Early Dynastic Egypt (51 page)

Examination of the topography in the vicinity of the Step Pyramid complex has led one Egyptologist to posit the existence of a 40-metre-wide dry moat, extending around the Step Pyramid complex on all four sides, and doubling back on itself to the south to form the hieroglyph
wsh t,
‘broad court’ (Swelim 1988). However, only the western and perhaps northern channels can be traced on the ground with any likelihood, and the theory has so far received only limited support (F.D.Friedman 1995:40–1, fig. 25).

The step pyramid complex of Sekhemkhet

Sekhemkhet began his own step pyramid complex to the south-west of his predecessor’s monument (Plate 7.2). The enclosure measures some 500 metres by 200 metres and the pyramid at its centre was planned as a seven-stepped structure, in contrast to Netjerikhet’s six-stepped pyramid. The construction technique shows notable advances in stone architecture: the enclosure wall uses larger blocks which would have given greater strength and cohesion, as well as allowing economies in the quarrying work; the fine Tura limestone for the outer casing was employed more sparingly than in Netjerikhet’s complex. Like the Netjerikhet complex, Sekhemkhet’s step pyramid complex seems to have been built in stages. The foundations of an early southern enclosure wall were uncovered, the same distance from

Plate 7.2
The unfinished step pyramid complex of Sekhemkhet at Saqqara (author’s photograph).

the pyramid as the northern enclosure wall. Hence, the complex seems originally to have comprised a rectangle with the step pyramid at its centre (Lauer 1968:99). The enclosure was subsequently enlarged to the north and south; the southward extension was more restricted due to the more difficult terrain, hence the asymmetry of the complex in its final form (Lauer 1968:99). Due to limited excavation inside the enclosure, it is unclear how many of the other buildings surrounding the pyramid had been started when work on the complex was abandoned (Edwards 1993:62). The substructure of the pyramid seems to have been largely completed, even though the monument above ground was abandoned at an early stage. A descending corridor in the north face of the pyramid gives access to the burial chamber, which was roughly hewn into the bedrock and surrounded on three sides by storage magazines. These number 132 in total and open off a transverse east-west corridor with arms extending southwards at both ends (Edwards 1993:61). The stone sarcophagus discovered in the burial chamber was intact, but contained no body, probably indicating that it was unacceptable to bury a king in an unfinished pyramid. Incidentally, it is the earliest royal stone sarcophagus from Egypt (Edwards 1993:62).

One element that was finished is the South Tomb. Located closer to the pyramid than in the complex of Netjerikhet (Lauer 1968), the South Tomb was part of the original plan, and seems to have been covered by a small mastaba measuring 60 by 30 cubits (32 by 16 metres) (Lauer 1968:100).

The ‘layer pyramid’ at Zawiyet el-Aryan

Another, unfinished step pyramid dated to the Third Dynasty is the socalled ‘layer pyramid’ at Zawiyet el-Aryan (Dunham 1978: xi). Only the lowest courses of the

pyramid’s inner core have been preserved, and even the substructure seems to have been left unfinished. The ‘layer pyramid’ seems to have been planned as a monument of six or seven steps, but work was clearly abandoned at an early stage, judging by the total absence of any funerary equipment (Edwards 1993:65). The similarities between the Zawiyet el-Aryan pyramid and Sekhemkhet’s monument are striking, both in the form of the superstructure and in the overall plan of the subterranean chambers. A date close to the reign of Sekhemkhet seems certain for the ‘layer pyramid’ (Edwards 1993:64).

The pyramid at Maidum

Considerable uncertainty surrounds the precise date of the pyramid at Maidum. Its initial stages have generally been attributed to Huni, last king of the Third Dynasty (for example, Wildung 1969a: 135), even though no inscription from the site bears his name. New Kingdom graffiti inside the pyramid itself show that Egyptians of later periods believed Sneferu to have been the builder of the monument (there is no doubt that Sneferu was responsible for the pyramid in its final form) and the fact that several of Sneferu’s relatives are buried in nearby mastabas may lend weight to this theory (Edwards 1993:93). The choice of location is unusual, Maidum lying a considerable distance from the Memphite necropolis which had served Huni’s Third Dynasty forebears. The proximity of the Seila pyramid, dated to the early part of Sneferu’s reign, may indicate that the Maidum pyramid was also built by this king (Seidlmayer 1996a: 206). However, two pyramids are already known to have been built for Sneferu at Dahshur, and it is perhaps unlikely, although not impossible (Edwards 1993:95–7), that he could have completed three massive funerary monuments within a single reign. Huni is allotted a reign of identical length (twenty-four years) by the Turin Canon, and would have had ample opportunity to construct an impressive mortuary complex. The fact that the tomb of Metjen, a high official under Huni, was located at Saqqara has suggested to some that the tomb of the king himself lay nearby. However, the tombs of officials seem to have been located at Saqqara throughout the Early Dynastic period, irrespective of changes in the location of the royal tomb (Roth 1993:50). In the absence of a more plausible candidate—and recent excavations have decisively rejected the Gisr el-Mudir enclosure at Saqqara as an unfinished step pyramid complex of the Third Dynasty (Mathieson and Tavares 1993; Bettles
et al.
1995)—the pyramid at Maidum, in its initial form, may have been intended as Huni’s funerary monument.

Like its predecessors at Saqqara and Zawiyet el-Aryan, the Maidum pyramid was originally planned as a seven-stepped monument. In a second building phase, the pyramid was enlarged to an eight-stepped monument (Petrie 1910; Edwards 1993:72). A more dramatic change of plan converted the step pyramid into a true pyramid, and it is this innovation, linked with fundamental changes in the Egyptian conception of the afterlife, that has been attributed to Sneferu, first king of the Fourth Dynasty. The courses of masonry used in the two phases of the step pyramid slope inwards towards the centre of the monument, a technique common to all Third Dynasty pyramids (and also shared by the lower half of Sneferu’s ‘Bent Pyramid’ at Dahshur). By contrast, the conversion to a true pyramid used horizontal courses, characteristic of Fourth Dynasty pyramid-building (and used in the upper part of the ‘Bent Pyramid’ and throughout Sneferu’s northern pyramid at Dahshur). Access to the burial chamber, located near ground level beneath the

centre of the pyramid, was via a descending corridor leading from an opening in the pyramid’s north face. At the end of the corridor, a vertical shaft connected with the burial chamber itself (Edwards 1993:75). No trace of a sarcophagus was found by the first archaeologist to enter the pyramid in modern times, but the monument is likely to have been robbed in antiquity.

An open causeway led from the pyramid to the valley temple. Due to its location beneath the modern water-table, this part of the complex has not been excavated. By contrast, the mortuary temple on the east side of the pyramid is well preserved. It is entirely devoid of decoration, and the lowest courses of masonry were left undressed, suggesting that the temple was never finished. Two uninscribed, round-topped stelae, presumably intended as funerary stelae, were found inside (Edwards 1993:76–7). The location of the mortuary temple, to the east of the pyramid, contrasts with earlier Third Dynasty practice—Netjerikhet’s mortuary temple lies to the north of his Step Pyramid— and may indicate that it belongs to the latest building phase at Maidum, when the step pyramid was converted to a true pyramid.

THE CHANGING SYMBOLISM OF ROYAL MORTUARY ARCHITECTURE

The form of the royal mortuary complex, its architecture and constituent components provide the best guide available to conceptions of the afterlife in the Early Dynastic period (cf. Edwards 1993:278). The royal tomb was not simply the repository and final resting place for the body of the king. It was also the means by which the king could participate in the afterlife. The tomb complex provided both the necessary material goods for the eternal sustenance of the royal
ka
—the commodities and other grave goods interred with the king—and, just as importantly, the architectural symbolism to create and foster the right conditions for his rebirth and life in the hereafter. A detailed examination of royal mortuary architecture over the course of the first three dynasties reveals the rich symbolic vocabulary with which it was imbued. Through the prominence of different symbolic elements over time, we can chart the course of afterlife beliefs during the Early Dynastic period. Two symbols emerge as pre-eminent: the primeval mound and the replica royal palace. Each points to a different aspect of royal mortuary ideology.

As we have seen, the superstructures of the royal tombs at Abydos have been reconstructed as simple mounds of sand, held in place by a mudbrick revetment. The symbol of the mound seems to have been so important that a second, hidden tumulus covering the burial chamber became a regular feature of royal tomb architecture. It seems likely that the form of the burial mounds recalled symbolically the primeval mound which first emerged from the floodwaters of chaos at the time of creation (cf. Badawy 1956:183). The primeval mound was, in later periods at least, a powerful symbol of rebirth and resurrection. Its incorporation into the royal tomb seems to indicate that the resurrection of the dead king was a primary objective, and one which could be assisted magically by the very architecture of the tomb. In the case of the Third Dynasty step pyramids, the symbolism may have been more complex than merely a stepped version of the primeval mound (see below).

From late Predynastic times, concepts of the royal afterlife seem to have given a prominent role to the palace. The architecture of tomb U-j at Abydos (dating to the late Predynastic period, Naqada IIIa2,
c.
3150 BC) seems to mimic the layout of the royal palace, with interconnecting chambers. The symbolism becomes more explicit from the reign of Djer onwards, when the king’s tomb on the Umm el-Qaab was accompanied by a separate funerary enclosure on the low desert. Judging from the Step Pyramid complex of Netjerikhet, the purpose of the enclosure was to provide an arena in which the rituals of kingship could be played out for all eternity. That a replica royal palace was considered an essential element of the royal mortuary complex has important implications for Early Dynastic conceptions of the afterlife. The deduction must be that the afterlife of the king was envisaged, on one level at least, as a continuation of his earthly existence. In death as in life, royal ceremonial was central to the function of the king, and proper provision for its celebration was a necessity in the planning of the royal mortuary complex. The royal tombs of the Second Dynasty at Saqqara emphasise the tomb as a dwelling-place for the king’s
ka.
The layout of the innermost chambers consciously imitates the private apartments of a house, and this aspect of the design may have made a separate funerary enclosure redundant (although the anonymous enclosures to the west of the Step Pyramid complex may date to the Second Dynasty).

Certain other aspects of the royal tombs at Abydos hint at the afterlife beliefs of First Dynasty Egyptians. As we have seen, there is a gap in the line of subsidiary burials surrounding some of the royal tombs; in each case, the gap occurs at the south-west corner, aligned with the prominent cleft in the cliffs behind Abydos. Evidence from later periods suggests that the cleft was believed to be an entrance to the underworld; if this belief was current in Early Dynastic times, the gap in the line of subsidiary burials may have been provided to allow the
ka
of the deceased king to travel freely from the tomb to the underworld. A belief in the royal
ka
is also suggested by the separate annex to the south-west of Den’s tomb. In the Third Dynasty step pyramid complexes, this aspect of the design is transmuted into the South Tomb, a second miniaturised tomb to the south of the main pyramid.