Where
do you look for a lost city?
Locating a feature as large as the settlement and infrastructure
that accommodated the ancient Egyptian pyramid builders is
very different than locating an object or a single building.
Landscape analysis combined with survey is crucial. The
Giza terrain itself tells much of the story of pyramid building
and something about the builders themselves.
AERA’s search was helped by eliminating
any areas where the ancient Egyptians would NOT have built
their pyramid settlement.
The Pyramids are surrounded by other monuments of the Old Kingdom (2575-2465
BC) that restrict the available space on the Giza Plateau:
- Pyramid temples, causeways, and valley temples once extended
east of all three pyramids.
- Queens’ pyramids sit on the south and east sides
of the Menkaure and Khufu pyramids respectively.
- Huge mastaba tombs stand east and west of Khufu’s
pyramid.
- The Khufu quarry lies southeast of Khafre’s pyramid,
south of his causeway and north of Menkaure’s causeway.
Petrie’s barracks
In his book, The
Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh (1883), Sir W.M. Flinders Petrie wrote of excavating
inside a set of huge comb-like galleries just west of the second Giza pyramid. Petrie
stated unequivocally that these were workmen’s barracks. But was his analysis
correct?
Petrie carefully described the composition and dimensions of the galleries,
which are 30 meters (98.4 feet) long and 3 meters (9.8 feet) wide, extending from
a back western wall of an enclosure 400 meters (1312.3) long and 85 meters (278.8)
wide. He noted “many fragments of statues were found, in diorite and alabaster,
of the fourth dynasty style: and among a large quantity of quartzite scraps lying
on the surface…part of a life-size head.” (The Pyramids and Temples
of Gizeh, Petrie, 1883).
Royal statue fragments might be out of place in a workman’s barracks
and Petrie described no cultural material that would indicate the domestic life
of a barracks.
Giza Plateau Mapping Project excavations: 1988-89
In order to test Petrie’s hypothesis, which had been
accepted by Egyptologists for over 100 years, we proposed
to re-excavate Petrie’s barrack galleries along with
two other areas at Giza to look for evidence of a pyramid-age
settlement.
Using our GPMP survey control network, surveyor David Goodman ran three north-south
lines along the 30 meter wide (98.4 feet) barrack structures, creating front,
back, and middle divisions. Then we opened about 11 excavation squares in the
front, middle, or back of the galleries.
Evidence of craftwork
Near the entrances of one gallery we found fragments of figurines:
lion figurines, a small statue of a king, and what looked
like possible models of larger architectural pieces.
We found rear portions of the galleries nearly empty. If workmen had been living,
cooking, and sleeping in these galleries for decades, we would expect to find
the kind of settlement debris so common wherever people lived in ancient times:
pottery, ash, bone, and other refuse.
The figurines, along with pieces of copper, malachite, and feldspar, were evidence
of craft working, leading us to the conclusion that Petrie’s barracks were
not barracks at all.
The material we found suggests that at least parts of the
galleries were used as a craft production area. But the overall
structure is huge. Other galleries may have been used for
storage, perhaps even grain storage, though we didn’t
find good evidence for grain.
Alternatively, most of the galleries may have been left empty, a state administrator’s
idea that never took final form. The galleries may have served as symbolic storage
for the pharaoh’s afterlife like the vast underground galleries west of the Step
Pyramid complex at Saqqara, and they may never have been used at all.
So if Petrie was wrong, where did the ancient pyramid builders
live?
(For more on the Khafre galleries, see Lehner and Conard, Journal of the American
Research Center in Egypt, XXXVIII, 2001.)

Another settlement location?
Mark Lehner had proposed another possible settlement location
(see MDAIK 41, 1985)—but while initially promising,
Area B quickly proved an unlikely location.
Area B is a broad elevated bowl on the Maadi
Formation due south of the Great Pyramid. Karl Kromer excavated
the northeastern part of the bowl (1971-1975), revealing a
sizeable dump of settlement debris.
Kromer found seal impressions with the names of Khufu (2551-2528
BC) and Khafre (2520-2494 BC) but none of Menkaure (2490-2472
BC). He was probably right in his assessment that the cultural
material was dumped from an ancient settlement that was razed
somewhere nearby.
When we inspected the bottom of the bowl early in the 1988-89
season, we found natural marl clay just below a shallow sand
cover. The bowl may have been a quarry for tafla, the buff-colored
desert clay that the ancient builders used as plaster and
mortar in ramps and embankments.
It’s possible that a settlement once occupied Area B,
and that the quarrymen razed the settlement, dumping the material to a far corner
as they exploited the bowl for more tafla. It is also possible that the settlement
remains derived from an older phase of occupation that the builders removed from
Area A.
We therefore decided to focus our efforts on Area A.
A city under the sand
In 1934, Egyptian archaeologist, Selim Hassan excavated test
trenches in a patch of low desert extending about 450 meters
(1476.3 feet) south of a colossal stone wall called Heit el-Ghourab
(Wall of the Crow). The wall is situated some 400 meters (1300
feet) south of the Sphinx. Hassan hit mud-brick walls and
pottery in all his trenches, indicating that ruins of a large
settlement lay below the thick sand layer that blanked the
site.
Hassan’s 1934 results, together with more pottery and mud brick walls
exposed when people from nearby riding stables removed the sand cover, led Mark
Lehner to propose in his MDAIK article that a major settlement of the 4th Dynasty
once thrived south of the Wall of the Crow. We designated this Area A.
We limited our 1988-89 excavation in Area A to five 5 X 5
meter squares (16.4 X 16.4 feet) just at the base of the sandy eastern slope of
the Maadi Formation ridge. Every square produced evidence of ancient settlement.
The easternmost of these squares (Squares A1, A2,
and A4) produced the most promising evidence of a settlement for workers.
We found two buildings in these squares: one building of alluvial
mud brick and another of stone and mud mortar, plastered inside
with tafla (desert clay).
The late phase of activity in these squares was connected with
bread making. We recovered a considerable number of sherds
(broken pottery) from large, bell-shaped bread moulds, of
the kind called bedja in Old Kingdom scenes. It appeared that
these were dumped all at once, suggesting a bakery in the vicinity.
Between the stone building and the mud brick structure we
found an alleyway filled with a dense refuse deposit rich
in bone, ash, sherd, and a number of clay sealings bearing
the name of Menkaure, builder of the third Giza Pyramid. Unlike
Kromer’s sealings in Area B, we found
our sealings in secure context within a settlement.
The main building, of fieldstone and clay, contained a series
of pedestals in two rows separated by a center wall. The pedestals
appeared to be the foundations for storage compartments.
A small closet-like compartment in the northeast corner contained three, smaller
pedestals. We called this the Pedestal Building. In subsequent
seasons, we have found many more of these pedestals in small compartments
and in long running rows at various places across the site.
In 1988-89, one old hypothesis had been tested and found
wanting: Petrie’s barracks were probably not barracks.
Another hypothesis proved to be problematic: Area
B might once have contained a settlement but, if
so, it was removed in antiquity.
Area A was just beginning to reveal its secrets. The Pedestal
Building would prove to be only the tail of a huge archaeological beast: the Lost
City of the pyramid builders.
|