This document is part of the online version of the book Amheida II: A Late Romano-Egyptian House in the Dakhla Oasis / Amheida House B2 by Anna Lucille Boozer, which is available at http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/amheida-ii-house-b2/. It is published as part of the NYU Library's Ancient World Digital Library and in partnership with the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World (ISAW). Further information about ISAW's publication program is available on the ISAW website. Please note that while the base URI of this publication is stable, the exact content available at that address is likely to change over time.
The objects of adornment found comprise seven beads made of glass and faience, one glass bracelet, one faience amulet, one bone pin, and two bronze finger rings.↩#p1949
The analysis of these objects can provide useful information about the inhabitants of the house and connections between this site and the outside world. What people used to wear can tell us what they looked like, their social status, and often their private relationship with religion. Moreover, jewellery reflects the fashion of the time, even if should be considered that, as happens today, jewels can be kept over time and passed on from generation to generation.2↩#p1950
The adornment recovered in the house, both by type and material, are quite widespread in Egypt in Roman times, and most of them are likely locally made; only some beads, because of their particular manufacturing technique, were probably imported from outside.↩#p1951
These imports are four beads composed of a thin sheet of metal sandwiched between two layers of high quality colorless glass: three specimens incorporating gold and one incorporating silver or a similar metal alloy.3↩#p1952
This precious kind of glass, termed “sandwich gold-glass” or “gold-in-glass,”4 commonly is thought to have been produced in Alexandria.5 Despite this assumption, a manufacturing center for such beads, dating to the early Roman period, has been recently attested on Elephantine island by the finding of work-shop wasters and half products.6↩#p1953
It is still not possible to reconstruct with certainty all of the bead manufacturing stages, but probably the glass layers were made by drawing.7 Scholars think these beads were made by sections of two tubes, a smaller one covered with gold slipped inside a larger one, which are then reheated together and constricted along their length, forming bulges.8 Different methods to form bulges could be used, but the only one archaeologically attested involved rolling the tubes along grooved stone blocks, as documented by the finds in a Late Roman workshop found at Kôm el-Dikka.9 The achieved bulges can finally be cut individually to create ball beads (Cat. Nos. 11.1 and 11.2). Alternatively, they can be cut in multiple to create segmented beads (Cat. No. 11.3), leaving the ends rough or finished by reheating or grinding. Ball beads also can be shaped with tools forming lobes and grooves to obtain ribbed beads (Cat. No. 11.4).↩#p1954
Three of these sandwich-beads come from room 3 and were recovered in a layer (DSU 13) consisting in vault and wall collapse, related by ceramic findings to the third phase of activity of the house.10 One sandwich-bead comes instead from a feature of compacted debris (FSU 11) underlying the floor of Room 1, related to the first phase of activity of the house.↩#p1955
Two more glass beads have been recovered, one in room 9 (DSU 74) and one in room 6 (DSU 47), both from layers consisting of occupational debris related to the second phase of the house. They imitate precious stones and show different manufacturing techniques.↩#p1956
One (Cat. No. 11.5) is a ribbon barrel bead, which probably imitates agate. It is made of dull blue glass decorated by concentric weaves of dull dark-blue, white and transparent light green glass. Its conical perforation, with the glass encircling the two holes, indicates that the bead has been rod-formed by winding; the fold at one end could suggest the use of premanufactured drawn canes, heated on a lamp.11↩#p1957
The other glass bead that imitates precious stone (Cat. No. 11.6) is a faceted bead. It is made of dull blue glass imitating lapis lazuli, in the shape of a cornerless cube. This kind of bead can be formed with different methods: wound and shaped with a paddle; worked by lapidary technique drilling the bead, grinding and polishing the facets; wound and finished by lapidary technique. Our specimen shows a clear and cylindrical perforation, which suggests that it has been made by lapidary technique; however, it is difficult to recognize the initial manufacturing technique when the bead is finished mechanically.12↩#p1958
Only one of the beads is made of faience (Cat. No. 11.7): it is a rod-formed ring bead, the simplest and most widespread kind of bead.13 It comes from room 3, DSU 18, an occupational debris layer above the floor level, related to the second phase of the house.↩#p1959
All of these beads were probably mounted in necklaces or earrings worn by women. Very close parallels can be found in the jewelry recovered in the necropolis of Aïn el-Labakha (Kharga oasis), some of which were found intact on the mummies showing the way they were worn and which way the beads could alternate.14↩#p1960
These findings testify that “middle class” women followed the fashion of the time, wearing jewels made of non-precious or semi-precious material, imitating in every aspects the precious jewels worn by the women of the “upper class.” Beads made of gold and precious stones, in the same shape of our imitations, indeed can be seen in the necklaces worn by the women represented by the Fayum Portraits.15↩#p1961
Another adornment that definitely belonged to a woman is a bone pin (Cat. No. 11.8). It was found on the floor level (DSU 75) of room 7, the central court, another room used frequently by women. The unit is related to the second phase of the house. Pins were generally used for ornamental purposes in female dress or hair. It is not always possible to distinguish dress pins from hairpins, but in Roman times pins were worn mainly in the hair, as the women used to put up their hair in a bun. Moreover, hairpins were mostly carved in bone and ivory, while dress pins were usually made of metal.16 The specimen found preserves only the shaft, carved at the top with a wrapped snake, suggesting that the missing head was carved in the shape of a hand.17↩#p1962
A glass bracelet and a faience amulet could be worn both by women and children. The glass bracelet (Cat. No. 11.9), in the shape of a bangle, is the most common and longest enduring form of bracelet. The fragment found likely belongs to a seamless bracelet, built by furnace winding like beads.18 It is made of dull black glass with uneven vertical ribbing on the external surface, a very common tooled decoration. This kind of bracelet appears in Egypt after the middle of the third century, then is well documented on every site occupied during the Late Roman Period.19 It was found in a surface layer of the Street S1.↩#p1963
The faience amulet (Cat. No. 11.10) is roughly formed but shows the typical iconography of the god Bes: a dwarf represented naked with the lion’s tail and bandy legs, human face with a protruding tongue, usually surrounded by a lion’s mane and wearing a feathered crown. Bes was a popular household deity, and women and children wore Bes amulets for protection against the perils of childbirth and infancy. This specimen, made of turquoise glazed faience with details in yellow-green glaze, is double-sided and perforated laterally through the neck for suspension. Small amulets like this one were often worn in necklaces together with various kinds of beads.20 It has been found in the northern part of room 2, immediately above the floor, in a surface layer (DSU 2) related to the fourth phase of the house.↩#p1964
The two bronze rings, possibly both imitations of gold rings, show two different uses of the same type of object. One (Cat. No. 11.11), which derived from a foundation layer in room 3 (DSU 29), was probably a female ornament, maybe once set with a glass bezel. It is a thin ring to which is fixed the collet of a missing bezel.↩#p1965
The other one (Cat. No. 11.12) belonged to a man. It had a larger diameter and is made with a wider band, on top of which is an image incised in sunk relief. This ring had a specific function in addition to being an ornament: it was used to seal documents, as a sign of authenticity and identifying the owner. The image shows a male profile wearing a helmet and a shoulder protection, identifying the owner as a cavalryman. The features of the helmet are indeed characteristic of the helmets worn by the Roman Auxiliary Cavalry, in particular of the helmet Heddernheim type I, which is dated to the third century.21↩#p1966
The ring has been found among occupational debris (DSU 16) that covered the floor level in room 1, a secure context, since it was sealed by the roof collapse above. The ostraka found in the same unit give us a range of dating of ca. 240–340.↩#p1967
The amounts of goods and the kind of transactions appearing in the accounts suggest we are dealing with a contractor, someone who acted like fiscal agent for the ruling elite, someone who collected taxes and tribute from locals, someone involved in the shipping and transportation business.↩#p1968
Technology: drawing;23 shaped in segmented mold (?)↩#p1976
Condition: good, almost complete, small chip missing. Milky weathering and iridescence in places.24↩#p1977
Description: ball (oblate) bead. Only one end is well finished by reheating.↩#p1978
Parallels: Francis 2000:217; Petrie 1906:60, pl. XLVI (143); Dunand, et al. 2008: Inv. 3675 (p. 129), 3465 (p.133), 3676 (p. 135); Peacock and Maxfield 2007: n. 13, p. 301, fig. 12.3; Rodziewicz 2005: cat. Nos. 447-449, p. 116, pl. 27 and pl. 107, photo no 5 a-c; Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, London, UC 51270, UC 51274 (from Saft el-Henna).↩#p1979
Notes: Stored in SCA magazine at Ismant el-Kharab, No. 2824↩#p1980
Figure 11.1: Sandwich gold-glass beads 3496, 3497, 3066 and 3498.
Parallels: Dunand, et al. 2008:131, Inv. 3405; Francis 2000:224; Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, London, UC 6781 (from Lahun), UC 26330, 26347 (from Qau: set with segmented gold-glass beads).↩#p2037
Notes: Stored in SCA magazine at Ismant el-Kharab, No. 2868↩#p2038
Technology: molded; probably glazed with the efflorescence technique27↩#p2082
Condition: complete but very worn; glaze iridescent in places.↩#p2083
Description: double-sided amulet of Bes, formed identically front and back, perforated laterally through the neck for suspension. The amulet is roughly formed, the crown is only sketched and very short; the details, in yellow-green glaze, are outlined in an approximate way. On one side the glaze is damaged, probably by the stand marks where the piece was set down to dry.↩#p2084
Parallels: Meyer 1982:226, pl. 59g (glass); Peacock and Maxfield 2007:301, n. 11, fig. 12.3; Petrie 1914:40, pl XXXIII, 188 n, o (UC52808, UC52809); Allard Pierson Museum, Amsterdam (APM 12771–12774).↩#p2085
Notes: Stored in SCA magazine at Ismant el-Kharab, No. 2824↩#p2086
Condition: very fragmentary, incomplete; oxidized and corroded. Glued together from pieces and consolidated with paraloid (5%).↩#p2095
Description: seven joining fragments of a finger ring. A thin band (0.2 wide and 0.05 thick) with the collet of a bezel is fixed on the ring. The collet (0.5 x 0.7) is incomplete and deformed, and the bezel is missing.↩#p2096
Description: band finger ring, seal. The band has a semicircular cross section and tapers to the extremities, which are probably incomplete. On the top is an image incised in sunk relief showing a helmeted head facing left. The features of the helmet recall very closely the helmets worn by the Roman Auxiliary Cavalry, in particular the helmet Heddernheim type I, dated to the third century.28 The skull is made in one piece with an integral neck guard and a rounded knob on top. The rim of the bowl, in which are apertures for ears, is stressed; it is not clear if the helmet has a frontal protection. The eyebrows are underlined but they seem to be an anatomical detail of the face, not part of the helmet.29 The broad collar with vertical strips worn by the cavalryman is most likely a shoulder protection (lorica segmentata ?) probably with the scarf to protect the neck (focale).↩#p2106
Parallels: Dunand, et al. 2008:136, Inv. 3461-3462; Petrie 1927: 17, pl. XIII.159 (UC 2457).↩#p2107
Notes: Stored in SCA magazine at Ismant el-Kharab, No. 2826.↩#p2108
Figure 11.8: Bronze finger ring 3452 (A. Cervi).
Notes
1 I would like to thank Professor Roger Bagnall, director of the Amheida project, and Professor Anna L. Boozer, director of the excavations in Area 1, for giving me the opportunity to study the objects presented in this chapter and in chapters 12, 13, and 18. I would also like to thank Dr. Marie-Dominique Nenna for reading the text and for her helpful comments. Finally, I wish to thank Marina Nuovo for assisting with the registation of finds on the site.
2 Single elements such as beads or amulets can have very long lives, being reused in new different jewels.
3 They can be considered less expensive imitations of gold beads and silver beads or pearls.
5 Davidson-Weinberg 1987, Barag 1990. Gold-glass beads are attested in Egypt from Ptolemaic times (cf. Brunton 1930:27: pl. 45, nos. 64, 68, pl. 46, nos. 146–148, 194–200); nevertheless, the earliest known production center is Rhodes (Davidson-Weinberg 1969:146, pl. 79d). In Roman times these beads are found in many sites also in Europe and Asia; parallels from well-dated excavated context of the Antonine-Severan period are attested in Britain (Bonn 1977:197-199, pl. XV). For the presence of the beads in Asia, see Alekseeva 1978:27-32 (Black Sea), Francis 2002:91-93 (eastern Asia).
6 Rodziewicz 2005:25, 27, 35. According to the author this sophisticated manufacturing technique was introduced in Elephantine by migrant advanced glassmakers, possibly from Alexandria, during the early Roman period.
8 The tubes are formed by pulling or drawing glass from a hollow gather of glass (ibid.:46-7, Francis 2002:11). The half products and the broken pieces found in Elephantine have made it possible to identify the morphology of the golden insertion, which has a powdery structure (Rodziewicz 2005:27, 35).
9 Rodziewicz 1984:146-159, 241-243, figs. 265-266, pl. 72. Grooved stone molds used for shaping drawn collared beads, along with beads individually finished by hot-working, were also found in house FB, in a context dated to the second to third century AD (Kucharczyk 2011: 64, 65, fig. 8).
11 This fold may have been caused by pulling off the bead from the mandrel (furnace-wound beads detach easily from the mandrel). For the description of the different winding techniques used to build glass beads, see Spaer 2001:45, Francis 2002:11, Francis 2007:252.
13 Unlike gold-glass beads (only one other specimen has been recovered in the street running north–south along the west side of House B1) the other kinds of beads presented are more common finds in Amheida, and they are attested also in the other investigated structures of the site.
14 Dunand et al. 2008:129-137. The jewels are dated to a period between the first and fourth century. Most of the jewels found on children’s mummies were adult women’s adornments.
15 See for example Walker and Bierbrier 1997: n. cat 56, 67, 77, 92, 93. The last portrait (190–210 CE) shows a necklace made of blue stone and segmented gold beads.
16 For the use of pins in Roman times, see Rodziewicz 2007:28-30.
17 For pins carved with hands decorated by uraeus bracelets on the wrist see Petrie 1927:24, pl. XIX, 26 [UC7878]; Medeksza 2005:116, fig. 8.
18 The glass is twisted around the mandrel then is expanded centrifugally by rotation (Spaer 2001:193-194).
22 It is not possible to identify the morphology of the gold insertion.
23 The striations in the glass are horizontal to the perforation axis.
24 The term “weathering” referes to any change on the surface of glass caused by chemical reaction with the environment (Whitehouse 2006: 88). The terminology used in the description of these varieties of changes mainly follows that employed in Harden's publication of the material found at Karanis by the University of Michigan (Harden 1936: 9-11).
29 An iron helmet found in Deir-el-Medina and now in the Cairo Museum (Dittmann 1940) has applied brow-plates and nasal, but it belongs to a different typology of helmet, in which the skull is made of several vertical strips. For another helmet found in Egypt, now in Leiden, see Ebert 1909. For an interesting essay about the origins and relationships of these different kinds of helmet, see James 1986.
