8'

INAA* OF THE POSTPHARAONIC POTTERY
IN THE COLLECTION OF THE MUSEUM
OF FINE ARTS IN BUDAPEST

HEDVIG GY6RY

The pottery collection of the Department of Egyptian Antiquities of the Museum of
Fine Arts in Budapest contains a considerable number of postpharaonic vessels, unfor-
tunately unprovenienced except for one cup from Alexandria, bought in 1907. We
also know that at least five pieces are from the collection of Philippe Back, who fi-
nanced the excavations at Sharuna and Gamhud. I could only identify four of these,
however. About the other pieces we know practically nothing.

With a few exceptions, the material of these vessels is Nile Silt C, in general
medium-hard (Mohs 3)-a hastily made ware for poor households. The vessels some-
times have a red slip or lime wash. Shapes are mostly complete, but the surfaces are in
poor condition-worn, patinated, or corroded. They were restored a few decades ago
and completed with plaster. Most of the common shapes of late antiquity are repre-
sented, along with some earlier types (figures. 8.1-30).

To learn more about the relationships of the vessels to each other, their ori-
gins, and their dates of production, we have taken samples for Instrumental Neutron
Activation Analysis (INAA). Samples were taken only from the ordinary vessels; i.e.,
no miniature plates or huge jars were included. We also tested some later period samples
of pottery which could have been used in later times. Results are shown in figure 8.31
and in table 8.1. Preliminary analysis indicates the following.

*      The marl clay and the Nile silt wares are clearly separated. Only

figure 8. 21 is problematic, for it is Marl Clay C with many limestone
particles.

*      The Nile silt wares are divided into two main groups on the first level,

and two others, both represented by only one piece, on higher levels.
*      The differences between the two main groups are not significant as

samples taken from the same vessel (figure 8.22) are found in both
groups.

* INAA stands for Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis.

Postpharaonic Pottery

2

51.2072; Ht: 26 cm;
MaL Diam.: 21 cm
From Gamhoud?

51.1534; Ht: 9 cm;

Max. Diam.: 17.6 cm;
Provenience unknown

3

4

51.1546; Ht: 6.1 cm;
Max. diam.: 12 cm;

Provenience unknown

5

51.1547; Ht.: 12.6 cm;

Max. Diam.: 13.15 cm;
Provenience unknown

6

56.44-E; Ht. 16 cm;
Max.Diam.: 14 cm;

Provenience unknown

56.137-E; Ht 7.3 cm;
Max. Diam.: 15 cm;

Provenience unknown

Figures 8.1 through 8.6

1

125

126    Egyptian Pottery

7

51.2009; Ht.: 13 cm;

Max. DIam.: 19.3 cm;
Provenlence unknown

4,

8

56.45E; Hlt.: 12.8 cm;
Max. Dia: 21 cm;

Provenience unknown

9

56.42-E; Ht.: 8.6 cm;
Ma   DIan: 9 cm;

Provenience unknown

10

56.49-E; lt: 12.8 cm;
Max. DIa. 12.25 cm;
Provenlence unknown

11

51.2071; Ht.: 14 cm;
Max. Dian: 28 cm;

Provenience unknown

12

51.1543; Ht.: 18 cm;
Max. diana: 11 cm;

Provenlence unlmown

Figures 8.7 through 8.12

Postpharaonic Pottery  127~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

13

51.1535; Ht.: 9 cm;

MaL Diam.: 22 cm;

Provenience unknown

14

56.138-E; Ht.: 20 cm;
Max Diam.: 13.5 cm;
Provenience unknown

15

51.2069; Ht.: 31 cm;
Max. diam.: 24 cm;

Provenience unknown

16

51.1521; Ht. 7.4 cm;
Ma   DIam: 16 cm;

Provenience unknown

17

51.1545; Ht.: 5.7 cm;

Max. Diam.: 15.5 cm;
From Gamhoud?

18

56.45-E; ht: 15.6 cm;
Max. Diam.: 15 cm;

Provenience unknown

19

51.2074; Ht.: 4 cm;

Max. dIam.: 12.7 cm;

Provenience unknown

Figures 8.13 through &19

Postpharaonic Pottery

127

128    Egyptian Pottery

20

56.43-E; Ht: 7.6 cm;
Max. Diam.: 15 cm;

Provenience unknown

21

51.2073; lt: 7.5 cm;

Max. Diam.: 10.5 cm;
Provenience unknown

22

56.47-E; Ht.: 3.2 cm;

Max. Diam.: 10.9 cm;
Provenience unknown

23

51.1544; Ht.: 7.2 cm;

Max. Diam.: 12.7 cm;
Provenience unknown

24

51.2078; Ht.: 6 cm;

Max. Diam.: 10.5 cm;
Provenience unknown

25
Ht.: 6 cm;

Max. DIam.: 12.8 cm;
Provenience unknown

26

56.41; Ht: 8.1 cm;

Max. Diam.: 17 cm;

Provenience unknown

Figures 8.20 through &26

Postpharaonic Pottery

28

51.1537; Ht:10.5cm;

Max. Diam.: 14.8 cm;
Provenience unknown

29

54.331; Ht.: 15 cm;

Max. Diam.: 6.8 cm;

Provenience unknown

75.2-E; Ht.: 10.5 cm;

Max. Diam.: 14.8 cm;
Provenience unknown

30

56.51-E; Ht.: 77 cm;
Max. Diam.: 57 cm;

Provenience unknown

Figures 8.27 through 8.30

*      The differences within and between the two main groups are there-

fore so small that their material can theoretically belong to the same
lump of clay.

*      The Late period types' samples match exactly the other pottery, which

shows unchanged clay sources.

From these statements we can conclude that the vessels analyzed fall into five or six
different fabrics, one or two of marl clay and four of alluvial Nile silt. The marl clay
group(s) corresponds to Marl A, while the Nile silt groups are A (fig. 8.14) and C (the
other three groups). For the next step I would like to get analyzed material with
known provenience to see if these fabrics could be located. If anyone has any ques-
tions or suggestions, please contact me by mail or fax.

27

129

130    Egyptian Pottery

19 1
15
26
6

21 -
22 1
16 l
12
7

28
13
4
17
20
11
8X
24
x
23
10
3
+
25
2

18
27
5
1
9
14

x    -  +

Figure 8.31 - Dendrogram

Postpharaonic Pottery      131

O 9" n39 w V" " ""- O & " ssh "  O "  s^9" " .

KM :"  6           M* :"  rv MO g :- 44  iM g g  M- :M4
C"  -4 azMcn  b b A CA            0   o c aXS  -@M

. ..b .  .. .  .4  .) .  .  .-4   .) .-  ..  .- ,n   .-4 .L  .  .&  .L .-4   .4  .4 .4   .4 .

<0 CL" ka  in  0 A   Cn   t   Q-.  19  t2 C; QL O" :.A  Ct   O :-1 0t  t   ;m   bD C;   OM g   :-. 3. :-

(A o000000400       0000     000    000400 CA (Ac D C 4C

46 Ab   CDA) 46-P  I~6 43   1)  46 A)~ OI 0)C  CO  A
ol(  0  o i  (A (A  co tn  a4 CA  a to  K) 0  t c co cn  a cli  c x a& s o&

O* g O OD O4 O  OD O :- " 8 co Q3 OM 8 g -4 O g g g g 00000  _ >

uzQ X v aa s s oo a s0

o    ~~~~~oS  OOOO  000     0   00    0  00

F' .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .   . P 9 .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .

_~~~~~~~~-       -4  -4  -4  -4  ch t nsX aQ%) (A   )  o4  c )  4 -4  -4  CY  a) 0) 0) (A  a(s.

X~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C              a   o   4 (Y  0  CA CA --  asooss9& "  o CA) a">@XocDc

0000000000000 ~~~~~88     -00      0  00  0 00
4)

@ a o     cr3 COD Coo           N   O) 1 4  0 -4 04 0        Q oQ

CA 0  h 46 CA O   CA OCO CO CO  O) (A Ob O) Ob  CA CA O A CA O   O ) (A CA CA CA) OO o
)        0000000000000             00000000000 0000 0
4)

=~~~~~~~ o o   4 o 4 o4 o o  :  oooooooo o4 CO   Ooo O, o  a
4)      N) ..a N4  - M   -  N). -4  -  .  N 4 .  M  -  - .  M  -4 -4 -4 C. N) -4 OD -a OD --4 -.  OD

>~~~~ g     t   bD b:- iDb X s b bD D  Q   O g g g:P O Xb LO: o m

v @ ~~~~C3  D OA, CD Ot co  C  CO CO  0  O 0  CA) 0)  "  CA N3 C n oD

o6

>      Co CD. N)  a   04 CO - N( 0      0 0 0     r

CD 0) -o  CD 0) -4 -  00  -  co  VI - ) -O -4 -D -4 Cn 0)0 N) CQ (   .  a  O C  CA C."

c      i       0       O  Q            c c; ^ c; M O b a) v c; o c; c  CDC  o C0)0   C  ) N)cn1  <

132    Egyptian Pottery

APPENDIX

BALLA MARTA

Instrumental neutron activation analysis was used for provenience studies of
ceramics. Eleven trace elements and Fe were determined by the multi-isotope com-
parator.

The measurements were carried out according to the following steps:
1)     Sample preparation:

The surface of the ceramics was cleaned by a diamond grinder at the
place of sampling. We drew 50-100 mg of powder samples by the
help of a conical diamond drill. The samples were heated in a fur-
nace at 900?C for one hour to turn up the absorbed moisture. After
cooling, the samples were placed in small polyethylene capsules fol-
lowed by accurate mass weighing.
2)     Irradiation:

The samples were irradiated in the nuclear reactor of the Technical
University of Budapest at a thermal neutron flux of 1016 n m-2s-1 for
8-12 hours time. Together with the samples, ruthenium compound
was irradiated as a flux-monitor and universal standard.
3)     Measurements:

Each sample was measured twice, 4-6 days and 25-30 days after the
irradiation to ensure optimal conditions to determine the greatest
amount of isotopes as possible. For gamma-ray spectrometry mea-
surements a HpGe semiconductor detector was used, produced by
ORTEC (energy resolution was 2 KeV for the 1333KeV peak of Co-
60; relative efficiency was 12.6%), connected to a CANBERRA-80
type multichannel analyser. Evaluation of the gamma spectra was
carried out by a PDP 11/23 computer using the program system
"spectran F."

The accuracy and reproducibility of our measurements were controlled by a
standard reference material called standard pottery prepared by Perlman and Asaro
(1969). For grouping the samples according to the similarity of their trace element
distributions, cluster analyses were used. As a similarity index we used the Euclidean
distances.

In order to calculate what deviation can be considered significant among the
samples, an investigation of homogeneity must be carried out. After this, it can be
decided whether or not the deviation of the sherds calculated from the analytical data
is significant. In this case we had no opportunity to take more samples than two each
from three sherds.

REFERENCES

PERLMAN, I., and F. ASARO

1969  Pottery Analysis by Neutron Activation. Archaeometry 11: 21-52.