See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/308548712

Geophysical Mapping of the Remains of Chephern Pyramidal Complex, Giza

Necropolis, Egypt. Journal of Geophysics, NRIAG, Egypt. P. 113-132.

Article · January 2006

CITATIONS READS

0 543

9 authors, including:

Magdy Atya Fathy Shaaban

National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics Umm Al-Qura University
46 PUBLICATIONS   172 CITATIONS    56 PUBLICATIONS   233 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Hatem Odah Tareq Fahmy Abdallatif

National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics, (NRIAG), Helwan, Cairo… National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics
27 PUBLICATIONS   348 CITATIONS    34 PUBLICATIONS   164 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Assessment of geothermal resources in Farafra Oasis (ID# 1351) View project

Marine Magnetic & Archaeological Prospection View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Tareq Fahmy Abdallatif on 01 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

9 NRIAG Journal of Geophysics, Special Issue, PP. 113 –132 , (2006)

GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF CHEPHREN

PYRAMIDAL COMPLEX, GIZA NECROPOLIS, EGYPT

Atya*, M. A., Abbas*, M. A., Shaaban*, F. A., Odah*,

H., Abdallatif*, T. F., Kamei**, H., Abd alla*,
M. A., El-Hemaly*, I., and El-Kenawy***, A. A.

ABSTRACT: The Giza necropolis plateau and its valuable artifacts’ content
attract the attention of all scientists, as it includes one of the seven world miracles. The
study of pyramids is full of secrets and many questions and quizzes make the
inspectors at the site busy. The Chephren pyramidal complex is the most complete one
in Egypt. It has also a wide fame due to its relation to Sphinx, so that the valley temple
of this complex is called in some articles “the temple of Sphinx”. Although most of the
Chephren pyramid complex’s elements have already been excavated (such as the
pyramid, the valley temple, the causeway, and the ship-shaped pits), some other
elements have not been discovered yet (the ancient channel, the harbor and platform,
and the subway of the public (Fakhry, 1963).

Modernized geophysical applications extend to the degree that, they confessed

archaeologists and gained their trust. In the present study, these were applied to
prospect for the channel and the harbor platform reported by Fakhry (1963) as missed
portions of the Chephren pyramidal complex. Five geophysical tools were applied and
categorized into two groups according to the partial aim and the suitability of the tool.
Resistivity vertical soundings and profiling together with TEM and seismic refraction
were carried out to prospect for the ancient channel and its flood plain. This data set
was collected by NRIAG members (Abbas, 1998) and reinterpreted to serve this target.
Integrated magnetic and GPR detailed surveys were carried out in order to locate the
remains of the harbor and its platform. Fakhry (1963) reported that, the public was
not allowed to pass over the ground like the priests and the royal community, but only
allowed to pass to the temple through a subway, that should guide them to the harbor.

The results gave good consistency with the location of the channel and its
flood plain, the harbor, its platform, and the subway. A proposal to excavate the site is
under preparation to confirm the results.

INTRODUCTION

Studying the pyramids in Egypt is one of the most complicated

research points. It includes uncountable unanswered questions. How were
____________________________________________________________________
* National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics, Helwan, Cairo, Egypt
** Department of Computer Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
*** Department of Geology, Zagazig University, Egypt.
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________
they built, who is the possessor, why in this place, which date...etc. and
many other unrevealed quizzes? The subject is quite wide, but we are
concerned here with the logistic bases, as it may be done in the initiator’s
mind, to select a site of a pyramid, which serves directly the research
point in this work. The site of a pyramid should be close to the necropolis
of former kings or monarchs. The ancient Egyptian believed in the death
kingdom that lies on the west where the sun sets, therefore, the pyramid
had to be placed on the western bank of the River Nile. The place of a
pyramidal complex has to be on an elevated place looking to the
cultivated valley and close to one of the Nile branches (Fakhry, 1963).
The pyramidal complex (as in Fakhry, 1963) is composed of the
following parts; 1)- the pyramid and its outer wall, 2)- a funeral temple on
the eastern face of the pyramid, 3)- a pylon on the northern side, 4)- a
small pyramid on the southern side, 5)- small ship-shaped pits
surrounding the pyramid, 6)- the causeway, and 7)- the Valley temple.
The Giza necropolis (Fig. 1) is the most known artifact standing against
the damage factors for over than 4500 years.

The present work attempts to map the remains of the Chephren

pyramid complex (Fig. 2) by means of geophysical tools. The missing
parts of the complex might be reported as the harbor platform and the
subway used by the public. Therefore, the previous geological and
geophysical works on the area have been collected (Omara (1952),
Knetsch (1953), Salem(1976), Lehner (1980), Gauri and Holdern (1981),
Aigner (1982), Strougo et al. (1982), Aigner (1983), Gauri (1983, 1984),
Strougo (1985), Yehia (1985), El-Aref and Refai (1986), Yoshimura and
Tanouchi (1987) and Dobecki and Schoch (1992)). Also, some of the
previous works collected by NRIAG members were reanalyzed and
reported in order to detect the channel system. This includes resistivity
(VESes and profiling), electromagnetic, seismic and hydrological data
(Abbas, 1998).

Furthermore, an integrated ground penetrating radar (GPR) survey

using SIR2000 from GSSI (Geophysical Survey Systems Inc.) together
with magnetic survey using the FM36 magnetic scan from GeoScan were
carried out in order to detect the remains of the Chephren complex. The
GPR system was connected to a 200 MHz antenna and the surface
distance was controlled by a calibrated survey wheel.

_______________________________________________________________________
114 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)
 Atya, M. A. et al.
_____________________________________________________________________
Finally, a part of the public tunnel and the front of the platform
were detected based on the GPR and magnetic surveys. Also, some other
remains were mapped. The resistivity, the electromagnetic and the
hydrogeology works helped to introduce the hydraulic system in the area,
therefore, assumptions were done to locate the channel that was used to
transport the bodies to the valley temple.

Mediterranean Sea
Alexandria

Cairo
Giza
Suez
Western Desert
Sinai
Eastern
Desert

Fig. 1: Map of the northern part of Egypt.

Fig. 2: Plane view of the study area with the Pyramids and the Sphinx.

_______________________________________________________________________
NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006) BBC
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________

GEOLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY OF

THE PYRAMID PLATEAU

The area is cropped out by Middle to Upper Eocene and Pliocene

rocks, and Nile sediments. However, two geomorphological features
could be distinguished; the limestone cliff and the Quaternary deposits
(Fig. 3). The Limestone cliff; Giza plateau is almost a square-shaped
plateau of about 1.6 to 1.9 km face length. Two Eocene limestone
escarpments of about 30m height difference could be noticed at the
northwestern side (Aigner, 1983), while the eastern border is gently
sloping Pliocene limestone. The southern part of the cliff is characterized
by Heit El-Ghorab, which is a ridge series of hills dissected by dry-
channels of drainage lines. It is composed of Upper Eocene-Pliocene
limestone. The Quaternary deposits; they characterize the eastern and
southern parts of the area; they are mainly the Nile flood plain Holocene
of alluvial sediments and channelling system. The flood plain deposits
extend to the foot of the pyramid cliff.

Ain Mousa
Maadi
Formation
Formation

Mokattam
Formation

Nile
Valley
0 500 m

Fig. 3: Generalized block diagram of the geomorphology

at the Giza Pyramid’s plateau (after Aigner, 1983).

_______________________________________________________________________
116 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)
 Atya, M. A. et al.
_____________________________________________________________________
The subsurface stratigraphy of the Giza plateau reveals the Middle
Eocene Mokattam Formation; it is gently dipping (5o-10o) towards the
southeast. It is composed mainly of limestone and dolomitic limestone. Its
southern part is overlained by marly limestone and sandy marls of the
Upper Eocene Maadi Formation (Aigner (1983)). The facies at Giza area
could be reported as follow: Nummulite bank facies, which forms a large
part of the bases of Cheop’s and Chephren’s Pyramids; Shoal and shoal
reef facies at the basal part of the Sphinx ditch and along the road from
the Sphinx temple up to the Pyramids; and Back bank facies that form the
body of the Sphinx statue and the southern part of the Pyramids plateau
(Strougo 1985). Figure 4a shows the stratigraphic column and figure 4b is
a schematic cross section showing the different facies of the pyramids
plateau.

Structurally, the pyramids plateau is described as Brachy Anticline

(Omara, 1952), it is typically a part of Abu Roash-complex (a group of
the NE-SW trending synclines and anticlines, that are referred to the Late
Cretaceous tectonic compression), as reported by Knetsch (1953) and
Salem (1976). Yehia (1985) suggested that, the area is considered as a
monocline dipping to the SE direction with a slight swing to the south.

Stratigraphy Formation Remarks Lithology

Aeolian Sand Sand

Quaternary Nile Terraces

Abbassia Fr. Gravel

Pliocene Sandy limestone

Oligocene Mina House Fr.

Ain Musa Mb. Sandy limestone

Upper Carolia Bed Carolia Placunoides biohorizon

Wadi Garawi Fr. Shally marl layers and thin bedded marly limestone
Eocene
El-Qura Fr. Agillaceous limestone and gypseous marl Sphinx
Obsevatory Formation White gray marly limestone
Akhet Mb.
Limestone marl complex sequence-Nummulite
Upper
Bank
Middle Setepet Mb.
Middle dark gray dolomitic limestone
Rosetau Mb.
Eocene Lower Nummulite white limestone

Fig. 4a: The stratigraphic column of the pyramid plateau (after Aigner, 1983).

_______________________________________________________________________
NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006) BBF
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________

SSE NNW

80 m
Littoral
Lagoonal Sphinx Nummulite
?
Maadi Bank
Formation
Back Bank
0
M o k a t t a m F o r m a t i o n
0 200 m

Fig. 4b: A schematic cross-section for the Pyramids plateau

showing the lithologic facies (after Aigner, 1983).

The Chephren pyramid complex

This is the most complete pyramidal complex in Egypt (Fakhry,
1963). However, some essential parts of the complex, such as the harbor
platform and the public subway leading to the valley temple, have not
been discovered yet. The present work is planed to detect them.
Therefore, the area front of the valley temple will be described and
researched. The eastern face of the temple of the valley (Figs. 5a and 5b),
where the subway-end should be, facies to the sound and light theater and
the houses of Nazlet Al Semman. In some articles, the valley temple is
referred to as the temple of Sphinx; this may be due to its location south
of Sphinx. The temple was excavated completely by Hoelscher (1912),
since that time, its relation to the complex items of Chephren was
declared. Fakhry (1963) reported that, at the eastern front of the valley
temple, it should be a harbor platform on a channel passing from the north
towards the south. The southern part of that channel should be passing
under a subway built of a big stone block and its northern end should be
under the temple of Osiers, the god of Rostaw, while its name had been
mentioned in the inscriptions of Isis temple near to the Cheop’s pyramid.

_______________________________________________________________________
118 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)
 Atya, M. A. et al.
_____________________________________________________________________
Panorama view of the valley temple

southern ramp
northern ramp

Fig. 5a: Panorama view of the valley temple, west to the study area.
0 10 20 30 meter

Fig. 5b: A schematic layout of the

about 2.5 m elevation
valley temple, the lower part is
a generated layout of the area of
study (modified after Fakhry,
1963).
Reference point

area for detailed magnetic

nd gpr survey

Theater of sound and light

to Nazlet Al Semman

_______________________________________________________________________
NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006) BBJ
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________

Site description
The area of study could be introduced in two ways; first on a
relatively large scale including Nazlet Al Semman and Kafr Al Gabal
villages and extending to Al Mansoriya canal to locate the ancient
channel; second on a detailed scale to locate any remains of the harbor or
the subway. The detailed scale area (Fig. 5b and photograph Fig. 6) lies
to the east of the valley temple and west of the theater of sound and light.
It is about 60 x 40 meters area and covered with the output of the
excavation of the temple. The extension of the two entrances to the
temple lies under the area of study.

Cheop's pyramid
Chephren's Pyramid

Sphinx
The Vally Temple

Area of detailed Survey

Sound and Light Theater

Fig. 6: The area for detailed survey showing the excavation output piles.

Data measurements and interpretation

The data used in this work is of two categories;
1) The resistivity, the electromagnetic and seismic refraction collected
by NRIAG members through a PhD work (Abbas, 1998). These were
directed to solve the groundwater problem at Sphinx area. Inhere; the
data is re-read to locate the possible place to the channel crossing
Nazlet Al Semman.
2) The GPR and magnetic detail surveys have been carried out to map
the area between the valley temple and the Nazlet Al Semman to find
archaeological remains.

_______________________________________________________________________
120 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)
 Atya, M. A. et al.
_____________________________________________________________________
The resistivity data
eighty one vertical electrical soundings (VES) were carried out using
the Schlumberger arrangement of AB ranging between 200m and 500m
according to distance availability. Figure 7a shows the location of the
VESes. Also, three Wenner profiles were distributed at a=10, 20 and 30m
(Fig. 7b).

The resistivity data set had been treated by a series of 1D programs

(Resist, 1989, Zohdy, 1989, Resixip-Interpex package, 1992, IPI, 1993
and VES4, 1995). A series of resistivity distribution maps and geoelectric
cross-sections had been constructed by Abbas (1998) and reread in a way
to serve in achieving the objectives of the present work. Two geoelectric
sections and a Wenner section crossing the study area were selected and
introduced (Fig. 8a, b, c).

The two Geoelectric sections (Fig. 8) cross the area of interest from
the west to the east; one of them is to the north and the second is to the
south of the valley temple. It is clear that the eastern end of the two
sections show flood plain deposits. The possibility of a channel is high.

Fig. 7: Location map of the resistivity points (a- is the location of the Schlumberger
VESes and b- is the direction of the Wenner resistivity profiles).

_______________________________________________________________________
NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006) BKB
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________

Fig. 8: a- and b- two geoelectric cross sections based on VES data and c- is a
geoelectric cross section based on Wenner data. The three sections show
flood plain deposits east- wards.

The electromagnetic data

Fifty six TEM survey points were recorded at the area of interest
(Fig. 9) using a Russian instrument. The data set had been used
previously by Abbas (1998). The points from 1 to 27 were operated with
25 m and the rest ones were surveyed with 50 m side distances. Field
noises due to the Sound and Light gallery of Sphinx were observed in the
field curves. Some data points have been dropped intentionally due to this
effect. Furthermore, the field data acquiring was refined by using 15 stack
over 32 time windows.
_______________________________________________________________________
122 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)
 Atya, M. A. et al.
_____________________________________________________________________

Fig. 9: Location of the TEM measuring points.

Interpretation of TEM fields was undertaken in two stages. The first

was to locate a possible subsurface target on the basis of the shape, size
and location of anomalies evident on profiles and maps of suitable
parameters. The second is more quantitative stage in which the quality of
the conductor using time constants can be determined from decay plots of
the field intensity at one or more locations (Reynolds, 1997). Figure 10 is
a geologic cross section based on TEM data. The results correspond to
that of the resistivity measurements. The eastern sections reveal the
existence of flood deposits.

Section 5
W-E
37 28
70

50

30
Fig. 10: Geologic cross-
section S5 based on
electromagnetic survey.
10

High Conductivity Zone

0

0 50 m

Hard Sandy
sandstone Marl
Limestone Limestone

_______________________________________________________________________
NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006) BKN
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________

Seismic refraction data

Four profiles had been carried out in the area (Fig. 11). Each of
them consists of a number of segments. Every segment includes 12
geophones with 5 m interval. The shot point was at 5 m away from the
first geophone. The shootings were conducted in direct and reverse
directions. OYO-75 twelve channel single enhancement seismograph had
been used in the survey. The survey had been carried out with non-
explosive (sledgehammer) energy source. The geophone cable was in a
variety of lengths with the pre-determined distances between the
geophone connections. The interval chosen is decided depending on the
optimum subsurface layering of interest.
A FORTRAN code developed
by Mooney (1984) and modified
by the author has been used in the
interpretation of the present work.
Figure 12 is the section along the
line D. The data reflect the same,
just like before, flood deposits
which, in turn reflects the
possibility of a channeling system
in the area.

Fig. 11: Location of seismic refraction lines.

Fig. 12: Geo-seismic cross-section

_______________________________________________________________________
124 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)
 Atya, M. A. et al.
_____________________________________________________________________
The previously reported data set (resistivity, TEM and seismic) was
oriented to detect the possibility to locate the ancient channel.
Distributing a perfect geophysical array through the house blocks and the
noise sources was difficult. However, the data were good enough to give
evidences that the flood plain was close to the foot of the plateau, and the
nearest point was almost east to the valley temple. Abbas (1998) showed
a resistivity heterogeneity distribution map based of the resistivity curve
type. Noticing the H-type, it might lineout the channel and its flood plain
towards the valley temple.

Magnetic survey data

a magnetic survey grid has been carried out in the summer of 2004
over an area of 20m x 60m. FM36 magnetic gradiometer scan was used
(Fig. 5b). Along the measuring line, the separation of measuring points
was 0.5m from the north to the south, while the distance between the lines
was 1 m.

Figure 13 shows the product of the magnetic survey, the upper part is
the raw data and the lower is the processed image. The processing steps
included grids edge marching, spike removal and band pass filtrating. The
results show the existence of shallow linear fire brick walls and some
limestone blocks. The survey area is higher than the ground of the valley
temple with more than 2 meters; therefore, the fired bricks objects might
not be related to the valley complex cultural layer. The limestone blocks
are relatively deep but shallower than the pyramid plateau body;
furthermore, it is possible that they reflect the harbor platform.

Negative anomaly
oval positive (It may be limestone
anomaly Shallow linear positive anomaly background)
(It may be remains of recent fire brick wall) nT
50
45

Negative anomaly 40

10 35

(It may be limestone 30

25

background)
20
15
10

5 5
0
-5
-10
-15

0
-20
-25
-30
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -35
-40
Positive magnetic anomalies -45
-50

Negative anomalies
(It may be part of limestone block or underground passageway) Shallow linear positive
anomaly (It may be remains
of recent fire brick wall)
Fig. 13: The magnetic result, it shows limestone and fired bricks objects.

_______________________________________________________________________
NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006) BKC
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________

GPR data
a ground penetrating radar survey was conducted after the magnetic
survey. A measuring net (40m x 60m) was planned N-S and W-E (Fig.
14). In each direction, the distance between the measuring lines was 2m
and along the line 20 traces were scanned at 512 samples per trace over
100ns. A SIR2000 GPR system from GSSI was used with a 200 MHz
antenna and the distance was controlled with a survey wheel. The Zigzag
layout was used for the acquision.

Processing of the GPR data was passed through a series of steps

started with line direction inversion for the reverse line to have the same
like the others, and then the profiles format was converted to be read in
the Reflex 2.1 processing program. The undesired background noise was
removed and data were filtered and migrated. The ground surface had
some sand piles; therefore time slices were not logic to be constructed.
The GPR records were read individually and the objects along each
direction were compared. The results from both directions were plotted
manually on one sheet (Fig. 15) and integritly interpreted.

Sound and Light theater

40

30

20

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
reference point
The valley temple
Fig. 14: The GPR survey layout.

_______________________________________________________________________
126 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)
 Atya, M. A. et al.
_____________________________________________________________________

40

B1

30

C2
B2 2nd Subway area
20
C1

C3 area of platform remains

A2

10
Subway area

C4
A1

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Fig. 15: Interpretation map based on GPR results.

The items A1 and A2 (Fig. 15) are interpreted from the GPR
signature as shown in the GPR record (F`ig. 16). The object in A1 could
be a typical signature for a subway with two sides and ceiling. A
schematic block diagram could be shown on figure 20. B1 and B2 may be
related to the remains of the harbor buildings. C1 and C2 could be the
platform remains, C3 and C4 may be some other terraces. Defining the
GPR signature into archaeological artifact was based on the geometry of
the object and the discussion with the archaeologist on the site. Also the
location of the objects is at the eastward extension of the ramps leading to
the valley temple (Fig. 17). On the interpretation map, some limestone
blocks, they match to some of the blocks found by the magnetic survey.

_______________________________________________________________________
NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006) BKF
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________

Foundation remains

Subway

Fig. 16: GPR record for some of the artifacts.

subway

terrace

Fig. 17: A generalized diagram for the subway and a

possible terrace based on GPR data.

_______________________________________________________________________
128 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)
 Atya, M. A. et al.
_____________________________________________________________________
The comparative analysis of the GPR records showed another
important observation on the area; it is contributed to the cultural layer’s
surface. As shown in figure 18, the surface of the cultural layer is dipping
in the center of the area at the WE direction and towards the south. The
upper part of figure 18 is composed of comparative segments of the
parallel GPR records (the segment from 40m to 50m). They are set
together on one sheet to show the surface distribution under the surface
debris cover.

Line number (meter reference)

W 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 36 40 E

Cultural layer

N S

Fig. 18: The upper part shows a generated visualization to the cultural layer
surface, it shows a dipping at the center of the area in the WE direction.
The lower part shows the GPR record at 24th meter at the NS direction, it
shows dipping of the cultural layer’s surface towards the south.

_______________________________________________________________________
NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006) BKJ
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________

CONCLUSION

The idea of the present work has been initiated after the discussion
with the archaeologists at the pyramid inspectoration and the review of
Fakhry (1963). They reported an ancient channeling system and a harbor
that should exist in the past close to the main entrance of the valley
temple. They are essential portions of the Chephren pyramid complex but
have not been yet discovered. The field program was designed to cover
two points. The first is to detect the ancient channeling system through
relatively large scale geophysical survey at Nazlet Al Semman and Kafr
Al Gabal. The area is full of houses and occupied by tourist daily
activities, so that applying a geophysical survey at the area in the present
time was impossible. Therefore, a data set that had been previously
collected by Abbas (1998) at the site was used for this purpose. The
ancient channel could be outlined by means of resistivity, electromagnetic
and seismic refraction. The three tools defined flood plain deposits at the
eastern foot of the plateau and just facing the eastern entrance of the
valley temple. The heterogeneity map of the resistivity distribution draws
back an approximate delineation of the channel and it flood plain.

The second point in this work was to define the remains of the harbor
platform and the subway used for the public. To achieve this object, an
integrated magnetic and GPR survey have been carried out at the area
separating the valley temple and the theater of sound and light. The
subway could be detected and its location is matching to the southern
ramp at the entrance of the temple. Limestone blocks are distributed and
could be contributed to the platform and the harbor foundations. A
proposal to excavate the site is under preparation.

The comparative study of the GPR records to show the cultural

layer’s distribution over the area of interest showed that, the layer is
sinking in the center of the area on the WE direction (parallel to Al-
Mansouriya canal) and sinking towards the south. This path corresponds
well to the channel layout postulated by Fakhry (1963) and to the layout
concluded by Abbas (1998) at the heterogeneity distribution map.

_______________________________________________________________________
130 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)
 Atya, M. A. et al.
_____________________________________________________________________
REFERENCES

Abbas, M. A. (1998) “Geophysical investigation into the ground water regime, and
development of a concept for underground thermal energy storage (UTES), and
for archaeological applications in the area of Giza, Egypt. Ph.D. Lenz-Verlag,
Giessen, Germany.

Aigner, T. (1982) “Zur Geologie und Geoarchaeologie des Pyramiden Plateaus von
Giza, Ägypten“. Natur und Museum; V. 112 (12), pp. 377-388.

Aigner, T. (1983) “Facies and origin of nummulitic buildup; an example from the Giza
Pyramids plateau (Middle Eocene, Egypt)”. Neues Jahrbuch Geologie,
Palaontologie Abhandlungen IGG; pp. 347-368.

Dobecki, T. L. and Schoch, (1992) “Seismic investigation; Sphinx of Giza“;

Geoarchaeology, An International Journal; V. 7 No. 6, pp. 527-544.

El-Aref, M. M. and Refai, E. (1986) “Paleokarst processes in the Eocene limestone

of the Pyramids Plateau, Giza, Egypt. ”. Journal of African Earth Sciences; V. 6
No. 3, pp. 367-377.
Fahkry, A. (1963) “Al- Ahramat Al- Misrya (The Egyptian pyramids)”. Arabic edition,
Anglo Lib., Cairo, 1994.

Gauri, K. L. and Holdern, G. C. (1981) “Determination of the stone of the Sphinx”.

American Research Center in Egypt: Newsletter V. 114, pp.35-47.

Gauri, K. L. (1983) “Removal of water soluble salts from the masonry and porosimetry
of a Pharonic venner stone from the Sphinx“. American Research Center in
Egypt: Newsletter; V. 124, pp. 19-27.

Gauri, K. L. (1984) “Geological study of the Sphinx“. American Research Center in

Egypt: Newsletter V127, pp. 24-43.

Hoelscher, U. (1912) “Das Grabdenkmal des Koenigs Chephren”. Leipzig.

Interpex, IPI (1995), Manual, Interpex Ltd., Golden CO, USA.

Knetsch, G. (1953) “Strukturelle Skizze von Ägypten“. Geol. Rundschau; V. 42, pp.
242-246.

Lehner, M. (1980) “The ARCE Sphinx project: a preliminary report“. American

Research Center in Egypt; Newsletter, V. 112, pp. 3-33.

Mooney, H. M. (1984) “Handbook of Engineering Geophysics, v.1, Seismic”.

Minneapolis, Bison Instruments, Inc., 220 p.

_______________________________________________________________________
NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006) BNB
 GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING OF THE REMAINS OF …..
_______________________________________________________________________
Omara, S. M. (1952) “The structural features of the Giza Pyramids area“. Ph. D. Thesis,
Cairo University, Faculty of Science.

Resist (1989), ITC Msc. Research Project, Van der Velpen, Netherlands.

Resixip (1995), Program manual, Interpex Company.

Reynolds, J. M. (1997) “An introduction to applied and environmental geophysics“.

Wiley & Sons: ISBN 0-471-96802-1; 796 p.

Salem, R. (1976) “Evolution of Eocene-Miocene sedimentation pattern in parts of

northern Egypt“. American Association of Petroleum Geologist; Bull. 60, pp.34-
64.

Strougo, A., Abul-Nasr, R. A. and Haggag, M. A. Y. (1982) “Middle Mokattam beds

of Egypt“. N. Jb. Geol. Palaont. Mh., V. 4, pp.240-243.

Strougo, A. (1985) “Eocene stratigraphy of the Giza Pyramids Plateau“. M.E.E.C. Ain
Shams University, Ser. 5, pp. 79-99.

VES4 (1995), WellSoft Co, A. Weller.

Yehia, M.A. (1985) “Geology of the Giza Pyramids Plateau”. Med. East, Res. Centre
Ain-Shams Univ. Sc. Ser.; pp. 100-120.

Yoshimura, S. and Tonauchi, S. (1987) “Non distructive Pyramids investigations”.

Part1 and 2; Studies in Egyptian Cultre No. 6, Waseda University.

Zohdy, A. (1989) “A new method for the automatic interpretation of Schlumberger and
Wenner sounding curves”. Geophysics; V. 54, No. 2, pp. 245-253.

_______________________________________________________________________
132 NRIAG Journal o f Geophysics, Special Issue, (2006)

View publication stats