Sickle Fragment

The Metropolitan Museum’s Egyptian expedition found this sickle fragment among settlement remains around the pyramid of Amenemhat I in Lisht, during the 1920-1922 excavations. That year they excavated settlement remains on the west and south sides of the pyramid (Mace 1921). Mace noted that finds included flint implements of all varieties, along with silos (which are commonly used to store grain), so this agricultural tool corresponds well with the reported finds.

The settlement remains excavated that year date mainly to the New Kingdom-early Third Intermediate Period. However, it should be noted that earlier Middle Kingdom cemetery and settlement materials were mixed throughout the later settlement materials (Arnold 1996:20), so the date of this object is difficult to establish definitively.

This sickle was a composite tool, made from two pieces of wood joined together with pegs. Additionally, pieces of flint would have been set into a small groove and held in place with adhesive. Sickles made from multiple pieces of wood are known from the Middle Kingdom on, such as ones from Kahun (Petrie 1890:29, 1891:12), the tomb of Tutankhamun (Carter and Mace 1933:143; Murray and Nuttal 1963:17-18), and examples in the British Museum (E.A.52861) and Brooklyn Museum (48.27). Earlier sickles were made from single pieces of wood, such as those found in the Early Dynastic Tomb of Hemaka (Emery 1938:33-34) and one from the Old Kingdom settlement at Elephantine (Kaiser et al. 1980:175).

The upper portion and handle of this sickle are entirely missing, as is a small portion of the distal tip. The remaining body would have held the flint inserts. The wood was nicely finished and smoothed all over. There is a gash or indent on one face that has been levelled out to some degree. The groove for holding the flint inserts is approximately 20 cm long, and the sickle extends an additional 16 cm without a groove, to the remaining distal tip. The groove is wider toward the handle end (0.83cm) and narrower toward the point end (0.62cm). The groove is not more than half a centimeter deep at the distal end, and slightly deeper at the proximal end. Toward the handle end, the edges of the groove appear to be lower on one face than the other.

Some adhesive remains in the groove. It is gray with macroscopically visible sand grains and other small black inclusions. It is very similar to adhesive remaining on flint inserts in the Museum’s collection. One was tested with X-ray diffraction that showed the adhesive is composed mainly of calcite (MMA 09.180.1378). Thus, the adhesive is lime-based, possibly a lime plaster (see also Endlicher & Tillman 1997). Five impressions of inserts are still visible in the remaining adhesive, though the exact joins are not often clear. Discoloration of the wood extends down from the edge of the groove on the exterior faces, but it fluoresces differently than the lime adhesive under UV light. These discolorations extend 1-2cm from the edge of the groove.

The handle of the sickle would have been made from a separate piece of wood and held on with small pegs set in holes drilled through the main body and the handle. Two of the pegs are still in place and are very closely spaced. They appear to be made of wood. There are three additional holes or partial holes still visible in the sickle. One is a natural knot in the wood, as can be seen from the grain of the wood that goes around the hole. The placement of the pegs is different than other sickles, which suggests that each was tailored to the specific requirements of the individual pieces of wood.

The pegs are flush on one face but protrude on the other. Additionally, there are striations around the pegs on the face where they protrude, indicating that the handle was attached on that side. Since the handle is always attached to the back of the sickle, then then face without the striations would be the front. This placement shows that the handle was attached on the right side relative to the position for use, and that it was to be used in the right hand.

Elizabeth Hart, J. Clawson Mills Research Fellow, 2019

References

Carter, Howard, and Arthur Cruttenden Mace 1933. The Tomb of Tut·ankh·Amen: Discovered by the Late Earl of Carnarvon and Howard Carter. Vol. 3. London: Cassell.

Emery, Walter B 1938. Excavations at Saqqara. The Tomb of Hemaka. Cairo: Government Press.

Endlicher, G., and Andreas Tillmann 1997. “Lime Plaster as an Adhesive for Hafting Eighteenth-Dynasty Flint Sickles from Tell El Dab’a, Eastern Nile Delta (Egypt).” In Archaeometry 39 (2), pp. 333-42.

Kaiser, Werner, Robert Avila, Gunter Dreyer, Horst Jaritz, Ewa Laskowska-Kusztal, Stephan Seidlmayer, and Martin Ziermann 1980. “Stadt Und Tempel von Elephantine/ Elfer/Zwolfter Grabungsbericht.” In Mitteilungen Des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 40, pp. 169-205.

Mace, Arthur Cruttenden 1921. “The Egyptian Expedition 1920-1921: I. Excavations at Lisht.” In The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 16 (11), pp. 5–19.

Murray, Helen, and Mary Nuttall 1963. A Handlist to Howard Carter’s Catalogue of Objects in Tut’ankhamūn’s Tomb. Oxford: Griffith Institute.

Petrie, William Matthew Flinders 1891. Illahun, Kahun, and Gurob. London: D. Nutt.

———. 1890. Kahun, Gurob and Hawara. London: K. Paul, Trench, Trübner and Co.

Excavated by the Egyptian Expedition of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Acquired by the Museum in the division of finds.