In a number of ancient Egyptian mine burials of the second half of the 3rd millennium BC in Giza, there are small protrusions located in the corners of the mines and cut out in a single massif with a rock. Foreign researchers have already paid attention to these elements, but their exact purpose remained unclear. Based on the analysis of data obtained by the Russian Archaeological Expedition of the Institute of Internal Affairs of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Giza, the article presents various arguments in favor of the version that the corner projections belong to the "marks" deliberately left by ancient craftsmen at different stages of construction to record the volume of work performed. Such construction tags can help us understand the stages of construction of burial structures, in the preliminary planning of construction works, and in some cases find a connection between the structural details of the mine and the status of the buried person.

Keywords: Ancient Egypt, Ancient Kingdom, Giza, architecture, rock tombs, mine burials, construction markers, corner projections.

THE BUILDING CORNER MARKS IN THE SHAFTS OF THE LATE DYNASTY V AND DYNASTY VI AT GIZA: NOTES ON THE PRELIMINARY PLANNING OF THE EGYPTIAN ROCK-CUT TOMBS OF THE OLD KINGDOM

A number of rock-cut shaft graves, both in the Giza Necropolis and Saqqara Necropolis, have corner protrusions of the small size. Foreign researchers have already paid attention to these architectural elements, but their exact appointment remained unclear. The paper gives arguments in favour of the belonging of corner protrusions to the "marks " which were consciously left by workers at different stages of construction for fixing of amounts of completed work. The main data were obtained from a large number of the similar elements which have been found by the Russian Archaeological Mission at Giza. The building marks in corners of shafts relating to fixing of the amounts of works executed by workers can help to understand staging of construction, preliminary planning of construction works, and in some cases to find connections between constructive details of a shaft and a status of a buried person.

Keywords: Ancient Egypt, Old Kingdom, Giza, architecture, rockcul tombs, shaft graves, building marks, corner protrusions.

CORNER PROJECTIONS AT THE SITE OF THE RUSSIAN ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXPEDITION IN GIZA

In a number of mine burials located on the eastern tip of the Eastern Plateau at the site of the Russian Archaeological Expedition of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Giza, there are small protrusions located in the corners of the mines and cut in a single massif with a rock (Fig. 1).

The presence of protrusions is recorded in most of the shafts of a number of adjacent rock tombs of the V and VI dynasties (XXVI-XXII centuries BC): GE 12, GE 15, GE 17, GE 18, GE 47 and GE 49, as well as in several shafts in front of rock tombs: GE 59A-1, GE 59C-1, GE 45 and GE 60 (Fig. 2).

There are both single corner protrusions cut down only in one corner of the shaft, and group protrusions located in three or four corners approximately at the same height.-

VETOKHOV Sergey Vyacheslavovich, Junior Researcher at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Sergey VETOKHOV - Junior Research Fellow, Institute of Oriental Studies, RAS, Moscow.

page 46
at a certain height. Most often, the corner ledges are located closer to the mouth of the shaft or to the beginning of the entrance to the burial chamber. For example, the proximity of angular projections to the mouth of the shaft can be observed in such tombs as GE 12 and GE 47 (Fig. 3).

The location of angular projections in the lower part of the shafts-near the beginning of the entrance to the burial chamber-is observed in the shafts of such rock tombs as GE 12, GE 17, and in the shafts in front of these rock tombs (Figs. 2, 4).

In some mines (GE 17-2, GE 59A-1, GE 60), there are two rows of protrusions at different heights. The first row is closer to the mouth, the second-at the level of the entrance to the burial chamber (Fig. 5). It is noteworthy that in the GE 59A-1 shaft, the lower row of corner projections was made below the level of the passage to the burial chamber. And after the upper corner projections in this shaft, its profile changes dramatically (Fig. 6).

The angular projections recorded by us at the site of the Russian Archaeological Expedition of the Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Giza have various sizes, both small (8-9 cm in height, protruding only 3-4 cm) (tomb GE 12, shaft 4) and quite large (30-40 cm in height, shaft GE 60).

CORNER PROTRUSIONS ON OTHER SECTIONS

Similar elements can be found in the mines of not only rock tombs, but also many small mastabas of the Eastern and Western Giza plateau. The size of such angular projections also varies from small (just over 10 cm high) to quite large (30-40 cm in height).

At the site of the Polish Archaeological Expedition in Saqqara, to the west of the circumferential wall of the Djoser pyramid complex, angular projections were also found in the mastaba mine burials [Kuraszkiewicz, 2013, p. 250]. Mastabs date back to the late fifth and Sixth dynasties. Protrusions occur at different heights and in different places in the mines: close to the mouth of the mine, in the middle of the depth of the mine, at the level of the entrance to the burial chamber, and also close to the floor of the mine. Their size reaches up to 30x30 cm. The depth of the protrusions tends to the integer values of the small Egyptian cubit 1: 0.90 m-i.e. 2 cubits (0.90 m), 2.20-2.32 m-i.e. 5 cubits (2.25 m), 3.22-3.28 m-i.e. 7 cubits (3.15 m) and 4.58 m - i.e. 10 cubits (4.50 m).

The depth of incomplete shafts (or, as they are now considered, ritual ones [Rzeuska, 2006, p. 492-512]) most often coincides with the depth of angular projections in completed shafts with a burial chamber:

5 cubits (2.25 m): shaft 26 (2.20 m) and shaft 6 (2.02 m);

7 cubits (3.15 m): shaft 20 (3.30 m), shaft 19 (3.22 m) and shaft 118 (3.20 m).

DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF CORNER LEDGES

Based on the Saqqara material, Kuraszkiewicz suggested that the function of angular projections is directly related to the burial process of the deceased, but their exact purpose remains unclear at the moment [Kuraszkiewicz, 2011, p. 530-536]. He also cites the opinion of the Egyptologist V. Dobrev [ibid.], who assumed that the corner ledges were intended for installing a lamp on them, which was necessary in the process of cutting down the mine, but immediately expressed arguments against such an assumption and explained this by saying that the corner ledges are located at such a height that the lamp installed on them will not to give light when it is necessary for work in the burial chamber, moreover, all the corner projections have an inclined upper surface,on which the lamp will not stand.

THE FIRST ASSUMPTION IS VERTICALITY CONTROL

Our first assumption about the purpose of the angular projections is that they could serve to control the verticality when cutting down a burial shaft. The idea of such a purpose of these elements was born in the process of measuring works, when the verticality of the shaft, its profile was determined using a plumb line. Then the idea arose that

1 Small Egyptian cubit - 0.45 m; in addition to it, there was a royal Egyptian cubit-approx. 0.52 m. Further in the article, in all cases, the small Egyptian elbow is meant.

page 47
For the ancient masters, the corner ledge helped to control the verticality of the shaft, allowing the plumb line to be at some distance from the wall, hanging freely without touching it. In the mines of the mid-fifth dynasty, angular projections are not found, for example, in the tomb of Khafraankh and Chenti I, whose shafts are far from vertical and go like a screw from the mouth to the bottom, while the mines built later have noticeably better verticality of the walls, and it is in them that angular projections occur.

However, in the course of further analysis, we drew attention to shafts with corner elements, the walls of which are far from vertical, or the corner projections were located in places where it no longer made sense to control the verticality.

CORNER PROJECTIONS - CONSTRUCTION PLACEMARKS

From the chisel marks left on the walls of the shafts from leveling, it is clear that the corner projections were deliberately preserved. This is clearly seen in the photos C13121 OS and C13114 OS from the archive of J. R. R. Tolkien. Reisner. In other words, the angular protrusions were needed not during the process of cutting down the mine, but after the construction work was completed. Judging by the very small angular protrusions encountered, they were not some important, necessary structural detail and could hardly carry any load, play the role of a certain stop.

Mines with less thorough finishing work carry a little more information than well-leveled mines, and it was they who suggested a different version of the origin of the corner projections. For example, on the walls of the mine G 5236A (photos C14377 NS, C13114 OS and C13213-01 OS in the archive of J. R. R. Tolkien). Reisner), located on the Western plateau of Giza, at the same level with the corner ledges, the boundary of various stages of mine cutting is clearly visible. Such traces, when you can see a clear boundary between the various stages of work, located on the same level with the corner ledges, are quite common in the mastaba mines of the VI dynasty in the Giza necropolis.

This is a strong argument in favor of the version that the corner projections belong to the "marks" deliberately left by workers at different stages of construction to record the volume of work performed. This is why we encounter marks in the most unexpected places where the verticality control we originally intended is not at all appropriate, for example, in mines where corner marks are located close to the beginning of the entrance to the burial chamber (Fig. 4) or below it (Fig. 6).

Cutting down a mine is a time-and material-consuming task. Even in small mastabs on the Western Plateau of Giza (G 1367, G 1356, G 1303, etc.), there are mines located only in the ground part of the mastaba (i.e. in its masonry) and ending before the beginning of the rock or continuing in the rock, but noticeably narrowing to reduce labor costs (for example, mines G 4420A [Reisner, 1942, p. 502], G 4520A, G 4820A, G 4310A, G 4150A, G 4610A). Therefore, it was important to clearly record the amount of work performed by ancient workers. A simple mark with paint on the wall of the mine is unreliable - you can exaggerate the amount of work done by making it higher, and the saved fragment of rock ("mark") on the border of the previous cutting of another master or the same master, but the next stage of work is a convenient and inexpensive way. It would be wrong to spend a lot of time creating such markers, in this case they themselves remained between different stages of cutting - just when leveling the walls of the mine, the corners were not touched.

Thus, during the grinding of the mine walls, after rough crushing operations, at the borders between different stages of construction work, the builders left small corner protrusions - "marks".

Not all tombs or mines were built in one stage, so payment for such structures was made gradually. Hence, there is a stage of work and, accordingly, its payment, and payment for a specific stage was determined by the volume of work. For this purpose, the workers left marks to show the amount of work they had done. First, a shaft was cut down, for example, to a depth of 3 cubits (Fig. 7), then future vla-

page 48
businessmen accumulated funds and could continue cutting down the mine for another 4 cubits (as in the case of the GE 59C-1 mine). There are examples where mines were "harvested" to a depth of about two cubits, for example, the unfinished GE 44 mine was cut to a depth of 0.70-0.85 m, the GE 22-4 mine was cut to a depth of about 1 m, the GE 28 mine (south of the rock tomb of Chenti I) was cut to 1-1. 10 m, and in the rock tomb GE 48, opposite the false doors, the depth of the unfinished shaft is 0.65-0.80 m.

PRE-PLANNING AND OWNER STATUS

The phasing of the work, determined by the preliminary marking of the mines, is consistent with the idea of planning the Giza necropolis [Manuelian, 1998, p. 115-127]. Corner "marks" appear with the beginning of planning for the development of individual rock parts of the necropolis, when the marking of future rock tombs and mine burials was carried out. The mines were planned for a shallow depth - about 1 Egyptian cubit (=0.45 m), and in them we see angular "marks" close to the mouth of the mine.

Mines where we do not see corner marks located within a group of mines that have them are usually shallow-they could have been cut down in one stage (for example, GE 17-3, GE 17-5, GE 43, GE 39, GE 37, GE 36, GE 50, GE 51 mines (Fig. 2)).

If the corner "marks" are located close to the mouth of the mine (about 1 cubit), then most likely, when the marking was done, the future owner of this mine was still unknown. Presumably, such mines could have been intended in advance for a person of low social status.

With the angular "marks" located 3 cubits from the mouth (about 1.35 m), the mine was originally supposed to be at least 5 cubits deep (2.25 m). Considering that the depth of completed mines in the area of the Russian Archaeological Expedition in Giza varies from 1.16-3.65 m, only in isolated cases reaching a depth of 6.6 m (GE 17-1), 8.28-8.67 m (mine 38 in the Small Necropolis in front of the tomb of Khafraankh [Kormysheva, Malykh, Vetokhov, 2012, p. 210, fig. 87]) and 11.05 m (Hafraankh's shaft in his tomb G 7948 [Kormysheva, Malykh, Vetokhov, 2010, p. 16, fig. 4]), harvesting to a depth of 1.35 m was significant. Accordingly, the status of the future owner may have been assumed higher.

The fact that the social status of the buried person was reflected in the depth of the mine, the type and size of the burial chamber, writes M. Barta [Barta, 2013, p. 269]. It should not be forgotten that the richness of the chapel's decoration could reflect not so much the rank of the tomb owner as the level of his wealth (see, for example, [Roth, 1995, p. 2]).

Mention of mines that could have been previously carved to a depth of about one cubit, and finally cut down immediately before burial, when the status of its owner became clear, can be found in M. Barta [Barta, 2002, p. 292]. In one of his works, there is a description of mines that have a depth of about one meter, but remained incomplete - that is, without burial chambers [Barta, 2011, p. 185].

The southern shafts in tomb chapels are most often deeper than all the others and rarely have angular "marks", and if they do, then at a great depth (GE 17-1). The mine was not built to its final depth until the status of its future owner was known, and where the status was already clear, it was cut down immediately to a specific depth. It is precisely in these mines that we do not find angular "marks" (GE 12-2, GE 12-3).

It seems that in the rock tomb of Centi II (GE 12), all the shafts and burial chambers were not built at the same time, as can be seen from their different sizes and shapes (Fig. 8). Shaft 1, judging by the angular "marks", was made in two stages: first it was cut to a depth of 1.35 m (that is, 3 cubits), after which, at the second stage, they were deepened to 2.60 m. Mine 2 does not contain pronounced angular projections, but has a noticeable boundary between the stages at the same depth as the angular projections in the adjacent mine 1. Mine 4 also has two stages of construction: at first, its depth was about 0.25 m (half an elbow), after which the mine was deepened to 1.40-1.48 m (about 3 cubits) and added a very small burial chamber-a niche. Mine 5 was initially cut down to a depth of 0.56 m, after which it was extended to a depth of 2.73 m-

page 49
2.86 m. The depth of shaft 4 coincides with the depth of shafts 1 and 2 at their first stage of cutting. Hence, it can be assumed that mine 4 was planned deeper, approximately like mines 1 and 2.The uneven bottom of mine 4 and the presence of a high threshold to the burial chamber indicate that the cutting of the mine and the chamber was carried out at different stages.

The presence of corner "marks" in all the shafts of a rock tomb, for example in tomb GE 49 (Figure 9), may indicate that all the shafts were blanks and, possibly, even the entire tomb was a blank that did not have a specific owner at the initial stage of construction.

LABOR STANDARD

The shaft was cut in small horizontal portions. A groove was cut along the perimeter of the bottom of the mine with a copper or flint chisel, after which the resulting stone "island" at the bottom of the mine was crushed with large stones-hammers made of dolerite, basalt or granite. The depth of this "portion" was approximately 0.25 m. At the same depth, you can find angular " marks "in mines, for example, in GE 47 and GE 12-4 (Fig. 3). Let's call such a portion the" technological stage " of mine crushing (Fig. 11). Further, the cutting of the mine continued until the specified depth was reached. Let's call this depth the "labor norm". The size of such a norm was equated to integer values of cubits (1, 2, 3, etc.), which can be judged by the distance between the mouth of the shaft and the corner "marks" (Fig. 7, 10), the distance between the corner "marks" located at different levels in the same shaft (Fig. 5, 6 10), and between the "marks" and the bottom of the mine (Fig. 5, 7).

Two adjacent GE 52 and GE 60 shafts, located in the Small Necropolis in front of the rock tomb of Chenti I, were cut down simultaneously, each time in equal portions to the same depth (Figure 10). This is indicated by the angular "marks" in the GE 60 mine, which are on the same level as the traces at the borders of different stages of logging in the GE 52 mine. In the GE 60 mine, we observe four stages of construction, from the initial marking to a depth of about 2 cubits to the cutting of the burial chamber to a depth of about 10 cubits. This example clearly demonstrates the size of the labor rate used for cutting down these mines, equal to 2 cubits (0.90 m) in depth. It can be assumed that the labor rate was a pre-agreed amount of work, and its volume directly depended on the amount of payment. For example, T. N. Savelyeva, referring to G. Junker (Junker, 1947, p. 58), mentions that the rate of limestone development per worker in quarries was about 2 cubic meters (Savelyeva, 1971, p.100). The technology of cutting down a mine burial site and mining stone in quarries is somewhat different, but in this example we were interested in the very fact of rationing the amount of work.

The often repeated depth of angular "marks" in various mines, equal to 1 cubit (GE 49-3, GE 49A-1) or 3 cubits (GE 12-1, GE 45, GE 59C-1, GE 60), may indicate the standardization of work volumes in the era of the second half of the Ancient Kingdom.

TYPOLOGY OF ANGULAR PROJECTIONS

At this stage of research, we can distinguish three types of construction corner projections found in the Giza and Saqqara necropolises:

1. Type 1-building corner "placemarks". As a rule, they are small in size, slightly more than 10 cm high, and in very rare cases they reach large sizes-30-40 cm in height. Most often, the deeper the placemark is located, the larger it is.

2. Type 2-construction corner projections deliberately left behind due to poor geology or thin outer walls, in close proximity to another mine, to preserve the strength of the mine walls. They reach quite large sizes - up to 50 cm in width.

page 50
3. Type 3-construction corner projections left over due to haste. They can be found in any size, both very small and quite large, similar in size to type 2.

Construction "marks" are most often found in well-leveled mines. Angular protrusions deliberately left behind due to poor geology can be adjacent to construction "marks", for example, in mines G 2419 B, G 4816 A II, G 1043 A II (photos C13783 NS, C13638NS and C12496 OS from the archive of J. R. R. Tolkien). Reisner). These examples clearly show the close proximity of angular projections with long vertical cracks. Ancient builders felt how the stone behaves under the chisel, so to preserve the strength and keep loose rock from collapsing (photo C11463 OS from the archive of J. R. R. Tolkien). Reisner) left unfinished sections of rock in dangerous places.

There are corner protrusions left over due to haste. It is possible that the deforestation of the mines immediately before burial was carried out in an accelerated mode, which may explain the rough quality of most of them. In such mines, the boundaries between construction stages and labor standards are poorly aligned, as is the whole mine, for example, in mines G 7422C and S 69 (photos C10883_NS and o_neg_nr_0457 in the archive of J. R. R. Tolkien). Reisner).

DATING INFORMATION

Finding corner "marks" in mine burials dating back to the VI dynasty, and their absence in tombs built earlier (for example, at Khafraankh (G 7948) and Chenti I (GE 11))2, can determine the time of appearance of a new structural element-corner markers.

The difficulty in determining the exact time of mine cutting in rock tombs lies in the fact that the shape of the tomb itself is "mobile": the layout of such a tomb can change, for example, as a result of cutting down new rooms to create new mines for burials. Accordingly, the time of creation of the main part of such a tomb may be different from the time of creation of additional rooms with shafts (see, for example: [Malykh, 2014, p. 11]), as well as the dating of the actual burials in such a tomb may be later than the time of completion of the tomb chapel and its decoration, usually determined by epigraphic and iconographic criteria. For example, the rock tomb of Khufukhotep (GE 15), according to the peculiarities of his titles and the paleography of hieroglyphic characters, belongs to the end of the V dynasty, but burials in mines 1 and 2, according to ceramic and clothing materials (primarily limestone canopies), were made not earlier than the turn of the V and VI dynasties [Malykh, 2010, p. 98, 103; Kormysheva and Malykh, 2010, p. 65-69].

Taking into account the ceramic material at the site of the Russian Archaeological Expedition's work in the Small Necropolis in front of the rock tomb of Chenti I (GE 11) in Giza and the location of the mines, we can say that the GE 25-28 mines directly adjacent to the tomb of Chenti I most likely belong to the end of the V Dynasty, and all the and the further away from the tomb of GE 11, the later. Some of the easternmost mines (i.e., those farthest from the tomb) date back to the end of the Sixth Dynasty, possibly even to the First Transition Period (GE 38, GE 39, GE 42, GE 44, GE 50, and GE 51).

According to the ceramic material found in the filling of mines with angular projections, their preliminary dating is as follows::

GE 59A-1-VI Dynasty;

2 These rock tombs (primarily their memorial chapels) were created in the middle - second half of the Fifth Dynasty [Kormysheva, Malykh, Vetokhov, 2010, p. 248; Kormysheva, Malykh, 2010, p. 69], although burials in them may have been somewhat behind in time. In any case, they date no later than the end of the Fifth Dynasty.

page 51
GE 59A-2-VI Dynasty;

GE 59C-1-VI Dynasty;

GE 45-VI Dynasty;

GE 52-probably late 6th dynasty;

GE 60-probably late VI dynasty 3.

Similar "marks" are found not only in the mines of rock tombs, but also in the mastabs of the Eastern and Western Giza plateaus. Mines such as G 1301 B, G 4631, and G 7112 are located in mastabs dating from the mid-fifth Dynasty. However, the vast majority of the discovered angular projections are located in mines on the Western Plateau in small stone and mud mastabs of the late fifth and Sixth dynasties. In the Saqqara necropolis, shafts containing angular projections date back to the VI Dynasty (Kuraszkiewicz, 2013, p. 251).

Thus, corner marks in mines as a marker of the completed labor rate of construction work are a kind of dating feature that relates the time of mine cutting to the late V and VI dynasties. Moreover, they indicate the flow of the construction process of burial complexes and the preliminary planning of necropolises with the existence of burial shafts-blanks and even tombs-blanks, which could be given to representatives of the ancient Egyptian nobility in the second half of the 3rd millennium BC.

Summing up, it is necessary to say that the study of rock burial architecture not only reveals the construction methods of the ancient Egyptians, but also helps in dating both individual mine burials and rock tombs, which is difficult due to the lack of epigraphic material or the destruction of clothing complexes.

list of literature

Malykh S.E. New data on the use of canopic jars in the era of the Ancient Kingdom // Bulletin of Ancient History. 2010. N 4. = Malykh S.E. Novye dannye ob ispol'zovanii kanop v epokhu Drevnego tsarstva // Vestnik drevnei istorii. 2010. N 4.

Malykh S. E. Mines with several burial chambers: the problem of functioning of the Gizeh necropolis in the era of the Ancient Kingdom// Bulletin of Ancient History. 2014. N 4. = Malykh S.E. Shakhty s neskol'kimi pogrebal'nymi kamerami: problema funktsionirovaniia Gizekhskogo nekropolia v epokhu Drevnego tsarstva // Vestnik drevnei istorii. 2014. N 4.

Savelyeva T. N. How the Egyptians lived during the construction of the pyramids. Moscow, 1971. = Savel'eva T.N. Kak zhili egiptiane vo vremena stroitel'stva piramid. Moscow, 1971.

Barta M. Egyptian Kingship during the Old Kingdom // Hill A.J., Jones P., Morales J.A. (eds.) Experiencing power, generating authority. Cosmos, Politics, and the Ideology of Kingship in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Philadelphia, 2013.

Barta M. Journey to the West. Prague, 2011.

Barta M. Sociology of the minor cemeteries during the Old Kingdom. A view from Abusir South // Archiv Orientalni. 2002. Vol. 70/3.

Junker H. Giza VIII. Der Oslabschnilt des Westfriedhofs. Zweiter Teil. Vienna: Rudolf M. Rohrer, 1947.

Kormysheva E., Malykh S. Lepsius Tombs in Giza Necropolis rediscovered// The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology. 2010. Vol. 96, pp. 49-70.

Kormysheva E., Malykh S., Vetokhov S. Giza. Eastern Necropolis I. The Tomb of Khafraankh. Moscow: Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, 2010.

Kormysheva E., Malykh S., Vetokhov S. Giza. Eastern Necropolis II. The Minor Cemetery to the East from the Tomb G 7948. Moscow: Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, 2012.

Kuraszkiewicz O.K. Saqqara V. Old Kingdom Structures Between the Step Pyramid Complex and the Dry Moat. Part 1. Architecture and Development of the Necropolis. Varsovie: Neriton, 2013.

Kuraszkiewicz O.K. The practicalities behind the ritual: Observations on Sixth Dynasty funerary architecture // Barta M., Coppens R, Krejci J. (eds.) Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2010. Vol. 2. Prague, 2011.

Manuelian P. A Case of Pre-fabrication at Giza. The False Door of Intj // Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt. 1998. Vol. 35, pp. 115-127.

Reisner G.A. History of the Giza Necropolis. Vol. I. Cambr., 1942.

Roth A.M. Giza Mastabas: Vol. 6: A Cemetery of Palace Attendants. Boston: Museum of Fine Arts, 2001.

Rzeuska T.l. Saqqara II. Pottery of the Late Old Kingdom: Funerary Pottery and Burial Customs. Varsovie: Neriton, 2006.

3 Oral report of the ceramist of the Russian Archaeological Expedition of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Giza SE. Small ones.

page 52
ILLUSTRATIONS TO THE ARTICLE BY S. V. VETOKHOV

Fig. 1. Projections in the corners of burial shafts (author's photo).

page 53

2. Mines with angular projections at the site of the Russian Archaeological Expedition in Giza (fig.
page 54

Fig. 3. Location of angular projections close to the mine mouth (Fig. 2).

page 55

4. Location of the corner projections close to the entrance to the burial chamber (Fig.
page 56

Fig. 5. Location of corner projections at different levels (fig. 2).

page 57

Figure 6. Location of the corner projections close to the mouth of the shaft and below the level of the passage to the burial chamber (Fig.

page 58

Fig. 7. Different shaft depths relative to the corner marker (Fig. 2).

page 59

Figure 8. Construction stages of mine burials in tomb GE 12 (Fig.

page 60

Figure 9. Construction stages of mine burials in tomb GE 49 (Fig.

page 61

10. Construction stages of the GE 52 and GE 60 mines (Fig.

Fig. 11. Stages of fulfilling the labor norm for cutting down a burial mine. Crushing stage (1) and wall leveling stage (2), technological stage (a) and labor standard (b) (Fig.

page 62

Permanent link to this publication: