cut in pegmatitic diorite in the Roman Wadi Umm Shegilat quarry complex. Note the faint parallel striations made by each pass of the saw. Pen is 15 cm long. Photo courtesy of V. Max Brown. Figure 4.38: Saw cut in pegmatitic diorite in the Roman Wadi Umm Shegilat quarry complex. Scale uses both metric (left, numbered in centimeters) and English (right, numbered in inches) units. Photo courtesy of V. Max Brown. Figure 4.39: Chiseled grooves in pegmatitic diorite that are probably precursors to saw cuts in the Roman Wadi Umm Shegilat quarry complex. Hammer is 28 cm long. Figure 4.40: Last surviving section of the ancient Gebel Ahmar quarries for silicified sandstone in Figure 4.41: Close-up of the tool marks on the quarry wall in Figure 4.40. Figure 4.42: Evidence of fire-setting in Aswan’s Unfinished Obelisk quarry. Note the dark, charcoal-rich ash layer immediately under the granite block at top and the many spalled granite flakes in the quarry debris below. Figure 4.43: Roughed-out colossal statue of a striding king (4.5 m long) of the 18th or 19th Dynasty found in the Gebel Ahmar quarry complex for silicified sandstone in the Nasr City district of Cairo. This has now been moved to the site of ancient Heliop Figure 4.44: Roughed-out, tonalite gneiss columns of Roman date in the Mons Claudianus quarry comple Figure 4.45: Three Early Dynastic vessel blanks (one for a tall cylindrical vase and the other two for bowls) in the Gebel Manzal el-Seyl quarry complex for metatuff and tuffaceous metalimestone. Pencil is 14 cm long. Figure 4.46: Roughed-out, dolerite porphyry naos of 30th Dynasty or, less likely, early Ptolemaic date in the Rod el-Gamra quarry. Figure 4.47: Broken tip (pyramidion) of a nearly finished (inscribed) obelisk for Sety I in the Gharb Aswan quarry complex for silicified sandstone. Originally abandoned in the quarry, the block is now located beside the antiquities office at nearby Gebe Figure 4.48: Nearly finished colossal statue (3.85 m long) of an unknown 25th-Dynasty king carved from granite/granodiorite gneiss in quarry B of the Tumbos quarry complex in northern Sudan. Chapter 5 Figure 5.1: Bronze bar chisel and wooden mallet from the Middle Kingdom. The chisel dates to the rei Figure 5.2: Scene from a painting in the 18th-Dynasty tomb of Rekmira in Thebes showing workmen using mallet-struck chisels to dress stone blocks. Also shown are workmen with a leveling rod at lower left and a measuring cord at lower right. Adapted from a Figure 5.3: Large, partially extracted limestone block in an 18th-Dynasty section (quarry A) of the Qurna quarry complex. The separation trench that surrounds the block on three sides is c. 2 m deep and 40 cm wide. Figure 5.4: Segmented chisel tracks on the wall of a separation trench in a probable New Kingdom section (quarry B) of the Nag el-Hammam sandstone quarry complex. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 5.5: Segmented chisel tracks (1.5-2 cm wide) on the floor of a separation trench between two partially extracted sandstone blocks (shown in Figure 5.13) in a probable Middle Kingdom section (quarry B1) of the Wadi el-Shatt el-Rigal quarry comple Figure 5.6: Chisel tracks on the wall of a separation trench in a probable 19th-Dynasty section (quarry A) of the el-Buweib sandstone quarry complex. Note the elongated pit at the end of each track (to the right of the scale) with these showing the width Figure 5.7: Chisel tracks (steeply inclined from upper right to lower left) and natural stratification (gently inclined from upper left to lower right) in sandstone in a probable New Kingdom section (quarry B) of the Nag el-Hammam quarry complex. Note t Figure 5.8: (a) Bronze chisel of the 19th or 21st Dynasty from the el-Dibabiya limestone quarry comp Figure 5.10: Partially extracted sandstone blocks in a 19th- or 20th-Dynasty (Ramesside) section of the Gebel el-Silsila East quarry complex. Separation trenches are up to 85 cm deep and 9-10 cm wide at the top. Note the bedding plane at the base of the c Figure 5.9: Narrow separation trenches in a probable New Kingdom section (quarry B) of the Nag el-Hammam sandstone quarry complex. Trenches are up to 40 cm deep, 6-8 cm wide at the top and narrower toward the bottom. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm di Figure 5.11: Narrow separation trenches and initial undercutting with chisels in an 18th-Dynasty section (quarry A) of the Qurna limestone quarry complex. The trench is c. 50 cm deep and 3-6 cm wide on the right side. Brush is 21 cm long. Figure 5.12: Wide separation trenches (60 cm on average) in the 4th-Dynasty quarry E on the north side of the Khafre pyramid in the Giza limestone quarry complex near Cairo. The author posing; view looking east. Photograph courtesy of V. Max Brown. Figure 5.13: Two partially extracted sandstone blocks in a probable Middle Kingdom section (quarry B1) of the Wadi el-Shatt el-Rigal quarry complex. The two blocks, which are still attached to the bedrock, are separated by a trench c. 1 m deep and 40-45 c Figure 5.14: Adze of 18th-Dynasty date from the tomb of Ani in Thebes, Egypt, and now in the British Museum, London (EA 22834). The adze is 58.7 cm long, and its bronze blade is attached to the wooden handle with a leather cord. Photograph courtesy of the Figure 5.15: Possible adze marks in a probable 18th-Dynasty section (quarry A1) of the Gebel Sheikh Said North limestone quarry complex. The tool marks are c. 4 cm wide, and the hammer is 28 cm long. Figure 5.16: Pick-like chert pounder notched for hafting (21.6 cm long) of Dynastic but otherwise uncertain date from the Wadi el-Sheikh chert quarry. Adapted from Forbes (1900: fig. 37). Figure 5.18: Close-up of the pick or adze marks in Figure 5.17. Photograph courtesy of Per Storemyr Figure 5.17: Pick or adze marks (lower half) and chisel marks (upper half) in a Ptolemaic section (quarry B) of the Shesmetet sandstone quarry complex. Note, in the upper half, the traces of two separation trenches that terminated against the quarry wall. Figure 5.19: Pick or adze marks in the Ptolemaic or Roman el-Keijal sandstone quarry near Edfu. Photograph courtesy of Per Storemyr. Figure 5.20: Line of wedge holes parallel to bedding in the Ptolemaic or Roman Hagar el-Ghorab sandstone quarry. View looking southeast. Photograph courtesy of Per Storemyr. Figure 5.21: Line of wedge holes in sandstone oriented for vertical splitting in a Ptolemaic or Roman section of the Gebel el-Silsila East quarry complex. Scale is 10 cm long with 1 cm divisions. Figure 5.22: Saw cuts in a New Kingdom or later section (quarry A2) of the el-Sawayta limestone quarry complex. Pencil is 14 cm long. Figure 5.23: Rectangular blocks of sandstone, as stockpiled in antiquity, in a Roman section of the Figure 5.24: Partially extracted column drum in a Middle or New Kingdom section (quarry C3) of the Wadi el-Shatt el-Rigal sandstone quarry complex. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 5.25: Footprint left by the extraction of a column drum in a Middle or New Kingdom section (quarry B) of the Nag el-Hammam sandstone quarry complex. Figure 5.28: White deposits of pulverized quartz sand produced by hammering chisels along the base o Figure 5.26: Chisel holes along the base of a sandstone block in a probable Middle Kingdom section (quarry A) of the Wadi el-Shatt el-Rigal quarry complex. Note the chisel tracks above the holes. Both the tracks and holes have the same width indicating th Figure 5.27: Chisel holes along the base of a sandstone block in a probable Middle Kingdom section (quarry A) of the Wadi el-Shatt el-Rigal quarry complex. Note the rough upper surface where the block broke free of the bedrock above the line of chisel hol Figure 5.29: Lever sockets cut along bedding planes in a New Kingdom section (quarry B) of the Nag el-Hammam sandstone quarry complex. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 5.30: Wedge hole with the apparent remains of a wooden feather in an early Roman section of the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. Scale is 5 cm long with 1 cm and 1 mm divisions. Photograph by Maria Nilsson, courtesy of the Gebel el-S Figure 5.32: Horizontal slots undercutting large limestone blocks in a Ptolemaic section (quarry B) Figure 5.31: Holes cut, possibly with a hammer-drill, for the insertion of chisels along the base of a limestone block near the Queen Tiy gallery in an 18th-Dynasty section (quarry A) of the Wadi el-Zebeida quarry complex. Scale is 1 m long with 25 cm div Figure 5.33: Drawing of an 18th-Dynasty relief carved on a limestone talatat block showing a workman carrying a talatat block. The block originally came from ancient Akhetaten (modern Tell el-Amarna) and was reused in the Rameses II pylon of the temple of Figure 5.34: Partially extracted talatat and other larger blocks in an 18th-Dynasty section (quarry A) of the Wadi el-Zebeida limestone quarry complex. The larger blocks may have been awaiting further division into talatats. Hammer is 28 cm long. Figure 5.35: Partially cut separation trench in a probable New Kingdom section of the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. Note the tripartite, chisel-width (1 cm) channels with intervening ridges. Scale is 10 cm long with 1 cm divisions. Figure 5.36: Partially cut separation trench in the Ptolemaic or Roman el-Keijal sandstone quarry. Note the tripartite, chisel-width (c. 2 cm) channels with intervening ridges. Photograph courtesy of Per Storemyr. Figure 5.37: Quarry wall produced by a descending platform in a Ptolemaic or Roman section of the Gebel el-Silsila West sandstone quarry complex. The major boundaries between tiers of chisel marks are former platform levels (just below the hand- and foot- Figure 5.38: Close-up of the quarry wall in Figure 5.37. Figure 5.39: Typical aspect of an 18th-Dynasty section (quarry C1) of the Wadi el-Zebeida limestone Figure 5.40: Wide separation trench around an isolated block in a probable Middle Kingdom section (quarry C2) of the Wadi el-Zebeida limestone quarry complex. Geologist Pamela Haywood posing. Figure 5.42: Close-up of the quarry wall in Figure 5.41 showing the multi-directional, disorganized chisel marks and faint block outlines. Note backpack for scale. Figure 5.43: Small-scale, non-systematic block extraction in a probable Middle Kingdom section (quarry B) of the Nag el-Hammam sandstone quarry complex. Figure 5.44: Close-up of the quarry wall in Figure 5.43 showing the multi-directional, disorganized chisel tracks and faint block outlines. Figure 5.45: Multiple-block extraction on descending platforms in a New Kingdom or later section (quarry A2) of the el-Sawayta limestone quarry complex. Note the two nearly-square platforms at lower center and middle left. View looking southwest. Figure 5.46: Descending platform in a late Ptolemaic or early Roman section of the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. Note the hand and foot holds leading up to the platform. View looking north. Figure 5.48: Walls produced by descending platforms in a probable Roman section (quarry B) of the Nazlet Hussein Ali limestone quarry complex. View looking west. Figure 5.49: Close-up of one of the quarry walls in Figure 5.48. Note the regularly spaced, vertical gashes left at each platform level that mark the ends of separation trenches, and also the reversal of chisel track inclinations on the right side. Figure 5.50: Walls produced by descending platforms in the New Kingdom or later Deir el-Abyad el-Bahari limestone quarry. An ancient gallery in this quarry (out of view at right) is now the site of a modern Coptic shrine with the tomb of Abu Shenouda. Figure 5.51: Close-up of the quarry wall on the left side of Figure 5.50. Note the chisel tracks at each level of the descending platform that abruptly change direction on the right side, where the platform ended at a drop-off. Figure 5.52: Quarry wall created by a descending platform in the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. Note the traces of separation trenches that were cut across the platform and into the bounding wall. Figure 5.53: Inward-sloping limestone wall produced by descending platforms in a New Kingdom or later section (quarry B) of the Beni Hasan South quarry complex. Note the large pile of quarry debris at right. View looking south. Figure 5.54: A ramp constructed with quarry debris below a descending platform in a late Ptolemaic or early Roman section of the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. Note the hand- and foot-holds leading down to the platform. View looking south Figure 5.56: Queen Tiy gallery in an 18th-Dynasty section (quarry A) of the Wadi el-Zebeida limestone quarry complex. Note the extensive apron of quarry debris below the gallery. View looking northeast. Figure 5.57: Interior of the gallery quarry shown in Figure 5.56. Photograph courtesy of V. Max Brown. Figure 5.58: Back wall of the 19th-Dynasty gallery (no. 2) in the el-Dibabiya limestone quarry complex. Note the horizontal slot cut at the top of the wall on level with the head of geologist Gamal Abdullah Ibrahim. Figure 5.59: Horizontal slot cut at the top of a former gallery wall with the gallery subsequently quarried away in a probable 18th-Dynasty section of the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. Figure 5.60: Close-up of the quarry wall on the left side of the gallery remnant in Figure 5.59. Note the disorganized chisel tracks and faint block outlines. Figure 5.61: Lines drawn with red paint on the ceiling of a gallery in an 18th-Dynasty section (quarry A) of the Qurna limestone quarry complex. Figure 5.63: Modern tool marks left in the Gebel el-Silsila East quarry complex by the early 20th-century extraction of rectangular sandstone blocks for the Esna Barrage. Figure 5.64: Artisanal quarrying of sandstone at Gharb Aswan in an area of ancient sandstone quarries. Photograph courtesy of Per Storemyr. Figure 5.66: Surfaces with two types of chisel marks in sandstone at the north end of the Gebel el-Silsila West quarry complex. On the overhanging wall at upper left there are disorganized chisel tracks (see the close-up in Figure 5.67) and below this and Figure 5.67: Close-up of disorganized chisel tracks in Figure 5.66. These are probably dressing marks. Figure 5.69: Partially extracted blocks and wide, deep separation trenches in a Middle Kingdom or 18th-Dynasty section of the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. View looking southwest. Scale is 1 m long with 10 cm divisions. Figure 5.70: Wall on the hidden left end of the partially extracted blocks in Figure 5.69. Note the original disorganized chisel tracks in the upper two-thirds of the surface, possibly from dressing the quarry wall, with these replaced by later (Roman?) s Figure 5.71: Chisel tracks dating to the 18th-Dynasty’s Thutmoside period in glauconitic sandstone at the north end of the Gebel el-Silsila East quarry complex. Note the herringbone pattern at the bottom. Scale has 10 cm divisions. Figure 5.72: Ramesside (19th or 20th Dynasty) chisel tracks in the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. See also Figure 5.10 for another view of these blocks. The two scales are 10 cm long with 1 cm divisions (center) and 1 m long with 10 cm di Figure 5.73: Block extraction in an 18th-Dynasty section of the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. Scale is 1 m long with 10 cm divisions. Figure 5.74: Close-up of the back wall of the quarry in Figure 5.73 showing a herringbone pattern of chisel tracks. Scale is 1 m long with 10 cm divisions. Figure 5.75: Chisel marks from limestone extraction in the 4th-Dynasty quarry E of the Giza limestone quarry complex. The same quarry wall is visible on the left side of Figure 5.12. Scale is 1 m long with 10 cm divisions. Figure 5.76: Close-up of chisel marks in Figure 5.75. Scale has 10 cm divisions. Figure 5.77: Disorganized extraction chisel marks on a limestone block at the 12th-Dynasty el-Lisht pyramid of Senusret I. Scale is 1 m long with 10 cm divisions. Figure 5.78: Systematic extraction chisel marks on a limestone block at the 12th-Dynasty el-Lahun pyramid of Senusret II. Scale is 1 m long with 10 cm divisions. Figure 5.79: Dressing chisel marks (1-2 cm wide) on a limestone block at the 12th-Dynasty el-Lisht pyramid of Senusret I. Scale is 1 m long with 10 cm divisions. Figure 5.80: 6th-Dynasty tombs at Gebel Qubbet el-Hawa in Aswan. View looking southwest with the entrances to the tombs of Sabni (in the distance) and Hekaib I (at right). Figure 5.81: Courtyard of the 12th-Dynasty tomb of Aku at Gebel Qubbet el-Hawa in Aswan. Note the quarry-like, bedrock trench on the right side (in the shadows). View looking northeast. Figure 5.82: Chisel tracks from sandstone extraction on the back wall of the courtyard of the 6th- Dynasty tomb of Mekhu at Gebel Qubbet el-Hawa in Aswan. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 5.83: Chisel tracks from sandstone extraction on the back wall of the courtyard of the 12th-Dynasty tomb of Aku at Gebel Qubbet el-Hawa in Aswan. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 5.84: Chisel tracks from sandstone extraction inside the courtyard trench of the 12th- Dynasty tomb of Aku at Gebel Qubbet el-Hawa in Aswan. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 5.85: Chisel tracks from sandstone extraction on the back wall of the courtyard of the 12th- Dynasty tomb of Sarenput II at Gebel Qubbet el-Hawa in Aswan. Note the smoother, dressed surface in the upper left corner. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and Figure 5.86: Chisel tracks from dressing activities on the back wall of the courtyard of the 12th- Dynasty tomb of Sarenput II at Gebel Qubbet el-Hawa in Aswan. Note the coarse dressing on the right (with 1.5-2 cm-wide chisel tracks) and finer dressing wi Figure 5.87: Chisel tracks from dressing (1.3 cm wide) on the back wall of the courtyard of the 6th- Dynasty tomb of Hekalb I at Gebel Qubbet el-Hawa in Aswan. Scale is 15 cm long with 1 and 5 cm divisions. Figure 5.88: Roughed-out sandstone statue of a seated figure in the courtyard of the 12th-Dynasty tomb of Sarenput II at Gebel Qubbet el-Hawa in Aswan. The undated, but probably 12th-Dynasty, statue measures 1.6 by 0.9 by 0.7 m and is carved from normal, Figure 5.89: 18th-Dynasty (probably reign of Amenhotep III) criosphinx carved from sandstone in the Gebel el-Silsila East quarry complex. This criosphinx, including the buried base, is over 3 m tall and matches in form and size the finished criosphinxes i Figure 5.91: Rope hole in the Ptolemaic Nag el-Fuqani sandstone quarry near Aswan. Figure 5.92: Early Roman chisel tracks and quarry marks in the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. Figure 5.93: Late Ptolemaic to early Roman chisel tracks and quarry marks in quarry A of the Nag el-Hosh sandstone quarry complex. Note the series of rope holes across the center. Figure 5.94: Early Roman (?) chisel tracks and quarry mark (an offering table capped with cow horns and solar disk) in the Nag el-Dumariyya sandstone quarry. Figure 5.95: Relief scene from the 19th-Dynasty rock-cut stela of Hapy (reign of Rameses II) in the Gebel el-Silsila East sandstone quarry complex. The scene depicts the quarrying of sandstone blocks, and their transport on a sledge to the river where the Figure 5.96: Partial remains of a gallery in qu