1 Introduction
Quarry 24 (subsequently abbreviated as ‘Q24’) is located in the central part of Gebel el-Silsila East, some 500 m south of the present-day guardians’ house, adjacent to the Ramesside quarries in the south (Q30–33), the (reused) 18th Dynasty quarries in the east (Q20–23), the New Kingdom-Late Period quarries in the north (Q27–28) and the Nile in the west. It can best be reached via the main N–S pathway along the Nile or via a pathway that meanders through the ancient spoil heaps to its south. Its proximity to the Nile combined with a slightly slanting landscape westwards provides the area with a natural road for transporting blocks from the quarry to a Nile quay that is located some 30 m to the south-west. The quarry stretches out over an almost 30,000 m2 area and has been divided into nine individual quarry faces (A–I) and the ‘stables’ (TS), which incorporates another three quarried cliff faces (Fig. 19). In addition to the quarry itself, the landscape is sculpted by a series of spoil heaps, in one of which a Roman administration building was constructed.
A large part of the ancient quarry was damaged in the northern section by dynamite extraction carried out in 1906–1909 for the construction of the Esna barrage. Equally, major damage was caused to the southern section, incorporating quarry faces F–I, where manual and dynamite extraction was carried out during the same period. Because of this, it is difficult to estimate an original transportation route and/or connecting pathways.
Four quarry faces (E–H) and the stables (TS) contain ancient material, which can be divided into epigraphic information and the physical remnants of extraction work. The latter includes tool marks or grooves produced when trenching and preparing the blocks for extraction; foot holes to aid climbing; rope holes to enable the transportation of extracted blocks and/or to tie animals; postholes to support scaffolding and a roof system; wedge (Roman) and lever (Dynastic) marks to separate the block from the bedrock; and the trenches themselves, which indicate block size and shape, including column drums. In addition, there are marks and groves made for disparate reasons, including rubbings, scratches, gouge marks, etc.
Figure 19
Topographic drawing of Q24, marked with partitions, Greek inscriptions (nos. 11–14; 15–20), and quarry marks
Drawing by Maria NilssonFigure 19
Topographic drawing of Q24, marked with partitions, Greek inscriptions (nos. 11–14; 15–20), and quarry marks
Drawing by Maria NilssonFigure 19
Topographic drawing of Q24, marked with partitions, Greek inscriptions (nos. 11–14; 15–20), and quarry marks
Drawing by Maria NilssonQ24 is nicknamed the ‘Pylon Quarry’ based on a series of (in size and amount) emphasised engraved illustrations of pylons on a large north-facing quarry face (E) (Fig. 20).1 Other than being unique and intriguing to observe, these pylons hold a central role in the general understanding of the quarry as they summarise a message jointly communicated in the material culture, epigraphic information and extraction techniques employed. This combination reveals the religious nature and identity of the quarry, as well as the predetermined destination and architectural function of the stone extracted. The pylons show the architectural form—a gate—while texts determine chronology—Tiberius (AD 14–37)—and the main deity worshiped—Montu—and the more enigmatic and encoded quarry marks express the extended divine family—Raet-tawi and Harpocrates.2 Together these clues reveal that the stone was intended for Tiberius’ gate at the Temple of Medamoud, the home of the divine triad Montu, Raet-tawi and Harpocrates.
Figure 20
Frontal overview of Q24.E, marked with its epigraphic documents. Greek texts are marked as nos. 11–14
Photo and editing by Maria NilssonFigure 20
Frontal overview of Q24.E, marked with its epigraphic documents. Greek texts are marked as nos. 11–14
Photo and editing by Maria NilssonFigure 20
Frontal overview of Q24.E, marked with its epigraphic documents. Greek texts are marked as nos. 11–14
Photo and editing by Maria NilssonThe tool marks left on the surfaces of quarry faces E–G follow a consistent diagonal, parallel pattern of a series of two longer (19–29 cm) segmented grooves and a final intersection (5–12 cm), creating a block size of 52–58 cm high. Each groove has a width of approximately 6–6.5 mm, which indicates the depth of the flat cutting edge of the chisel. The direction of the work regularly follows a right to left orientation with exceptions in sections where such handling would not be possible (edges), possibly indicating a predominantly dextral work force. Based on preserved tool marks and trenches, there was no consistent (single) block size, which can be related to the quarry workers’ practical method of following the natural strata and fracture lines within the bedrock. In general, the trenches are 52–58 cm long × 125–145 cm wide × 60–90 cm deep.
To estimate the actual block size one has to include the width of the trench in the calculation, reducing the size given above by a hand or a fist (c. 9.5–10.5 cm). Larger and smaller blocks also occur, with examples of lintel-sized blocks still preserved in situ on top of the stables. However, even with these numbers it is, evidently, difficult to estimate the total number of blocks that were extracted at each work instance. Moreover, one has to calculate also the original perimeters of the mountain, as well as considering that the area may have been quarried during various ancient phases.3 It is therefore possible to estimate the amount of horizontal and perpendicular extraction levels of each preserved quarry face. For quarry face GeSE.Q24.E, for example, this can be calculated to be 22 vertical and 12–14 horizontal levels, which would have resulted in nearly 300 blocks per vertically consecutive quarry face.
Associated with the extraction process is the build-up of quarry spoil, which for the ancient quarries is located to the north-west and due west of the quarries, and creates the foundation upon which the administration building sits. Through the excavation work within the administration building it was established that there were three different orientations of spoil, indicating slight variations within the chronological frame.
2 The Stables of Tiberius and Its Administration Building
Opposite quarry face F with its long axis lies another quarried stretch, nicknamed ‘Tiberius’ Stables’ (‘TS’), above which sits an administration building. Stables for larger animals (equine or bovine) are located on the ground level and follow the preserved, exposed east-facing quarry face, 30 m wide and covering an area of approximately 150 m2. No internal dividing walls have been discovered to date, nor any enclosure wall, which—if this ever existed—may have been deconstructed by the Esna Barrage workers in the early 20th century.
Four food troughs were chiselled straight into the vertical cliff face, and another three block-troughs were found among the quarry rubble a few meters to the east. Surrounding them are rope holes of varying sizes, used for tying the animals (Fig. 21). Larger, rectangular rope holes are found towards the northern section of the quarry face, adjacent to the pathway that leads to the Nile, which were likely used for pulley systems to aid the extraction and transportation of blocks. Partially or fully collapsed central bars indicate continuous use of the rope holes, worn down by the friction of moving ropes. Three of the four troughs cut into the quarry face are decorated with demotic or Greek inscriptions, and similarly all four, and additionally two of the ‘block troughs’, are surrounded by quarry marks, presumably indicating ownership of the animal or caretaking thereof.
Figure 21
Trough, c. 80 cm above the current ground, surrounded by rope holes for the tying of animals. Notice the demotic text below the 10 cm scale, as well as the Greek text diagonally to the right of the trough
Photo by Maria NilssonFigure 21
Trough, c. 80 cm above the current ground, surrounded by rope holes for the tying of animals. Notice the demotic text below the 10 cm scale, as well as the Greek text diagonally to the right of the trough
Photo by Maria NilssonFigure 21
Trough, c. 80 cm above the current ground, surrounded by rope holes for the tying of animals. Notice the demotic text below the 10 cm scale, as well as the Greek text diagonally to the right of the trough
Photo by Maria NilssonThe administration complex (Fig. 22) occupies an elevated position, nestled on a Roman spoil heap, which in turn sits directly atop an exhausted Dynastic quarry. Due to its elevation and geographic location, it held a strategic position with a clear overview of the west bank and with a direct line of sight to adjacent Roman stations to its north, east, and south. The complex at present comprises a total of 15 excavated dry stone walled rooms that are rectangular or square, with the exception of one semi-circular room. The stratigraphy of the individual rooms reveals at least three occupation periods: the dateable archaeological material (chiefly coins and ceramic material), however, is limited to the reign of Tiberius, which indicates that the complex was used periodically during the quarrying seasons. This is supported by the epigraphic documents, which record activity during an eight-year period between years 10 and 18 of Tiberius.
Figure 22
Overview of the upper level of the administration building, looking south-west. Scale (in front of the entrance to the middle room): 1 m
Photo by Maria NilssonFigure 22
Overview of the upper level of the administration building, looking south-west. Scale (in front of the entrance to the middle room): 1 m
Photo by Maria NilssonFigure 22
Overview of the upper level of the administration building, looking south-west. Scale (in front of the entrance to the middle room): 1 m
Photo by Maria Nilsson3 The Epigraphy
The epigraphy of Q24 has received some attention in the past, but the corpora remained incomplete, and several of the facsimiles and translations were erroneous and required reanalysis.4 In total, 60 textual inscriptions are preserved (demotic, Greek, and bilingual combinations of Latin-Greek, Greek-demotic) as well as 110 quarry marks, which make a total of 170.
Graff. Silsile presented 38 catalogue entries from Q24, referred to as ‘Carrière VI (?)’. Graff. Silsile 288, which is a Greek signature belonging to a ‘Julius’, is no longer preserved, and was presumably situated on quarry face D, and will have been lost during the work on the Esna barrage. Although most texts have been published already, developing technology and continuous documentation in different seasons and sunlight have resulted in clearer reproductions and, thus, more precise transcriptions and translations of the inscriptions. Therefore, all facsimiles have been reproduced rather than relying on previous drawings.5 The majority of the texts were inscribed by means of a chisel with a cutting edge of approximately 6–6.5 mm; occasionally the composer of the text used only the sharpest corner of the tool, leaving much narrower and sharper engravings.
Table 5
Epigraphic distribution in Q24
|
Quarry face |
Quarry marks |
Greek inscriptions |
Demotic inscriptions |
Bilingual or pseudo script |
Illegible |
Total inscriptions |
Total graffiti |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
E |
42 |
3 |
7 |
1 |
11 |
53 |
|
|
F |
9 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
11 |
||
|
G |
1 |
1 |
|||||
|
H |
1 |
1 |
|||||
|
TS |
57 |
5 |
39 |
2 |
1 |
47 |
104 |
|
TOTAL |
110 |
8 |
49 |
3 |
60 |
170 |
Including the demotic texts,6 108 individuals were recorded: 54 names belonged to the main subject/person, 39 names were those of fathers, five of grandfathers, four of brothers and six of sons. In addition to the names, six professions were listed, including an administrator of the desert plateau, a chief sailor of the boat that carried stones for Montu, a chief shrine opener of Montu, a divine craftsman of Montu, two overseers of the works and a transport skipper. Three gods are mentioned, including Montu, Shaï (Pashai) and Horus, and dating formulae between years 10 and 18 of Tiberius (AD 24, July 2–32, July 1). The Greek texts, however, are very limited in their information, and all but one (no. 13) are signatures with or without patronym. The single exception, no. 13, gives year 15 as the year of production. Twelve individuals are listed in the nominative; seven, possibly nine (if including the demotic names of the bilingual nos 15 and 20), individuals are listed as fathers. Two of the individuals are brothers (no. 18).
4 Quarry Face ‘E’
Eleven inscriptions were preserved on the north-facing quarry wall E (Fig. 20, above): seven demotic, three Greek and one bilingual Latin-Greek. All texts are names with or without affiliations, omitting adoration formulas. Graff. Silsile includes only one Greek (no. 286) and two demotic inscriptions (nos 298, 291), whereas the bilingual Latin-Greek inscription has been incorrectly interpreted as purely Greek (no. 290). In consequence, six texts were previously unpublished. The Greek texts are here labelled nos 11–14.
5 Corpus
No. 11
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.E.Inscr. 1
Measurements: L. 12, W. 143 cm
Height above the ground: c. 1.5 m
Condition: Well preserved
Bibliography: Graff. Silsile 290; SB III 6913; I. Thèbes à Syène 157; TM Text ID 54370
| 1. |
CERDOCAESI |
| 1. |
Cerdo Caesi vv |
| 1. |
Cerdo, son of Caesius (repeated in Greek) |
Commentary
Graff. Silsile 290:
No. 12
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.E.Inscr. 6
Measurements: L. 7, W. 29 cm
Height above the ground: c. 4 m
Condition: Well preserved
Bibliography: Unpublished
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
Pamentebos? |
Commentary
The text is well preserved, but difficult to distinguish due to deep underlying tool marks. The reading of the name not secure.7
No. 13
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.E.Inscr. 7
Measurements: L. 7, W. 29 cm
Height above the ground: c. 1.5 m
Condition: Well preserved
Bibliography: Graff. Silsile 286; SB I 1748; I. Thèbes à Syène 155
Date: based on the context, this is likely to be year 15 of Tiberius, AD 28; TM Text ID 54366
| 1. |
? |
| 1. |
? |
| 1. |
…15, Chares |
Commentary
Graff. Silsile 286; I. Thèbes à Syène 155:
It appears that the writer drilled a series of holes in the edges of each letter in order to correctly align the text. The initial three letters are located slightly below and to the left of the signature and are not carved as deeply, which means the two texts were probably not written by the same person. It is tempting to read the first sign as a badly carved = (
No. 14
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.E.Inscr. 11
Measurements: L. 7.5, W. 31 cm
Height above the ground: c. 1 m
Condition: Generally well preserved
Bibliography: Unpublished
| 1. |
|
Commentary
The text is unfinished. The first letter was perhaps intended as a monogram.
6 Quarry Face ‘TS’
The most inscribed quarry wall in Q24 is the east-facing surface that is designated Tiberius’ Stables in accordance with the above-mentioned structure (Fig. 23). There are 44 demotic and seven Greek inscriptions, including engraved and scratched examples. Thirty-four texts (28 demotic and 6 Greek) were published in Graff. Silsile, but many were incorrectly copied or translated, and another 17 texts can now be added.8 All inscriptions were incised at a height reachable from ground level or Level III of the administration building. The demotic inscriptions are usually names written with large signs, but there are also more elaborate examples consisting of several lines, titles and affiliations. The stylistic character is usually that of a name including patronym, combined with a few adoration formulae already known from elsewhere at Gebel el-Silsila.
Six demotic inscriptions were recorded on an upper quarry level within TS, including three carefully engraved and elaborate inscriptions facing north. These texts include several lines with smaller and more elusive signs compared to other texts within the quarry.
Figure 23
Overview of the Stables, marked with its epigraphy. The Greek texts are numbered
Figure 23
Overview of the Stables, marked with its epigraphy. The Greek texts are numbered
Figure 23
Overview of the Stables, marked with its epigraphy. The Greek texts are numbered
7 Corpus
No. 15
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.TS.Inscr. 3
Measurements: L. 2.5–7, W. 79 cm
Height above the ground: c. 1.5 m
Condition: Well preserved
Bibliography: Graff. Silsile 278; SB III 6911; I. Thèbes à Syène 154; Moje 2014, 164–165 no. 9; TM Text ID 54359
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
(Gr.) Harpaes(is) son of Psenmonthes. (Dem.) Harpaesis the Elder |
Commentary
I. Thèbes à Syène 154:
-
Ἁρπάησ (ις ) is probably an abbreviated form of the name but without an abbreviation mark. -
The demotic text is not published in Graff. Silsile 278. The reading of last signs of the demotic line is uncertain.
No. 16
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.TS.Inscr. 8
Measurements: L. 12, W. 142 cm
Height above the ground: c. 1 m
Condition: Poorly preserved, fragmentary
Bibliography: Unpublished
| 1. |
|
| 2. |
|
| 1. |
|
| 2. |
|
| 1. |
Psennou- Horos (son of) Herie(us) |
| 2. |
uris |
Commentary
The signature is written below and next to the troughs, directly above two rope holes (both present at the composition of the text) and fragmentary due to the whittling of the stone surface. The various colours as well as irregularities in the surface make it difficult to discern any details. The long lacuna after
No. 17
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.TS.Inscr. 17
Measurements: L. 8, W. 100 cm
Height above the ground: c. 1 m
Condition: Well preserved
Bibliography: LD VI: 12, pl. 82 no. 186; Graff. Silsile 276 SB 1 4067; I. Thèbes à Syène 153; TM Text ID 54357
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
Apollonios, Hermias |
Commentary
The signature runs over the central part of a rope hole, intact at the time of production (see Fig. 21). Adjacent ankhs (GeSE.Q24.TS.P32–33) were probably produced with the same metal tool as the text and may represent the two individuals.9
The alphas in the two names are different and it seems that they were not written by the same person.
No. 18
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.TS.Inscr. 28–29
Measurements: L. 9, W. 114 cm
Height above the ground: c. 0.5 m
Condition: Well preserved
Bibliography: LD VI: 12, pl. 82 no. 185; Graff. Silsile 261; SB I 4066; I. Thèbes à Syène 152; TM Text ID 54341
| 1. |
|
| 2. |
|
| 1. |
|
| 2. |
|
| 1. |
Pamonthes Pachnoub(is) |
| 2. |
son of Petechnoubis |
Commentary
The text is located to the left of a trough, which was cut after the signature based on the fragmented beta (and absence of terminal iota and sigma). For
No. 19
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.TS.Inscr. 30
Measurements: L. 11, W. 64 cm
Height above the ground: c. 0.5 m
Condition: Well preserved
Bibliography: LD VI: 12, pl. 82 no. 185; Graff. Silsile 261; SB I 4066; I. Thèbes à Syène 152; TM Text ID 54341
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
Orses, (son of) Pames |
Commentary
This was not interpreted as the combination of a name and a patronym in previous publication (see I. Thèbes à Syène 152). However, the position of the two names suggests they were son and father. The name
No. 20
Inv.no.: GeSE.Q24.TS.Inscr. 36
Measurements: L. 15, W. 82 cm
Height above the ground: c. 0.5 m
Condition: Well preserved
Bibliography: Graff. Silsile 255; SB III 6910; I. Thèbes à Syène 151; TM Text ID 54337
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
|
| 1. |
(Gr.) Philota(s)? (Dem.) Pachnoumis |
Commentary
The ending of the text has been damaged in the process of producing a rope hole, making the letter following omega questionable. The signs to the right of the rope holes present an unfinished demotic name Pa-H̱nm,10 either intended as a patronym or a separate signature. Graff. Silsile 255 presents a slightly different drawing and read
Table 6
Individuals listed in Q24
|
No. |
Type of text |
Name in transliteration |
Name transcribed |
Type of individual |
Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
11 |
S |
|
Cerdo |
1st |
Q24.E |
|
11 |
S |
|
Caesius |
Father |
Q24.E |
|
12 |
S |
|
Pamentebos? |
1st |
Q24.E |
|
13 |
S |
|
Chares |
1st |
Q24.E |
|
14 |
I |
Q24.E |
|||
|
15 |
S |
|
Harpaesis |
1st |
Q24.TS |
|
15 |
S |
|
Psenmonthes |
Father |
Q24.TS |
|
15 |
S |
Ḥr-pa-I҆s.t ꜥꜣ? |
Harpaesis |
2nd (?) |
Q24.TS |
|
16 |
S |
|
Psennouris |
1st |
Q24.TS |
|
16 |
S |
|
Horus |
2nd |
Q24.TS |
|
16 |
S |
|
Herieus |
Father |
Q24.TS |
|
17 |
S |
|
Apollonios |
1st |
Q24.TS |
|
17 |
S |
|
Hermias |
Father |
Q24.TS |
|
18 |
S |
|
Pamonthes |
1st |
Q24.TS |
|
18 |
S |
|
Pachnoub(is) |
2nd |
Q24.TS |
|
18 |
S |
|
Petechnoubis |
Father |
Q24.TS |
|
19 |
S |
|
Orses |
1st |
Q24.TS |
|
19 |
S |
|
Pames |
Father |
Q24.TS |
|
20 |
S |
|
Philota(s)? |
1st |
Q24.TS |
|
20 |
S |
Pa-H̱nm |
Pachnoumis |
2nd |
Q24.TS |
(Grey = demotic; Type of text: I = Illegible; P = Proskynemata; S = Signature)
Nilsson (2020: 141 with Tab. 1).
Nilsson (2020: 142 with Tab. 2, 153 with Tab. 3).
Moreover, during excavations of the northern bluff of the stables several older extraction levels were revealed, clearly separated from the adjacent Roman extraction in block size (including drums), tool marks and the application of lever marks as opposed to wedges. Further studies are required prior to proposing any concluding estimations.
Graff. Silsile 253–291; I. Thèbes à Syène 150–157.
This is in contrast with I. Thèbes à Syène.
The demotic texts are to be published separately.
Cf.
Graff. Silsile 253–291.
The ankh may have been used as a male determinative within the quarry mark corpus. See Nilsson et al. (2019: 1–2).
DNb 408–409; 557.