A Royal Boat Burial and Watercraft Tableau of Egypt's 12th Dynasty ( c .1850 BCE) at South Abydos
2016; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 46; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/1095-9270.12203
ISSN1095-9270
Autores Tópico(s)Archaeological Research and Protection
ResumoExcavations at Abydos, Egypt, during 2014–2016 have revealed the remains of a boat burial dating to the reign of Senwosret III (c.1850 BCE). The boat burial occurred inside a specially prepared, subterranean vaulted building. Surviving elements of planking appear to derive from a nearly 20 m-long boat that was buried intact but later dismantled for reuse of the wood. The vessel may belong to a group of royal funerary boats associated with the nearby tomb of Senwosret III. Incised on to the interior walls of the boat building is an extensive tableau including 120 surviving drawings of pharaonic watercraft. A unique deposit of pottery vessels was found associated with the ceremonial burial of this royal boat. Las excavaciones en Abidos, Egipto, durante los años 2014 y 2016 revelaron los restos de un enterramiento de una embarcación menor que data del reino de Senusret III (c.1850 ACE). El enterramiento de la embarcación tuvo lugar dentro de una edificación subterránea, abovedada, preparada especialmente para ese fin. Los remanentes de tablazón aparentemente derivan de una nave de cerca de 20 m de largo que fue enterrada intacta y, posteriormente, fue desmantelada para reutilizar la madera. La embarcación puede haber pertenecido a un grupo de naves reales funerarias asociadas con la tumba aledaña de Senusret III. Gravado en el interior de las paredes de la edificación en la cual reposa la embarcación, hay un extenso retablo en el que se conservan las ilustraciones de 120 naves faraónicas. En asociación con el entierro ceremonial de esta nave real, fue hallado un depósito único de vasijas de cerámica. 埃及阿拜多斯遗址2014-2016年度的发掘清理出一艘辛努塞尔特三世时期༈约前1850年༉陪葬船遗存。该船被置于地下一处专门预留的拱形建筑内。从现存的船壳板遗迹来看༌此船原长近20米༌其最初被完整地埋入地下༌但随后船板即被取下另做他用。这艘船可能属于一支皇家陪葬船队༌它们附属于近旁的辛努塞尔特三世墓。该船船体内壁刻有一幅长卷༌包括了保存下来的120艘法老船图像。独特的陶罐遗存则是与这艘皇家陪葬船的葬礼仪式相关。 埃及阿拜多斯遺址2014-2016年度的發掘清理出壹艘辛努塞爾特三世時期༈約前1850年༉陪葬船遺存。該船被置於地下壹處專門預留的拱形建築內。從現存的船殼板遺跡來看༌此船原長近20米༌其最初被完整地埋入地下༌但随後船板即被取下另做他用。這艘船可能屬於壹支皇家陪葬船隊༌它們附屬於近旁的辛努塞爾特三世墓。該船船體內壁刻有壹幅長卷༌包括了保存下來的120艘法老船圖像。獨特的陶罐遺存則是與這艘皇家陪葬船的葬禮儀式相關。 Archaeologists have long recognized the ancient Egyptian practice of burying boats in association with royal funerary complexes. Variable preservation, paired with the only partial investigation of most royal mortuary sites, however, has produced a still limited picture of the development of this long-lived tradition. Boat burials connected with pharaonic royal tombs are best known through the group of dismantled vessels buried adjacent to the pyramid of Khufu at Giza (Lipke, 1984; Awady, 2008; Mark, 2009). Variations on this practice persisted throughout the Early and Middle Bronze Age in the Egyptian Nile Valley. Watercraft held significance not only to the daily functions of the living king, but also served in royal funerary ceremonies and had symbolic relevance to the king's netherworld existence (Ward, 2000: 17–22; Creasman et al., 2009 with discussion of the literature). The use of boats in royal funerary rites appears to have transformed them into potent objects that could be ritually interred in connection with royal burials. The discovery in the 1990s, at the site of Abydos in southern Egypt, of a group of royal funerary boats dating to the Early Dynastic Period (c.3000–2800 BCE) has pushed the evidence for this practice to the beginning of Egypt's historical dynasties (O'Connor, 1992, 1995) and provided insight on the nature of early boat technology in the Nile Valley (Ward, 2003, 2006). Recent discoveries have added further evidence to this early inception of the practice of boat burials (Tristant et al., 2014). Thereafter, boat burials are attested from the Early Dynastic Period through the late Middle Kingdom (c.3000–1800 BCE). Yet, boat burials remain relatively scarce across this lengthy timeframe. There appears to have been significant variation in the nature and scale of boat burials. Symbolic substitution of boat models and boat-shaped architectural elements in place of actual boats occurred already in royal pyramid complexes of the late Old Kingdom (Verner, 1992; Altenmüller, 2002). Burial of full-scale boats re-emerged during the 12th Dynasty (c.1990–1800 BCE), occurring alongside the resumption of royal pyramid construction. Yet, the evidence to date appears to imply a reduction in size of the vessels relative to the larger Old Kingdom examples (Creasman and Doyle, 2015). Subsequent to the Middle Kingdom the use of full-scale boat burials died out. Burial of watercraft was echoed at that stage by the inclusion of model boats in royal funerary assemblages (for example Jones, 1990), a practice attested in private mortuary practices already as early as the Old Kingdom (Merriman, 2011: 55–92). Significant in understanding the development of this tradition is evidence for full-scale boat burials during their final stage: the late Middle Kingdom, c.1850–1700 BCE. During 2014–2016 the remains of a royal boat burial have been identified and excavated at the mortuary complex of the 12th Dynasty King Senwosret III (c.1878–1841 BCE) at South Abydos (Fig. 1). Although located at Abydos—like the Early Dynastic boat graves—this example dates to the 12th Dynasty, late in the tradition of royal boat burials. Apart from augmenting the fragmentary record for boat burials in pharaonic Egypt the subterranean building that contained this 12th Dynasty boat burial preserves remarkable wall decoration: over 120 surviving drawings of watercraft. This article is a preliminary report intended to provide an overview of the primary features of this recently excavated boat burial and the associated boat images. Here I will discuss: 1) the archaeological context, date, and architecture of the vaulted boat building and related structures; 2) physical remains that may be attributed to the original boat; 3) the incised images of watercraft that decorate the building's interior; and 4) a ceremonial pottery deposit associated with the interment of the boat. I will further examine the close parallel between the recently documented building at South Abydos and a nearly identical building at the Dahshur pyramid complex of Senwosret III, along with discussion of the possibility that this boat burial forms part of a larger ensemble of burials of watercraft connected to royal mortuary practices at South Abydos. The site is still under active investigation and this article is intended to present key evidence in anticipation of future final publication. Excavations of the Penn Museum, University of Pennsylvania, in cooperation with Egypt's Ministry of State for Antiquities, have been underway at the Senwosret III mortuary complex since 1994. This site is a multi-component, state-planned, funerary complex that includes a mortuary temple and connected urban site, as well as administrative and production areas (Wegner, 2007, 2009). The complex of Senwosret III is located on the low desert, extending over a distance of some 800 m between the edge of the Nile floodplain and the base of the high desert cliffs (Fig. 2). The temple and settlement components were established for the long-term maintenance of a mortuary cult, notionally focused on a 180 m-long subterranean tomb with its entrance inside a T-shaped enclosure that covers some 1.8 hectares at the base of the high desert cliffs. The site of this royal tomb was designated in ancient times as the 'Mountain of Anubis', while the mortuary complex as a whole bore the institutional designation, 'Enduring-are-the-Places-of-Khakaure-justified-in-Abydos'. Work at South Abydos during the past decade has included investigation of the interior of the subterranean tomb of Senwosret III and the wider environs of the T-shaped tomb enclosure. The recent research has greatly expanded earlier knowledge of the site that derived from a brief, exploratory phase of work conducted in 1901–1903 by Arthur Weigall and Charles Currelly on behalf of the Egypt Exploration Fund (Ayrton et al., 1904). During that time Weigall discovered the tomb of Senwosret III as well as an enigmatic ensemble of structures in and around the tomb enclosure. The unparalleled nature of this royal tomb enclosure has necessitated systematic examination of its component elements in order to understand the overall functions of the enclosure and the subterranean tomb located within it. Although Senwosret III also had a pyramid complex at the site of Dahshur, just south of modern Cairo, it appears probable from recent evidence that South Abydos served as the burial place of this king (Wegner, 2009). The tomb of Senwosret III became the nucleus for a royal necropolis that included tombs for three kings of the succeeding 13th Dynasty (likely including kings Neferhotep I and Sobekhotep IV: Wegner and Cahail, 2015), as well as eight tombs of a group of previously unknown rulers dating c.1650–1600 BCE during the later Second Intermediate Period (Wegner, 2015). All of these currently identified later royal tombs cluster on the west side of the Senwosret III enclosure. In an effort to understand the functions and chronological development of this royal necropolis we have devoted considerable attention in recent excavations to the eastern side (equivalent to 'Nile' or 'local south') of the Senwosret III tomb enclosure. It is in this eastern sector that we have now identified one large boat burial, as well as indications for a wider grouping of subterranean features potentially signalling the presence of additional boat burials. The eastern external area of the Senwosret III tomb enclosure includes a series of structures that Weigall briefly investigated in 1901–1902. Crucial new evidence has come from the 2012–2016 seasons (Fig. 3). The primary visible features in this area are two 'dummy mastabas', which still stand to a height of some 5 m. (The Arabic term 'mastaba' denotes a rectangular bench-shaped superstructure.) The mastabas are plastered mudbrick buildings of similar design, but differing dimensions, occupying a secondary enclosure formed by the addition of a sinusoidal wall appended to the main walls of the Senwosret III enclosure. Both buildings were filled with large volumes of construction debris from the Senwosret III tomb, but lack any internal chambers, hence the designation dummy mastabas. The specific function of the two structures remains, as yet, unclear. However, the evidence demonstrates a close contemporaneity between the two buildings and the main 12th Dynasty phase of the Senwosret III tomb enclosure. Positioned slightly to the north-east of the dummy mastabas is a group of five subterranean buildings that Weigall originally noted in 1901–1902. In 2002 we completed magnetic mapping across this area, which allowed us to re-establish the position of these structures and to correct their position on Weigall's inaccurate sketch map (Herbich and Wegner, 2003). Excavation of all five structures has now been completed during three field seasons in 2012–2016 (Fig. 4). The buildings display a high quality of construction employing the same format mudbricks employed in the architecture of the Senwosret III tomb enclosure. Although not physically linked, the structures are evidently related to each other as they follow a roughly linear arrangement spanning 60 m north-south and positioned at a distance slightly over 60 m east of the lower projection of the Senwosret III enclosure. The orientation of the individual structures varies slightly. The nature of the mudbrick construction and plasterwork is quite uniform, however, and suggests not only that they are associated features, but also all five buildings are contemporaneous with the Senwosret III tomb enclosure. The excavation of the four southern structures produced no artefacts or architectural evidence to illuminate their original function. The essential nature is that of a mudbrick-lined structure descending 3–3.5 m into the desert subsurface. The three central structures are simple rectangular shaft-like chambers. They are all finely plastered with a smooth coat of mud plaster faced with gypsum whitewash but lack any features such as chambers or recesses. One of these is quite large, with internal dimensions measuring 2.75×5.2 m (Fig. 4a). South of it are two smaller structures of nearly identical size, each measuring c.1.6×2.1 m on their interiors (Fig. 4b,). The southernmost building in this group (Fig. 4c) has a rectangular entrance chamber (2.2×2.6 m) that opens into a small vaulted chamber (1.6×2.6 m) extending to the east. Although the combination of shaft-like entrance and vaulted chamber might suggest the structure was a tomb, the comparatively shallow depth, paired with wide proportions of the vaulted chamber, indicates this was never intended as a tomb. In fact, none of the four structures shows any evidence for having been designed as a tomb. Rather, they served some other purpose and in all likelihood they must be understood as an interrelated group. The possible functions of this group can now be delineated by the evidence that has come from the fifth structure: the subterranean, vaulted building that once housed a large boat burial, and which preserves an extensive group of boat images incised on to its walls. The subterranean boat building is positioned 65 m east (local or Nile south) of the front of the tomb enclosure of Senwosret III (labelled '5' on Fig. 3). The axis of the structure is aligned, probably intentionally, with the enclosure's front wall. The orientation closely follows that of the tomb enclosure, although it runs slightly askew (-6°) relative to the enclosure itself. Arthur Weigall first noticed this building during his exploratory season of 1901–1902. At that time he exposed the building's barrel-vaulted roof. His work, however, was hampered by the damaged condition of the massive brick vault. The central sections of the vault collapsed as Weigall removed the debris from beneath. This event evidently ended his investigation, but not before he had observed some of the incised boat drawings decorating the upper parts of the building. 'To the east of this group is a large tomb, built on the exaggerated plan of S2. The roof was barrel shaped, and some of it was still standing until excavated, when it fell in. Upon the whitewashed walls of the burial chamber a number of drawings of boats had been scratched in later times, some of which are of interest. Photographs of them are given in the plates. At the time of writing this tomb awaits complete clearance, and a fuller description of it will be appended.' (Ayrton et al., 1904: 16–17) No photographs or plan, apart from a rough sketch, were published. Nor was further work undertaken in 1902–1903 when Charles Currelly completed the work of the Egypt Exploration Fund at South Abydos. The building has sat untouched until the renewed site work of the University of Pennsylvania. The general outlines of the building remained visible on the surface but full excavation did not occur until 2014 and after completion of the smaller subterranean structures nearby. The interior of the building was excavated during May and June of 2014. Excavation then continued on the front part of the building during November 2015–January 2016. Although further work remains to be completed, particularly on the wood elements still in situ within the structure, documentation of the building itself is now complete with a significant set of evidence regarding the building's function. The boat building (Figs 5–6) is extremely well built and an outstanding example of pharaonic mudbrick architecture. The construction employs large-format mud bricks measuring 0.20×0.40×0.12 m (±1 cm). These bricks are identical in size and composition to those used in the enclosure walls and other features of the Senwosret III tomb enclosure. The building is set down into the desert subsurface with heavy main walls composed of two rows of bricks with a plastered, gypsum-coated interior surface. The walls sit on the harder, compact gebel or desert subsurface. The interior measures 20.6 m long and 4.1 m wide along most of its length but widening slightly towards the entrance where it measures 4.3 m in width. The building's sidewalls have a slight outward batter. The walls rise to a height of 1.6 m where the brickwork begins to step inwards anticipating the transition from vertical wall to the vault. The walls then extend slightly further to a height of 2.2 m where the vaulted roof begins. The back wall is angled outwards its entire height. The side walls preserve putlog holes for a series of three substantial wooden beams, c.0.25 m in diameter, which once spanned the width of the structure at the point of transition from the lower walls to the vault. Two further putlog holes occur at the top of the end wall just below the top of the vault. These appear to have served as part of a scaffolding system used during the vault's construction with the timbers removed and the holes plastered over upon completion of the building. The vault construction was a double-ring, incline-vault, with the brickwork laid at an angle leaning against the end wall. This end wall still stands to its original height and fully preserves the curvature and height of the vault. The vault had a wall thickness of 0.5 m with overall internal dimensions of 4.2 m in width and 2 m in height. This gave the building a total interior height of c.4.4 m from the base of the walls. On the outside the vault was flanked along its entire length with stacks of loose, unmortared bricks. Beyond the stacked bricks there were extensive numbers of large limestone boulders running the length of the building. The combination of unmortared, stacked bricks and limestone boulders served to counteract the significant outward force created by the 4.2 m-wide barrel vault. Attached to the building's exterior at the same elevation as the vault are two spur walls that project outwards from the entrance. The spur walls are 0.4 m wide (one brick length) and c.2.8 m long, stepping upwards on to the loose desert sand. These features served as retaining walls for the mass of stacked brick and boulders that flanked the vault on either side. The entire vault with its adjacent brick stacks and limestone boulders was originally buried to the elevation of the surrounding desert surface (c.6 m above the building's floor). Overall the investment in construction is considerable and the technical expertise the 12th Dynasty builders devoted to the large barrel vault is noteworthy. We found in 2014, as Weigall had stated, that portions of the edges of the vault were still in place; however, the structure had been broken through along its entire length. Despite attempts to repair and support the undermined brickwork, it proved unfeasible to rescue surviving elements of the vault. The inward-angled brickwork of the vault was not only severely damaged but was weighed down by the mass of stacked brickwork and limestone boulders. Consequently the edges of the vault were removed to the top of the sidewalls in order to permit us to excavate the building's interior (Fig. 7). Removal of the compromised edges of the vault allowed us to expose the extensive tableau of boat drawings, as well as document the base level of the building with its physical indications of an original boat burial. During excavation of the building's interior in 2014 it became clear that the building lacks a flat floor. Rather, it is characterized by a rough-cut, c.3 m-wide, hull-shaped cavity (a long trench with angled sides) that runs the length of the building. The cavity is cut into the compact desert subsurface: a sandy aggregate material that can be easily shaped with a sharp implement, but solid enough to hold its form under considerable pressure. This central cavity has sloping sides cut at an angle of approximately 45° and was clearly cut as a receptacle for a boat hull of substantial scale. The presence of this feature extending the full length of the building indicates that the boat was buried with its hull intact rather than disassembled. Outside of the building's entrance this hull cavity connects directly with a wide, stepped trough cut down through the compact subsurface. The trough (discussed below) descends over a length of approximately 15 m with a gentle downward gradient from the desert surface to reach the level of the hull cavity. The length of this approach to the building appears adapted to permit the installation of a boat of considerable dimensions that was slid, or carried, to the entrance and then guided inwards to occupy the trench-like cavity. In 2014 it was not feasible to excavate the entire length of the feature, but we completed a 5 m-long exploratory trench across the width of the cavity near the middle of the building (11 m from the back wall) (Fig. 3). The 2014 cut exposed a group of five wooden planks (Table 1). These elements are badly preserved and disarticulated in the sandy fill of the cavity (Fig. 8), but appear likely to be fragmentary remnants of the original boat. For a variety of reasons these planks do not appear attributable to coffins or other wood funerary objects resulting from intrusive burials. Remains of one badly disarticulated intrusive pit burial, including a coffin and human skeletal elements, were encountered at a higher elevation in the boat building. However, these five wood planks are at a much greater depth and the context is tellingly devoid of any human osteological remains. The wood fragments sit within the hull cavity at a depth 4 m below original surface and significantly deeper than any intrusive pit burial is likely to have reached. The recovered elements are not in primary context; they are elevated in the sand and do not sit directly on the floor of the cavity. The floor of the hull cavity—at least 1 m deep from rim to base in this area—was not reached in 2014 because the wood fragments were left in situ and reburied. It seems likely that additional fragments will be encountered when the remainder of the hull cavity is excavated. The lowest parts of the cavity may have naturally accumulated fragmentary remains assuming that substantial demolition of the large boat hull took place within the building itself. If a broader scatter of wood elements is found within the lower parts of the hull cavity we may be able to confirm the origin of these planks in the original boat. None of the fragments encountered so far appears to derive from the boat hull itself but perhaps represent elements of the boat's superstructure. No discernible joinery or tenon marks were observed. Although the dry desert environment theoretically should have contributed to a high quality of preservation, these wood elements are in extremely fragile condition. Most of the wood mass had been consumed by white ants leaving a shell of frass. This decay process also occurs in the Early Dynastic boats at North Abydos (Ward, 2003: 20, states that 60–80% of the wood volume was transformed to frass) and is typical for archaeological wood at the site as a whole. In 2014 we left the wood in situ due to its fragile condition and the need for extensive chemical stabilization to successfully move the pieces. For that reason detailed identification of wood species has not yet been undertaken. Two of the planks (Planks 1 and 4) in a better state of preservation are likely cedar (Cedrus libani), and preserve the same grain and texture as cedar identified in other uses in the royal necropolis at South Abydos. Two of these planks (again Planks 1 and 4) have remains of gypsum plaster coating that appears intended as backing for a painted surface, although no colour was preserved. Conceivably these are parts of decking or elements of a cabin. Future examination of all of the fragments following removal may indicate whether these elements can be attributed to boat construction and, if so, whether the vessel might have predominantly employed cedar, or used multiple wood species for different elements of the construction. Continued work in the hull cavity and detailed documentation of recovered wood elements is planned for 2016–2017 at which point a full discussion of these physical remains can be presented. During 2015–2016 excavation shifted from the interior to the building's entrance and the area immediately in front. Here the outer end of the central cavity was exposed. We excavated down to the base of the cavity, which measures 3 m wide and 0.5 m deep in this area: somewhat shallower than the c.1 m+ depth reached in the centre of the building. The trench-like hull cavity continues beneath a 1 m-thick mud brick blocking that originally sealed the building's arched entrance. No wood fragments were found within the cavity in this area. However, lying astride the brick blocking we found additional remains of wooden planking: very badly disintegrated in this case, and largely reduced to frass through insect action, and not possible to consolidate or remove intact (Fig. 9). A group of three planks (Planks 6–8) was exposed lying parallel to one another (Table 1). A fourth shorter fragment (Plank 9) lay adjacent to the main group of three and likely originally connected to vestiges of another plank on the outer end of the group (Fig. 10). The planks sloped downwards into the building's interior at an angle of approximately 45°. Significantly, these fragments, unlike those found in 2014, constitute a cohesive structural group. Not only did they lie parallel, but sitting atop Planks 7 and 8 was a smaller wood element, rectangular in cross section and measuring 0.07×0.12 m that once ran perpendicular across the width of the planks. This may represent a cross-member that originally ran across the width of the planks together forming a 1.01+ m wide surface. The common width and thickness along with the potential cross-member suggests these four planks were dislocated together from the same original feature. The dimensions are too large to derive from a wooden coffin and, like the fragments found in the 2014 exposure of the hull cavity, may originate from elements of the superstructure of the original boat burial. The dimensions of the planks are comparable with deck planking preserved on contemporary cedar funerary boats at from the pyramid complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur, although we did not observe preserved peg attachments that characterize the deck planks of the Dahshur vessels (Creasman, 2010: 103–109) and the cross-member may not fit with an origin as decking. Another possibility is the planking derives from a deckhouse or cabin, which could potentially have been among the first elements to be dismantled from an intact boat burial. Particularly significant is the planks' secondary position at a sloping angle in the middle of the break in the building's bricked doorway. The disposition of the wood strongly suggests the planks are the remnants of an ad hoc wood ramp or slide created by laying wood over the sand slope. There once may have been additional wood elements creating a wood track about 1 m in width extending between the desert surface and building interior. I would hypothesize that when the boat building was initially broken into through this brick blocking a sand slope was created that made removal of larger, heavier elements out of the building's interior challenging. Placement of some of the lighter planking, deriving from the upper parts of the boat, then facilitated the process of deconstructing the rest of the boat and dragging the more desirable larger elements out to the desert surface. The meagre physical remnants that we have recovered so far demonstrate that the boat itself was substantially removed in antiquity, possibly due to the value of the wood—likely including extensive use of cedar—employed in its construction (regarding aspects of reuse of wood from ancient Egyptian boats: Ward, 2004: 16–17 and Creasman, 2013). Other examples exist in the Egyptian archaeological record of containment buildings for royal watercraft where the actual boat appears to have been stripped away in antiquity (such as boat burials associated with the pyramid complexes of Senwosret I at Lisht and Amenemhat III at Dahshur: Arnold, 1992: 52–3). One motivating factor is likely to be the reuse of long-lived, durable wood such as cedar that tended to be used for royal funerary boats (see Arnold, 1992: 52–53). Indeed, repurposing of cedar spanning a timeframe of two centuries has been documented in an unrelated context excavated recently at South Abydos where cedar coffin boards originating in a plundered royal burial of the 13th Dynasty were repurposed during the Second Intermediate Period (Wegner and Cahail, 2015: 149–156). In a wood-poor environment such as the Nile Valley, the large volume of high-quality wood used in a royal funerary boat would have offered a desirable commodity every bit as marketable as the valuable materials that attracted tomb robbers to pharaonic necropoli. Despite the limited evidence furnished by the wood remains, the profile of the hull cavity and dimensions of the building directly reflect the basic nature and scale of the vessel. The flattened profile of the c.1 m deep hull trench suggests a shallow-draught vessel with slender hull proportions: a length approaching c.18 m with maximum hull width of 4 m. The hull's width to length ratio of 1:5 or more is consistent with extant ceremonial boats with hulls four to eight times their maximum width (Ward, 2004: 13). The increase in the depth of the central cavity from the entrance to the midsection of the building appears purposefully cut to reflect the contours of the boat hull as it deepened and widened towards the middle of the vessel. The occurrence of remnants of plaster and paint on a number of the wood fragments documented in 2014 and 2016 is intriguing. Use of plaster and paint does not occur on the well-preserved Khufu boat but there is evidence for these elements on the Ea
Referência(s)