Geoelectric Resistance Scanning on Parts of Abydos Cemetery

Transcription

Archaeological Prospection
Archaeol. Prospect. 6, 225±239 (1999)
Geoelectric Resistance Scanning on
Parts of Abydos Cemetery Region,
Sohag Governorate, Upper Egypt
M. M. EL-GAMILI1, A. S. EL-MAHMOUDI1*, S. SH. OSMAN2,
A. GH. HASSANEEN2 AND M. A. METWALY2
1
Department of Geology, Faculty of Science, El-Mansoura University, El-Mansoura,
35516, Egypt
2
National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics (NRIAG), Helwan, Cairo,
Egypt
ABSTRACT
The ancient Egyptian Abedju (original name of the present Abydos) locality is a famous
archaeological site southwest of Balyana town, Sohag Governorate, Upper Egypt. It is located to
the west of the agricultural land of the Nile Valley. The locality represents one of the most
important burial grounds for kings and high court dignitaries in ancient Egypt.
Shallow geophysical techniques are considered as one of the most accurate and cost-effective
methods used in archaeological prospecting and are considered as rapid and safe techniques in
detecting a wide range of buried archaeological features. The geoelectric resistance scanning
technique, using the Geoscan RM-15 Resistance Meter, is applied with a twin-electrode configuration at three sites of the unexcavated localities of Abydos area. This technique proved to be
a useful means of exploring the sites through mapping the subsurface burial inhomogeneities
resulting from the marked resistance contrast between the buried stone and brick walls and the
covering fill of sand, silt and clay.
Interesting different buried features are imaged and displayed on maps and three-dimensional
representations to guide the archaeological excavation programmes at the sites of Umm
El-Qaab, Shunet El-Zebib and Kom El-Sultan within the Abydos region. At the Umm El-Qaab site
the combined interpretation of the tomography resistance ranges and maps indicate buried walls
and rubble as well as an amorphous background area. At the Shunet El-Zebib site, the texture of
the images, which show scattered and crowded high-resistance anomalies, confirms the existence of buried tombs at the site, which is surrounded by defence walls. Thus, this site was not a
fortress or a palace, but a special cemetery for higher dignitaries. Kom El-Sultan, however,
shows a concentration of high-resistance anomalies at the northern part. Thus, these may be
c 1999 John Wiley &
related to walls and rubble related to a nearby elevated temple. Copyright *
Sons, Ltd.
Key words: archaeological remains; geophysical prospecting; resistance imaging; Necropolis,
Abydos, Upper Egypt.
Introduction
The Abydos locality is a famous archaeological
site located 12 km southwest of El-Balyana town,
Sohag Governorate, Upper Egypt. It is located at
*Correspondence to: Dr A. S. El-Mahmoudi, Geology Department, Faculty of Science, Mansoura University, Egypt.
Email: mahmoudi@mum.mans.eun.eg
CCC 1075±2196/99/040225±15$17.50
Copyright # 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
the western boundary of the agricultural land of
the Nile Valley (latitude 318530 ±318570 N and
longitude 268100 ±268150 E, Figure 1).
Abydos represents one of the most important
holy burial grounds for kings and high court
dignitaries in ancient Egypt since the beginning
of the early Dynastic period and was a pilgrimage site for the religious Pharaohs for a long
time. Rituals for the burial of the dead king and
Received 11 June 1999
Accepted 15 July 1999
226
Figure 1. Location map of the area of study at Abydos,
Sohag Governorate, Upper Egypt.
the accession of his successor were celebrated
there.
Abydos and its necropolises were both devoted
to the worship of the death god Khontamenti
( first of the inhabitants of the Western Kingdom)
who had the form of a dog. Under the Old
Kingdom, the cult of Osiris, the god of life in the
underworld and of resurrection, had gained a
foothold at Abydos. Thereafter the temple was
devoted to Osiris and Isis as Khontamenti and
were both worshipped equally. The myth of Osiris
and Isis has been discussed by many authors, e.g.
Bicky (1984) and Rogers (1992).
The most important part of ancient Abydos
was its extensive necropolis, situated in the
desert. Four separate areas can be identified. In
the most southern part of the necropolis, near
M. M. El-Gamili et al.
El-Araba, there are the tombs of the New Kingdom, the temples of Sethos I and Ramesses II and
the so-called Osireion (Figure 2). To the north of
the temple is a hill containing burials of the late
Old Kingdom. Still further north, between the
sanctuary of Osiris and the remains of the walls
at Shunt El-Zebieb, there are the tombs of the
Middle Kingdom, many of them in the form of
small brick pyramids. Here, too, there are burials
of other periods, particularly from the Eighteenth
to Twentieth Dynasties (1500 BC ±1000 BC) and the
late Dynastic Period (Baedeker, 1978). Finally, in
the hill of Umm El-Qaab, to the west, are the
royal tombs of the earliest Dynasties and the
sacred Tomb of Osiris. The presence of water in
the Osireion affects access to that portion of the
temple as well as eroding the enclosing rocks of
the temple. A detailed study of the groundwater
at the Osireion and its source using geoelectric
resistivity investigations has been discussed by
El-Mahmoudi et al. (1998).
The hill of Umm El-Qaab was believed to be
Osiris's Tomb, and from the Sixth Dynasty
onwards the dead from all over Egypt were
buried at Abydos. Several kings of the Middle
Kingdom as well as wealthy private citizens
erected cenotaphs or stelae there. For the pious
Egyptian there was no greater blessing than to be
buried beside the Tomb of Osiris, or failing this to
have his mummy brought temporarily to Abydos
to receive the desired consecration, or at the very
least to recommend himself to the favour of
Osiris, lord of the Underworld, by the erection of
a cenotaph or a memorial stone (Baedeker, 1978).
The mystery of Abydos
At the temple of Seti I in the ancient city of
Abydos, part of a plaster overhang crumbled,
revealing some most remarkable underlying
hieroglyphs. This is a very unusual frieze depicting what appear to be modern machines
(Figure 3). This photograph is discussed on the
internet, and shows what appears to be a
helicopter in the upper left, a submarine in the
upper right, a flying disc in the middle (right)
and a plane in the lower right. These photographs and glyphs reveal that the Egyptian
civilisation was far more mysterious than we
have been led to believe.
Archaeological Prospection, Vol. 6, 225±239 (1999)
Geoelectric Resistance Scanning on Parts of Upper Egypt
227
Figure 2. Abydos Necropolises and Temples (after Baedeker, 1978).
Many explanations of mysterious hieroglyphs
of Abydos have appeared on the internet. Many
do not believe in the existence of the technology
in antiquity, some others question the originality
of these hieroglyphs, and others suggest the
capability of seeing the future. They may, however, represent a dream of the future explained
by the artist or priest. The dreams were therefore
recorded in Abydos the place of resurrection.
Many prophesies appear as dreams in the holy
Koran (Surat Yusuf, verses 4, 36, 43 and 44).
Geophysical investigations
The resistance scanning method
The first use of electrical resistance scanning in
archaeological prospecting was conducted in
England in 1946 by R. J. C. Atkinson (Aitken,
1974). Resistance is dependent largely on the
water and ionic content of the different
subsurface rock materials, such as stone, clay,
wet soil, dug soil, sand, etc. Buried walls,
building foundations, roads and ditches show
up clearly with this technique, as well as tombs,
bits and underground cavities.
In particular, probes have to be inserted
temporarily a few inches into the ground in
order to make electrical contact when taking
measurements by resistance scanning. In general,
with this technique, some archaeological features
possibly can be distinguished from small-scale
geological effects.
The instrument used in the present study is the
Geoscan Resistance Meter, RM-15 designed primarily for use with the twin array of electrodes. It
228
Figure 3. Photograph showing the strange hieroglyphs at the Temple of Seti I, Abydos area (extracted from the internet,
from web site http://www.user.cs.tu.berlin.de/ leonardo/abydos.html., 1998).
can be used with other arrays, such as Wenner,
with reasonable accuracy. This is the configuration that will be required for accurate Tomography survey. The instrument includes data-logger
memory for area survey mode. In this mode, grid
size, traverse interval and sample interval may be
set. The data logger keeps track of survey
position for both zig-zag and parallel traverses
and displays the current grid, line number and
line position. All the automatic facilities enable
speed of area coverage and transfer of area
coverage and transfer of the data to PC computers. For more information about data treatment
and presentation of the results refer to the GR
manual, Geoscan Research, RM-15 Resistance
Meter (1993).
The results obtained are in the form of
resistance images and maps that show anomalous distribution of electrical resistance in the
surveyed site.
Twin electrode array
This configuration is developed especially for
archaeology. It is, in effect, the Wenner configuration divided into two parts, with a very large
229
separation between the current and potential
pairs. One pair (A and M) is placed in a fixed
position and the other pair (B and N) is moved
over the site and acts as the mobile detector probe
(Figures 4 and 5). Because of the strong gradient
of voltage near B, the measured resistance is most
influenced by the ground in the vicinity of N.
Simple mathematics (Aspinall and Lynam,
1970) show that if the separation of the pairs is
at least 30 times their individual spacing, then
variations in the separation will affect readings
by less than 3%, which is insignificant in
resistivity work, especially if the data are filtered
for presentation. Once they are so separated, the
relative orientation of the probe pairs (A and M)
is also irrelevant and penetration is improved,
because the current flow from the current probes
(A and B) is effectively radial. To achieve the
same penetration as, for instance, in the normal
Wenner, the probe spacings need to be only
about half as great. Thus with 0.5 m spacing the
twin electrode configuration sees as deeply as the
normal 1 m Wenner, but with greater horizontal
resolution. Such a compact array lends itself to
construction as a frame with the instrument
attached.
Figure 4. Electrode configurations. W Wenner; Tw twin array; A and B current electrodes; M and N potential
electrodes (after Clark, 1990).
Figure 5. The twin probe array set-up for area surveying.
230
The background resistance due to the whole
region between M and N is minimized by
making a b, where a is the distance between
A and M and b is the distance between N and B
(Aitken, 1974).
Area surveying with the twin array
The Geoscan Resistance surveys may consist of
either an area survey, the most usual one, or a
line survey. For more details about both types of
survey, refer to the manual of Geoscan Resistance
Meter RM-15. Figure 5 shows a 0.5 m twin array
set-up for area surveying.
In an area survey the ground is covered by a
square of traverses adjacent to one another. The
traverses may be either in the same direction all
the time, referred to as parallel traverses, or may
reverse direction for each new traverse, referred
to as zig-zag traverses (Figure 6). The most usual
choice of the traverse method is the zig-zag
surveying. Zig-zag traverses eliminate the return
walk back to the beginning of the next traverse
and are thus more efficient than parallel surveys.
Of course the probe configuration in use must not
be direction dependent, otherwise a striping
effect may occur.
Survey results and interpretation
According to the surface evidence and the
opinion of the archaeological inspectors in the
area of Abydos, three sites were chosen to make
the resistance survey with the Geoscan RM15 Resistance Meter. The locations of these three
sites are shown in Figure 7. The task of this
geophysical survey is to help in locating
anomalies of expected archaeological targets,
Figure 6. The two methods for surveys: (a) zig-zag
traverses and (b) parallel traverses.
which were buried under the surface, depending
on the variations in electric resistance of the
buried objects and the surrounding medium.
The interpretation of the survey results may
not always be straight forward owing to a
number of complicating factors. Firstly, archaeological anomalies depend on the nature and
depth of the structure, local soil type and
geology, terrain and climatic conditions. Secondly, the resistance meter also may give a
response to non-archaeological structures; this
can mask the response required or may be
misinterpreted as archaeologically significant.
Before examining the anomalies detected in
the resistance survey it should be noted that the
exceptionally dry conditions at the time of the
survey (May and August 1997) had an adverse
effect on the speed of surveying and had to be
taken into consideration when interpreting the
data.
This technique has been used extensively in
archaeological prospecting in England since the
early nineties, e.g. Linford (1993), Aspinall and
Pocock (1995), Linford and Linford (1996), Cale
et al. (1997), and in the Nile Delta by El-Gamili
et al. (1998), as well as many published reports on
the internet.
The three sites surveyed in Abydos include
Umm El-Qaab, Shunt El-Zebib and Kom ElSultan (Figure 7). In the following the results of
the geophysical survey will be discussed for each
site.
Umm El-Qaab site ( pronounced
Gaab) Ð `Mother of Pots'
The site gets its name from the large numbers of
votive vessels left at the spot by the ancient
pilgrims. The mud-brick mastabas of the early
kings were surrounded by secondary burials
belonging to members of their court, servants
and animals. The kings' cenotaphs were marked
by the fine stone-cut stelae, a feature not found at
Saqqarah (Black and Norton, 1993).
In 1895±1896, E'Amelineau excavated a series
of tombs containing objects with the names of
Early Dynastic Kings at Umm El-Qaab. After
that, W. M. Flinders Petrie reworked the site in
1900±1901, and found monuments of all the
231
Figure 7. Location map of the Abydos area and the Necropolises, showing the sites of the resistance surveys.
kings of the First and Second Dynasties. The
superstructures of the tombs had been lost, and
only brick-lined remnants with rows of subsidiary burials remained. The finds included
magnificent stone stelae of the kings, and small
objects such as clay sealings, ivory and ebony
labels, parts of stone vessels and fragmentary
furniture. The tomb of Djer (First Dynasty) was
believed, during the middle kingdom, to be the
tomb of Osiris (Baedeker, 1978). Practically
nothing of these monuments is now to be seen.
The geological and climatic conditions at the
Umm El-Qaab site are the main factors to affect
the results. The soil of this area comprises
gravelly sands weathered from the plateau, and
extends to a few metres in depth. As a result of
the sunny and dry weather there was inadequate
connection between the electrodes and the
ground, which caused some problems in the
speed of the survey because of the need of water
to enhance good contact.
The site surveyed (Figure 8) is divided into
10 grids. Each grid is 20 m 20 m, each square is
surveyed by making successive zig-zag traverse
Figure 8. Surveyed grids at Umm El-Qaab, Abydos, Upper
Egypt (for location see Figure 7).
232
Figure 9. Some excavated tombs at archaeological site of Abydos, Upper Egypt. (a) Some excavated structures at Shunet
El-Zebib site. (b) Excavated tomb at Umm El-Qaab (east of grids 2 & 4).
233
Figure 10. Resistance results and interpretation, Umm El-Qaab, Abydos, Upper Egypt.
234
Figure 11. The grids of the surveyed site at Shunet
El-Zebib, Abydos Area, Upper Egypt.
lines separated by 1 m. The mobile probe
separation is 0.5 m, so the maximum depth of
penetration is 1 m. Measurements are recorded
digitally by the RM-15 Resistance Meter and
subsequently transferred to lap-top computer for
storage and preliminary processing. The Geoplot
2 program (1994) and the Surfer 6.04 program
(1997) are used for presenting the data as images
and maps.
It should be noted that there is an excavated
tomb (Figure 9a) directly at the eastern side of
grids numbers 2 and 4. In grid 8 there is an
excavated tomb that was buried by sand and
mud bricks prior to this field work (Figure 8).
Also, it is important to notice that the walls of the
tombs (Figure 9b) were built of burnt bricks
having a thickness of about 1.5 m. The excavated
material generally consists of find sands with
mud-brick remains. Therefore, it is expected that
the walls will show up as positive polarity
anomalies, whereas the filling material as well
as the background materials will show up as
negative polarity anomalies.
Results and interpretation
Figure 10a represents the resistance survey image
in terms of simple dot density with higher
resistances or positive polarities represented by
increasing dot concentrations, and in Figure 10b
the output of the program Surfer 6.04 is
represented, which shows the contour map of
the resistance data. A three-dimensional plot of
the same anomalies is represented in Figure 10c.
There is much coincidence between each
anomaly image, the contour mapping and the
three-dimensional plot. The crowded high-resistance data represent the archaeological burials on
the contour map, and the higher anomaly values
on the three-dimensional map. The remainder is
the background resistance, which is of lower or
negative polarity on both the contour map and
the three-dimensional plot.
Therefore, the combined interpretation results
obtained from the above images and maps can be
summarized in Figure 10d, which shows the
buried walls, their surrounding rubble as well as
the amorphous background areas. It can be
recommended that future excavation plans start
at the boundaries between very high-resistance
and very low-resistance anomalies and follow the
low-resistance anomalies to find the remains
within the tombs. In other words, do not dig on
walls, but dig within the rooms or tomb cavities,
in order to save time, money and show the sides
of the walls for architectural survey aspects.
Shunet El-Zebib site
This site is surrounded by an outer and an inner
(and higher) wall (originally 13 m high) built of
sun-dried brick. The walls were covered with
white plaster, like the white walls of Memphis.
This complex measures about 120 m 45 m,
and probably dates from the Second Dynasty
(Baedeker, 1978); however, some Egyptologists
contest that it is older. The site was considered as
a palace (Baedeker, 1978), however Black and
Norton (1993) state that the interior seems to have
been filled with small dwellings. Also, the
popular view of this structure as a fortress is
undoubtedly erroneous (Baedeker, 1978). The soil
of the area consists now of wind blown sands.
Previous excavations have revealed some
rooms or tombs, especially in the entrance of
the area (see Figure 9a). Also it is noticed that
these rooms are built of massive mud-bricks and
filled with friable sand. The dimension of each
room is 2.5 m 1.5 m.
235
Figure 12. Resistance results, Shunet El-Zebib site, Abydos, Upper Egypt.
236
Figure 13. The grids of the site surveyed at Kom El-Sultan,
Abydos Area, Upper Egypt.
The surveyed site is divided into nine grids,
each grid is 20 m 20 m, as shown in Figure 11.
Each squared grid was scanned by making
successive zig-zag traverses by line separations
equal to 1 m. The mobile probe separation is 1 m,
so the maximum depth of penetration is 2 m. The
station interval is 1 m apart.
Figure 12a represents the dot density image, with
higher resistances represented by increasing dot
concentrations. The corresponding anomalies are
shown by an image plot in grey scale with solid
shadings. These solid shadings represent the
archaeological features, whereas those with lighter shading represent the background resistances.
A contour map and a three-dimensional plot of
the resistance data are represented in Figure 12b
and c.
By comparing these results with the excavated
features (Figure 9a) in the site as well as the
opinions of archaeologists, it can be noticed that
the texture of the images and size of these
excavated features agree with the dimensions of
the resistance anomalies in the images, so we can
interpret the scattered anomalies all over the site
as scattered archaeological features that can be
considered as tombs. These tombs extend in
depth to 2 m below the ground surface. Also, the
lack of obvious road design in the images
confirms the non-existence of dwelling conditions
at this site, as the features overlap each other as
tombs of narrow dimensions (2.5 m 1.5 m).
Such excavated dimensions (2.5 m 1.5 m)
appear as too narrow for living rooms, but
appear mostly as tombs in the sacred holy land
of Abydos. If this proves to be correct through
future excavations, then the question of the
fenced perimeter can be answered through the
dismissal of the interpretation as a fortress or
dwelling site.
In this case the walls surrounding the site acted
as a guardian for the higher dignitaries' necropolis. For other persons, however, the guarding
authority is expected to make a charge or raise
taxes for holy burial of the dead or his memorials
in the land of resurrection of Abydos.
Kom El-Sultan site
The centre of the ancient walled town and temple
of Osiris is located in the mound known as Kom
El-Sultan. The most important feature of the
town must have been the temple, at first for
Khontamenti and from the Twelfth Dynasty for
Osiris. The temple was built in brick, with only a
few elements, such as door jambs and lintels, in
stone. This accounts in part for its almost
complete destruction. The earliest objects that
were found were from the beginning of the First
Dynasty: a vase fragment of King `Aha', and a
number of small stones and faience figures of
men, animals, and reptiles. Starting with Khufu
of the Fourth Dynasty (an ivory statuette, the
only preserved likeness of him), almost all kings
of the Old Kingdom down to Pepy II are
represented among the finds. In the Middle
Kingdom Nebhepetre, Mentuhotpe probably
added a small shrine to the existing temple, and
from then on many kings are represented down
to the Seventeenth Dynasty. In the Eighteenth
Dynasty, Amenophis I, Tuthmusis III and
Amenophis III carried out rebuilding work, and
all the major Ramessids are represented, including Ramesses II by a complete temple nearby. In
the late period, Apries, Amasis and Nectanebo I
feature prominently. The temple probably continued to function well into the Graeco-Roman
period. The site of Kom El-Sultan is enclosed by
massive mud-brick walls of the Thirtieth Dynasty
(Baines and Malek, 1992).
237
Figure 14. Resistance results for Kom El-Sultan site, Abydos, Upper Egypt.
238
The area surveyed is divided into 12 grids,
each is 20 m 20 m (Figure 13). Each squared
grid was surveyed by making successive zig-zag
traverse lines separated by 1 m. The mobile probe
separation was 0.5 m, so the maximum depth of
penetration was 1 m, with a station interval of
1 m.
Field observations in the site surveyed indicate
the probable remains of a destroyed temple on an
elevated surface in grids 1, 2, 5 and 6, which had
a relief of 6 m above the ground surface. This
temple was built of bricks and the door jambs
and inlets were made of limestone. The soil
comprises a mixture of weathered sand, limestone fragments and mud bricks. At the infill
western side of grids 1, 5 and 9 there is a recently
excavated temple outside the wall. The temple
appears to be built of massive mud-bricks and
contains some statues and columns of limestone
and granite. Excavation of the temple by an
American archaeological expedition had not been
completed at the time of the survey.
Figure 14a shows the results of the resistance
survey in terms of simple dot density, with
higher resistances represented by increasing dot
concentrations. For more details, however, the
data were transferred to Surfer program Ver 6.04
(1997) and a contour map for the resistance data
is represented in Figure 14b.
Inspection of the image and processed map
indicates that the high-resistance anomalies are
concentrated on the western side of the site
surveyed, whereas the remaining area is very
smooth (i.e. non-anomalous background or
amorphous areas). The anomalous western side
does not indicate a particular pattern, which
suggests that rubble occupies grids 1, 2, 5, 6 and
9, probably related to the elevated wall located to
the west of the survey site.
Conclusions
Three sites in the Abydos archaeological area
were surveyed using the Geoscan RM-15 Resistance Meter. The twin configuration was used for
this purpose with the mobile electrode (C1P1)
having a separation of 0.5 m at both Umm ElQaab and Kom El-Sultan, whereas at Shunet ElZebib a separation of 1 m has been used, with the
fixed electrode (C2P2) located at 30 m distance
from the square surveyed. The automatically
logged resistance data are then processed and
interpreted using PC desk computer Geoplot
software (1995) and Surfer software (1997), which
produce contour maps and three-dimensional
diagrams. The interpretation of such maps for the
expected archaeological features and patterns
depends on the resistance contrast between the
buried archaeological features and the surrounding background lithology. Thus, the resistance
anomalies are related to suitable and expected
buried elements such as stone or brick walls, rock
foundations, rubbles, ditches, roads, canals,
tombs, etc.
The combined interpretation of the images and
maps indicates that:
(i) at the Umm El-Qaab site, walls and rubble
derived from the walls can be traced within
an amorphous background;
(ii) at the Shunet El-Zebib site, the texture of the
images show scattered and crowded highresistance anomalies, which suggest buried
tombs in a field that is surrounded with still
intact thick clay brick walls bounding the
site Ð i.e. the site represents a cemetery for
high-ranking dignitaries and not a palace or
fortress;
(iii) at the Kom El-Sultan site, where superficial
inspection indicated a temple and wall
located to the west, concentration of highresistance anomalies at the western part of
the site surveyed can be related to rubble
from the nearby elevated wall.
References
Aitken, M. J. (1974). Physics and Archaeology, 2nd edn.
London: Oxford University Press.
Aspinall, A. and Lynam, J. T. (1970). An induced
polarization instrument for the detection of near
surface features. Prospezioni Archeologiche 5: 67±75.
Aspinall, A. and Pocock, J. A. (1995). Geophysical
prospecting in garden archaeology, an appraisal and
critique based on case studies. Archaeological Prospection 2: 61±84.
Baedeker, S. (1978). Egypt from A to Z, Handbook for
Travellers. Norwich: Jarrold and Sons.
Baines, J. and Malek, J. (1992). Atlas of Ancient Egypt.
Oxford: Andromeda.
Bicky, G. (1984). Egyptian Monuments in the Nile Valley,
Dar El-Kotob, Part II, Egypt.
Black, A. C. and Norton, W. W. (1993). Blue Guide
Egypt. London: Bedford.
Cale, M. A., David, A. E. U., Linford, N. T., Linford,
P. K. and Payne, A. W. (1997). Non-destructive
techniques in English gardens: geophysical prospecting. Journal of Garden History 17: 26±39.
Clark, A. J. (1990). Seeing Beneath the Soil. London: B. T.
Batsford.
El-Gamili, M. M., El-Mahmoudi, A. S., Osman, S. S. h.,
Hassaneen, A. G. h. and Taha, A. I. (1998).
Resistance geoelectric scanning and resistivity profiling on parts of Tell Timai, archaeological site,
Dakahliya Governorate, Nile Delta, Egypt. First
International Symposium on Geophysics, Department
of Geology, Faculty of Science, Tanta University,
Tanta, Egypt, 8 and 9 September 1998.
239
El-Mahmoudi, A. S., El-Gamili, M. M., El-Sayed, E. A.,
Hassaneen, A. G. h. and El-Metwally, M. A. (1998).
Geoelectric resistivity exploration of Abydos area,
Sohag Governorate, Upper Egypt. First International
Symposium on Geophysics, Department of Geology,
Faculty of Science, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt,
8 and 9 September 1998.
Geoplot Version 2.02 (1995). GPB9643. Bradford:
Geoscan Research.
Geoscan Research Resistance Meter RM-15 (1993).
Instruction Manual. Bradford: Geoscan Research.
Linford, N. (1993). Geophysical Survey at Reigate
Priory, Hamsted. London: English Heritage, Ancient
Monuments Laboratory Report No. 44/93.
Linford, N. and Linford, P. (1996). Report on Geophysical Survey at Hamsted. London: English Heritage,
Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report No. 2/97.
Rogers, A. (1992). New Complete Guide of Egypt.
Bologna: La fotometalgrafica Emiliana Spa.
Surfer Version 6.04. (1997). Golden, Colorado: Surface
Mapping System, Golden Software.

Geoelectric Resistance Scanning on Parts of Abydos Cemetery

Transcription

Similar documents

Invitation to seminar and workshop

From: Smith, Roland [mailto:Roland.Smith@reading.gov.uk] Sent: 09

ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺣﻞ ﺍﳌﺼﺮﻱ The late Egyptian ﺻﻼﺡ ﺟﺎﻫﲔ Salah Jaheen

Nineteenth-century Apache wickiups

CV - Zahran

this PDF file

Skills for Green Jobs: Egypt

Development Corridor for Sustainable Growth in Egypt

Long-term effect of seismic activities on archaeological remains: A

Werethekau and the votive stela of PA-n-Imn

3 - Ontario Archaeological Society

RUDSAK

Print this article - Journals at the University of Arizona

Know Before You Go Egypt

The Jay and Jeanie Schottenstein National Campus for the

FULL TEXT - Miscellanea Anthropologica et Sociologica

10.07.2013 - Daily News Egypt

Society in new Kingdom Egypt during the

Hoonko Service - Higashi Honganji Buddhist Temple

Here - RegOnline

here. - TAG Chicago 2013

Pottery in the Southwest in October