Sonderdruck aus

G. Mumford, Egypto-Levantine relations during the Iron Age to early Per-

sian periods (Dynasties late 20 to 26) .................................................................... 225
Alter Orient und Altes Testament
E. J Owens, The Waters of Alexandria ......................................................................... 289
VerOffentlichungen zur Kultur und Geschichte des Alten Orients
R. B. Parkinson, 'Une cantilene de Pentaour': Marguerite Yourcenar and
und des Alten Testaments
Middle Kingdom Literature ...................................................................................... 301
Band 347
T. Schneider, Contextualising the Tale of the Herdsman ........................................ 309

L Shaw, Late Roman Amethyst and Gold Mining at Wadi el-Hudi ................ 319

H S. Smith and S. Davies, The Sacred Animal Necropolis at North Saqqara

yet again! Some Late Period inscribed offering-tables from the site .......... 329

K Spence, Topography, Architecture and Legitimacy: Hatshepsut's founda-

tion deposits at Deir el-Bahri .................................................................................. . 353
Egyptian Stories
N Spencer, A Theban Statue Base from the reign of Nekhtnebef ....................... 373

K Szpakowska, Flesh for Fantasy: Reflections of Women in Two Ancient A British Egyptological Tribute to Alan B. Lloyd
Egyptian Dream Manuals ......................................................................................... . 393
on the Occasion of His Retirement
J H Taylor, The earliest Egyptian Hippocampus ....................................................... 405

A. P. Thomas, The Barefoot Aristocrats and the Making of an Egyptian Collection 417

P. Wilson, A Cult of Amasis and 'The Procession of Two Gods' at Sais ........... . 437
Edited by
Thomas Schneider and Kasia Szpakowska
Indices ...................................................................................................................................... . 451

2007
U garit-Verlag
Munster

Egyptian Stories. A British Egyptological Tribute to Alan B. Lloyd
on the Occasion of His Retirement.
Edited by Thomas Schneider and Kasia Szpakowska
Alter Orient und Altes Testament, Band 347
© 2007 Ugarit-Verlag, MUnster
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
All rights preserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechariical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior permission of the publisher.
Herstellung: Druckhaus Folberth, Pfungstadt
Printed in Germany
ISBN: 978-3-934628-94-6
Printed on acid-free paper
A Taste of Honey: mnt- and 11l{iqt-Vessels
in the Late Eighteenth Dynasty
D. A. Aston
When I was younger, just starting out as a first year Egyptology student, there
appeared on the new book shelf of the university library, a couple of volumes
full of the most obscure references to practically everything under the sun.
They struck me then, as they strike me now, as examples of quite amazing
scholarship. Those erudite volumes were, of course, Herodotus Book II· Introduc-
tion and Commentary, and, their author, none other than the person honoured
by this Festschrift.l Amongst the varied information given in the Commentary,
there are a number of remarks relating to various oils, meats, honey, grains and
other dry foodstuffs, as well as a reference to pottery making. 2 Since, coinciden-
tally, it is these same food products which are often found on pottery dockets,
perhaps Alan might find the following remarks interesting, and, hopefully, he
will forgive me for jumping from the Late Period back to the New Kingdom.
For a long time now Egyptology has been bedevilled by an ideefixe that un-
inscribed sherds should be treated as ceramic finds, whilst jar dockets should
be seen as objects. The latter tend to be assiduously collected, whilst the former
are often ignored; the latter tend to appear within a catalogue of objects, whilst
the former in a separate catalogue of pottery, generally written by different
people, who, it would seem, often do not communicate with one another. This
separation of jar labels from their original pots is to be particularly lamented
since, when such labels are glued back into their original vessels, it might be
possible to discover not only whether certain contents can be associated with
their own particular vessel shapes, in much the same way as the reader of this
article can immediately tell the difference between a modern milk, beer, or
wine bottle simply by the individual shape traits of the bottles themselves, but
also whether it is possible to relate extant vessels with their Egyptian names.
A surprisingly large number of words are known for Egyptian vessels, but very
few can be related to actual types, especially those made of pottery as opposed
to metal or faience. 3 It is the purpose of this article to trace, if at all possible,
1 A.B. Lloyd, Herodotus Book II Introduction, Leiden, 1975; Herodotus Book II. Commentary
1-98, Leiden, 1976, followed by Herodotus Book II Commentary 99-202, Leiden, 1988.
2 Commentary 1-98, 156, 180-2.
3 C£ W-F Reineke, Der Zusammenhang der altiigyptischen Hoh/- und Liingenmqfle, MIO 9,
14 D. A. Aston
whether any similar relationship exists between jars, their contents, and their
names in ancient Egypt.
There are three principle means of identifYing what a pot once contained.
Firstly one can simply examine the contents, since sometimes these are still
recognisable, though more often than not, the contents have gone, having ei-
ther been consumed or have decayed over time. However, some idea of what
was once there can often be revealed through chemical analyses. Secondly
there are the jar seals. These usually describe what the vessel contained at the
time that particular sealing was applied, that is to say the last time the vessel
was filled, and thirdly there are jar labels. These dockets written onto the jars
themselves clearly indicate what the vessel once contained at some point in
the life of the pot concerned, though this need not necessarily be a true record
of what the pot contained the last time it was filled. Numerous studies of ves-
sel contents, jar seals and jar labels exist, but almost none of them attempt to
relate the contents to their containers. This is not surprising since the majority
of such are based entirely on sherd fragments, or on seals which have become
detached from the vessels they once closed.
Pots, of course, change typologically over time, thus it might be considered
somewhat pointless to attempt to find correlations, if any exist, between a
specific vessel type and certain products. However, for at least one period of
Egyptian history, that covered by New Kingdom ceramic Phase 3A, enough
evidence exists to perhaps make a preliminary attempt worthwhile. Based on
changes in pottery styles ceramicists conventionally divide New Kingdom
pottery into four major phases, two, if not three, of which, can be subdivided. 4
Thus, Phase 1 extends from the reigns of Ahmose to Tuthmosis II; Phase
2A is coeval with the reigns of Hatshepsut and Tuthmosis III; 2B the reigns
of Amenophis II and Tuthmosis IV; Phase 3A is equivalent to the reigns of
Amenophis III through the reign of Horemheb; 3B from the reign ofSeti I to
Merenptah; and Phase 4 from the reigns of Amenmesse to Ramesses XI. No
deposits of material clearly dated to the reign of Ramesses I exist so it remains
unclear whether, from a ceramic point of view, his reign should fall within
Phase 3A or 3B. Unpublished material also now suggests that Phase 4 can
be divided into a Phase 4A which covers the late Nineteenth Dynasty and a
Phase 4B which probably developed in or around the reign of Ramesses III.
A judicious combination of content analysis, jar seals and jar labels from the
settlements at Malkata and Amarna, and from various late Eighteenth Dy-
1963,145-63; Jac. J. Janssen, Commodity Prices from the Ramessid Period, Leiden, 1975,407-35.
4 R.S. Merrillees, The Cypriote Bronze Age Pottery Found in Egypt, Lund, 1968, 4; J. Bourriau,
Umm el-Gaab, Pottery from the Nile Valley, Cambridge, 1981, 72; eadem, 'Canaanite Jars from
New Kingdom deposits at Memphis, Kom Rabia', EI21, 1990, 19*; C.A. Hope, 'Review of
Bourriau, Dmm el Gaab',jEA 71, reviews supplement, 4-5; D. Aston, 'New Kingdom Pottery
Phases', in M. Bietak ed., The Synchronisation of Civilizations in the Eastern Mediterranean in
the Second Millennium BC. II, Vienna, 2003, 138-40; J. Bourriau, D. Aston, M. Raven, R. van
Walsem, The Memphite Tomb ofHoremheb, III. The New Kingdom Pottery, London, 2005,8.
A Taste ofHoney: mnt- and nujqt- Vessels in the Late Eighteenth Dynasty 15
nasty elite tombs at Thebes and Saqqara, in particular the tomb of the overseer
of the treasury, Maya,S enables one to supply a preliminary compendium of
jar shapes and their contents. Deir el-Medineh is also a valuable source of jar
dockets, although most of the published examples6 date to the Nineteenth dy-
nasty,? and thus fall outside the temporal limits of this article, as do the dockets
and jar seals from the Ramesseum. 8 Restorable vessels from Saqqara, Amarna,
Malkata and Thebes bear dockets which refer to the following commodities:
'Ale'/Date Wine (srmt)
'Ale' or date wine (srmt)9 dockets occur in reasonable quantities at both Mal-
kata10 and Amarna,l1 and it is thus a pity that the shape of the vessel concerned
at both these sites remains unknown. However since Hayes points out that
the Malkata dockets are found on the same ware as the Marl D amphorae, one
might assume that vessels of Marl D are to be expected. Indeed this would
seem confirmed by Hayes' observation that the types of jar seals which refer to
'ale' and those which refer to wine are identical, indicating, perhaps, that the
same type of vessel was used for both 'ale' and wine. As such one may assume
that 'ale'/date wine was also bottled in Marl D amphorae of the type shown in
Figures 1.3 and 4.1. However, how much reliance can be placed on jar seal-
ing types is somewhat questionable. On the one hand, Hayes indicates clear
differences between those used for 'ale'/date wine and ordinary wine (irp) to
those used for honey and moringa oil, which are again different to those used
to seal jars containing meat and fatp but Hope could find no difference in
sealing types used to close jars containing wine, 'ale'/date wine, meat, water
fowl, fish, fat, honey, curds, and oil.13 Whilst Marl D amphorae may have been
5 'The tomb of Maya was excavated in 1987 and 1988, but the pottery from it is still unpub-
lished. 'The drawings of the pots from that tomb which appear in this article are included here
courtesy of the EES.
6 Cf. YKoenig, Catalogue des etiquettes de jarres hieratiques de Deir el-Mtdineh, Cairo, 1979.
7 Cf. L. Bavay, S. Marchand, P. Tallet, 'Les jarres inscrites du Nouvel Empire provenant de
Deir al-Medina', CCE 6, 2000, 78.
8 Dockets:.W. Spiegelberg, 'Bemerkungen zu den hieratischen Amphoreninschriften des Ram-
esseums', ZAS 58,1923,25-36; K.A. Kitchen ''The Vintages of the Ramesseum'in A.B. Lloyd, ed.,
Studies in Pharaonic Religion in Honour off Gwyn Griffiths, 1992, 115-23: Jar seals, G. Lecuyot, 'A
propos de quelques bouchons de jarres provenant du Ramesseum', Memnonia 8, 1997, 107-18.
9 'Ale' was suggested by Hayes, W.C. Hayes, 'Inscriptions from the Palace of Amenhotep III',
JNES 10, 1951,88, and followed by Leahy - M.A. Leahy Excavations at Malkata and the Birket
Habu, IV The Inscriptions, Warminster, 1978, 6, although Heick has plausibly suggested that
srmt was made with dates - W. Heick, Das Bier im Alten Agypten, Berlin, 1971, 32, and this
interpretation is followed by Valbelle, D. Valbelle, Les ouvriers de la Tombe. Deir el-Mtdineh a
lepoque Ramesside, Cairo, 1985, 279.
10 W.C. Hayes,fNES 10, 88, 90; Leahy The Inscriptions, 6-13.
11 F. LL Griffith in W.M.F. Petrie, Tell e/-Amarna, London, 1894, 34; H.W. Fairman inJD.S.
Pendlebury, The City ofAkhenaten, III, London, 1951, 175.
12 Hayes,fNES 10, 157.
13 C. Hope, Excavations at Malkata and the Birket Habu, V Jar sealings and Amphorae, Warm-
inster, 1977,27.
 D.A.Aston
16
used for most types of 'ale' / date wine this would seem unlikely in the case
of snnt Qdy which probably refers to 'ale' / date wine of Kizzuwatna, and one
would thus expect those dockets, at least, to appear on imported vessels. l?e
only vessel known to me which preserves enough of the shape to. recogmze
the type of vessel concerned is a fragmentary Marl D flask, of eVlden.t Late
18th Dynasty type, from Deir el-Medina. 14 'This jar, similar to the genenc type
illustrated as Figures 2.2-6, bears at least three dockets, one of which re~ers
to wine bottled in Year 28 (evidently of Amenophis III), and another whlch
refers to srmt. 'The publishers of the piece plausibly suggest that the vessel was
first used for wine which was brought from the Delta, and that being drunk,
was then refilled with locally produced 'ale'/date wine. 1S Perhaps, therefore the
srmt dockets found on the Marl D sherds at Malkata and Amarna should
also be considered as evidence of reuse. Dried grains, apparently the 'residu de
biere d'orge' was also found in another Marl D vessel of the same type in the
late Eighteenth Dynasty tomb of Setiwy, Deir el-Medina tomb 1352.16
Bread
A large Nile silt vessel, Figure. 1.1, from the tomb ofTutankh~mun bore a
docket to the effect that it once contained Kylestris bread of... 'ThlS docket had
been smeared with plaster, whilst another docket on the opposite side refers
to dry loavesY Presumably the vessel had been used for Kylestris bread, and,
later, for dry loaves.
Fat ('4)
A jar label on a large Marl D amphora, 88-813, Figure 1.3, from the tomb of
Maya indicates that it once contained fresh animal fat ('4 w34).18 From the
description of the 91 animal fat jar labels from Malkata, it is cle~r that ~ar~ D
sherds are also concerned, but by contrast the jar sealings are sald to be simllar
to those which mention meat products, being roughly spherical in form and
shaped by hand. 19 It is thus reasonable to assume t?at, at :'1~ka:a, fat was
stored in meat jars. Dockets mentioning fat, but Wlth no mdlcatlOn of the
types of vessels concerned, are also known at Amarna. 20
14 Cf. Bavay, Marchand, Tallet, GGE 6, 85, fig. 7.
15 Cf. Bavay, Marchand, Tallet, GGE 6, 86.
16 B. Bruyexe, Fouilles de Deir el-Medineh (1933-4), Cairo, 1937, 102 no. 15, fig. ~5. Flour was
also found in Twentieth Dynasty amphorae (storage jars ?) in tomb 1069 - Bruye,re, Fouzll~s de
Deir el-Medineh, 1926, Cairo, 1927, 33. Note that Bruyere often used the term amphore for
both handled amphorae and handle-less storage jars.
17 For the pot, R. Holthoer, in A. el-Khouli, R. Holthoer, C. Hope and O. Kaper, Stone ve.ssels,
Pottery and Sealings from the Tomb ofTutankhamun; Oxford, 1993, 62, no. 38; for the mscnptlOns,
J. Cerny, Hieratic Inscriptions from the Tomb ofTut ankhamun, Oxford, 1965, 6, no. 38 ..
18 J. van Dijk, 'Hieratic Inscriptions from the Tomb of Maya at Saqqara: A Prehmmary Sur-
vey', GM 127,1992, 3l.
19 Hayes,JNES 10, 157.
20 Griffith, in Petrie, Tell el-Amarna, 34.
A Taste ifHoney: mnt- and mgqt- Vessels in the Late Eighteenth Dynasty 17
Flour (n4) and other dry foodstuffs
D~ring the clea~ance of the tomb of Maya at Saqqara, a series of twelve large
Nlle B2 storage Jars, one of which, 88-600, is shown as Figure 2.1, were found
in Room L. 'These jars still contained flour of such excellent quality that the
workmen excavating the tomb wanted to take it home with them saying it was
better than any flour which could be bought locally. Flour has also been found
in two decorated jars within the tomb of Kha at Deir el-Medina,21 whilst
grains were also found in large Eighteenth Dynasty storage jars east of the
Deir el-Medina temple. 22
Nile silt vessels containing various dry foodstuffs were found in the tomb of
Tutankhamun. 23 In a number of the jars almonds, lentils, fenugreek and the
fruit of Zizyphus spina-christi (Christ's 'Thorn Tree) were still extant. 'These
contents matched the labels inscribed on their containers, whilst the label on
another of the jars, in which no contents were preserved, referred to grapes.
All these jars were of the same type, c£ Figure 1.2. Dockets referring to grapes
have also been found at Amarna,24 and Buhen,25 though in each case no indi-
cation of the type of vessel involved is given. 'That a Nile silt vessel, however,
was used at Buhen is clear from Smith's comment that the docket was written
on a 'sherd of drab ware; washed with a red slip.'
Honey (bit)
A docket referring to honey was found on the Marl F jar 88-779, Figure 2.2,
within the tomb of Maya. 26 Similar dockets were found on jars 88-771,88-
778,88-783,88-786,88-787, and 88-789 which are of the same type, and on
88-784 a somewhat similar type of vessel more closely akin to the jar 88-730,
Figure 2.3. Dockets referring to honey have also been found at Amarna,27 at
least a few of which were found on imported Canaanite jars. 28 It is, of course,
unclear whether this implies that the Canaanite jars were reused, or whether
indeed these dockets refer to imported honey. However, since it is known
from the annals ofTuthmosis III that both pistachio resin (sn[r) and honey
E. Schiaparelli, Relazione sui lavori della missione archaeological italiana in egitto (Anni 1903-
21
20): II. La Tomba Intatta dell' Architetto Gha della Necropoli di Tebe, Turin, 1906, 158.
22 Bruyere, Fouilles de Deir el-Medineh {1948-1951}, Cairo, 1953, 91, pl. xxii.
23 ~or the pots, Holthoer, in el-Khouli, Holthoer, Hope and Kaper, Stone Vessels, Pottery and
Sealtngsfrom the Tomb ofTutankhamun, 56-60, nos. 27-35; for the inscriptions Cerny Hieratic
Inscriptions, 5-6, nos. 27-35. ' ,
24 Fairman in Frankfort and Pendlebury, The Gity ofAkhenaten, II, London, 1933, 106; id., in
Pendlebury, GOA III, 175
25 H.S. Smith, The Inscriptions ofBuhen, London, 1976, 179.
26 van Dijk, GM 127, 25.
Griffith in Petrie, Tell el-Amarna, 34.
27
28 M. Serpico, J. Bourriau, L. Smith, Y. Goren, B. Stern, C. Heron, 'Commodities and Con-
tain~r~: A Proj.ect to Study Canaanite Amphorae Imported into Egypt during the New King-
dom, m M. Bletak ed., The Synchronisation ofGivilizations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the
Second Millennium Be. II, Vienna, 2003, 373.
18
were exported from the same places, it is probable that these dockets do refer
to an imported product. In the tomb ofTutankhamun, small flasks of the type
shown as Figure 3.3, and a one-handled mug of the type shown in Figure 3.2
were closed with sealings mentioning honey.29 Finally at Deir el-Medineh a
docket, in Eighteenth Dynasty hieratic, referring to sft-honey was found on a
'fragment d'une amp h ore. '30
Meat (iwj)
Second only to wine, jar labels referring to meat (iwf dr) are common at both
Malkata,31 where among the labels studied by Hayes, they outnumbered (~75)
the wine dockets (285), and Amarna. 32 Such dockets apparently occur pnma-
rily on large globular Marl D (or, to a lesser extent, Marl A4) jars with rolled
rims, often colloquially termed "meat jars" 'by the excavators of the ~mar~a
town site because of the coincidence of dockets referring to meat With thiS
shape of vessel.'33 Although it is possible that such jars, Figure 3,.1, could have
contained whole joints, scholarly opinion tends to favour the Idea that the
meat would have been removed from the bone and processed in some way be-
fore being packed. 34 Instances are also known where wine amphora~ have been
reused to store meat, the best example being found at Amarna which bears a
wine docket dated to year 5 and a meat docket dated to year 10,35 whilst wild
fowl were found in a handled flask from the tomb of Kha. 36 Water fowl are
also said to have been packed in amphorae by Hayes,37 though it is not clear
whether he could recognise that the water fowl dockets actually derived from
amphorae, or whether he simply meant that the water fowl dockets occur on
marl Dsherds which may have derived from other types of vessels, such ~s
handled flasks or meat jars. That perhaps amphorae were not normally used IS
indicated by the numbers involved which can be as many as 30, 40 a~d, in one
case 108.38 If a single amphora contained these numbers then the birds must
have first been filleted which is indeed indicated by the genitival n in Hayes'
29 Hope, 'The Jar Sealings' in e1-Khouli, Holthoer, Hope and Kaper, Stone Vessels, Pottery and
Sealingsfrom the Tomb ofTutankhamun, 114 nos. 10-11.. . 40 van Dijk, GM 127, 25.
30 G. Nagel, La ceramique du Nouvel Empire aDeir el-Mid/neh, Cairo, 1938, 61 no. 19.
31 Hayes,fNES 10, 1951, 88, 91-3; Leahy, The Inscriptions, 16-17. . 42 Hayes,fNES 10, 1951, 93; Leahy, The Inscriptions, 17-18.
32 B. Gunn in T.E. Peet and C.L. Woolley, The City ofAkhenaten, I, London, 1923, 1~7~ Fmr-
man in Pendlebury, COA III, 1951, 169-75; Leahy, 'The Hieratic Labels 1979-1982, m B.J.
Kemp (ed.), Amarna Reports II, London, 1986, 66. . Tait eds., Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honour ofH.S. Smith, London, 1999, 269.
33 P.J. Rose, in A el-Khouli and G.T. Martin, Excavations at EI-Amarna, 1984, Cmro, 1987,
20. 'P l' .
34 Fairman in Pendlebury, COAIII, 1951, 170; Hayes,fNES 10, 1951, 96; H. Hecker, re Iml-
nary report on the faunal remains from the workmen's village', in B.J. Kemp, Amarna Reports, I,
London, 1984, 160 n.9; S. Ikram, Choice Cuts, Meat Productzon mAnczent Egypt, Leuven, 1995,
186.
35 Griffith in Petrie, Tell el-Amarna, 33.
36 Schiaparelli, Cha, 159.
37 Hayes,fNES 10, 92.
38 HayesJNES 10, 92-3; Leahy, The Inscriptions, 17.
docket 180, which refers to 30 S(3)t geese. Fragments of jar seals referring to
water fowl have also been found at Malkata, but the seals themselves have nei-
ther been illustrated nor described, thus it is impossible to know to which kind
of vessel such seals may have been applied. 39 Since, however, most tomb scenes
show prepared wild fowl as being plucked but not boned, it may be reasonable
to assume that water fowl were normally packed in meat jars or similar vessels,
the more so since the complete birds may not have passed through the narrow
amphora neck.
Moringa (b;q n<Jm) oil
Sweet moringa oil occurs on vessels from the tomb of Maya at Saqqara40 which
are similar to those shown as Figure 2.2-6. Four hin of moringa oil mixed with
gum and mandragora41 was evidently placed in the jar 88-730, Figure 2.3,
found in the tomb of Maya at Saqqara, whilst dockets mentioning b;q oil have
also been found at Malkata,42 Amarna,43 and on a Canaanite jar at Buhen. 44
Mr~toil
Dockets referring to mr~t oil (castor oil?) occur on the jars 88-725, Figure 2.4,
and 88-750, a similar type of vessel, found in the tomb of Maya at Saqqara. 45
Mr~t unguent has also been found on dockets from Amarna. 46
Olive (n~1:t) oil47
Olive (n~~) oil dockets were found on five Marl F vessels in the tomb of Maya
at Saqqara. 48 Three of them 88-733, 88-734, Figure 3.3,88-735, are of the
same type, whilst the other two, 88-906, Figure 2.4, and 88-240 are of a differ-
ent type. Other nlJJ:t dockets have also been found at Amarna,49 on Canaanite
jars made offabric P40,50 and at Deir el-Medina and Buhen also on imported
Canaanite jars, though these presumably date to the Nineteenth Dynasty.5!
Here there is the interesting point that at Amarna and Buhen nlJlJ oil was ob-
39 Leahy, The Inscriptions, 35.
41 van Dijk, GM 127, 31.
43 Griffith in Petrie Tell el-Amarna, 34.
44 Serpico, 'New Kingdom Canaanite Amphora Fragments from Buhen', in A. Leahy and J.
45 van Dijk, GM 127, 25.
46 Fairman in Pendlebury, COA III, 175
47 R. Krauss, nWl)-OI = Oliveni:il, MDAIK 55,1999,293-8.
48 van Dijk, OM 127,25.
49 Griffith in Petrie, Tell el-Amarna, 33, Fairman in Pendlebury, COA III, 175
50 Serpico, Bourriau, Smith, Goren, Stern, Heron, in M. Bietak ed., The Synchronisation of
Civilizations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Second Millennium BC. II, 371.
51 G. Castel and D., Meeks, Deir el-Medineh 1970, Cairo, 1980,26 no. 2, pIs. XIa-b: Serpico,
in A. Leahy and J. Tait eds., FS Smith, 270.
20 D. A. Aston
viously imported since it came in imported vessels, but the jars containing nJ:zJ:z
oil found in the tomb of Maya at Saqqara are clearly Egyptian. To explain this
difference two possibilities spring to mind. On the one hand, it is theoretically
possible that the Saqqara nJ:zJ:z oil was also imported and then, at some point,
decanted into the smaller flasks found in Maya's tomb. Conversely Ramesside
dockets from Deir el-Medina refer to nJ:zJ:z oil produced in the great orchard
(bmw) of Ddw, which implies that by the Nineteenth Dynasty, Egypt had
begun local production. 52 Perhaps the jars from the tomb of Maya could also
suggest that local production of olive oil had in fact started before the death of
Maya in or around Year 9 of the reign ofHoremheb. Indeed this would not be
surprising since representations of olive trees are known from Amarna,53 and
a garland of olive leaves was found in the tomb ofTutankhamun. 54 Imported
olive oil may have come from the area of Ras Shamra in Canaanite jars made
from fabrics P40, P51 and P52 (Amarna IV.1a, IV.lb, IV.lc and IV.7), since
analysis of Canaanite jar sherds made of these fabrics indicate that they were
used for the transport of this commodity.55
Pistachio resin (sntr)
Analysis, by Serpico and White, of LB lIB Canaanite jar sherds from Am-
arna, in fabrics Pll and P30, some of which were inscribed, show that these
vessels were used for the transport of pistachio resin,56 most probably used as
incense. 57 A number ofPll Canaanite jar sherds from Deir el-Medina, date
uncertain, also bore dockets to indicate that they too, once contained pistachio
resin.58 At least one undated Canaanite jar in fabric P39 found at Saqqara
bears a docket to say that it also once contained 38 hin of pistachio resin,59 and
although the publisher of that piece suggests that the vessel was reused for
filling with incense, the evidence from Amarna suggests that it is more likely
52 Y. Koenig, I, pIs. 1-11. Cf. also Serpico, 'Natural Product Technology in New Kingdom
Egypt', in J. Bourriau and J. Phillips ed., The Social Context ofTechnological Change. Egypt and the
Near East 1650-1550, II, Oxford, 2004,105.
53 Frankfort, The Mural Painting ofEI-Amarna, Chicago, 1929, pI. IX.25;J.D. Cooney,Amarna
Reliefifrom Hermopolis in American Collections, 1965, 5 no. 1.
54 PE. Newberry in H. Carter, The Tomb ofTutankhamun, II, London, 1927, 33, 222, 226; R.
Germer, Die Pjlanzenmaterialien aus dem Grab des Tutanchamun, Mainz, 1989,4.
55 Bourriau, Smith and Serpico, 'The provenance of Canaanite Amphorae found at Memphis
and Amarna in the New Kingdom', in A,J., Shortland ed., The Social Context of Technological
Change. Egypt and the Near East 1650-1550, Oxford, 2001, 143.
56 M. Serpico and R. White, 'Chemical Analysis of coniferous resins from ancient Egypt us-
ing gas chromatography', in C,J. Eyre, ed., Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of
Egyptologists, Leuven, 1998, 1041.
57 Serpico, 'Resins, Amber and Bitumen' in P.T. Nicholson and 1. Shaw eds., Ancient Egyptian
Materials and Technology, Cambridge, 2000, 458-9; Serpico and White, 'The botanical identity
and transport ofIncense during the Egyptian New Kingdorn',Antiquity, 74, 2000,884-97.
58 Cf. Bavay, Marchand, Tallet, CCE 6, 2000, 80.
59 B. Aston, 'The Pottery' in M,J. Raven et al., The Tomb of Pay and Raia at Saqqara, London,
2005,127 no. 210.
A Taste ofHoney: mnt- and mt}qt- Vessels in the Late Eighteenth Dynasty 21
that the jar was intended as a resin transport vessel from its day of production.
Indeed this Saqqara docket and those from Deir el-Medina act as confirma-
tion of the content analyses.
Water
Six examples of water dockets were also found within the tomb of Maya at
Saqqara. 60 Four of them belong with the Marl F flasks, 88-731, 88-767, 88-
776 and 88-792, all of which are of the same general type shown as Figure
2.2-6. Such dockets, which are all written in a different hand, refer to water
from various localities in the Delta, and thus must have been brought a con-
siderable distance, and, presumably, therefore had special significance. Indeed
water from Xois, not mentioned in any of the dockets from the tomb of Maya,
but mentioned in a docket found in the neighbouring tomb ofTia and Tia,
which dates to the reign of Ramesses II, clearly played a particular sanctifYing
role during the New Kingdom when it was used in funerary rites,61 and per-
haps this role is also to be extended to the other areas mentioned on the earlier
dockets. Van Dijk also points out the connection with a group of spells in the
Book of the Dead (chapters 58-63) which refer to the drinking of water in the
necropolis, and additionally makes the alternative suggestion that such water
was meant to be drunk by the deceased to replenish the body fluids lost during
mummification. 62 This type of vessel on which the Maya labels are inscribed
does not appear to survive into the New Kingdom ceramic phase 3B, and it
is interesting to note that in the tomb ofTia and Tia, water dockets occur on
Marl D amphorae of the type I have characterised elsewhere as type B2.63
Wine (irp)
Wine jars have probably received the most attention from the scholarly world
since wine jar dockets tend to outnumber all others. Moreover enough ex-
amples exist to show that wine from the Western Delta tended to be bottled
in Marl D amphorae, which, for the period under review, from the reigns of
Amenophis III to Horemheb, are evidently of the type I have termed Bl, wine
from the Eastern Delta in Marl F amphorae of type Cl, and wine from the
oases in amphorae of type H,64 and that shown as Figure 5.1 from the tomb
ofTutankhamun. 65 I have previously pointed out that Marl F amphorae, al-
though most common from the reign of Ramesses II onwards, no doubt due
to the adoption of Per-Ramesses as the state capital, are known at Amarna,
60 van Dijk, GM 127, 28.
61 P. Vernus, 'L'eau sainte de Xois', in A. Nibbi, ed., The Archaeology, Geography and History of
the Egyptzan Delta in Pharaonic Times, Oxford, 1989, 329.
62 van Dijk, GM 127,30.
63 D. Aston, 'Amphorae in New Kingdom Egypt',A&L 14,2004,191-3.
64 D. Aston,A&L 14, 187-91, 195-7,200-3.
65 Hope, 'The Jar Sealings' in A. el-Khouli, R. Holthoer, C. Hope and O. Kaper, Stone Vessels,
Pottery and Sealings from the Tomb ofTutankhamun, 108.
22 D. A. Aston
and thus must have developed as early as the reign of Akhenaten. However
Marl F amphorae must also have existed as early as the reign of Amenophis
III since Hayes pointed out long ago that some of the wine jars from Mal-
kata, which contained Delta wine were 'light and thin walled, made of a drab
pottery, rough and striated on the outside, smooth and dull reddish brown in
colour on the interior surface, [whilst] those from the oases and the region
of Memphis were heavier with a glossy outer surface which ranges in color
from a deep pink to a pale green ... '66 Although he was unaware of it, Hayes
has clearly observed the distinction between thin-walled drab Marl F C1 type
amphorae, and the heavier, glossy Marl D B1 type amphorae. It has also been
suggested that wine was stored in large one-handled jugs since a sealing at-
tached to one of these vessels found in the tomb of Tutankhamun, Figure
5.2, refers to a commodity from the Estate of 'Onophris, Lord of [Busiris],
which Hope presumes to be wine. 67 Whilst literally thousands of dockets at-
test to 'normal' wines from the Western Delta, Eastern Delta and the oases,
a relatively small number refer to §d/:l, often translated as pomegranate wine,
but more likely to be a sickly-sweet alcoholic syrup.68 Whilst references to sh-
edeh-wine appear in a number of papyri from the Eighteenth Dynasty on, the
few extant jar dockets and jar seals which refer to shedeh, all date between the
reigns of Akhenaten and Horemheb. 69 As for the type of vessel used to hold
shedeh wine, evidence from the tomb ofTutankhamun shows that the same
type of wine jar was used as those used for bottling 'normal' wine. 70 This helps
confirm the view that 'normal' wine and shedeh wine were produced in the same
vineyards, as indeed is reflected in Papyrus Anastasi IV where for every 1500
mnt jars of'normal'wine, 50 of shedeh were also produced. 71 The jar from Deir
el-Medineh, referred to above in the discussion of'ale'/date wine also shows
that wine could be bottled in flasks of the type shown as Figures 2.2-6.
Other products, jar types not known, include moringa pods (prt b3qt), dates
(bnr), shelled beans (iwryt hfJ, and basha (presumably some kind of product
manufactured from grain)72, and myrrh, jar labels of all of which were found
66 Hayes,lNES 10,96.
67 Hope, 'The Jar Sealings' in A. el-Khouli, R. Holthoer, C. Hope and O. Kaper, Stone Vessels,
Pottery and Sealings from the Tomb ifTutankhamun, 115.
68 P. Tallet, 'Le shedeh: etude d'un proceede de vinification en Egypte ancienne', BIFAO 95,
1995,482.
69 P. Tallet, BIFAO 95, 464-9.
70 For the pots, Holthoer, in el-Khouli, Holthoer, Hope and Kaper, Stone Vessels, Pottery and
Sealings from the Tomb ifTutankhamun, 44-56, nos. 1-26; for the inscriptions, Cerny, Hieratic
Inscriptions, 1-4, nos. 1-26
71 A.H. Gardiner, Late Egyptian Miscellanies, 41-2; P. Tallet, BIFAO 95,474-5.
72 P. Posener-Krieger, 'A propos du bsl, GM25, 1977,67-71.
at Malkata,73 whilst basha,74 pig fat, 75. incense,76 gnn (suet ?),77 kmi gum 78 and
figs 79 are all recorded on dockets from Amarna. Although the types of vessels
are unknown, the fact that one of the two Malkata labels mentioning dates,
and the single example referring to shelled beans found by Hayes, are said to
be written on 'coarse thick-walled jars roughly cylindrical in shape', tends to
indicate that these commodities were stored in silt jars. Among the jar seal-
ings, but for which there are no dockets, are, from Malkata, /:ldbt beverage,
mutton fat (sr), sty pigment and bolti fish (int),80 and, from the tomb ofTut-
ankhamun, dqrw. 81
What can one conclude from the above? The most obvious outcome is that
two sizes of vessel are concerned; on the one hand labelled jars are either very
large such as those shown in Figures 1,2.1, 3.1, 4 and 5, or much smaller,
Figures.2.2-6,3.2-3. Such a size discrepancy could normally be explained by
suggestmg that the contents found in the smaller vessels are more expensive
than those found in the larger vessels, however this is unlikely since honey,
olive oil and wine dockets occur on both the large and the small size vessels. A
different explanation must therefore be sought. Although it would be nice to
postulate a clear vessel type for a specific content, one must, unfortunately, at
least in the light of current knowledge, report that this is not the case. Rather
the restorable vessels show that most products were probably originally stored
in. lar?e containers - silt vessels for dry foodstuffs, and marl jars for liquids,
Wlth Imported honey, olive oil, pistachio resin, and presumably srmt Qdy, be-
ing transported in Canaanite jars. The liquids, at least, were then presumably
decanted into smaller jars both for smaller scale distribution and easier han-
dling. In view of the fact that, 'ale'/date wine, honey, moringa oil'mrht
.oil ' 01-
ive oil, water and wine all found their way into the generic type of flask shown
as Figure 2.2-6, it is obvious that this vessel type was the handy household or
~tchen container of choice into which the Ancient Egyptians decanted liq-
UIds from larger storage vessels. This is actually not surprising since this type
of vessel is easily portable, fitting comfortably into the hand when it is grasped
by the neck, and, when tilted, the contents can be easily poured out. There is,
however another explanation which is worthy of examination. Among the
73 Hayes,lNES 10, 1951, 94-5; Leahy, The Inscriptions, 18.
74 Leahy, in Kemp, Amarna Reports II, 69 no. 49.
75 Leahy, in Kemp, Amarna Reports II, 67 no. 8.
76 Fairman in Pendlebury, eOA III, 175
77 Fairman in Pendlebury, eOA III, 174
78 Fairman in Pendlebury, eOA III, 175
79 Fairman in Pendlebury, eOA III, 175
80 Hayes,lNES 10, 1951, 162; Hope,lar sealings andAmphorae, 24.
81 Holthoer, 'The Pottery'in el-Khouli, Holthoer, Hope and Kaper, Stone Vessels, Pottery and
Sealzngs from the Tomb ifTutankhamun, 54 no. 24; Hope, 'The Jar Sealings', ibid., 121 no. 22,
131.

Ramesside sources Janssen used to compile his Commodity Prices from the
Ramessid Period, there are frequent references to mnt and m4qt jars. Janssen
concludes that such references 'most likely relate not to the container but to
its traditional contents, namely wine in the case of mnt and beer in the case of
m4qt.'82 Reineke had earlier suggested that a mnt jar 'hatte besondere Form:
Weite Offnung, trichterformig verengten Hals, 2 vertikal angebrachte Henkel
und unten z.T. spitz zulaufend.'83, by which he clearly means a wine amphora
(Figures 1.3,4.1). Both Reineke and Janssen have clearly been influenced by
references to mnt jars of wine, but I beg to differ. During the Nineteenth and
Twentieth Dynasties various sources reveal that not only wine, but honey, mrlJt
oil, olive oil, beer and hmy also came in mnt jars. 84 Although no restorable ves-
sel known to me bears a docket referring to hmy, it is noticeable that dockets
referring to wine, honey, olive oil, mrlJt oil, and if we include 'ale'/ date wine as
beer, beer are, during the Late Eighteenth Dynasty all found on the generic
type of jar shown in Figure 2.2-6, and it may not be too improbable to sup-
pose that such jars are the mnt jars of the Late Eighteenth Dynasty. However
such vessels would seem to contain only 4 hin,85 which contrasts markedly for
other volumes of a mnt jar which range from approximately ten to thirty hin.86
Such calculations are based on Ramesside documents, and whilst it is possible
that during the Ramesside Period, mnt jars were larger, it seems impossible
for the volume to vary so much. That a mnt contained 30 hin is perhaps to be
explained as a scribal error, since a 30 hin jar seems to have been called a ;('('t,87
but Papyrus Turin 1894,4 claims that 5 mnt jars contain together 49 hin.88 The
type of vessel here suggested as the Late Eighteenth Dynasty mnt jar did not
survive much into the Ramesside Period, and if it were replaced by a vessel of
approximately twice the volume, this might explain the discrepancy. Now if it
is likely that, contra Janssen, a mnt jar is a physical entity, then what of a m4qt
jar? Known commodities which come in medkhets comprise beer, olive oil and
honey.89 Burchardt and HeIck have suggested that the word m4qt derives from
a Semitic loan word,90 which, if true is undoubtedly significant, as will become
clear below. Moreover HeIck supposes that the only beer found in m4qt jars
82 Janssen, Commodity Prices, 408.
83 Reineke, MIO 9, 147.
84 Janssen, Commodity Prices, 330, 336, 352, 357; J. Cerny, the Valley ofthe Kings, Cairo, 1973,
45.
85 van Dijk, GM27, 31.
86 Cf.Janssen, Commodity Prices, 330, 340.
87 C£Janssen, Commodity Prices 339 table IV.
88 Janssen, Commodity Prices, 330. HeIck's view that a rrmt jar of beer held 'fast genau 20 hin',
seems unsupported (HeIck, Bier, 46).
89 Janssen, Two Ancient Egyptian Ship's Logs, Leiden, 1961, 71; id., Commodity Prices, 347, 352,
354.
90 M. Burchard, Die altkanaanaischen Fremdworte und Eigennamen im Aegyptischen Raum, II,
Leipzig, 1910, 29, no. 522; HeIck,Bier, 50.
A Taste ofHoney: mnt- and rmjqt Vessels in the Late Eighteenth Dynasty 25
is the imported Qdy-beer. 91 From the above lists of commodities we have seen
that honey and olive oil dockets occur on Canaanite jars, whilst one may as-
sume that 'ale'/date wine of Kizzuwatna, was also imported in foreign vessels.
Is it too far-fetched, therefore, to suggest that, during the Late Eighteenth to
Twentieth Dynasties the m4qt is none other than the Late Bronze IIB Ca-
naanite jar represented as Figure. 4.2? If this is so then the volume of a m4qt
is probably around 38 hin, and not the circa 50 hin traditionally assigned to
it. The traditional measurement of 1 m4qt = 50 hin was proposed by Cerny,92
and used as the basis for price calculations by Janssen, in the belief that a
m4qt was simply a measure of capacity rather than an actual vessel. HeIck
had disputed this, believing that a m4qt was an actual jar of a smaller size, but
did not make the connection between a m4qt and a LB IIB Canaanite jar. 93
There is some evidence to show that a m4qt contained 38 hin, as postulated by
Reineke, on the basis of a then incompletely published reference to papyrus
Turin 1881.III.12, dated to Year 7 of Ramesses IX.94 Janssen points out that
the complete reference rather indicates that one m4qt of honey costs 38 deben,
but then goes on to say that 'the average price of honey seems to have been c. 1
deben per hin,'95 which seems to somewhat confirm Reineke's belief even if the
latter arrived at it from an incorrect standpoint. Moreover in Papyrus Turin
2008+2016 there is a record of an olive (nlJlJ) oil delivery which comprised 4
mslJ jars and 1 m4qt jar, together 5 jars, makes 262 hin; 55 (hin), 55 (hin) 61
(hin) 41 (hin) 54 (hin), together 266 (hln).96 If we are kind to the scribe we
could say that the expected delivery should have been 262 hln, but when the
contents of each jar were actually measured it came to four more hln than ex-
pected. A deduction of 38 hln from either total would leave the four mslJ jars
with an average capacity of 56 or 57 hln, and the m4qt jar must be equivalent
to the fourth jar in the list of individual volumes which follow the total of 262
hln. Assuming that 262 hin was the (officially?) expected delivery then one
could suppose that a mslJ jar would normally contain 56 hln, although else-
where only 46 hin are given. 97 Finally if a m4qt is aLB IIB Canaanite jar which
contained 38 hln, the pistachio resin docket found on the jar from Saqqara (see
above), is certainly suggestive!98 If a LB IIB Canaanite jar held 38 hln, then a
jar of30 hln would hold just a little less, and must therefore be slightly smaller.
Could a ;('('t, therefore, be a wine amphora? Janssen lists four instances of ;('('t
containing 30 hln of fat, (five, if we correct the scribal error),99 whilst an ostra-
9! HeIck, Bier, 52.
92 Cerny, Prices and "fUzges in Egypt in the Ramesside Period, CHM 1, 1954, 908.
93 HeIck, Bier, 50.
94 Reineke,MIO 9,149.
95 Janssen, Commodity Prices, 347 n.30, 352-3.
96 Janssen, Two Ship's Logs, 71.
97 Reineke,MI09,148.
98 B. Aston, in Raven et aI, Pay and Raia, 127 no. 210.
99 Janssen, Commodity Prices, 339 Table 4.
 oney: mnt- and mgqt Vessels in the Late Eighteenth Dynasty 27

con from Amarna refers to irp njr njr f:ir 3~~ mnt 4 .... which is translated as
very good wine in jars, 4 mnt-vessels of the capacity of (??). Janssen takes this
to mean 'very good wine in jars, [that is] four mnt jars,' but could it not also be
seen as 'very good wine in amphorae [and] 4 mnt jars .... .'? We have seen that
wine, as well as being bottled in amphorae, was also put into the flasks equated
here with mnt vessels, whilst, perhaps significantly, the only docket mention-
ing fat on a restorable vessel listed above does indeed come from an amphora
(Tomb of Maya, 88-813).100

The above remarks come from an examination of dockets which have been
glued into pots which have been substantially restored. Much more informa-
tion can surely be extracted in future if only excavators take the time to put

~\IU
dockets and sherds together.

Bread

Fal

Dry Foodstuffs
(almonds, lentils, fenugreek)

Figure 1 (Scale 1:8)

100
Fairman, in Pendlebury eOA III, 161 no. 4.
 28 D.A.Aston
A Taste ofHoney: mnt- and m!jqt- Vessels in the Late Eighteenth Dynasty 29

Meat

MrhtOil Water O!iveOtl

Olive Oil
Water Honey
Honey

Figure 2 (Scale 1:8) Figure 3 (Scale 1:8)

30 D. A. Aston A Taste ofHoney: mnt- and mgqt- Vessels in the Late Eighteenth Dynasty 31

Oasis Wine

Wine

Pistachio resin
Honey

Figure 4 (Scale 1:8) Figure 5 (Scale 1:8)