RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS Rock art research in the Dakhleh Oasis, Western Desert (Egypt) Petroglyph Unit, Dakhleh Oasis Project Paweł POLKOWSKI * Ewa KUCIEWICZ ** Eliza JARONI *** Michał KOBUSIEWICZ **** Riassunto Summary Résumé Dall’insorgenza di condizioni più umide, all’inizio dell’Olocene, e fino ai giorni nostri, l’Oasi di Dakhleh è sempre stata abitata. Le sabbie del Deserto Occidentale hanno coperto numerosi resti archeologici degli antichi abitanti, ma non tutti sono stati sepolti dalle dune, come ad esempio l’arte rupestre. Innumerevoli alture in arenaria nella parte centrale e orientale dell’Oasi ospitano una grande quantità di petroglifi, martellinati o incisi nella roccia. L’esistenza di arte rupestre nell’Oasi è stata menzionata per la prima volta da Herbert Winlock nel 1908. Più tardi, alla fine degli anni ‘30, Hans Winkler ha intrapreso uno studio approfondito, ma dopo l’interruzione della seconda guerra mondiale ci sono voluti più di 40 anni per riprendere il suo lavoro. Dal 1985 l’arte rupestre dell’Oasi viene studiata dalla Petroglyph Unit, parte del programma a lungo termine Dakhleh Oasis Project. Il presente documento si concentra sui principali temi delle più recenti ricerche, come ad esempio le associazioni tra immagini di giraffe e figure antropomorfe e il motivo “femminile”, caratteristico della regione, con le sue potenziali associazioni con il culto della fertilità. Infine, viene affrontata l’arte rupestre “storica”, specie del periodo dinastico, e si presentano le più importanti questioni teoriche e le caratteristiche principali del nostro approccio. Since the onset of more humid conditions at the beginning of the Holocene period and up to the present day, Dakhleh Oasis has been continuously inhabited. The sands of the Western Desert covered numerous archaeological remains of the ancient Oasis dwellers, but not all of them have been buried by dunes and rock art is one of them. Countless sandstone hills in the central and eastern parts of the Oasis are covered with petroglyphs, pecked, engraved or incised in the soft rocks. The existence of rock art in the Oasis was first mentioned by Herbert Winlock in 1908. Later on, in the late 30’s, Hans Winkler undertook a thorough study, but after the interruption of World War II it took more than 40 years to resume his work. Since 1985 rock art in the Oasis is studied by the Petroglyph Unit, part of the long-term Dakhleh Oasis Project. The present paper focuses on the main issues of the latest rock art research in the Oasis, such as the associations between giraffe images and anthropomorphic figures, the “female” motif, characteristic of the region, and its potential associations with the fertility cult. Finally, “historical” rock art, mainly from the dynastic period, is dealt with. Besides the brief overview of the petroglyphs found in the Central Oasis, the most important theoretical issues and main features of the approach are shortly described. Depuis l’apparition de conditions plus humides, au début de l’Holocène, et jusqu’à nos jours, l’Oasis de Dakhleh a été continuellement habitée. Les sables du Désert Occidental ont couvert de nombreux vestiges archéologiques des anciens habitants, mais non pas l’art rupestre. Les innombrables reliefs de grès dans les parties centrale et orientale de l’oasis sont riches en pétroglyphes – piqués, gravés ou incisés dans les roches tendres. L’existence de l’art rupestre dans l’Oasis a été mentionné par Herbert Winlock en 1908. Plus tard, à la fin des années 30, Hans Winkler a entrepris une étude approfondie, mais après l’interruption de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, il a fallu plus de 40 ans pour reprendre le travail qu’il avait commencé. Depuis 1985, l’art rupestre dans l’Oasis est étudiée par l’équipe Petroglyph Unit, qui fait partie du projet à long terme Dakhleh Oasis Project. Cet article se concentre sur les principaux enjeux des plus récentes études, tels les associations entre les images des girafes et des figures anthropomorphes, le motif « féminin », caractéristique de la région, et ses associations possibles avec le culte de la fertilité. Ensuite, on discute l’art « historique », à partir de la période dynastique, et, pour finir, nous nous confrontons avec les questions théoriques les plus importantes et les principales caractéristiques de notre approche. * Poznań Archaeological Museum Rock Art Unit Wodna 27, 61-781 Poznań - Pałac Górków Past research (Michał Kobusiewicz) Rock art in the Dakhleh Oasis was noted for the first time by Herbert Winlock on the Darb el-Ghubari, coming from Kharga (Winlock, 1936: 9-10). He recorded Bedouin tribal signs, as well as representations of giraffes and pubic triangles, which he perceived to be prehistoric, but was not sufficiently interested to continue studies of the issue. W.J. Harding King devoted more attention to the petroglyphs he had recorded in the eastern part of the Oasis, publishing a description of his findings in a famous book, Mysteries of the Libyan Desert (1925). His interest focused on tribal marks, but he also did not undertake any broader studies of petroglyphs as such. SAHARA 24/2013 www.saharajournal.com ** Jagiellonian University Institute of Archaeology 11 Gołębia Str. 31-007 Krakow (Poland) ***2 Place de l’Ancienne Mairie 66820 - Vernet les Bains (France) **** Inst. of Archaeology and Ethnology of Polish Academy of Science Centre for Prehistoric and Medieval Studies Rubież Str. 46, 61-612 Poznań (Poland) Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz 101 RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS The German Hans Alexander Winkler laid a sound foundation for scientific research on the rock art of Egypt. Twice he took part in Sir Robert Mond’s Desert Expedition, in 1936/1937 and 1937/1938. The Eastern Desert was the focus of the first field season, whereas the next year the expedition concentrated on the Western Desert and more specifically its eastern fringes from Qena to Aswan and along the road from the Nile to Kharga, from Kharga to Dakhleh and subsequently all the way to Gebel Uweinat. On the El Ghubari route from Kharga to Dakhleh Winkler found an extremely rich scatter of petroglyphs of particular significance for the current project. Those that he documented were later included in his twovolume publication (Winkler, 1938, 1939). Winkler proposed to distinguish a number of chronologically different groups in the rock art of the Western Desert, although he found some of these groups to be simultaneous. The oldest groups, which he described as being of Neolithic date, were: Earliest Hunters, Early Nile Valley Dwellers, Autochthonous Mountain Dwellers, Eastern Invaders, Early Oasis Dwellers and Uweinat Cattle Breeders. Later rock art was attributed to the Dynastic period, the Graeco-Roman and Coptic age and ultimately the Islamic period. Winkler’s periodization and interpretation of Western Desert rock art was extremely modern for its time. His documentation was extensive and analysis exhaustive, but he also drew attention to the cultural and environmental context. He found rock art to be a rich source of data on the material culture, as well as beliefs and social organization of the dwellers of today’s desert. In the early 1980s Anthony Mills, founder and director of the multidisciplinary Dakhleh Oasis Project (DOP), was surveying Dakhleh and observed numerous engravings in parts of the Oasis that Winkler had not visited. Consequently, in 1985 Lech Krzyżaniak joined the project, acting on behalf of the Archaeological Museum in Poznań, which he directed at the time, and the Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. The Petroglyph Unit that he formed continues to work within the DOP framework until today. Krzyżaniak first traced Winkler’s footsteps, locating many of the petroglyphs which the German had recorded. Together with his wife Karla Kröper, he began to document the petroglyphs methodically, starting from the oldest linked to the Neolithic Bashendi cultural unit and the period of Egyptian domination in the Oasis in the times of the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties. Research started first in the eastern part of the Oasis, moving later to the Central Oasis. The results were published in numerous articles and communiqués (Krzyżaniak, 1987, 1990, 1993, 1999, 2001, 2004; Krzyżaniak & Kröper, 1985, 1990, 1991). He also instigated an experimental project, carving easily recognizable modern engravings and painting them with handmade pigments. Annual monitoring of these carvings should help to determine whether and to what extent winds could erode the pigments. A number of watch-posts identified already by Winkler was explored in the 1980s and 1990s. These Ancient Egyptian sites from the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties guarded against raiders from outside and monitored the caravan trade passing through the oasis (Kaper & Willems, 2002: 79-85). Numerous petroglyphs of Pharaonic age were discovered on the rock faces of the hills on which the sentry posts were located (Krzyżaniak, 2001: 251-253) and were most probably carved by the soldiers stationed here. This work was carried out by R.A. Frey, O. Kaper, M.R. Kleindienst, K. Kröper, L. Krzyżaniak and M. McDonald (Kaper & Willems, 2002). Ewa Kuciewicz and Eliza Jaroni have participated in the work of the Petroglyph Unit uninterruptedly from 2000 and since 2004, following the premature demise of Lech Krzyżaniak, the unit has been directed by Michał Kobusiewicz on behalf of the Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, University of Warsaw. Joining the Unit periodically were Joanna Sawicka, Elżbieta Palka, Anna Longa and Andrzej Rozwadowski. Paweł Polkowski, who joined the team in 2011, has a research grant from the National Science Centre of Poland. The chief objective of the investigations in recent years has been the Painted Wadi in the central part of the Oasis and some chosen areas in its eastern part (Kobusiewicz, 2012; Kuciewicz, Jaroni & Kobusiewicz, 2006, 2008, 2010; Kuciewicz & Kobusiewicz, 2012; Polkowski & Kobusiewicz, 2012). In 2008 Australian researchers from Monash University in Victoria undertook an unsuccessful attempt to date rock art in the Oasis based on the patina covering it. 102 SAHARA 24/2013 Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz www.saharajournal.com RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS Investigations in recent years have also covered the immediate neighbourhood of the Oasis. About 30 km to the southwest C. Bergmann discovered two sites of similar function as the watch-posts described above, codenamed Dachla 99/38 and Dachla 99/39. Dynastic rock art was also discovered at these sites. The two sites were explored in 2000 by German scientists within the framework of the ACACIA project (Riemer et al., 2005). They also investigated Meri with its rich flint scatters and Neolithic rock art (Riemer, 2006). Another site of interest is Djedefre’s Water Mountain situated about 80 km southwest of Dakhleh. It was discovered also by C. Bergmann (2011) and investigated by a group from Cologne headed by Rudolph Kuper (Kuper & Förster, 2003; Kröpelin & Kuper, 2007; see Kuhlmann, 2002, 2005). One should note the research on the so-called Abu Ballas Trail, which also brought to light an abundance of rock art, as well as new data on Dakhleh’s role in the context of Egyptian expeditions to the Western Desert during the Old Kingdom (Förster, 2007). Other scholars who have undertaken issues connected with rock art include F. Berger (2006, 2008, 2012), K.P. Kuhlmann (2002, 2005), D. James (2012) and O. Kaper (Kaper & Willems, 2002; Kaper, 2009). In the past two decades reports of new findings of rock art in the Western Desert have multiplied (Riemer, 2009a), being frequently a byproduct of other excavation or survey work in search of settlement in the region. The DOP Petroglyph Unit continues to concentrate on rock art in the Oasis. The article is a presentation of the main research issues currently undertaken by our team. Prehistoric rock art: animal representations (Eliza Jaroni) Changes of climate have shaped the specificity of the Eastern Sahara as a region in the past ten thousand years. Broad scale multidisciplinary research traces the dynamics of these changes and the adaptive processes taking place among the local dwellers. Correlated geological, paleobotanical, archaeozoological and archaeological data paint a picture of the natural environment, successive climatic stages and cultural mechanisms in this part of the Sahara in the Pleistocene and Holocene (Kuper & Kröpelin, 2006). Rock art is part of this “jigsaw puzzle” of data, enlarging on the socio-cultural and economic information that contributes to our knowledge of the world of beliefs and the personal preferences and talents of those who made it. Animal representations are the most common theme of rock art in Dakhleh Oasis. Judging by stylistic criteria, execution techniques, superimpositions and archaeological as well as archaeozoological data, it can be stated in general that most of the images were associated with the prehistoric cultures of Bashendi A and B (ca 6420 BC-3950 BC) and Sheikh Muftah (ca 3800-2900 BC, until the Fifth-Sixth Dynasty in Egypt) (McDonald, 2002). Petroglyphs can be found on isolated hills or on chains of hills aligned more or less north-south, carved from the bedrock Nubian sandstone. No evident preferences regarding the location of the images have been established, except perhaps for a certain tendency to avoid the south side. The same can be said of the position on rock surfaces. Vertical rock faces forming “galleries” of a kind are just as common as flat rocks still in position and blocks loosened and broken owing to processes of erosion. Practical issues, that is, easy access and facile execution, seem to have dictated the choice of location.1 In a few instances, however, the present location made it difficult to impossible to document the glyphs, leading one to question how they were made in the first place. One possible explanation is a drifting sand dune or perhaps some other kind of deposit which had once facilitated access to these sites, forming a platform of sorts for the ancient authors. The range of animal species represented in Dakhleh rock art is impressive. The following species have been identified, listed here in the order of the number of individuals: giraffe, antelope, oryx, ostrich, gazelle, unspecified birds, cattle, buffalo, dog, elephant, as well as hare, sheep, lion, zebra, crocodile and lizard. A comparison of these depictions with archaeozoological evidence from Dakhleh and its environs is parSAHARA 24/2013 www.saharajournal.com 1 Although one should take into account the visibility of the petroglyphs and their potential role as messages. Some of the pictures are located in places that were difficult to access, which could speak in favor of considerations other than practical. Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz 103 RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS ticularly interesting. The excavated faunal remains are dominated by gazelle, hare and bovid, but there is not a single giraffe bone among them. On the other hand, faunal remains of Barbary sheep are known from Ayn Asil site (Pantalacci & Lesur-Gebremariam, 2009: 250-251), but until now there are no depictions of these animals in the corpus of rock art from the Oasis. However, engravings representing Barbary sheep were discovered in Kharga Oasis (Ikram, 2009b: 274), as well as on Meri sites (Hendrickx et al., 2009: 196). In general, the picture is that of a typical Holocene fauna, reflecting the prehistoric world of the Egyptian Western Desert (Churcher, 1999). Correlation of different data suggests a savannah-like environment with permanent sources of water, seasonally covered with grasses and trees. Conditions were sufficient both for grazing the cattle, as well as for the existence of wild animals dependent on water sources (Churcher, 1999 ). It should be noted that animal images from later periods than the Holocene included camels, horses, asses and perhaps also ducks and geese. Most representations were engraved, but examples of the pecking technique, rubbing and a combination of methods were recorded as well. Animals were depicted in groups (from a few to a few dozen), as well as singly. On the whole the images were static in quality and more or less simplified, but naturalistic in form. Giraffes escape this general statement to some extent as their representations reveal a wide stylistic range, from very schematic outlines of figures rendered with just a few lines to images rendering even such elements as horns, ears, mane and hooves. The bodies of the animals take on different forms as well. Either there are parallel or oblique engraved lines of different thickness and depth or the bodies are characteristically potted, using the pecking technique (Fig. 1). When shown in groups all the animals tend to face in one direction. Moreover, they were often represented in association with human figures, a unique trait with regard to giraffe representations from Dakhleh. Thus, there are giraffes depicted being led on a line (mainly by men) (Fig. 2, 3), giraffes accompanying ‘female’ figures (Fig. 1, 4, 11; see below for a discussion of this motif), and giraffes with human figures of both sexes. There is also a scene of a hunter armed with a bow and accompanied by dogs hunting giraffes. Why was there such a preference for this particular animal species in Dakhleh Oasis? Why were the giraffes tethered and depicted in association with humans? The phenomenon was explained as a record of the domestication of the species and ritual binding (Krzyżaniak, 1990) as well as by associations with the solar cult (Huyge, 2002: 200; Darnell, 2009: 90) and with rain (Van Hoek, 2003). Other interpretations are 104 SAHARA 24/2013 Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz www.saharajournal.com Fig. 1. Tracing of the “Gallery” panel with animals, “females” and Seth animal motifs. RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS surely possible as well. Interestingly, the archaeozoological material, not only from Dakhleh but also from the Western Desert as a whole, does not bear out this popularity of the giraffe in rock art. Skeletal remains are very scarce (Churcher et al., 2008), despite images being found also in other regions of Egypt, like Kharga Oasis (Ikram, 2009b) and the site of Meri located 60 km to the west of Dakhleh (Riemer, 2009b). The dominance of animals in Dakhleh’s rock art, especially giraffes, may have been of a pragmatic nature, constituting a projection of contemporary fauna for the authors carving the glyphs. Animals were attractive hunting objectives for consumption purposes, extremely important as a source of protein in early hunter-gatherer societies or as a diet supplement in pastoral economies (Riemer, 2009b; Pöllath, 2009). Hunting also was a source of pelts, hides and feathers coveted in the trade exchange with the Oasis and the Nile Valley. Neither should one exclude the prestigious character of elite hunting (Hendrickx et al., 2009: 231). Hunting of this kind could have also created the opportunity to capture live animals, such as giraffes for example, which could explain the “tethered giraffe” motifs, so popular in the Dakhleh area. But if the interest in giraffes as an animal was a factor of their specific and characteristic appearance, then why did not the elephant provoke a similar interest? Elephant bones have been recorded on sites belonging probably to both the Bashendi and Sheikh Muftah cultures, but depictions of the animal are known only from two sites in Eastern and Central Oasis (Churcher et al., 2008: 5-6; Winkler, 1939, pl. LVI, 1). The example from the Central Oasis is even more interesting, as it is fitted with a tail that is exaggerated and bushy like that of a giraffe (Fig. 5). Perhaps the author carving this particular animal representation had only heard of the animal without having actually seen one? SAHARA 24/2013 www.saharajournal.com Fig. 2. Petroglyph from Central Dakhleh, showing a giraffe being led by a man. Fig. 3. A “tethered giraffe” motif. Fig. 4. Anthropomorphic figures associated with giraffes. Eastern Dakhleh Oasis. Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz 105 RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS Fig. 5. “Elephant Hill” in the Painted Wadi. Central Dakhleh Oasis. Prehistoric rock art: “female” anthropomorphic representations (Ewa Kuciewicz) Among the hundreds of prehistoric petroglyphs recognized in the Dakhleh Oasis, anthropomorphic representations, commonly referred to as female images, form an extremely large and intriguing group. Smaller or larger, but always substantial numbers of such depictions have been discovered in the two areas intensively surveyed by the Unit. The first scholar to recognize and describe these representations was Hans Winkler (1939: 7-8, 27-30; pl. XXXIX-XLVIII), followed by members of the DOP Petroglyph Unit D.O.P. (Krzyżaniak, 1987, 1990, 1991, 1994, 2004; Krzyżaniak & Kröper, 1985, 1991, 1993; Kuciewicz, Kobusiewicz & Jaroni, 2007, 2008, 2010; Kuciewicz & Kobusiewicz, 2011, 2012). Anthropomorphic representations are not limited to the immediate vicinity of the Oasis, even though their range is still quite limited territorially. In recent years their distribution has been extended to include the site of Meri 99/36, so-called ‘Ladies Hill’ (Riemer, 2006: 499), in the Chufu region (Kuhlmann, 2002: 136; Berger, 2006; Riemer, 2009a: 40) and in the environs of Kharga Oasis (Ikram, 2009a: 75), that is, respectively about 50 and 80 km southwest of Dakhleh and about 180 km to the east of it. Although dating prehistoric art is an extremely difficult issue, certain indirect assumptions – iconographic, stylistic, degree of weathering, relation to other archaeological remains, etc. – allow us to say that the carvings were the work of members of the Neolithic culture Bashendi B, which functioned in the Oasis in the sixth and fifth millennium BC, possibly continuing in the Sheikh Muftah cultural unit (McDonald, 2002: 113). Further indirect confirmation of this idea comes from the known range of these representations which corresponds to the territory still exploited around 5300cal BC, when the desertification process of the Sahara after the Holocene humid phase had begun (Kuper & Kröpelin, 2006; Riemer, 2009a). The anthropomorphic representations in question shared certain traits, like profile views (although front views were also present), a schematic upper body barely marked by a head, stick-like trunk and truncated arms, and a strongly, even excessively emphasized lower body, often richly decorated. The degree of particularization of the figures differs considerably, from extremely schematic forms consisting of just a few lines, through diverse variants and variations, to sophisticated depictions including tattoos or painted body art, hairdos, bracelets and pendants, as well as other dress ornaments (Fig. 6). Occasionally, the feet and sometimes even parts of the legs were shown. Some figures had marked breasts, and a bulging belly on many of the silhouette 106 SAHARA 24/2013 Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz www.saharajournal.com RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS Fig. 6. Some depictions of ‘women’ are very elaborate, with evident dress ornaments and opulent coiffure. Eastern Dakhleh Oasis. Fig. 7. Group of ‘females’ executed on a loose block on the top of the hill. Two of them are connected with a deeply incised line. Winkler’s site 62. Eastern Dakhleh Oasis. depictions could be suggestive of pregnancy. The figures appear alone, in pairs, often as mirror reflections (examples of figures connected by a line may be interpreted literally or as a symbolic joining, or as a metaphor of the sexual act, Fig. 7), as well as in groups. Interestingly, the ‘females’ were shown frequently in relation with animals, mostly giraffes (e.g. Fig. 4, 11) (see below). Diverse techniques were in use: incision, pecking, sunk relief or a combination of these. Not all of the images have marked female sexual traits, hence Winkler’s theory that they represented women cannot be accepted without reservations (Berger, 2008; James, 2012). On the other hand, no indisputably male traits have been noted. The interpretation of these figures as ‘females’ in this text is fully conscious, even while keeping in mind that not all of them needed to represent women. The interpretation of these representations is expectedly difficult. Winkler saw in them images of real female statuettes (Winkler, 1939:29). There are indeed cases when the central vertical axis around which the figure is constructed continues downward, beyond the bottom outlines of the silhouettes (e.g., Winkler, 1939: Pl. XLI, 1) (Fig. 7). The presence of repeated images of this kind, admittedly rare, is sufficient SAHARA 24/2013 www.saharajournal.com Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz 107 RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS Fig. 8. Example of an extremely exposed location of a ‘women’ representation. Eastern Dakhleh Oasis. proof that we are not dealing with a mistake or artistic awkwardness, but the reason for this form of depiction has not been explained. Certain scholarly interpretations saw in these figures fertility goddesses (Winkler, 1939:29, Krzyżaniak, 1990:96), or female sorcerers (Krzyżaniak & Kröper, 1991:60). While it may be going too far to imbue these figurines with divinity, broadly understood fertility associated with reproduction, fecundity and abundance could have played a role of some kind. Let us consider the localization of these figures. The loose blocks with such images found on hill slopes may have found their way there as a result of erosion processes, but a substantial number of the representations was engraved on exposed, evidently carefully chosen vertical rock faces which could be observed from afar, almost always high up and only rarely in the lower parts of the hills. No unquestionable orientation has been ascertained, but a definite majority of the images occupied the eastern side of hill complexes, while the south side was generally avoided. The most striking of all are engravings on flat rock blocks on hill summits, so that the representations face the sky (Fig. 8). Moreover, in such cases the rest of the hill is usually devoid of petroglyphs or 108 SAHARA 24/2013 Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz www.saharajournal.com RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS Fig. 9 Numerous shallow scoops on the top of a hill. Winkler’s site 67. Eastern Dakhleh Oasis. Fig. 10. Simplified engraving of a ‘woman’ inside a scoop. Winkler’s site 67. Eastern Dakhleh Oasis. has only a few additional representations. This while the surrounding hills are literally packed with dozens, if not hundreds of rock carvings of different date. Meriting particular interest are images placed inside hollows scooped out of the rock on the summits of hills; these scoops are believed to be stationary querns. Winkler’s Site 67 (Winkler, 1939:8, Pl. XLIII,2; XLIV,1,2) embraces two flat-topped hills with dozens of shallow scoops of this kind on the northern side (Fig. 9). The hollows were probably made by grinding either grain or some kind of minerals for making pigments. Schematic ‘female’ representations were recorded in at least seven of these scoops (Fig. 10). The rock here is so soft that the carvings would have been obliterated had such a hollow been used again, even if only once. The interesting question is were these images inside the ‘querns’ carved anew after each use event or were they executed much later, when the scoops had already been abandoned. Another site with scoops and female anthropomorphic figures carved inside the hollows was located in the past season, meaning that more sites of this kind are to be expected. The exposed and frequently isolated location of panels with ‘female’ representations argues in favor of their intentional placeSAHARA 24/2013 www.saharajournal.com Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz 109 RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS ment and their uncommon importance for the community which made them. The location on a hill summit could have had some link with rain as a source of potable water. The same can be said of the engravings inside the querns, where grain as a source of food could be associated with life and survival. A justified presumption, considering the rather oppressive natural environment in which their potential authors lived. Leaving aside the localization issue, let us return to questions of iconography. These purportedly female representations often appear together with animals, especially giraffes. As a matter of fact, giraffes dominate the set of animals shown in the prehistoric art of the Oasis. They come in ones as well as groups and were depicted with diverse techniques and in a whole range of styles. Representations of ‘tethered giraffes’ are also quite common (images of this kind are frequent in Egypt as well as throughout the Sahara – e.g. Hallier, 1990; Allard-Huard, 1993, Vahala & Červiček, 1999; Darnell, 2009: 90). Sometimes they are led by human figures, but often enough only a line is visible, running down from the neck or head of the animal. In association with anthropomorphic representations, giraffes are depicted walking in a row together with a ‘female’ figure or apparently flocking around it. Going back again to the possible pregnancy of some of these figures, let us look at the scene illustrated in Fig. 11. The anthropomorphic figurine is accompanied by three giraffes with clearly emphasized protrusions on their bellies. It should be mentioned here that images of giraffes with that kind of ‘swelling’ in the abdominal area were depicted in the rock art of the Oasis also not in connection with female figures. However, following up on the maternity interpretational lead, it seems to be justified to take into consideration that at least some of the bulges in the belly area of the giraffes and anthropomorphic figures from Dakhleh Oasis depict pregnancy. Looking at this panel, one should also note the two lines connecting a giraffe with the ground. In another representation of a ‘female’ figure with a giraffe, found on a loose block on the northern slope of a hill, but probably not in its original position, the giraffe is represented with a complex pattern incised inside its belly (Fig. 12). A “channel” running to the animal’s anus or vagina has been emphasized additionally. It remains a moot point whether this is a representation of a fetus or not. Superimposed on top of the single image of a giraffe was an anthropomorphic female figure, executed in a very fine rubbing technique that is not well visible until the morning hours when sun rays falling at an acute angle bring it out clearly. The head of the figure overlaps the animal’s belly. As discussed above, while the images of tethered giraffes may reflect processes of domestication or at least attempts at taming these animals (Krzyżaniak, 1990), there is another possible explanation. In many Af110 SAHARA 24/2013 Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz www.saharajournal.com Fig. 11. ‘Female’ figure with pregnant (?) giraffes. Central Dakhleh Oasis. Fig. 12. Superimposed images of the ‘woman’ and the giraffe with unidentified pattern inside. Eastern Dakhleh Oasis. RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS rican cultures the giraffe is considered a potent rain animal connected with rain creating or evoking fertility (Van Hoek, 2003:60). In this context the recurring association of ‘females’ and giraffes, sometimes with presumable signs of pregnancy, speaks in favor of the plausibility of the suggested fertility factor in the interpretation of female representations from Dakhleh Oasis. Fig. 13. a, Fragment of a scene depicting a procession of human figures with staves; b, bearded(?) human figure wearing a pectoral(?); c, sickle-shaped boat with steering oar juxtaposed with two ostriches; d, falcon figure in hieroglyphic style. Rock art landscapes in central Dakhleh Oasis (Paweł Polkowski) Petroglyphs from “historic” times, that is, from the late Old Kingdom through Arab and even modern times is another of the research issues taken up by the Petroglyph Unit team. Currently the work is concentrated in the so-called Central Oasis and focuses on a holistic approach to the phenomenon of rock art in these regions and on recognizing relations between petroglyphs from different periods. Dynastic motifs are evident in the rock art of the Oasis, connected as a rule with the said watch-posts (Kaper & Willems, 2002; Kaper, 2009; Riemer et al., 2005), but found also in places without any evident functionality (Krzyżaniak, 1999, 2001: 251-253, 2004: 187). Very rarely the petroglyphs are associated with hieroglyphic inscriptions (Krzyżaniak, 2004: 187, fig. 9) or single glyphs2 (Fig. 13d). Anthropomorphic figures and boat motifs appear seldom. The former are shown usually in a characteristic silhouette outline of the figure with the typical Egyptian apron; in some cases the figures hold a stave or staff, or both together, the arm being raised and bent at the elbow (Fig. 13a, b). The torsos are of triangular shape and the general impression is that of the canonical human representation in ancient Egyptian art. As for boats, only four images are known from the Central Oasis region (Fig. 13c). These sickleshaped boats furnished with a steering oar can be assigned to type XX or XXII in the typology presented by P. Červiček (1974: 133-134). Červiček dated both of these types to the Middle Kingdom, although the former of the two could also go back to the Old Kingdom. SAHARA 24/2013 www.saharajournal.com 2 Recognized potential hieroglyphic signs include D36, E20, E34, G5 and U6 (according to Gardiner, 1957 [2007]). Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz 111 RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS Dynastic rock art from the Oasis is represented mainly by two motifs: the pubic triangle and feet/sandals. The two motifs predominate in number. Pubic triangles are known from Dakhleh (Winkler, 1939: 13; Kaper & Willems, 2002: 86, fig. 7; Kaper, 2009: 171), as well as from other regions of Egypt and Nubia3 (Verner, 1973: 105-116; Vahala & Červiček, 1999; Ikram, 2009a: 76, fig. 12). They are widely believed to be of Graeco-Roman origin (Verner, 1973; Červiček, 1982, 1986), although Kaper’s investigations at Nephthys Hill have demonstrated that they could have been made as early as in the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties (Kaper & Willems, 2002: 88). The form of the petroglyph is quite homogenous, although there are numerous variations differing in the details (Fig. 14). The most common form is a triangle with the apex pointing downward, bisected by a vertical line ascending from this apex. The length of this line may differ, just as the shape of the vulva need not be an ideal triangle.4 Other anatomical details were emphasized on occasion, like the clitoris (Fig. 14a) or perhaps folds of skin of the belly (Fig. 14c, see Verner, 1973: 109, cat. no. 483). The pubic triangle motif is found usually in the midst of other engravings of the type and in packed groups of petroglyphs from different periods. Single finds of triangles are also known, often on vertical rock surfaces. Feet or sandals5 (Fig. 15, 16) occur most often in association with other feet/sandals and with the described pubic triangles. Called footprints by some scholars (see Verner, 1973:13-48), they are rather an image of the foot or sandal seen from above.6 Many were carved only in outline, which could suggest a footprint, but there are enough known images with all the particularities visible to support the latter view. Sandals have not only an outlined sole, but also inner straps as well as short straps extending outwards. The pattern of leather straps can be rendered extremely meticulously, although for the most part the image is quite schematic. In some cases the heel of the foot is marked and the toes 112 SAHARA 24/2013 Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz www.saharajournal.com Fig. 14. a-d Different variants of representations of female anatomical parts. 3 The motif is known in connection with the so-called quarry marks (see Depauw, 2009: 95). 4 Indeed, some of the petroglyphs presumed to represent female sex organs take on an oval shape. 5 A motif known from Dakhleh as well as from other regions (Castiglione, 1968; 1970; Hellström, 1970; Verner, 1973; Vahala & Červiček, 1999; Winkler, 1939; Kaper and Willems, 2002; Kuhlmann, 2005; Kaper, 2009). 6 Some of the petroglyphs, especially those executed in sunken relief, could have indeed been footprints in principle, see Fig. 15. RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS visible. Naturally, toes are evident on images of feet, which in the area of Central Oasis, tend to range from schematic and not very natural shapes to detailed anatomical renderings of a human foot. The foot/sandal motif occurs in pairs,7 but it is much more frequent as single petroglyphs. Nonetheless, it is found usually in concentrations of rock art that were created gradually and possibly at long time intervals to judge by the diverse style and form of the representations. A clear majority occupies flat horizontal surfaces, repeating in this a trend already observed in other regions of Egypt and Nubia (e.g. Dunbar, 1941: 24; Verner, 1973: 34-39). This is not to say that some of the representations that are in situ are on vertical rock surfaces. The same observation has been made for Egyptian temples in the Nile Valley (Murray, 1904; Edgerton, 1937; Castiglione, 1970; Jacquet-Gordon, 2003), as well as for Ain Birbiyeh in Dakhleh (Mills, pers. comm.). Feet and sandals are depicted mostly on temple roofs and were made by priests of lower rank in the temple hierarchy who manifested thus their piety (Jacquet-Gordon, 2003: 3-5), as indicated in the inscriptions that are frequently associated with these motifs. So far, none of the petroglyphs from the Central Oasis were furnished with an inscription, which could mean that the authors of these representations were basically illiterate. Various more or less legible signs occurring sometimes inside and in the neighbourhood of these motifs could have constituted some kind of identity marks in association with the feet or sandals (Kaper, 2009). Petroglyphs from post-Dynastic times investigated by the Petroglyph Unit are foremost Christian and Arab in date. The first of these time horizons is represented mainly by representations of crosses (Fig.17a), some of simple Greek form, others more elaborate like the so-called Jerusalem crosses (Verner, 1973: 60; Vahala & Červiček, 1999: no. 213, 858, 945) and also swastikas (Fig. 17b). The swastika, however, also called crux gammata, is not necessarily an early Christian symbol only, as it was imbued with symbolic connotations already in Pharaonic times (see Förster, 2007: 33, fig. 35; Kaper, 2009: 173). Petroglyphs from the Arab period, which are equally numerous in the corpus of rock art from the Central Oasis, include among others representations of camels. The weak patina and/or weathering observed on these engravings also point to a recent origin. The same can be said of some of the anthropomorphic figures, possibly some of the female sex organ images (but not in the shape of a triangle) and many other forms that are difficult to interpret. Among the latter there may be many wusum or Bedouin tribal marks (Winkler, 1938, 1939, 1952; Huyge, 1998: 1383-1385). Work on their identification has only just begun.8 Some of the shapes recall wusum known from Kordofan and Darfur in Sudan (MacMichael, 1913, 1922), others correspond to similar marks discovered in the Selima Oasis (Newbold, 1928); still others evince a formal similarity with wusum from Syro-Palestine (Field, 1952). There is much to indicate, however, that many of the signs taken as Arab tribal marks could have served a similar or other functions in much earlier times. Research on “historic” rock art is not restricted necessarily to iconographic studies. Contextualizing the petroglyphs and considering them SAHARA 24/2013 www.saharajournal.com Fig. 15. Pair of sandals executed in sunken relief technique. Fig. 16. Horizontal surface covered with sandals and feet engraved in different styles and superimposed on one another. A bird figure (a peacock?) is visible in one of the sandals. 7 In the sense that a pair consists of a left and right foot, the two executed in a similar style, similarly shaped and using the same techniques. 8 Some have already been recognized by W.J. Harding King (1925: 326-336). Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz 113 RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS within the landscape of which they were part is a very important part of the analysis. Standing behind this approach is the post-processual conception of landscape (Ingold, 1993; Tilley, 1994; Branton, 2009), the theoretical assumptions of which have been discussed in detail elsewhere (Polkowski, in press). In short, landscape in this approach is not considered as natural environment, but as a medium for human activity, which holds agency at the same time (Tilley, 1994: 19). The landscape constitutes a certain constancy in societies under continuous structuring, being transformed on one hand and participating dynamically on the other hand, due to its agency, in a dialectic constituting of new meanings. Thus a landscape is formed of material elements (natural, but also man-made) as well as immaterial ones, such as paths, emotions, memories, stories, smells, etc. It is biographical in nature (Ingold, 1993: 152-153; Tilley, 1994: 18, 33), meaning that stories and events, but also meanings are in some way recorded in it. Places embodying landscapes are a key concept of the landscape theory. These places and the paths connecting them constitute the direct medium of social practice (Shanks & Tilley, 1987; Tilley, 1994; see Hodder 1986). The biographic character of landscape refers us also to the idea of the biographic nature of things (Kopytoff, 1986; Gosden & Marshall, 1999) and places (Roymans, 1995; Blake, 1998; Holtorf, 1998; 2002; but see Holtorf, 2008). In this approach rock art may be considered not only in the cultural context of its origin (e.g. petroglyphs representing sandals in the context of Graeco-Roman occupation of Dakhleh), but also in later contexts (the same petroglyph in the Christian, Arab and modern periods). In other words, one traces its biography, the way in which petroglyphs continue to be reinterpreted and their meanings transformed. After all, it is natural that an image created, for example, in the Neolithic was seen and reconceptualized repeatedly, and had its own agency at the same time, frequently inviting action from a passer-by, in the form of a new carving next to the old one, if nothing else. One of the assumptions of this research is to trace the biography of rock art in different parts of the landscape of the Central Oasis, a landscape that could be called a palimpsest of meanings (Bailey, 2006: 203-208; Lucas, 2005: 37). An excellent example of the biographic nature of landscape in rock art is supplied by the so-called Gallery (Fig. 1) in the southern part of the Painted Wadi (Kuciewicz et al., 2008: 319-321). Judging by the style as well as content, a composition found there on one of the panels appears to have been created in several stages. Weathering and patina on the engravings also point to a gradual carving of the various figures filling the panel. Giraffe representations rendered in the pecking technique appear to be the oldest of the set. They are surrounded by a few zoomorphic images combining techniques of rubbing and engraving. These images presumably depict gazelle or antelopes, as well as an ostrich. Dating in this case is difficult, the images being attributable to the Neolithic as much as to later times. Three anthropomorphic representations with female traits executed in sunken relief are also probably of Neolithic origin. It can be assumed with considerable likelihood that the giraffes, 114 SAHARA 24/2013 Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz www.saharajournal.com Fig. 17. a, The Potent Cross with two additional crosses; b, swastika engraved between two quadrupeds oriented vertically (with head running down) and pubic triangle. RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS antelope(?) and ‘females’ constituted a single and fairly coherent group, even if not carved all at one time. The anthropomorphic motifs, even if slightly later than the zoomorphic ones, appear to fit the composition perfectly, something that is made apparent by the same orientation of all of the figures which are turned to the same side. The meaning of this picture must have been as unfathomable to later observers, as it is to us today. At least four or five of the depictions appear to have been carved in the Dynastic period. At the extreme edges of the panel there are engraved representations of quadrupeds (a bull on the left side, an animal of unidentified species on the right), the carving apparently “fresher”, the lines not so weathered and consequently more distinct. A giraffe was also depicted, but its much more realistic style is so evidently different from the Neolithic examples that it cannot be mistaken. The animal is much rounder in shape and more dynamic. Its bushy tail end brings to mind the old pictures. The image may be an imitation made in Pharaonic times. To my mind, it is very likely that the author was inspired by what he saw on the panel, which is dominated by zoomorphic representations. On one hand, the imitation refers to the form of the older giraffe images, on the other, it is much different owing to different stylistic traits and a different engraving technique.9 There can be no doubt as to the Dynastic origin of the Seth animal motif present on the panel. It was carved in the very centre of the composition, obscuring to some extent the pictures of three of the giraffes. The petroglyph was carved meticulously and in detail, indicating that the author was fluent in writing hieroglyphic signs. Its central location cannot have been accidental as it focuses the observer’s eye on itself in spite of its small size. It stands out like a stamp on the elaborate panel composition, which it was integrated with quite effectively by being made to face in the same direction as all of the other animal images, that is, to the left. The superimposition suggests that the author, presumably an Egyptian, ventured into a semantic interaction with the ancient rock art he found on the panel. He interpreted the zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figures, but it is difficult to say how he conceptualized them. One can only guess that he had no knowledge of the original semantic value of the images, so he would have drawn on his experience. He imbued the representations with meanings through the prism of his own culture. Whatever were these meanings, he intended to manifest them through his own petroglyph, thus entering into a dialogue with an ancient past. He tamed the panel and the place, in some way he appropriated the landscape. If this Egyptian created the petroglyphs anew by adding physically just one image, can we really say that rock art belongs only to the cultural context in which it was created? Different interpretational possibilities arise, if we decide to consider the meaning of the Seth animal motif itself. As Lord of the Oasis, Seth was the most important deity worshipped in Dakhleh (Kaper, 1997: 63-64). The animal of Seth in hieroglyphic writing, as well as in temple iconography, appeared in the Oasis at least into the Twentyfifth Dynasty, supplying a possible terminus ante quem for most, if not all the figures depicted on the panel in the Painted Wadi. In the Nile Valley, Seth gradually lost in importance and the connotations associated with the god deteriorated, but in Dakhleh his status remained unchanged despite having to compete with Amun-Nakht for the title of Lord of the Oasis. As a defender of the Sun God against the serpent Apophis, he gained in importance primarily as a protector. Thus he was obviously Dakhleh’s most important deity and defender. In this light his choice for the petroglyph that the anonymous Egyptian carved on the panel comes as no surprise. Could there be anything better than the Lord of the Oasis to habituate a place full of ancient pictures that may have appealed to the supernatural in the Egyptian mind? Conclusion Research covered in this article demonstrates the chronological and thematic range of the program implemented by the Petroglyph Unit. The number and nature of petroglyphs found in Dakhleh Oasis is immense. The team concentrates on sites that are already known as well as on sites SAHARA 24/2013 www.saharajournal.com 9 The fourth somewhat isolated representation of a ‘female’ should perhaps be interpreted in a similar way. In form it refers to the other figures, but it is more schematic and was made using a different technique. On the other hand, the pecked giraffes appear to obscure another female figure (unfinished or partly damaged), meaning that it may not only precede the Dynastic stage, but may even be the oldest petroglyph on this particular panel. Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz 115 RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS discovered in their archaeological reconnaissance of previously uncharted regions. Three doctoral dissertations are currently in preparation, ranging from the rock art of the Middle Holocene to modern petroglyphs and inscriptions, as demonstrated also in this article. One of the objectives of the team’s research is to include rock art on the general archaeological discourse on Dakhleh Oasis and its environs. It should be understood that after all rock art was not isolated from life in the Oasis and any narrative concerning this phenomenon should contextualize it appropriately. It is such narratives that the team will focus on in the near future. Acknowledgments The Petroglyph Unit is financed by the Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology of the University of Warsaw. Paweł Polkowski’s project „In the space of palimpsest. Rock art in archaeological landscapes of the Dakhleh Oasis” is financed by the Polish National Science Centre on the basis of decision no. DEC-2011/01/N/HS3/05994. He is also a holder of the Foundation of the Adam Mickiewicz University scholarship for year 2013. Members of the Unit wish to express their gratitude to the Dakhleh Oasis Project Director, Dr. Anthony J. Mills, the Polish Centre of Archaeology Director, Prof. Piotr Bieliński, and the Poznań Archaeological Museum Director, Prof. Marzena Szmyt, for their ongoing support. References ALLARD-HUARD L., 1993. Nil-Sahara. Dialogues Rupestres 1: Les Chasseurs. Privately Published, Divajeu, France. BAILEY G.N., 2006. Time perspectives, palimpsests and the archaeology of time. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 26: 198-223. BERGER F., 2006. Relative Chronology of Rock Art at Djedefre’s Water Mountain, SW-Egypt. In: K. Kröper, M. Chłodnicki and M. Kobusiewicz (eds), Archaeology of Early Northeastern Africa: In memory of Lech Krzyzaniak. Studies in African Archaeology 9, p. 195-212. Poznań Archaeological Museum. BERGER F., 2008. Rock Art West of Dakhla: The ‘Women’ from Dakhla. Rock Art Research, 25(2): 137-145. BERGER F., 2012. Rock Art West of Dakhla: “Water Mountain” Symbols. In: J. Kabaciński, M. Chłodnicki and M. Kobusiewicz (eds), Prehistory of Northeastern Africa. New Ideas and Discoveries, p. 279-305. Poznań Archaeological Museum. BERGMANN C., 2011. On the origins of hieroglyphic script. In: V. G. Callender, L. Bareš, M. Bárta, J. Janák and J. Krejčí (eds), Times, Signs and Pyramids. Studies in Honour of Miroslav Verner on 116 SAHARA 24/2013 the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday. Charles University in Prague. BLAKE E., 1998. Sardinia’s nuraghi: four millennia of becoming. World Archaeology, 30(1): 59-71. BRANTON N., 2009. Landscape approaches in historical archaeology: The archaeology of places. In: T. Majewski and D. Gaimster (eds), International Handbook of Historical Archaeology, p. 51-66. New York. CASTIGLIONE L., 1968. Inverted Footprints. Acta Ethnographica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 17: 121-137. CASTIGLIONE L., 1970. Vestigia. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 22: 95-132. ČERVIčEK P., 1974. Felsbilder des Nord-Etbai, Oberagyptens und Unternubiens. Ergebnisse der 8. DIAFE nach Agypten 1926. Wiesbaden: K. Steiner Verlag. ČERVIčEK P., 1982. Notes on the chronology of Nubian rock art from the end of the Bronze Age onwards. In: J. M. Plumley (ed.), Nubian Studies. Proceedings of the Symposium for Nubian Studies, Selwyn College, Cambridge 1978, p. 57-63. Warminster. ČERVIčEK P., 1986. Rock pictures of Upper Egypt and Nubia. Annali, Istituto Universitario Orientale, Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz www.saharajournal.com Vol. 46/1-suppl. 46, Napoli. CHURCHER C. S., 1999. Holocene faunas of the Dakhleh Oasis. In: C. S. Churcher and A. J. Mills (eds) Reports from the Survey of the Dakhleh Oasis, Western Desert of Egypt, 1977-1987, p. 133-150. Dakhleh Oasis Project: Monograph 2, Oxbow Monograph 99, Oxford: Oxbow Books. CHURCHER C. S., M. R. KLEINDIENST, M. F. WISEMAN, AND M. M. A. MCDONALD, 2008. The Quaternary faunas of Dakhleh Oasis. Western Desert of Egypt. In: M. F. Wiseman (ed.), Oasis Papers 2. Proceedings of the Second International Conference, p. 5-6. Dakhleh Oasis Project: Monograph 12, Oxford: Oxbow Books. DEPAUW M., 2009. Quarry marks in Deir el-Barsha and the logistics of building materials in Late Period and Graeco-Roman Egypt. In: B. J. J. Haring & O.E. Kaper (eds), Pictograms or pseudo script? Nontextual identity marks in practical use in Ancient Egypt and elsewhere, p. 93-106. Peteers Leuven. DARNELL J.C., 2009. Iconographic Attraction, Iconographic Syntax, and Tableaux of Royal Ritual Power in the Pre- and Proto-Dynastic Rock Inscriptions of the Theban Western Desert. ArcheoNil, 19: 83-107. RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS DUNBAR J. H., 1941. The Rock-pictures of Lower Nubia, Cairo. EDGERTON W. F. (ED.), 1937. Medinet Habu Graffiti Facsimiles. The University of Chicago Press. FIELD H., 1952. Camel brands and graffiti from Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Iran, and Arabia (Supplement to the Journal of the American Oriental Society 15). Baltimore. FÖRSTER F., 2007. With donkeys, jars and water bags into the Libyan Desert: the Abu Ballas Trail in the late Old Kingdom/First Intermediate Period. BMSAES 7: 1-39. http://www.britishmuseum.org/ pdf/Foerster.pdf. GARDINER A. H., 1957. Egyptian Grammar. Third edition reprinted in 2007. University Press, Cambridge. GOSDEN CH. AND Y. MARSHALL, 1999. The Cultural Biography of Objects. World Archaeology, 31(2): 169-178. HALLIER U. W., 1990. Die Entiwcklung der Felsbildkunst Nordafrikas. Stuttgart. HELLSTRÖM P. AND H. LANGBALLE, 1970. The Rock Drawings. The Scandinavian Joint Expedition to Sudanese Nubia, vol. 1 & 2, Odense. HARDING KING J. W., 1925. Mysteries of the Libyan Desert. Philadelphia. HENDRICKX S., H. RIEMER, F. FÖRSTER AND J.C. DARNELL, 2009. Late Predynastic/Early Dynastic rock art scenes of Barbary sheep hunting in Egypt’s Western Desert. From capturing wild animals to the women of the ‘Acacia House’. In: H. Riemer, F. Förster, M. Herb and N. Pöllath (eds), Desert animals in the eastern Sahara: Status, economic significance, and cultural reflection in antiquity, Colloquium Africanum 4, p. 189-244. Köln. HODDER I., 1986. Reading the past. Current approaches to interpretation in archaeology. Third Ed. Cambridge University Press. HOLTORF C. J., 1998. The life-histories of megaliths in MecklenburgVorpommern (Germany). World Archaeology, 30(1): 23-38. HOLTORF C. J., 2002. Excavations at Monte da Igreja near Évora (Portugal), From the life-history of a monument to re-uses of ancient objects. Journal of Iberian Archaeology, 4: 177-201. HOLTORF C. J., 2008. The life-history approach to monuments: an obituary? In: J. Goldhahn (ed.), Gropar och monument. En vänbok till Dag Widholm, Kalmar Studies in Archaeology, p. 411-427. Kalmar. HUYGE D., 1998. Art on the decline? Egyptian rock drawings from the Late and Graeco-Roman Periods. In: W. Clarysse, A. Schoors and H. Willems (eds), Egyptian Religion. The Last Thousand Years. Studies Dedicated to the Memory of Jan Quaegebeur, pt. II, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 85. Leuven. HUYGE D., 2002. Cosmology, ideology and personal religious practice in ancient Egyptian rock art. In: R. Friedmann (ed.) Egypt and Nubia: Gifts of the Desert, p.192-206. The British Museum Press. IKRAM S., 2009a. Drawing the World: Petroglyphs from Kharga Oasis. Archéo-Nil, 19: 67-82. IKRAM S., 2009b. A desert zoo: An exploration of meaning and reality of animals in the art of Kharga Oasis. In: H. Riemer, F. Förster, M. Herb and N. Pöllath (eds), Desert animals in the eastern Sahara: Status, economic significance, and cultural reflection in antiquity, Colloquium Africanum 4, p. 263-285. Köln. INGOLD T., 1993. The Temporality of the Landscape. World Archaeology, 25(2): 152-174. JACQUET-GORDON H., 2003. The Graffiti on the Khonsu Temple Roof at Karnak: A Manifestation of Personal Piety. Vol. 3.,Oriental Institute Publications 123. JAMES D., 2012. Ambiguous Images: The Problems and Possibilities of Analysing Rock Art Images in the Egyptian Western Desert. In: C. Knoblauch and J. Gill (eds), Egyptological Research in Australia and New Zealand. Proceedings of the conference held in Melbourne, September 4th-6th 2009, p. 71-84. Oxford. LUCAS G., 2005. The Archaeology of Time. Routledge: London & New York. KAPER O. E., 1997. Temples and gods in roman Dakhleh, studies in the indigenous cults of an Egyptian oasis. Groningen. KAPER O.E., 2009. Soldier’s identity marks of the Old Kingdom in the Western Desert. In: B.J.J. Harring and O.E. Kaper (eds), Pictograms or pseudo script? Non-textual identity marks in practical use in Ancient Egypt and elsewhere, p. 169178. Peeters Leuven. KAPER O. AND H. WILLEMS, 2002. Policing the Desert: Old Kingdom Activity around the Dakhleh Oasis. In: R. Friedmann (ed.) Egypt and Nubia. Gifts of the Desert, p. 79-94. London. KOBUSIEWICZ M., 2012. Nowe odkrycia prahistorycznej sztuki naskalnej w północno-wschodniej Afryce. Nauka (3): 155-166. SAHARA 24/2013 www.saharajournal.com KOPYTOFF I., 1986. The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process. In: A. Appadurai (ed.), The Social Life of Things. Commodities in Cultural Perspective, p. 64-91. Cambridge University Press. KRÖPELIN S. AND R. KUPER, 20062007. More corridors to Africa. CRIPEL 26: 219-229. KRZYżANIAK L., 1987. Dakhleh Oasis Project: Interim report on the first season of the recording of petroglyphs, January/February 1988. The Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 17: 182-191. KRZYżANIAK L., 1990. Petroglyphs and the research on the development of the cultural attitude towards animals in the Dakhleh Oasis (Egypt). Sahara, 3: 95-97. KRZYżANIAK L., 1991. Dakhleh Oasis Project: Research on the petroglyphs, 1990. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 2: 60-64. KRZYżANIAK L., 1993. Dakhleh Oasis: research on the rock art, 1992. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 6: 80-82. KRZYżANIAK L., 1994. Dakhleh Oasis: Research on rock art, 1993. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 5: 97-100. KRZYżANIAK L., 1999. Dakhleh Oasis. Research on petroglyphs 1998. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 10: 131-134. KRZYżANIAK L., 2001. Dakhleh Oasis. Research on petroglyphs 2000. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 12: 249-257. KRZYżANIAK L., 2004. Dakhleh Oasis: Research on petroglyphs, 2003. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 15: 181-189. KRZYżANIAK L. AND K. KRÖPER, 1985. Dakhleh Oasis Project: Report on the reconnaissance season of the recording of petroglyphs, December 1985. The Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities, 15(4): 138-139. KRZYżANIAK L. AND K. KRÖPER, 1990. The Dakhleh Oasis Project: Interim report on the second (1990) and third (1992) seasons of the recording of petroglyphs. The Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities, 20: 77-88. KRZYżANIAK L. AND K. KRÖPER, 1991. A Face-mask in the Prehistoric Rock Art of the Dakhleh Oasis?. Archeo-Nil, 1: 59-61. KUCIEWICZ E., E. JARONI, AND M. KOBUSIEWICZ, 2007. Dakhleh Oasis, Petroglyph Unit. New rock art sites, season 2005. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 17: 279-284. Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz 117 RESERVED RIGHTS - DROITS RÉSERVÉS KUCIEWICZ E., E. JARONI, AND M. KOBUSIEWICZ, 2008. Dakhleh Oasis, Petroglyph Unit. Rock art research, 2006. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 18: 317322. KUCIEWICZ E., E. JARONI, AND M. KOBUSIEWICZ, 2010. Dakhleh Oasis, Petroglyph Unit. Rock art research, 2007. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 19: 305310. KUCIEWICZ E. AND M. KOBUSIEWICZ, 2011. Dakhleh Oasis Project, Petroglyph Unit. Rock art research, 2008. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 20: 237244. KUCIEWICZ E. AND M. KOBUSIEWICZ, 2012. Dakhleh Oasis Project, Petroglyph Unit. Rock art research, 2009. Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, 21: 279287. KUHLMANN K.P., 2002. The „Oasis Bypath” or The Issue of Desert Trade in Pharaonic Times. In: Jennerstrasse 8 (eds), Tides of the Desert – Gezeiten der Wüste, p. 125-170. Köln: Heinrich-BarthInstitute. KUHLMANN K.P., 2005. Der Wasserberg des Djedefre (Chufu 01/1). Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo, 61: 243–89. KUPER R. AND F. FÖRSTER, 2003. Khufu’s ‘mefat’ expeditions into the Libyan Desert. EA, 23: 25-28. KUPER R. AND S. KRÖPELIN, 2006. Climate-controlled Holocene occupation in the Sahara: Motor of Africa’s evolution. Science, 313: 803-807. MACMICHAEL H.A., 1913. Brands used by the chief Camel-owning tribus of Kordofan (a supplement to The Tribes of Northern and Central Kordofan). Cambridge University Press. MACMICHAEL H.A., 1922. A history of the Arabs in the Sudan and some account of the people who preceded them and of the tribes inhabiting Darfur, vol. I, II. Cambridge University Press. MCDONALD M. M. A., 2002. Dakhleh Oasis in Predynastic and Early Dynastic Times: Bashendi B and the Sheikh Muftah Cultural Units. Archeo-Nil, 12: 109-120. 118 SAHARA 24/2013 MURRAY M. A., 1904. The Osireion at Abydos. Egyptian Research Account 9th year. London. NEWBOLD D., 1928. Rock-pictures and Archaeology in the Libyan Desert. Antiquity, 2: 261-291. PANTALACCI L. AND J. LESUR-GEBREMARIAM, 2009. Wild animals downtown: Evidence from Balat, Dakhla Oasis (end of the 3rd millennium BC). In: H. Riemer, F. Förster, M. Herb and N. Pöllath (eds), Desert animals in the eastern Sahara: Status, economic significance, and cultural reflection in antiquity, Colloquium Africanum 4, p. 263-285. Köln. PÖLLATH N., 2009. The prehistoric gamebag: The archaeozoological record from sites in the Western Desert of Egypt. In: H. Riemer, F. Förster, M. Herb and N. Pöllath (eds), Desert animals in the eastern Sahara: Status, economic significance, and cultural reflection in antiquity, Colloquium Africanum 4, p. 79-104. Köln. POLKOWSKI P., in preparation. Places and spaces. Rock art in the Dakhleh Oasis. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Dakhleh Oasis Project. New Developments in the Archaeology of the Egyptian Western Desert and its Oases, Leiden. POLKOWSKI P. AND M. KOBUSIEWICZ, 2012. Badania nad sztuką naskalną w Oazie Dachla (Pustynia Zachodnia, Egipt). Stanowisko 06/09. Fontes Archaeologici Posnanienses, 48: 237-248. RIEMER H., 2006. Out of Dakhla: Cultural diversity and mobility between the Egyptian Oases and the Great Sand Seas during the Holocene humid phase. In: K. Kröper, M. Chłodnicki and M. Kobusiewicz (eds), Archaeology of Early Northeastern Africa: In memory of Lech Krzyzaniak, Studies in African Archaeology 9, p. 493-526. Poznań Archaeological Museum. RIEMER H., 2009a. Prehistoric Rock Art Research in the Western Desert of Egypt’. Archéo-Nil, 19: 31-46. RIEMER H., 2009b. Prehistoric trap hunting in the eastern Saharan deserts: A re-evaluation of the game trap structures. In: H. Riemer, F. Förster, M. Herb and N. Polkowski - Kuciewicz - Jaroni - Kobusiewicz www.saharajournal.com Pöllath (eds), Desert animals in the eastern Sahara: Status, economic significance, and cultural reflection in antiquity, Colloquium Africanum 4, p. 175-185. Köln. RIEMER H., F. FÖRSTER, S. HENDRICKX, S. NUSSBAUM, B. EICHHORN, N. PÖLLATH, P. SCHÖNFELD UND G. WAGNER, 2005. Zwei pharaonische Wüstenstationen südwestlich von Dachla. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo, 61: 291-350. ROYMANS N., 1995. The cultural biography of urnfields and the longterm history of a mythical landscape. Archaeological Dialogues 1(2): 2-24. SHANKS M. AND CH. TILLEY, 1987. Social Theory and Archaeology. University of New Mexico Press. TILLEY CH., 1994. A Phenomenology of Landscape. Oxford and Providence. VÁHALA F. UND P. ČERVIčEK, 1999. Katalog der Felsbilder aus der Tschechoslowakischen Konzession in Nubien. Prag: Verlag Karolinum. VAN HOEK M., 2003. The Saharan “giraffe à lien” in rock art. Domesticated giraffe or rain animal? Sahara, 14: 49-62. VAN NOTEN F., 1972. The Rock Paintings of Jebel Uweinat. Graz. VERNER M., 1973. Some Nubian Petroglyphs. Praha. WINKLER H. A., 1938. Rock-Drawings of Southern Upper Egypt I: Sir Robert Mond Desert Expedition. Season 1936-1937. Preliminary Report. London: The Egypt Exploration Society. WINKLER H. A., 1939. Rock Drawings of Southern Upper Egypt II (Including Uwenat): Sir Robert Mond Desert Expedition. Season 1937-1938 Preliminary Report. London: The Egypt Exploration Society. WINKLER H. A., 1952. The origin and distribution of Arab camel brands. In: H. Field (ed.), Camel brands and graffiti from Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Iran, and Arabia (Supplement to the Journal of the American Oriental Society 15), p. 26-35. American Oriental Society. WINLOCK H. E., 1936. Ed Dakhleh Oasis. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.