Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pottery From The Predynastic Settlement at Halfia Gibli (Diospolis Parva)
Pottery From The Predynastic Settlement at Halfia Gibli (Diospolis Parva)
Sally Swain
Abstract
This article outlines the nature of an assemblage of pottery excavated at the Predynastic
Egyptian site of Halfia Gibli in Upper Egypt, within the context of its relative dating. The
nature of the assemblage is examined, which appears to have the characteristics of that from
a settlement. The ceramic technology is also discussed, ware groups are defined and
described, and a detailed description is given of all diagnostic sherds.
Key Words
Diospolis Parva, Hu, predynastic, settlement patterns, Hierakonpolis, technology,
material
Introduction
During July-August 1991 an ephemeral Predynastic settlement was excavated near
the modern village of Halfia Gibli, in the area of Diospolis Parva (Hu), on the west bank of
the Nile ca. 60 km southwest of Qena (Bard 1992). Fieldwork was directed by Kathryn Bard
(Boston University), with funding provided by the National Geographic Society.
Earlier surveys had revealed evidence of a Predynastic settlement in the area, which
was first investigated by Flinders Petrie in 1900-01 (Petrie 1901: 1-2; Bard 1990). The site
was threatened by a new irrigation project and the fieldwork was in the nature of a rescue
excavation. Previous cultivation had caused serious disturbance to the archaeological
deposits, which were, in any case, very deflated. The pottery did not come from well
stratified contents and does not represent a secure, chronological sequence, but it has value
in representing an assemblage of material from a Predynastic settlement.
Dating
All pottery found dated to the Predynastic period. It was dated to the period between
Naqada Ic and IIb-c in Kaiser’s chronology (Kaiser 1957), using criteria of shape and ware.
One sherd of Petrie’s White cross-lined class could be dated very precisely to Naqada Ic.
Other material in the assemblage suggested the terminus postquem of Naqada IIc. The
remaining material fitted into this date range.
Technology
The ceramic technology was typical of the period, which included coil-built and hand
pinched bodies, some of which may have been formed over a mold. Rims were turned or
hand-made and bases hand-pinched, and in some cases they were scraped or cut to shape.
These were either flat or more rarely pointed. Only a few, tiny pieces remain from pointed
bases. A number of rims were thickened either by squeezing up excess clay into a
thickening, or, more usually, by folding or rolling the rim back on itself to make a rounded
lip. No wheel-made wares occurred either from bodies or bases. It was clear that many
vessels were made in pieces. Joins could be seen where turned rims had been added to coil-
made bodies. It was also possible to see the addition of coils to bases consisting of flat cups
or cakes or clay. Bases were not turned.
Part of a handle was identified. It had been made by hand, using the pulling
technique in which a lump of clay is wetted and then pulled between the potter’s thumb and
fingers until a uniform length of clay is obtained. Drag marks which are characteristic of
this technique were left on the handle. A tiny ring-form jar stand may also have been made
by this technique. It has a diameter of 5.4 cm and had been formed into a ring, with the two
ends smoothed together. The top had been tapered to allow the stand to support a small jar
in a stable position.
All vessels showed evidence of careful manufacture and finishing. Those made of
fine Nile silts, and with slipped and burnished finishes, showed special attention to detail,
but vessels made from coarser clay and with less elaborate finishes also displayed
considerable attention to detail. They were well and sturdily made, carefully smoothed with
neatened joints, and then well fired. It is apparent from the care taken to finish vessels that
even domestic pottery was a valuable commodity. This view is further enhanced by the
presence of repair holes on a number of vessels where breakage had occurred.
Hierakonpolis region (Hoffman 1982). The pottery from Predynastic sites at Hierakonpolis
shows some striking resemblances to that from Halfia Gibli, and may also be placed in a
broadly similar time range.
Predynastic ceramics from Hierakonpolis include a preponderance of storage jars of
varying size with narrow mouths and an in-turning, rolled rim. These are of a very
characteristic type which also occur in some quantity at Halfia Gibli, but are rare in funerary
contexts. A large quantity of pottery from Hierakonpolis also takes the form of open bowls
and dishes. Painted material is rare at Hierakonpolis (as it is at other settlement sites such
as Armant and Hemamieh), but some sherds of White cross-lined class do occur. There is
a large quantity of material in both unslipped Nile silt C and in slipped and burnished red
and/or black finer Nile silt fabrics.
Trays of the type described above and in a similar fabric also occur at Hierakonpolis,
but are not known from funerary contents.
The pattern of settlement pottery at Hierakonpolis does, therefore, seem to accord
well with what is known of the material from Halfia Gibli. The material also fits with what
is known of settlement pottery from the nearby sites of Armant and Hemmamieh (Mond and
Myers 1937: Pl. 64; Brunton and Caton Thompson 1928: Pl. 76), especially the presence of
large quantities of coarse, straw-tempered storage vessels and bowls, and dishes and smaller
vessels in slipped and burnished finishes. The use of roll-rimmed jars, a lack of painted
pottery, and the use of types of decoration seem to be characteristic of settlements but not
burials. Particularly important in this last group is the occurrence of pottery which has been
burnished without being slipped. This burnishing is often found on the rim of even quite
large vessels and is done in decorative bands. These traits are also known to occur in the
settlements of both Armant and Hemmamieh.
Also important is the use of incised or punctate decoration, which is especially well
represented at Armant. This kind of decoration is extremely rare in funerary pottery, but
seems to be well represented in settlements, including Halfia Gibli.
Ware Groups
Twelve ware groups were identified at the site. Ware is defined here as being the
overall combination of fabric, surface treatment, color, and decoration, which gives each
class its characteristic appearance. The ware groups comprise the following:
1. Uncoated Surface. This ware includes vessels of Nile silts A, B2, C, D, and E. The
surface varies from a pale buff (7.5Yr 6/4) to reddish brown (between 5YR 4/4 and 5YR
3/2), to red (10R 4/4) and dense black. There is a great variation between the color readings
given here. The surface is self-slipped or wet-smoothed. This is often irregular over the
surface of the vessel and seems in many cases to have been incidental rather than a deliberate
slip. It probably resulted from the potter running wet hands over the vessel surface, although
this is not always the case. This type of surface is undecorated. This ware group may be
identified with Petrie’s R class (Petrie 1901: 10) and with the straw-tempered ware identified
at Hierakonpolis (Hoffman 1982: 68).
2. Uncoated with burnished surface. Vessels of the Nile silts in 1 above also occur in this
ware. The color ranges between buff (7.5YR 6/4) and black. The coloration is due to the
type and firing of the clay and not to the use of a slip (this is also true of ware group 1). The
162 Swain
burnish does not produce a fine, even gloss but occurs in wide bands on the inner and/or
outer surface usually at the rim, although this is not always the case. The burnish is done
in wide bands which are either concentric or which form a criss-cross effect. It may have
been felt that this treatment reduced porosity, but when it occurs on the outer rim of a closed
form, it can only have served a decorative function.
3. Red-slipped and burnished inside and outside. This treatment was used exclusively for
vessels of Nile silts A, B2, and D. The finish, achieved by using an iron rich slip, varied
from a deep, plum red (10R 3/6) to a weak reddish-brown (between 7.5R 4/4 and 2.5YR
4/4). It was enhanced by careful burnishing the whole vessel (on both surfaces in the case
of open forms). Some closed forms also have a band of burnishing on the inner surface of
the rim. This gives the surface a compact and characteristic sheen, which may have helped
to reduce porosity, but acted mainly as a decorative device. Although the fabric is, in many
cases, tempered with fine sand and straw, this ware group is identified with Petrie’s P class,
and with the untempered plum-red ware at Hierakonpolis (Hoffman 1982: 68 ff.).
4. Red-slipped and burnished outside. This treatment resembles that described above (3),
but was used only on the exterior of a closed form where the interior was inaccessible.
5. Red-slipped and burnished inside. This treatment resembles that described above (3), but
was used only on the exterior of a closed form where the interior was inaccessible.
6. Red-slipped and burnished inside and outside. This treatment was used only for vessels
of Nile silt A and B2. The color was probably achieved by the reduction firing of an iron
rich slip (Hodges 1982). The color is a characteristic, intense black with a fine, high burnish
that often results in a metallic appearance. In some cases, black rim sherds may well be
remnants of bi-chrome red and black vessels. One sherd from the base of a vessel was black,
and burnished inside and outside, indicating that monochrome black-burnished vessels did
exist. This ware was used for open and closed forms. Some closed vessels have a band on
the inner surface of the rim.
7. Black-slipped and burnished outside. This treatment resembles that described above (6),
but in this case the treatment is used only on the exterior of the vessel. Petrie (1901: 9)
ascribes black-burnished pottery to the category of fancy forms. It is quite evident, however,
that it forms a separate although small ware-group related to the red and black and red bi-
chrome material which occurs much more commonly in the Predynastic repertoire.
8. Bi-chrome red- and black-slipped with burnishing. This is the ware described by Petrie
as “black-topped red ware” (Petrie 1901: 8). As the name implies, the vessels usually have
a red body which can be identified with ware groups 3, 4, and 5. In addition, they have a
black band (ware groups 6 and 7), encircling the mouth. The surface is burnished, often to
a high sheen. This style only occurs on closed vessels and in fabrics Nile silt A, B2, and D.
9. Black-slipped inner and red-slipped outer surface with burnishing. This is a variant of the
preceding ware group found only on open forms where the inner surface is black-slipped and
burnished, and the outer, red-slipped and burnished. The surfaces resemble those of groups
3-5 and 6-7. Nile silts A and B2 are the only fabrics which occur in this ware. The term bi-
chrome has been preferred for both these ware groups since two colors have been
deliberately combined to give a particular effect.
10. White cross-lined Ware. This ware, also defined by Petrie is the characteristic decorated
pottery of the Naqada I phase (Petrie 1901: 9). The decorated surface, which could either
be the inner surface of an open form, or the outer surface of a closed form, was red-slipped
JSSEA 30 (2003) 163
and burnished in the manner of Ware group 4. This surface was then decorated with
geometric and other designs in white, cream, or pink paint. Only one sherd of this type was
found at Halfia Gibli. It took the form of a rim from a deep, steep-sided bowl. The profile
was preserved to a height of 6.2 cm. It flared widely to a direct rim with a rounded profile
(Figure 8c). The decoration was painted on the interior surface and consisted of a group of
concentric semicircles running across the top section of the rim, and a group of five parallel,
diagonal lines in the middle of the vessel’s interior.
11. Incised Ware. Vessels of this ware group have a finish which is identical to that of ware
group 1, except that an incised decoration was added while the clay was still damp. This
was probably before the clay reached the leather hard stage, as the edges of the incisions
show no sign of chipping or flaking. A pattern was cut into the surface of the clay using a
sharp tool. The most common motifs were criss-cross lines. Sherds of this type are rare at
Halfia Gibli, where only three body sherds from closed forms were excavated.
12. Punctate Ware. Vessels of this ware group have a finish which is identical to that of
Ware group 1, except that an impressed decoration was added while the clay was still damp.
This decoration was made by pressing a pointed or patterned tool into the wet clay, which
left behind a series of impressions. Two sherds of this ware from Halfia Giblia come from
the rims of roll-rimmed jars. In both cases the design had been impressed with a tool which
has left ring marks in the clay. One sherd seems to be covered with random dots, while the
other is patterned with a zig-zag design.
Conclusions
It is apparent that the pottery from Halfia Gibli relates very closely to that of other
known Predynastic settlements. If the quality of different ware groups is considered, it is
clear that the assemblage is dominated by uncoated and uncoated burnished wares of Nile
silts B2 and C. About 83% of the material from the site belonged to these two ware groups,
the first being by far predominant. (No detailed statistical work has been attempted with the
pottery from Halfia Gibli because of the deflated nature of the site.)
This is exactly what would be expected at a settlement site, and it is also the pattern present
at Hierakonpolis. The types of vessels present in this ware group are mainly roll-rimmed
jars of varying types and sizes (Figures 3; 4, 4b, 4c; and 5), and open bowl forms also in
a variety of shapes and sizes. This again reflects the pattern at Hierakonpolis where, “roll-
rimmed jars are by far the dominant vessel type, accounting for about 70% of all identifiable
rim sherds. The next most common type is shallow bowls/dishes/lids” (Hoffman 1982: 72).
The Halfia Gibli site also reflects the pattern at Hierakonpolis in that the next most
dominant group of material belongs to the ware groups which include a red- and/or black-
slipped surface with a burnished finish. The remaining 17% of the material is almost all of
these ware groups, the exceptions being the very small number of decorated sherds. Of the
sherds in these ware groups the vessel types are, as far as it is possible to tell, evenly divided
between open and closed forms. Monochrome black material is much less common than red.
There are only two definite examples of bi-chrome red and black vessels, both of a type
commonly found in burials as well as in settlement material. It is, however, very likely that
some of the apparently monochrome black rim sherds were from vessels of this type.
Painted pottery is extremely rare in all known Predynastic settlement assemblages,
although one sherd of White cross-lined Ware was found at Armant (Mond and Myers 1937:
164 Swain
Pl. 54:6), and the ware is also known as Hierakonpolis (Hoffman 1982: 16, 66-85). It is,
therefore, consistent to see it represented at Halfia Gibli by a single sherd. Its scarcity is
suggestive of the possibility that painted pottery of this type had a much more important role
as a mortuary offering than as a domestic ware, especially as it occurs with much greater
frequency in funerary contexts.
Sherds decorated with incised and punctate design are also extremely rare, being
represented by only five pieces from the entire Halfia Gibli assemblage. Still, their presence
is significant in suggesting that this material has a character which is different from that of
mortuary assemblages, since this type of decoration does not occur in graves, but is known
from various settlement sites, with Armant being especially important.
The presence of Nile silt E, a porous clay containing large quantifies of rounded
sand grains, is also significant, since this type of clay is not known in funerary contexts, nor
was it identified by Petrie. But it does occur at Hierakonpolis, where it is designated “grit
tempered ware.” At Hierakonpolis, as at Halfia Gibli, its presence is rare. At Halfia Gibli,
it seems only to have been used for large, open platters, similar to types found at
Hierakonpolis, but unlike material found in graves.
The relative quantity and type of sherds from Halfia Gibli would appear to fit into
the overall pattern of ceramics from other settlement sites in Predynastic Egypt. The
dominant presence of undecorated vessels made from coarse Nile silt clays, the use of
particular vessel shapes, especially roll-rimmed jars and flat trays, the scarcity of decorated
pottery, and the use of incised decoration all suggest that such is the case. Although the site
was badly disturbed, the material is both valuable and significant.
Bibliography
Bard, K.A. 1992. Preliminary Report: The 1991 Boston University Excavations at Halfiah
Gibli and Semaineh, Upper Egypt. Newsletter of the American Research Center in
Egypt 158/159: 11-15.
_____. 1990. Predynastic Settlement Patterns in the Hiw-Semaineh Region, UpperEgypt.
Nyame Akuma 32: 2-4.
Brunton, G., and G. Caton Thompson. 1928. The Badarian Civilisation., London: British
School of Archaeology in Egypt.
Hodges, H. 1982. Black-Topped Pottery an Empirical Study. Bulletin de Liason du Groupe
international d’Étude de la Ceramique égyptienne 7: 45-51.
Hoffman, M.A. 1982. The Predynastic of Hierakonpolis – An Interim Report. Cairo:
Egyptian Studies Association, Publication Number 1.
Kaiser, W. 1957. Zur inneren Chronologie der Naqadakultur. Archaeologia Geographica 6:
69-77.
Mond, R., and R.O. Myers. 1937. The Cemeteries of Armant. London:EgyptExploration
Society.
Nordström, H.- ., and J.D. Bourriau. 1993. Ceramic Technology: Clays and Fabrics.
Fasicle 2 in An Introduction to Ancient Egyptian Pottery, Do. Arnold and J.D.
Bourriau, eds. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1921. Corpus of Prehistoric Pottery. London: British School of Archaeology
in Egypt.
JSSEA 30 (2003) 165
_____. 1901. Diospolis Parva. The Cemeteries of Abadiyeh and Hu., London: Egypt
Exploration Fund.
List of sherds
Rim-sherds, bases, and other significant finds from Halfia Gibli are listed as follows,
according to the number of the excavated unit. The list is selective, but includes all the rims
which were found. They were recorded and drawn at the site and are included here. Of the
bases, those which could be drawn are included, although others were also found that have
been described above. The bases shown here reflect the material as a whole, except that no
pointed base was found which was complete enough to draw. Other pieces include the jar
stand, handle and decorated body sherds. The material is divided into the ware groups
described above and subdivided into open and closed forms. The numbers after each entry
indicate the number of the drawing in the figures. Diameters are given in centimetres. All
the drawings are to the same scale, indicated on the figures.
57
HG 3/183/79/L1A. Nile Silt B2. Diameter 10 cm. Flat base of a jar. Hand-made,
pinched and cut to shape with coils built on to form vessel body. Scraped finish inside
and out. 58
HG 203/174/L2B. Nile Silt C. Diameter 10 cm. Flat base of a jar. Hand-made, pinched
and cut to shape. Scraped finish out. Smoke stained. 59
HG 1.3.4.D. Nile Silt B2. Diameter 9 cm. Complete profile of a ring-form jar-stand.
Pinched from a circular coil of clay. Irregularly shaped. 60
HG 1.3.4.H. Nile Silt C. Diameter 11 cm. Flat base of a jar. Hand-made, cut and
pinched to shape. Cut down after breakage for re-use as a pot stand. 61
HG 1.3.4.J. Nile Silt B2. Small handle, pulled to shape from wet clay. 62
HG 18/165/L2A. Nile Silt D. Body sherd of a closed form, re-cut for use as a gaming
piece. 22
Red slip and burnished inside and outside Figure 6b (page 180)
HG 96/NW/2A. Nile Silt A. Diameter 16 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. 1
HG 1.1.1.F. Nile silt A. Diameter 16 cm. Direct, in-turned rim of a bowl. 2
HG 1.2.1.B. Nile Silt A. Diameter 18 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. 3
HG 1.3.1.C. Nile Silt A. Diameter 14 cm. Direct rim of round-bottomed bowl. 4
HG 1.3.4.C. Nile Silt A. Diameter 8 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. 5
HG 1.4.1.A. Nile Silt A. Diameter 18 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. 6
HG 7/187/165/L2B. Nile Silt A. Diameter 22 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. 7
HG 199/159/F43B. Nile Silt A. Diameter 18 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. Repair holes
drilled through the body of the sherd after firing. 8
HG 200/159/F8A. Nile Silt A. Diameter 15 cm. Direct rim of a deep bowl or basin. 9
Black slip and burnished inside and outside Figure 7b (page 181)
HG 1.1.1.E. Nile Silt A. Diameter 14 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. 1
HG 1.3.2.K. Nile Silt A. Diameter 15 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. 2
HG 7/187/164/L21B. Nile Silt D. Diameter 16 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. 3
HG 199/159/F43F. Nile Silt A. Diameter 25 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. Repair hole
drilled through the body of the sherd after firing. 4
HG 1.1.1.B. Nile Silt A. Diameter 17 cm. Direct, in-turned rim of a bowl. 5
HG 187/164/L2A. Nile Silt A. Diameter 11 cm. Direct, upright rim of a jar. Two repair
JSSEA 30 (2003) 171
Red slip and burnished outside, black slip and burnished inside Figure 8b (page
182)
HG 1.3.2.E. Nile Silt A. Diameter 18 cm. Direct rim of a bowl. 1
White Cross-lined class. Red burnished inside and outside. Figure 8c (page 182)
HG 5/200/159/F43A. Nile Silt A. Diameter 14 cm. Direct, out-turned rim of a jar, Petrie
Corpus, P1. XXXIV, 76R. 1