The Origin of Nose-Boops (and maybe Cats)

Cats and humans have been living side-by-side for a long time, be it out on our homesteads catching vermin, or curled up by our fires on someone’s lap. Gradually the role of the cat is moving further away from pest control and firmly entrenching itself as a companion animal. But how did we get to this point with our feline friends? And how long ago did the process start? 

For quite some time it was thought that the oldest occurrence of cat domestication took place in Egypt around 3000 years ago. This is unsurprising when you look at the amount of cat imagery that has been discovered, depicting them as everything from hunting companions to deities. But we have no reason to believe that the veneration of cats would have taken place at the same time as the beginnings of their domestication. 

This faience cat found at the site of Abydos by John Garstang shows a coat pattern reminiscent of that of a wild cat.

The oldest known example of humans and cats living alongside one another by choice occurs on the island of Cyprus, 9500 years ago. As Cyprus is an island it is possible to examine the zooarchaeological remains to see roughly when the first occurrence of a species comes about. The cat in question was found buried alongside a child, suggestive of some relationship in life. This places the earliest known cat-human co-occurrence during the Neolithic period, around the fertile crescent. It is here that it seems humanity first truly settled; with the advent of plant and animal domestication came the need to adhere to a more sedentary lifestyle. Storing quantities of food became necessary as time went on, as did the need to dispose of accumulated waste. These provided big ‘all you can eat’ buffets for mice and other household pests who would have come flocking in from the surrounding landscape to try their luck with the humans. The cat probably wasn’t far behind. Of course, at this point in time, the cats in question would have been a wild species, and while they bear a striking resemblance to our modern-day moggies, they’re far more territorial and solitary, and far less likely to put up with nose-boops and having to use a litter tray. Wild cats are a step up from feral cats, and feral cats are already considerably less easy to cuddle than a domestic cat! But nonetheless, these wild cats would have viewed the mice in much the same way as the mice viewed the grain; an unusual concentration of food that they may as well help themselves to. But other than pest control, which the cats are adept at without human intervention, there is no real reason to domesticate cats; unlike cattle or sheep, we can get no by-products from them. And thus, a commensal relationship with humans was likely born; the humans no longer had to battle quite so hard to stop mice from stealing their harvests, and the cats could just do what came naturally to them. Domestication probably came later, once the wild cats had settled into their new routines, natural selection and disposition having pushed cats that couldn’t peacefully co-exist with people further out into the wild. These creatures of commensalism that were leftover would gradually lose their fear of people, and people would come to see the connection between cats and their positive effect on granary stores. Thus, people probably began to create inviting environments for cats to inhabit, and cats adapted to the relative comfort and security that these environments afforded them. And that’s the story of where nose boops came from.

Check out more 3D models of cats (and other things!) here!

Sarah McBride


Papyrus Westcar

Continuing the theme of Egyptian literature, today we’re going to be talking about another ‘classic’ Egyptian story; the Tale of Khufu and the Magicians, also known as Papyrus Westcar.

The Westcar Papyrus (P. Berlin 3033) was (supposedly) found by Henry Westcar, a British antiquarian, in 1823-4. In 1838-9 it was (supposedly) bequeathed to Karl Lepsius, but was found in his attic after his death; there’s a deal of speculation about whether Lepsius did ‘inherit’ the papyrus, or whether it was stolen! The papyrus was viewed as a curiosity, until it was translated into German by Adolf Erman in 1890; since then, it has been re-translated numerous times.

The story is quite an unusual one, consisting of five vignettes relating to the sorcerous efforts of various priests and magicians. Each tale (save the last) is told in the court of King Khufu, the famous 4th Dynasty pharaoh and builder of the Great Pyramid at Giza, though the composition of the text itself has been placed between the Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period.  The first of the stories is almost entirely missing, but the others survive.

The First Story

The first story is missing entirely, save for the ending, where Khufu orders that offerings be made to the kings featured in the story. The conclusion mentions King Djoser, and may have had something to do with his famous Step Pyramid (and Imhotep, its famous architect!).

The Second Story

The first complete vignette begins when Prince Khafre stands up to speak and tells of a biayt – a ‘wonder’ – that happened in the time of King Nebka. Nebka had gone to the temple of Ptah to perform rites therein, accompanied by his chief lector-priest, Weba-iner, and the lector-priest’s wife. The lady meets a charming commoner, and the two decide to spend a pleasant day drinking in a nearby pavilion…and their ‘pleasant day’ doesn’t end until the sun has set!

Weba-iner finds out about this, and decides to exact his revenge with magic. He crafts a wax model crocodile, and passes it to the caretaker, instructing him to wait until the commoner goes for his daily swim, and then throw the model crocodile into the water.


E.620 – Model of a Crocodile, Hierakonpolis.

Meanwhile, Weba-iner’s wife sends to have the pavilion made ready again, and spends another ‘pleasant day’ with the commoner. After the sun sets, the commoner goes for his evening swim…and the caretaker throws the crocodile into the lake! When it touches the water, the crocodile springs to life, becoming a real crocodile, seven cubits long. It snaps its jaws around the commoner and drags him to the bottom of the lake!

Chuffed with his work, the lector-priest brings Nebka to the lake to see the magical crocodile. He summons it back, and it brings the commoner along for the ride. The lector-priest transforms the crocodile back into a wax figure, and explains his woes to Nebka. Outraged, the king declares that the crocodile can drag the commoner back to the bottom of the lake, while the adulterous wife of Weba-iner is burned alive.

Then, everyone celebrates how cool the magical crocodile was. Priorities.

The Third Story

After declaring that offerings be made to Nebka and his lector-priest, Khufu is ready for another tale. This time, Baufre has the floor, ready to tell a salacious story of a bored king, a boating accident, and fishnet stockings.

King Snofru is bored. So bored, in fact, that he sends for his chief lector-priest, Djadjaemankh, and complains that he has been through every room of the palace looking for something to do and found nothing. The lector-priest has an idea on how to alleviate his King’s ennui…

Djadjaemankh counsels Snofru to visit his palace lake, and sail around on it with a ship manned entirely by beautiful women. The king sends off for twenty ebony oars, plated with gold, with handles of special wood plated in electrum (why not?), as well as twenty beautiful, virginal women, with braided hair and large breasts. He also asks for twenty nets, and for the women to remove their clothes and replace them with the nets.

This may be the first historical reference to fishnet stockings in the world.

The women row back and forth, and Snofru feels very pleased with himself, but alas! He made a mistake asking for women with braided hair. The lead stroke gets entangled in her braids, and her turquoise fish-pendant falls into the water! Distraught, she stops rowing, which infuriates Snofru. He is, after all, a king, so he can just get her another pendant. Alas, she doesn’t want another pendant, she wants hers back. She gets a little bit sassy, telling Snofru, “I prefer my own to its substitute”. Ouch.

Growing rather grumpy due to this turn of events, Snofru sends for Djadjaemankh. The lector-priest arrives, and Snofru complains that he was having a rather wonderful time, but then this fish-pendant got lost and ruined everything. Without a worry, Djadjaemankh casts a magic spell, folding the waters of the lake, and revealing the lake bed. He pops over to the newly-revealed lake bed, retrieves the pendant, and then casts a spell to return the water to normal.

Cheered up once more, Snofru proceeds to spend the day partying with the entire palace, and making joyful offerings to his favourite lector-priest.

The Fourth Story

After another bout of offerings, this time dedicated to Snofru and Djadjaemankh, Khufu is amazed…but his son, Prince Hardedef, is not. Hardedef complains that all of these stories take place in the past, where one cannot easily discern truth from falsehood. Instead, Hardedef can tell Khufu of a man who still lives, and who can perform miracles! A commoner, named Djedi, who is 110 years old; he eats five hundred loaves of bread and a shoulder of beef, and drinks one hundred jars of beer every day. He can mend a severed head, make a lion follow behind him with its leash on the ground, and even knows the number of chambers in the sanctuary of Thoth!


Image of Thoth, from the Book of the Dead (2016 Book of the Dead).

Now, Khufu is intrigued. He himself had been seeking the chambers of the Thoth sanctuary, in order to make something like it for himself…so he commands that Hardedef bring Djedi to him, so he can be questioned! Hardedef sets off for Djed-Snofru by boat, and the prince is borne to Djedi upon an ebony palanquin, with poles of special wood, plated in gold (of course).

Hardedef finds Djedi, with servants anointing his head and rubbing his feet. After buttering him up, Hardedef summons Djedi to meet with Khufu, and the two return to the river bank, board ships, and head back to the royal residence. Djedi is announced to Khufu, who excitedly asks if it is true – can Djedi really mend a severed head? Djedi answers that he can, and Khufu sends for a prisoner to be brought so Djedi can prove it.

Djedi refuses to work his magic on a human, asking instead for a goose; Khufu agrees, and a goose is brought before Djedi and beheaded. The head is placed on one side of the chamber and the body on another, and Djedi works his magic – causing the body of the goose to waddle over to its head and reattach it. Khufu sends for another goose, and Djedi does the same; he then sends for a bull, and once again, it stands up and walks – with its leash on the ground (hang on, I thought Hardedef said it was a lion who would walk with his leash on the ground – oh well, I suppose Khufu wasn’t paying attention…).


E.608– Faience lion figurine.

Khufu then brings out the big question – does Djedi know the number of the secret chambers in the sanctuary of Thoth? Djedi says he doesn’t know the number – but he does know where it is kept, in a hidden casket at Heliopolis. Khufu asks him to bring the casket, but Djedi says it is not him who will bring it – it would be brought by the eldest of three children, currently in the womb of the woman Reddjedet.

“Who is she?” Khufu asks, and Djedi replies, telling him that she is the wife of a priest of Re, pregnant with his three children. These children would ascend to the highest offices of the land – a fact that Khufu is not entirely happy about. Khufu agrees to visit the woman, and the temple of Re, but the sandbanks of the canal will be cut off when she is due to give birth – Djedi assures him that he will cause water to rise there.

And then there are more offerings, of course.

The Fifth Story

The fifth vignette continues immediately, Reddjedet struggling with a difficult labour. Seeing this, Re sends for the gods Isis, Nephthys, Meskhenet, Heket, and Khnum, sending them to deliver these three children – who are prophesied to become the next royal dynasty. The gods disguise themselves as musicians – Khnum carries the bags – and go to visit Reddjedet.

The priest, Reweser, leads them to Reddjedet, and the gods assist with her birth. Isis commands the baby Userkaf to behave himself, and he is born into her arms with ease. After washing the child, Meskhenet and Khnum bless him.

Then, Isis brings forth Sahure, and again, he is washed and blessed by the other gods. Finally, she hastens the birth of Kakai, who is washed and blessed like the others. Having delivered the three children, the gods head out to inform Reweser, who provides them with a tip for their efforts – a sack of grain.

E.9381 (B) - Copy.jpg

E.9381 – Wooden model of Nephthys.

Isis realises that they had not yet provided a sufficiently wondrous wonder, and so the gods create three royal crowns, placing them in the sack. They summon a storm, and return to the house, asking if they can leave the grain so it will not get wet in the rain.

Later, the household are throwing a celebratory party, but there is no grain to brew beer – save for the grain left by the ‘musicians’. Reweser decides to use this grain and sends the maid to fetch it, thinking he will compensate them when they return. When the maid enters the room, she hears the sounds of celebration – dancing, singing, and music – without any obvious source. Reddjedet heads down to the room, puts her ears to the grain sack and discovers the sound is coming from inside the sack!

She realises that her sons will be kings, and is overjoyed – but fearful. Reddjedet hides the sack, locking it away in her room, and tells Reweser, who is equally joyous, and they have a wonderful party.

A few days later, Reweser has a quarrel with the maid, ordering her to be beaten as punishment, and she decides to seek her revenge by telling Khufu of the new kings. She finds her brother (or uncle, depending on the translation), and tells him of her plan, but he is appalled – and beats her with flax. Distraught, the maid rushes to the riverbank to get a drink of water and is snatched away by a crocodile (presumably not the same one from the previous story, but who knows?).

Her brother (or uncle) heads to tell Reddjedet, who is terrified that Khufu will now know about her children. He informs her of the maid’s death by crocodile…


…and the story ends there!

The Significance of Westcar

These stories appear to teach entertaining moral lessons – though some are perhaps lost in translation, and others just make very little sense to our modern sensibilities! Egyptologists have argued that these stories may have been drawn from the folklore of the common people of ancient Egypt, instead of deriving from the compositions of the royal court.

The tale was certainly written much later than it is set, and this provides the opportunity for reflection; the text itself acknowledges its fictional nature, with Hardedef remarking that it is hard to discern fact from fiction in stories from the past. Moreover, the text uses this temporal distance to create characters out of the royal figures it discusses; rather than distant, impersonal pharaohs, they are each portrayed almost as caricatures. Nebka is strict, lawful, and judgemental. Snofru is bored, cantankerous…and a little perverted! Meanwhile, Khufu is harsh, cruel even, willing to sacrifice a man’s life to see a magic trick and concerned that his dynasty will be replaced.

Is the ending of the story complete? It seems a little abrupt, but studies by Egyptologists Verena Lepper and Mirian Lichtheim both indicate that this is, indeed, how the story was supposed to end. The crocodile sequence is repeated – almost like a refrain – and in any case, Lepper argues, there was enough room on the papyrus to add more if there was any more to add.

By Christopher Bebbington.

The Destruction of Humanity

We are fortunate to have many surviving pieces of Egyptian literature and religious writings, allowing us to translate, read, and share stories that were originally composed in the ancient past. We have previously looked at the story of Osiris and Isis, one of the most famous tales from ancient Egypt. Today, we’re going to be looking at a very different tale, however – one known amongst Egyptologists by the rather unusual name, “the Myth of the Heavenly Cow”.

The Myth of the Heavenly Cow, telling the tale of the near-destruction of humanity, was first discovered in the outermost of the four gilded shrines of Tutankhamun, but in incomplete form. Three completed versions of the text were found, however, in the tombs of Seti I, Ramesses I, and Ramesses II. The text forms part of a corpus of royal funerary compositions dating to the New Kingdom, but was written in Middle Egyptian (the seminal form of the classical Egyptian language), and the ideas within it may date back as far as the Pyramid Texts of the Old Kingdom.


E.507(2) – A section of the amduat of the 21st Dynasty songstress of Amun, Tja-ty. The amduat is another royal funerary composition; unlike the Myth of the Heavenly Cow, the amduat is concerned with the topography and inhabitants of the Egyptian underworld.

The Rebellion of Man

The story begins in the mythical past, at the dawn of Egyptian history when the land was ruled by the sun god, Re, ‘the god who created himself’. The sun god had reached old age, and his mortal subjects had conspired against him, rebelling against his rule. Re summoned his council in secret – the gods Shu, Tefnut, Geb, Nun, and the primordial ‘mothers and fathers’ who were with him before the world was created. He also summoned his ‘Eye’, a fiery manifestation of his divine power, and retreated with his council to discuss what should be done about the rebellious hearts of men.

The council of gods suggested that Horus should ‘let [his] Eye go’, sending her down in the form of the goddess Hathor, to wreak vengeance on the disobedient humans below. With her power, she could smite the evildoers, preventing them from rebelling against the rule of the sun god.


E.9186 – A wadjet-eye amulet. Eyes could symbolise many things in ancient Egypt; while the wadjet is a symbol of magical protection, the powerful Eye of Re instead symbolised divine vengeance.

The Descent of the Eye

The story continues with Hathor returning triumphant; not only did she overpower mankind, but it pleased her! As Re celebrated his unopposed rule, Hathor took the form of the vengeful lion-headed goddess Sekhmet, to wade in the blood of the humans she had massacred throughout Egypt.


E.9011 – an amulet depicting the mighty goddess, Sekhmet.

At this point, Re realised that his retribution was perhaps a little disproportionate. With Sakhmet spilling the blood of people across Egypt, he sent for swift messengers – messengers who could ‘rush like the shadow of a body’ – and concocted a plan to calm the raging Eye.

The Drunken Goddess

Re sent his messengers to Elephantine, to bring him red ochre in vast quantities. When the messengers returned, he sent word that the ochre should be ground up to make red pigment, while servants were to grind barley and make beer. The pigment was mixed with the beer, creating a mix that looked like human blood; in total, 7 000 jars were made for Sekhmet.

Vowing to protect mankind against the vengeful goddess, Re had the beer brought to the fields that Sekhmet would target next, and during the night, the beer was poured over the fields, flooding them. When the goddess arrived that morning, she found the fields already full of ‘blood’, and stopped to sate her thirst on it. With the Eye drunk – 7 000  jars drunk! – she decided to leave mankind alone, returning to the other gods.

The Aftermath

In the aftermath of the tale, Re leaves the earthly world behind forever, ascending to the heavens. The sky was created in the form of the Heavenly Cow, a manifestation of the goddess Nut, and the other gods joined him, separating themselves from the world of mortals. In future generations, the pharaoh would be a human – one who acted as an intermediary between the mortal world and the realm of the gods.


E.66 – cult statue of Hathor in her bovine form.

The Ancient Egyptian World and the Concept of Evil

The Myth of the Heavenly Cow elucidates the role of the pharaoh – a semi-divine emissary who ruled the world on behalf of the gods, maintaining ma’at (balance) and stopping isfet (chaos), and ensuring the gods were properly worshipped. At the end of the tenure of the pharaoh, they would take their place in the gods’ realm, ascending to the heavens and integrating themselves in the divine cosmos.

The tale also raises issues of evil in the world – even in the mythical, perfect times, humanity was imperfect and chose to rebel against the rule of the sun god. The existence of evil is not due to the actions of the creator god, but instead arises from the selfish interests of humanity; Re must slaughter the very people he created in order to stop this evil.

When the gods choose to leave, separating themselves from humanity, it creates three realms – the divine realm, the duat (the underworld), and the mortal world. It is this mortal world where evil can be found; it is the mortal world that is forever caught in the perilous struggle against the ensuing forces of chaos, and where the pharaoh must work to bring about order and divine perfection.

By Christopher Bebbington.

The A-Group at Koshtamna

The site of Koshtamna, in the Aswan region, was excavated by John Garstang in 1906. The site is approximately 7 km northeast of Dakka, and contains material remains dating from various periods of Pharaonic history. The majority of Garstang’s finds, however, dated to prehistory; material remains of the Sudanese ‘A-Group’. John Garstang’s excavation at Koshtamna was never published, but the Garstang Museum is working to bring these artefacts, and the story of this site, into the public eye for the first time.

The A-Group

The Sudanese ‘A-Group’ were named by American archaeologist George Andrew Reisner. His ‘Archaeological Survey of Nubia’, conducted between 1907-1909, explored the origins of Nubian civilisation. The A-Group did not have writing, and so this relatively dry classification was imposed upon their remains; we still do not know what these people called themselves. There are numerous issues with Reisner’s classification, and it has been challenged by numerous scholars, but this relatively simplistic naming convention persists in Egyptology and Nubiology today.

The Importance of the A-Group Remains in Museums

Between 1960 and 1970, Egypt constructed the Aswan High Dam across the Nile at Aswan, a region at the southern edge of Egypt. The dam was constructed to control Nile flooding, increase water storage for agricultural irrigation, and generate hydroelectric power. Building the dam, however, came with a serious cost to the archaeological remains in the region.

The construction of the Aswan High Dam resulted in the flooding of Lake Nasser, submerging Nubian remains from Aswan to the Dal Cataract under roughly 50 metres of water. In 1959, the Egyptian government requested the assistance of UNESCO in preserving important archaeological material in this region. In 1960, the International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia began; a series of ‘rescue excavations’ intended to preserve and record as much information about the submerged region as possible. As well as excavating hundreds of sites and preserving thousands of artefacts, the UNESCO campaign also deconstructed and relocated vast pieces of monumental architecture, moving them to safer ground – most famously, the temple of Philae (now located on Agilkia Island).

Due to the haste with which this material was excavated, a great deal of it has not yet been fully studied or published. Furthermore, due to the submerging of the region, one of the only ways to study the A-Group – a cultural group about which we know very little – is to study the material remains now stored in museums around the world. John Garstang’s excavations at Koshtamna, long predating the UNESCO rescue operation, have provided the Garstang Museum with a wealth of A-Group material to study, which may illuminate more about this ‘lost’ civilization.

Koshtamna: The Material Culture

The material found at Koshtamna illustrates the similarities between Predynastic Egyptian and prehistoric Nubian settlements. Much of the material from Koshtamna has parallels across both Sudanese and Egyptian prehistory; for example, numerous objects of personal adornment can be found in the Koshtamna material at the Garstang Museum. Typically, these include ‘necklaces’ made by stringing together shells, bones, or beads made of semiprecious stones; there are also numerous bracelets made of shell or bone. Though the strings tying the ‘necklaces’ together are a (relatively) modern construction, likely done on site at the Garstang excavation, the bored holes in the shells, bones, and semiprecious stones indicate that they were likely originally worn this way (though the precise arrangements are a reconstruction).

Another very common type of object found in the Koshtamna collection is the cosmetic palette – already extensively discussed in a previous blog. Nubian palettes appear similar in size, shape, and material to their Egyptian counterparts; some of these palettes may have been imported from Egypt, or may have been ‘copies’ or interpretations of the Egyptian style. They would likely have been used for a similar purpose, and reflect the natural world in the same way Predynastic Egyptian palettes do, depicting birds, fish, and other Nile Valley fauna. The majority of the palettes from Koshtamna are fragmentary, though this is no surprise – indeed, the majority of cosmetic palettes found in Egypt are also fragmentary (usually, it is only the best and most well-preserved examples that are put on display in museums!).

Pottery, of course, is another regular find at Koshtamna, whether whole vessels or fragmentary sherds. The ceramic vessels in the Koshtamna collection include numerous Egyptian ‘imports’ or ‘imitations’ – classically Egyptian-style morphologies, such as W-Ware (wavy-handled ware) that indicate trade and exchange between the A-Group and the Naqada culture to the north; whether this is direct material trade or simply the exchange of ideas is harder to know for sure. There are also, of course, numerous wares that are more typically ‘Nubian’, including the recognisable ‘black-topped red ware’ that characterises Nubian pottery.

E.4723, E.4605, E.6118


One of the most interesting finds (so far!) has been the ceramic vessel pictured below – E.6163. This black-topped vessel is marked with two holes around a break in the ceramic; evidence of an ancient repair! Holes like these would be used to bind the two broken parts of the vessel together, using string and (possibly) some form of glue to mend the break. Some 4-5 000 years ago, an individual decided this object was important enough to them that they would rather repair it, once broken, than throw it away and acquire a replacement.


Burial Practice and Mortuary Culture

What does this collection of material tell us about the A-Group? How was this material used? What was its significance?

It is difficult to reconstruct social behaviour – peoples’ thoughts and feelings – from prehistory, where there is no written evidence to guide our interpretations. However, one of the ways this material was used is obvious – it was included in burials. The majority of the material in the Garstang Museum excavated at Koshtamna comes from individual burials; the ‘K’ numbers you may have noticed on the objects refer to areas of the site and particular burials from where these objects were excavated. Though we know very little about the funerary beliefs of the A-Group, we do know about their burial practices – and once again, a remarkable similarity can be found between the A-Group in Sudan and their Egyptian neighbours to the north.

The image on the left above is from John Garstang’s photographic archive, and shows a typical burial at Koshtamna; the burial is a simple pit, covered with sand. The body is contracted, with the arms raised to the chest and the legs bent, and burial goods – typically pottery, bracelets, palettes, and other material discussed above – are laid around it. The image on the right, also from Garstang’s photographic archive, shows a typical burial at Hierakonpolis in Egypt; the similarities are very notable. Whether these ideas originated in Nubia or Egypt and made their way northward or southward (respectively), or whether (and this is perhaps more likely) there were a number of factors influencing a cultural cross-pollination that resulted in similar burial practices, it is clear that similar ideas were being shared across both cultures. Whilst it would be too simplistic to argue that the individuals interred with these possessions were hoping to ‘bring them to the next life’, this is one of numerous possibilities for why they would be buried in this way.

Illuminating the A-Group

The Sudanese A-Group is an understudied culture group, one often ignored in favour of the later Kerma culture, or the comings and goings of its Egyptian neighbours. However, these material remains provide a vital window into the prehistory of Sudan, and the origins and developments of ideas that would perpetuate and evolve in later Sudanese history, from Nubia to Egypt and beyond.

By Christopher Bebbington.

(Edited by Sarah McBride).

The Environment in Egyptian Prehistory – A Story in 3D Models!

The geography of the Nile Valley was instrumental in shaping Predynastic material culture, which often incorporates motifs drawn from the natural world. The recurring use of natural imagery in the decoration of Predynastic material culture illustrates the importance of the natural world to these people, providing us with a window into the thoughts and concerns of people living over five thousand years ago.

Thanks to the tenacious efforts of our photogrammetry team, we are excited to now present these objects in full 3D!

Painted Decoration – Creating Landscapes in Ceramic


Painted decoration was one of the most common ways of incorporating natural motifs on objects during the Predynastic. Painted decoration regularly included scenes of desert hills, plants and foliage, boats, and a variety of animals, alongside more abstract designs. Sculpted forms of plants and animals were also applied to objects, particularly ceramic vessels.


Boats and water are another motif regularly incorporated into Predynastic designs; the importance of river travel in Egypt cannot be understated. Travel by boat was much quicker than by land, facilitating communication, which in turn allowed individual groups and rulers to control larger territories and proto-states; the connections forged by the capability to travel by boat also assisted in the transmission of material and social culture.


The way in which these motifs were utilised also illustrates the way prehistoric people viewed the world; for example, in the decorated sherd above, the animals appear to be wearing some kind of collar. The emphasis of the conflict between the settled land of the Nile valley and the wild, untamed creatures of the adjacent deserts is a recurring theme in Predynastic art, and depictions of animals sometimes include collars or ‘leashes’ to indicate the imposition of human order and control over the natural world.

Representations of Animals

Predynastic material culture included objects made to resemble animals, or otherwise incorporating animalistic motifs in their design. Small figurines, such as the crocodile below, were made to resemble animals. They may have been purely decorative, or they might have had some religious or ritual purpose – unfortunately, that information has been lost to us.


The ‘Hierakonpolis bird dagger’ (E.616)


This ‘bird dagger’ is one of the most unusual and unique objects in the Predynastic collection at the Garstang museum; it seems entirely impractical, and would not have functioned particularly well as a dagger. The blade has been crafted to resemble a wing, while the hilt bears more than a passing resemblance to a bird’s beak. The purpose of this object is unknown, but its form is very interesting – the use of avian motifs here is in an abstracted form, suggesting identifying features of the animal without appearing thereomorphic.

Animal Forms (Theriomorphism)

Some Predynastic objects do not simply incorporate animal motifs on their design, but were manufactured to resemble certain animals. These are known as theriomorphic objects. The forms of these artefacts are often impractical, and it is unclear whether they would have seen actual use or whether they were purely decorative.


Palettes are one of the most common forms of material culture that incorporated natural designs; palettes were often made to resemble birds, fish, turtles, goats, and other animals from the Nile Valley. They were used to grind pigments for cosmetics.

The Natural World

The historian Herodotus said that “Egypt is the gift of the Nile”, and this was the case even in prehistory. When studying prehistoric artefacts, the lack of written evidence and poor survival of important archaeological features such as settlements, housing and clothing can distance the modern observer from the thoughts, feelings and experiences of the people who created these artefacts. By examining the recurring decorative motifs on Predynastic objects, we can begin to understand the way prehistoric people experienced the world; the things that were important to them, and the way they chose to display this importance.

If any of these objects piqued your interest, you can see them in person – visit the BEFORE EGYPT exhibition at the Victoria Gallery & Museum to discover more of our predynastic Egyptian collection.

By Christopher Bebbington (edited by Sarah McBride).

Photogrammetry Team: Ardern Hulme-Beaman, Sofie Kinzer, J.R. Peterson.


Object in Focus: Stela of Amenysoneb (E.30)

Ancient Egyptian stelae are slabs of stone or wood which are typically inscribed with funerary and biographical texts and images. The Garstang Museum of Archaeology has a rather unique example of a Middle Kingdom (2055-1650 BCE) stela which belonged to a man called Amenysoneb. This stela dates to the 13th Dynasty (1795-1650 BCE) and was discovered at the site of Abydos by John Garstang in 1907.


Obverse of Stela. Image courtesy The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York


Reverse of Stela. Image courtesy The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

Abydos was a highly important religious and funerary site for the ancient Egyptians. During the Middle Kingdom, the Northern Cemetery at Abydos served as the primary burial ground for non-royal individuals. One area of the site was dedicated to cenotaphs and small ka chapels often containing stelae and ka statues and statuettes. These mud-brick cenotaphs were intended to serve as a place where the ancient Egyptians could commemorate their dead. They were a locus for the offering of food to the ka (soul) of the deceased so that they might be sustained in the afterlife. Not all stelae were placed in cenotaphs, some were erected along a processional route where cult activities honouring the god Osiris took place.


A stela in mud-brick chapel at Abydos, A.253. Garstang Museum of Archaeology

The stela of Amenysoneb is highly unusual for a number of reasons. The large ankh, perhaps the most eye-catching feature of this object, with the cut-out window is not a common feature of Middle Kingdom stelae. In fact, only five similar examples are known to exist. The double-sided decoration on the stela is also unusual, with most stelae only being decorated on the front side. Unfortunately, the stela is damaged with two corners missing.

The obverse of the stela shows the stela owner, Amenysoneb, on the left of the cut-out. He is raising his hands in adoration to the funerary god Wepwawet who is shown in jackal form above. Traces of paint are visible on Amenysoneb, with his body being painted red-brown and his collar a blue-green. The hieroglyphs above Amenysoneb’s head read ‘Adoration of Wepwawet by the regulator of the phyle (group of priests) of Abydos’, to the right they read ‘Amenysoneb begotten of Waemsha’.

Below this figure of Amenysoneb, is a women holding a lotus flower to her face. This is a common scene in Egyptian art as the lotus held religious and funerary associations. This woman is labelled as ‘His mother, the lady of the house, Nebetitef, the justified’. Below Nebetitef sit her son, Sainheret, and daughter, Nebetaneheh, the siblings of Amenysoneb.


Obverse, detail of Amenysoneb. Image courtesy The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

On the right, two sisters of Amenysoneb sit at his feet and hold lotus flowers. Nenni, the lady of the house, sits underneath Amenysoneb’s feet next to her daughter. In the bottom register, the doorkeeper of the temple, Siankhenptah sits next to his wife Titiu.


Obverse, detail of figures. Image courtesy The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

On the reverse, six registers show different scenes of daily life. Various workmen and women prepare food (top register), slaughter cattle (second register), mill grain and prepare bread and beer (third register), harvest (fourth register), transport grain (fifth register), and sow crops (sixth register).

The depiction of scenes of daily life is common in Egyptian tombs, but on stelae it is perhaps unique to this stela. These scenes were intended to magically provide for the deceased and their ka in the event that physical food offerings were lacking.


Reverse, detail of registers 1 and 2. Image courtesy The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York


Reverse, detail of registers 2, 3, and 4. Image courtesy The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York


Reverse, detail of registers 4, 5, and 6. Image courtesy The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

Amenysoneb held the title of ‘regulator of the phyle of Abydos’, and he was probably in charge of the rota of the priests at the temple of Osiris at the site. Two other stelae belonging to Amenysoneb are also known, although this is the most unusual and curious example.

Stela were erected where those visiting these sites would see them and speak the words written on them, so it might have interested Amenysoneb to know that as well as an Egyptian and Liverpool audience, his stela has also been seen by visitors to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

Suggested Bibliography

Hill, J. A. (2010). ‘Window Between Worlds: The Ankh as a Dominant Theme in Five Middle Kingdom Mortuary Monuments’ In Hawass, Z. and Houser Wegner, J. (eds), Millions of Jubilees: Studies in Honor of David P. Silverman Vol. 1, Cairo: Conseil Suprême des Antiquités, 227-247.

Kitchen, K. (1961). An Unusual Stela from Abydos. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 47, 10-18.

Oppenheim, A., Arnold, D., Arnold, D., Yamamoto, K. (eds) (2015). Ancient Egypt Transformed: The Middle Kingdom. New Haven, London: Yale University Press.

By C. Sargent

Before Egypt: 3D Models


With our upcoming exhibition launching soon, we thought it would be nice to put the ‘spotlight’ on a few of the objects that will be on display. Our photogrammetry team has been hard at work creating 3D models of many of the objects that will be on display, in order to provide access to the objects for anyone unable to visit the exhibition in person.

The first three of our models are now available to view on Sketchfab; each of these objects depicts an animal, which suggests the importance of the Nile Valley, and its flora and fauna, to the Predynastic Egyptian people living there. These objects serve to illustrate the three important environs within the Nile Valley – the land, the river, and the sky.

The Land: E.4176

This black-topped red ware sherd is decorated with white crossed-line depictions of animals. The depiction of animals in Predynastic art often relates them to a fundamental struggle – the civilised order of humans triumphing over the wild beasts of the desert. In this case, the animal on the right appears to have a collar or leash of some kind around its neck, a sign of domestication.

The River: E.620

This carved stone crocodile was excavated by John Garstang at Hierakonpolis, and likely dates to the Early Dynastic Period. It is quite unusual in its form, particularly in the inclusion of a base for the crocodile to stand on. The pierced holes on the base of the object indicate it may have been worn (as an amulet or pendant of some kind), or it may have been suspended. Though John Garstang excavated primarily at the fort cemetery at Hierakonpolis, the unusual form of this object indicates it was likely excavated elsewhere.

The Sky: E.6111

This ceramic vessel also comes from Hierakonpolis, and is a unique object. Birds are commonly portrayed in Predynastic art, but they are never shown in flight – this vessel is the only known example. Though the decoration has faded over time, the distinctive and unusual forms of these flying birds are still clearly visible in their original red pigment.

Working With 3D Models

Exhibitions are limited in their scope; they run only for a short time, and even in large exhibitions, there is always a great deal of material that cannot be displayed – simply, there is never enough space! We hope that these 3D models will provide a means of access for anyone unable to make it to the exhibition, and for those who are coming, we hope this will whet your appetite! You can rotate the models, and zoom in and out to look at specific details; you can find out more information about the objects in the model descriptions and by clicking on the annotation points on each model.

We will continue uploading and sharing 3D models on our sketchfab page – check it out!

Christopher Bebbington.

Photogrammetry by: Sofia Kinzer, JR Peterson, Ardern Hulme-Beaman


Ancient Technology: Faience Beads in the Garstang Museum


Strung faience beads, Lipscombe collection

A fairly common object to see in any museum collection or to find during a dig are beads, sometimes in vast quantities. The John Lipscombe Collection, formerly belonging to John Garstang’s daughter, Meroe, and recently donated to the Garstang Museum is no exception, containing large amounts of faience beads from various Egyptian sites (e.g. Esna). While they may not look like much on their own, faience beads have the potential, when analysed analytically, to raise questions about trade routes and the interconnections of regions and cities as well as the different technological choices being made by ancient craftsmen. This gives modern scholars the chance to peek into the mind of those in the ancient past.

IMG_1527 crop

String of faience beads, Lipscombe collection

This is possible due to the way Egyptian faience was made. Egyptian faience was the first man-made non-clay ceramic, with examples of this material dating back to the Predynastic Period, before the unified state of Egypt existed. Egyptian faience comes in a variety of different colours, possibly intended to imitate precious stones, but the most common colour is a blue or blue/green that is visually very similar to turquoise. It was the use of copper that created this turquoise colour, and beads of this colour form the majority of those in the Lipscombe collection.

IMG_1065 Crop

Beads in 20th century soap box, Lipscombe collection

IMG_1345 crop

Beads in 20th century cigarette tin, Lipscombe collection

Egyptian faience was made by using a silica source (sand), an alkali (natrun from the Wadi Natrun near the Delta), and lime.  These ingredients were then ground together to form the body material.  There were three ways of making Egyptian faience, the Application, Cementation, and Efflorescence technique.  With the application technique, the ground together ingredients would be made into a paste like material that could then be shaped or pressed into a mould (and we have faience objects that look like they were mould formed in this collection too).

IMG_1728 crop

Mould-formed faience amulet, Lipscombe collection

Then this form was dipped into a slurry mixture that formed the glaze.  This slurry was made of silica, an alkali, lime, and a colourant.  Once dipped the object would be left to stand.  Application method produced objects can sometimes be identified with a simple visual examination of the surface to see if there are any pools or runs of the glaze where it was stood up whilst drying before being fired at 800°C-1,000°C. Cementation method uses the same glazing materials but instead of being a slurry is a powder.  The objects, rather than being dipped, are buried in a box of this powder so that during the firing process this powder would adhere to the surface of the objects.  It was a great way to make small objects like beads.  The efflorescence method involved the glazing material being mixed with the body material and then during the firing process the colourant would rise to the surface to leave the glaze.  It is these techniques that can be seen to be used across a wide time period and range of objects and shows how there was a choice in how these objects were made.

So while beads are numerous and may look like they have little to tell us, a quick analysis of them can give us an insight into the processes involved and in some cases the complex choices that could go into making something as simple as a single faience bead.


Garstang senior volunteer, Sarah, untangling some strung faience beads

Further Reading

Friedman, Florence Dunn (ed.), Gifts of the Nile: Ancient Egyptian Faience (London: Thames and Hudson, 1998)

Kaczmarczyk, Alexander, and Hedges, Robert E. M., Ancient Egyptian Faience: An Analytical Survey of Egyptian Faience from Predynastic to Roman Times (Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1983).

Nicholson, Paul T., with Peltenburg, Edgar, ‘Egyptian Faience’, in Nicholson, Paul T., and Shaw, Ian (eds), Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 177-194.

By Juliet Spedding

International Women’s Day

It is International Women’s day! To celebrate, we are taking a closer look at just a few of the historical women represented within the Garstang collections.


Living around 5000 years ago, at the very beginnings of written history, Neith-hotep was the first woman in the world to have her name written down (that we currently know of). Neith-hotep, who was active during the Proto-dynastic Period, is generally thought to be the consort of King Narmer and mother of King Hor-Aha – both men have been credited as the first king of a unified Egypt. The history is probably far more complex, but it is clear that Neith-hotep was a member of the ruling family during the period of Egyptian unification.

Here at the Garstang Museum of Archaeology we have been carrying out Reflectance Transformation Imaging (RTI) analysis on clay seals from Neith-hotep’s impressive tomb at Naqada. This photographic technique revealed that Neith-hotep’s name is sometimes written in a serekh, a symbol only used to represent an independent ruler – in other words the king or queen regnant, never a queen consort. Very little is known about the political structures of the proto-kingdoms in Egypt before the unification. Her name in serekh form suggests that Neith-hotep was a ruler of one of these states, and that her union with King Narmer was a major factor in the very creation of ancient Egypt as a nation!


Young girls looking at objects from the tomb of the first woman in recorded history.


Hatshepsut was the step-mother to Egyptian Pharaoh Thutmose III, who was only a child when he ascended the throne. While acting as co-regent for her young step-son, Hatshepsut declared herself Pharaoh too. She capitalised on the reputation of her illustrious father (Thutmose I) and even claimed to be the daughter of the god Amun, granting her sovereignty and making her the primary ruler of Egypt.

During her reign she led a colossal building program across Egypt that was equal to anything her male predecessors had achieved. Her spectacular temple at Deir el-Bahri is a testimony to her power, decoration on its walls document her diplomatic policies, which stretched from Cyprus to Nubia, to the mysterious Land of Punt. Egypt prospered under her reign, trade blossomed, temples were restored and peace was maintained across the unified country.

After Hatshepsut’s death, her successors campaigned to remove her from history. Her name was erased from monuments, replaced with names of later (male) Pharaohs, and she was omitted from supposedly complete lists of kings going back to Narmer and the foundation of Egypt itself. Despite all these attempts to blot Hatshepsut out of history, she persisted.

E.5268 (1)

Limestone depiction of Hathor, bearing Hatshepsut’s rebus in her headdress.

The Candaces of Meroë

Meroë was a capital city of the ancient African Kingdom of Kush (modern-day Sudan). Candace (Kandake, kendake, or kentake) was the title given to powerful female rulers and is sometimes taken to mean “royal woman”. There is evidence that the Candances of Meroë enjoyed power equal to, and sometimes greater than, their male counterparts, with some Candances ruling entirely under their own authority. The earliest recorded Candace is Shanakdakhete (c. 177-155 BC), who is said to have ruled without a king. Bas reliefs of Shanakdakhete (dated circa 170 BC) show her dressed as a warrior, wielding a spear. Candace Amanirenas is one of the best known Kushite queens, famous for leading an army against the Roman Empire in a five-year war (27-22 BC). Here at the Garstang Museum we have a Candance depicted in relief on a sandstone block discovered at the ancient city of Meroë.

E.8645 (7)

Candance depicted on a sandstone block.

Flavia Julia Helena Augusta

Flavia Julia Helena Augusta (also known as St Helen, patron saint of archaeology) was Empress of a world usually associated with masculinity and patriarchy; the Eastern Roman Empire. Born to humble beginnings, not much is known of her early life, although there is some evidence to suggest she was from the province of Bithynia in Asia Minor. She rose to prominence within the Roman court, eventually marrying Constantius who became Emperor in 293 AD. As Helena was considered too low-status to be Empress, Constantius divorced her before he assumed leadership, and Helena was removed from the imperial court. Their marriage did produce one son – the boy who would become Constantine the Great.

When Constantine became Emperor Helena was welcomed back to the imperial court. She was granted the title Augusta in 325, making her Empress and an ‘honoured woman’ within the imperial family. As an ‘honoured woman’ she could issue her own coinage, wear imperial regalia, and even rule her own court. It was around this time, it seems, that she converted to Christianity, travelled extensively, undertaking pilgrimages and (allegedly) finding lost relics associated with her new religion – including fragments of the true cross. Her piety greatly influenced Constantine’s conversion to Christianity and his decision to make Christianity the official religion of the Eastern and Western Roman Empires, changing the religious landscape of the world.

IMG_E3648 (2)

Coin depicting Flavia Julia Helena Augusta.

Marie Garstang

Marie Garstang was the wife and colleague of John Garstang (first professor at the Liverpool Institute of Archaeology and the museum’s namesake). Although we know Marie Garstang worked with her husband in Egypt, Sudan and the Near East, it is hard to determine the extent of Marie’s contributions to her husband’s work. In a time when it was very difficult for women to gain independent academic recognition, her working relationship with John may have been one of mutual intellectual collaboration, interest and respect. She is acknowledged in introductions to John Garstang’s publications and in his 1934 Jericho field report John recognised Marie for her expertise in ceramic conservation.

The museum’s extensive collection of glass plate negatives gives a far greater insight into Marie Garstang’s working life, photographs show her excavating at Meroë, exploring Sundanese pyramids, and pouring over fragments of ancient pottery. Beyond archaeology, Marie served as a nurse with the Voluntary Aid Detachment during the first-world-war. At a time when women were demanding the renegotiation of their place in society, Marie Garstang followed in the footsteps of her ancient predecessors, proving that a skirt won’t slow you down.

(Find more about Marie Garstang, and other women in archaeology, at Trowel Blazers:


Excavating at Meroë.


Exploring Sundanese pyramids.


Examining ancient pottery fragments.

By Gina Criscenzo Laycock, Lauren Darsham, Eleanor de Spretter, Sarah McBride, Juliet Spedding, Ceri Stanford & Julia Thorne.

Photography and Photogrammetry at the Garstang

Professor John Garstang was a prolific photographer, and if there is one thing that the Garstang Museum has, it’s photographs! A lot of the pictures in our archive were taken by John Garstang himself during his excavations. Photographic documentation in archaeology wasn’t common practice at the time, making these archival entries all the more important. They are not just pictures of the artefacts and the sites from which they came, but of the people involved in the excavations, and even the odd candid snap of his life surrounding his work.

Today, documenting artefacts and sites via photography is an important step not only in the excavation process, but also in curatorial work. It allows us to digitally preserve images of artefacts that may be too fragile to handle, provide a way for the general public to view objects that they are unable to visit in person, and analyse the excavation processes of past excavations and even sites that no longer exist.


Digital Archive Photograph from John Garstang’s Excavations at Meroë

Focus Stacking

The Garstang Museum has been working with Retrograde Photography to get some high-quality images of our objects for use in new displays and exhibits. One of the techniques used is called “focus stacking”. When getting very close to small objects for detailed photography, the focus range can be quite small, causing focus to “drop off” very quickly. Focus stacking involves taking a large number of photographs of the same object with different parts in focus, and then digitally combining these images to create a photograph of the object with every single part in perfect focus. The results are quite impressive!


Hedgehog amulet photograph, courtesy of Retrograde Photography (E.207)


Technology has moved on from the simple photograph. A technique called photogrammetry is something that the Garstang Museum has begun exploring over the last couple of years. At its most basic it involves taking a series of high quality photographs of an item at different angles. This is achieved by placing the item on a turntable and moving it around in small increments, until the entire circumference of the item has been digitally captured. A series of ‘targets’ are placed on the turntable prior to photographing. They provide fixed points on the images, so that once the pictures have been taken they can be uploaded onto a computer and special software can pinpoint these fixed points. These fixed points then allow the software to turn those 2D images into a 3D model.


Ardern, one of the post-doctoral researchers at the University of Liverpool, teaching the team about photogrammetry.

The availability of this technology means that objects that are too fragile to normally handle can be manipulated and studied. Most importantly, members of the public can interact with artefacts in a way that they previously haven’t been able to; artefacts normally behind cases and only viewed from one angle can become items that a person can move around and examine. Objects that are not normally on display for whatever reason could be digitised and uploaded into interactive catalogues for people engage with. The wide reaching implications of museums such as the Garstang being able to utilise photogrammetry technology not only to educate in the public sphere, but also to aid in research pursuits, is incredible. It has the possibility of inspiring new fields of study, revitalising older ones, and bringing the past to life in a manner that is accessible to all.

Sarah McBride (Edited by Chris Bebbington).