close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

?

Biological differentiation at predynastic Naqada Egypt An analysis of dental morphological traits.

код для вставкиСкачать
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 93:427433 (1994)
Biological Differentiation at Predynastic Naqada, Egypt: An
Analysis of Dental Morphological Traits
ANDREW L. JOHNSON AND NANCY C. LOWLL
Department of Anthropology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta
T6G 2H4 Canada
KEY WORDS
inequality
Biological distance, Dental anthropology, Social
ABSTRACT
Cemetery T a t Naqada has been postulated as being the
interment site of a predynastic royal or ruling elite due to its small, localized
area and the richness of its burial goods. In order to examine possible biological differentiation between the individuals buried in Cemetery T and those
buried in other, possibly lower Istatus cemeteries a t Naqada, nonmetric dental
morphological data were analyzed using the Mean Measure of Divergence
statistic. Results indicate that Cemetery T shows some biological distinction
from both Cemetery B and the Great Cemetery. The size of the difference
supports the archaeological interpretation that Cemetery T represents a ruling or elite segment (or lineage) of the local population at Naqada, rather than
a ruling or elite immigrant population. Given the problem of small samples,
however, this interpretation is tentative. o 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
The ancient Egyptian civilization is well
known for its striking remains, such as the
pyramids, the burial riches of King Tutankhamun, and the form of writing ltnown
as hieroglyphics. Some of the fundamental
questions in the study of this civilization,
however, concern aspects of its formation,
such as its environmental, politicail and
ideological associations and antecedents
(Bard, 1992; Hassan, 1988; Wenke, 1989,
1991), and the timing and nature of social
inequality (Anderson, 1992; Bard, 1988,
1989; Griswold, 1992). Social inequality is
clearly evident in the pyramids of Giza, near
Cairo, which are monumental tombs for
pharaohs of the Old Kingdom (a name attributed to the period of rule by the royal
Dynasties 111-VI, c. 2686-2181 B.C.), and in
the ornate grave goods found with the
mummy of King Tutankhamun, who was
buried in a rock cut tomb in the ‘Valley of
the Kings” in southern Egypt, the traditional burial place for royalty of the New
Kingdom (Dynasties XVIII-XX, c. 15701070 B.C). The origins of the inequalit,y that
manifested itself in monumental architecture and opulence in life and death for those
0 1994 WILEY-LISS. INC.
of high status are not well established, however.
Several investigations into the origins of
social inequality in ancient Egypt have focussed on the Upper (southern) Egyptian
predynastic site of Naqada or Nagada (Fig.
11, excavated by Petrie in 1894-95. The predynastic era falls before the period characterized by the royal dynasties and is generally agreed to cover the time frame from
about 5500 B.C. to 3050 B.C. Petrie mistakenly identified the site as belonging to the
Egyptian dynastic period, and, observing
the lack of any material goods typical of that
period, interpreted the site as representing
the immigration of a “New Race” into Upper
Egypt (Petrie and Quibell, 1896). This was
quickly discounted when the predynastic
nature of Naqada was demonstrated (De
Morgan, 1896-97). The site has remained
ReceivedJanuary 26,1993; accepted November 5,1993.
Address reprint requests to Nancy C. Lovell, Department of
Anthropology, 13-15 Tory Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H4 Canada.
A.L. JOHNSON AND N.C. LOVELL
428
LIBYA
Fig. 1. Map of Egypt and Nubia showing the location of the predynastic site of Naqada.
significant, however, because, along with
nearby Ballas, it served as the basis for Petrie’s pottery Sequence Dating system (Petrie, 1901), becoming the standard typological reference for the Egyptian predynastic
era. The site includes three main cemeteries, which are commonly designated “Cemetery B” (after a nearby mound called Kom
Belal), “Cemetery T (located near two tumuli), and the “Great New Race” or “Great
Cemetery” (the largest). Cemetery T often
has been considered an elite cemetery because it was small in size and produced the
largest and richest graves. Petrie (Petrie
and Quibell, 1896) attributed the burials to
the wealthy citizens of Naqada, while other
scholars have interpreted the burials as representing a special status group (Davis,
1983), or as royal in nature, perhaps foreshadowing the royal tombs of the early dynastic period (Arkell and Ucko, 1965; Bard,
1992; Case and Payne, 1962; Hoffman,
1979; Kemp, 1973,1991).
That Cemetery T may be an elite cemetery
raises the possibility that the individuals
buried there may be biologically distinct
from the general population, since a ruling
elite may consist of a family lineage or may
have come from outside the local population.
Naqada’s contribution to studies of population affinity has been restricted so far to
data obtained from bones. The Naqada skeletal material originally was sent by Petrie to
Karl Pearson at University College, London,
for use by Pearson’s biometric school, which
quickly produced a correlation of skull
length and breadth (Pearson, 1895), followed by measurements of the chief bones of
the skeleton (Warren, 1897). One of the research objectives of the biometric school was
the metric definition of different human
races, and the Naqada crania were examined in order to determine whether the ancient Egyptians resembled the Negro in cranial characteristics (Fawcett and Lee, 1902;
Morant, 1925). Early in its development,
BIOLOGICAL DIFFERENTIATION AT NAQADA
429
cranial nonmetric traits analysis al,;G O was years, the sex of each specimen was conapplied to the Naqada series and to the firmed at the time of this study, following
question of racial admixture in Egyptian contemporary osteological procedures (Bass,
history (Berry and Berry, 1972; Berry et al., 1987; Ubelaker, 1989; White, 1991). Fifty
1967).Now part of the Duckworth Collection females, 72 males, and 9 individuals of unat Cambridge University, the materi.‘11 con- known sex comprise the total sample; the
tinues to be the subject of craniometric in- sex distribution is the same in all three cemvestigation into the biological affinities of etery subsamples.
the ancient Egyptians (Crichton, 1966;
Forty-three morphological traits of the
Keita, 1990,1992).
permanent dentition were scored by Love11
Biological affinity studies also can be in accordance with the criteria and scoring
based profitably on dental morphological plaques established by Turner et al. (1991).
traits, which are well suited to biological dis- The data collection took place over a period
tance analyses because: (1)many traits are of one month. Intraobserver variation was
independent of each other as well as inde- assessed by repeated scoring of 25 toothpendent of age and sex; (2) there is a high trait combinations in a randomly selected
genetic component in occurrence and ex- subsample of 20 individuals and was found
pression; and ( 3 ) the amount of intergroup to be well within the limits recommended by
variation in trait frequencies is high (Irish Nichol and Turner (1986). All available
and Turner, 1990). Teeth also are often bet- teeth were scored individually, but only the
ter preserved than are bones and are rarely antimere showing the highest degree of trait
altered significantly by postmortem diagen- expression was used in the analysis, accordesis, so data can be obtained from fragmen- ing to the individual count method (Turner
tary remains that are unsuitable for cranial and Scott, 1977). Unfortunately, the scores
metric and nonmetric study. Nonnnetric for many of the 43 morphological traits could
traits of the dentition in skeletal samples not be included in subsequent statistical
from ancient Nubia, to the south of Egypt, analysis due to small samples of observable
have been examined in several studies of teeth within the cranial samples for each
population affinity (Greene, 1967, 1972, cemetery; premortem tooth loss due to peri1982; Irish and Turner, 1990; Turner and odontal disease or infectious abscessing, seMarkowitz, 1990). The purpose of this study vere tooth wear, and postmortem tooth loss
was to examine nonmetrical morphological and breakage are the causes of the small
traits of the teeth t o address the question of samples of teeth. Although some workers inwhether any degree of biological differentia- clude a trait in an intersample comparison if
tion can be detected among the skeletal Sam- it is observed in only one of the samples beples obtained from Cemeteries B, T, and the ing considered (i.e., it is absent in the other
Great Cemetery at Naqada.
samples), this procedure can magnify the influence of chance occurrences of rare traits
MATERIALS AND METHODS
in small samples, such as those available in
Skeletal samples were examined at the this study. Therefore, only traits that were
Department of Biological Anthropology a t observed in at least two of the three samples
Cambridge University: 38 skulls from Cem- were included in the analysis. Any toothetery B, 26 skulls from Cemetery T, and 67 trait combination that was wholly unobservskulls from the Great Cemetery. Sex alf the able in any of the cemetery samples was necindividuals was determined at the tirne of essarily ignored. Accordingly, the final data
excavation by Warren (18971, who assisted set was reduced to 11 morphological traits,
Petrie in the field. Later, sex was reassessed scored as 24 tooth-trait combinations (see
when the specimens were accessioned by the Table 1). Since anterior teeth, i.e., the inciDuckworth Laboratory at Cambridge Uni- sors and canines, are most easily lost or broversity. Since postcrania are available for ken in the burial environment, it is not surmany of the Naqada specimens, these deter- prising that these 11traits all are found on
minations of sex were largely accurate, but the posterior molar and premolar teeth. To
because methods have improved over the avoid eliminating traits which have con-
A.L. JOHNSON AND N.C. LOVELL
430
TABLE 1 . Frequencies' of nonmetric dental traits for the Naaada cemeteries
Traits
~.
Protostylid LM3
Protostylid LM2
Protostylid LM1
c u s p 5 UM3
cusp 5 uM2
cusp 5 u M 1
Carabelli UM3
Carabelli UM2
Carabelli UM1
Absence UM3
Absence LM3
Root no. UPMl
Cusp no. LM3
Cusp no. LM2
Cusp no. LM1
Root no. UM3
Accessory Cusp UPM2
Accessory Cusp UPMl
Hypocone UM3
Hypocone UM2
Hypocone UM1
YGroove LM2
Metacone UM1
Metacone uM2
.-
Cemetery B
_
_
217
6/16
3/12
319
4/18
1/13
1/10
3116
2111
0122
2/20
9114
116
0115
619
8/10
118
117
516
15/15
3/14
6114
7/16
16/19
Great
Cemetery
~
-
Cemetery T~
10128
17/32
11/24
21/35
6/38
8/33
7/31
10136
6/29
2/49
4/46
24/29
14/26
4131
17/25
6/18
6/16
2/13
23/32
32/37
4137
9/26
25/37
33/44
Total
-~
013
417
114
117
5/14
119
115
1111
3/10
3/17
2/13
8115
213
217
45
12/38
27/55
15/40
25/51
15/70
10155
9/46
14/63
11/50
5/88
8/89
41/58
17/35
6/53
27/39
16/36
7/29
3/23
32/42
57/66
7/62
15/47
35/64
60177
218
015
013
414
10114
0111
017
3111
11/14
'Frequencies are given as the number ofexpressions of the trait over the number of observable teeth
stant frequencies (i.e., are expressed to some
degree) in all groups being compared, those
traits were dichotomized by scoring only full
expressions of the trait as present. Thus,
any expression of a trait was scored as presence of the trait except for the following
(scores refer to the definitions and descriptions of Turner et al., 1991): Cusp no. (all)
presence = a score of 5 or greater; Root no.
(UPM1) presence = a score of 2 or greater;
Root no. (UM3) presence = a score of 3 or
greater; Hypocone (UM3 and UM2)
presence = a score of 3 or greater; Hypocone
(UMl) presence = a score of 3 or greater;
Hypocone (UMl) presence = a score of 5;
Metacone (all) presence = a score of 5. Table
1 lists the traits analyzed, sample frequencies for each cemetery and total sample frequencies.
Chi-squared statistics were calculated to
evaluate sex differences in trait frequencies,
and since none of the traits were found to
have any significant degree of heterogeneity, the sexes were pooled for further analysis. Since the expressions of traits are believed to be correlated among teeth in a
given tooth class, we have chosen to perform
distance calculations on a subset of nine
traits which are considered to be genetically
independent of each other: Protostylid LM2,
Cusp 5 UM2, Carabelli UM2, Absence UM3,
Root no. UPM1, Cusp no. LM1, Hypocone
UM2, and YGroove LM2. For traits whose
presence is thought to be correlated across
the three molars, the second molar was chosen as the defining tooth since this resulted
in the largest sample sizes.
Traits were arscine transformed using the
Freeman and Tukey transformation recommended by Green and Suchey (1976) for
small sample sizes:
+ -21 sin-'
(1
-
2
[-I)
k + l
n + l
where k = the observed frequency of the
trait, and n = the number of individuals observable for the trait. Comparisons were
made among the three samples using the
multivariate Mean Measure of Divergence
(MMD) statistic (Berry and Berry, 1972;
Green and Suchey, 1976; Sjsvold, 1973),and
the variance and standard deviations were
calculated according to the mathematical
method of Sjsvold (1973):
BIOLOGICAL DIFFERENTIATION AT NAQADA
TABLE 2. Between cemetery distances using nine
independent traits
MMD'
SD
Standardized MMD
Approx. p-values
'MMO
=
B-Great
Cemeteries
B-T
T-Great
0.0101
0.0464
0.2186
0.335
0.2415
0.0836
2.8890
0.0206
0.1065
0.0665
1.6006
0.068
mean measure of divergence;SD
=
standard deviation.
431
TABLE 3. Cemetery to pooled cemetery distances using
nine independent traits
Cemetery
BiGreat and T) TiGreat and B)
MMD'
SD
Standardized MMD
Approx. p-values
'MMD
=
0.0370
0.0431
0.8584
0.178
0.1388
0.0621
2.2350
0.0375
mean measure of divergence;SD = standard deviation.
that each cemetery represents a random
sample from a single parent population, best
estimated from the pooled trait frequencies.
In addition, comparisons between each of
the two smaller cemeteries and a pooled
sample of the remaining cemeteries have
1
1
been calculated and are shown in Table 3.
The results presented in Table 2 indicate
n,, + -nli + that the Great Cemetery and Cemetery B
2
are not statistically distinguishable from
each other. The two isolated cemeteries, B
SDmD = dVarMMD
and T, are quite distinct ( p = 0.026) and
where 8,= the angular transformation of Cemetery T and the Great Cemetery are
the sample for the ith trait; nl,, nZ1= the very nearly significant in their differentianumber of individuals observed for the ith tion ( p = 0.068). The comparisons of each of
trait for sample 1 and 2, respectively; and the isolated cemeteries to a pooled sample of
the other two (Table 3) are very much in line
r = the number of traits.
Standardized distances were calciulated with the pairwise comparisons and suggest
by dividing the raw MMD score by it6 stan- that Cemetery T represents a significant dedard deviation, as those are most appropri- parture from the other two cemeteries.
ate for evaluating and comparing relative These results favor rejecting the null hydistances among samples of different, sizes pothesis that all three cemeteries represent
(Sofaer et al., 1986). Sjevold (1973) sug- random samples from a single parent popugested that a standardized MMD greater lation, and further, indicate that the rejecthan 2.0 denotes a significant differeince at tion of the null hypothesis is largely due to
the differentiation of Cemetery T from the
the alpha = .05 level.
other two cemeteries.
RESULTS
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Table 2 gives the raw distances, their
This analysis indicates that the sample of
standard deviations, and the corresponding
standardized distances for each pairwise individuals interred in Cemetery T can be
comparison of cemeteries using the subset of differentiated from those interred in Cemenine traits. Simulation experiments by one tery B and the Great Cemetery on the basis
of the authors (Johnson, in prep.) have of dental morphology. Therefore, the suggesshown that the standardized MMD can be- tion that Cemetery T represented an elite or
come quite conservative under small sample even royal burial ground is supported over
sizes. Therefore, approximate p-values (pre- the argument that it merely represents a
sented also in Table 2) have been obtained special status group of some kind. Cemetery
by simulation for the distances calculated B, on the other hand, is much closer to
here. These comparisons were simulated the Great Cemetery in affinity than it is to
under the sampling conditions reflected in Cemetery T. Thus, Cemetery B may still
this study and under the null hypothesis represent, as Davis (1983) suggested, a sta-
432
A.L. JOHNSON AND N.C. LOVELL
tus-differentiated group which is not biologically distinct from the population using the
Great Cemetery.
One possible explanation of the biological
distinction among the cemeteries is that it
represents temporal variation. Hoffman
(1979) suggested that Cemetery T was constructed and used in the Late Gerzean
(Naqada 111) period (c. 3200-3050 B.C.),
while Davis (1983)concluded that Cemetery
T was used contemporaneously with the
Great Cemetery throughout the entire
Gerzean period (c. 4000-3050 B.C.) rather
than just the late Gerzean period. The possibility exists, therefore, that the distinctions
found among Cemetery T, Cemetery B and
the Great Cemetery are the result of microevolutionary changes over time, rather than
a contemporaneous distinction of an elite
group from the general population. The
magnitudes of the raw MMD distances, however, are incompatible with this interpretation given the time period in question. According to Turner’s (1986) proposed rate of
dental microevolution, these distances
would represent up to 13,000years of microevolution if indeed the occupants of Cemetery T were temporally distinct from the
population that is now represented in the
other two cemeteries.
Alternatively, Cemetery T may represent
a different, i.e., immigrant population, although this would have taken place several
generations earlier in order for cultural assimilation to be complete, i.e., for the grave
goods to be so unquestionably similar in
style, if not richness, among the cemeteries.
Although population movements along the
Nile undoubtedly occurred, we suspect that
in the predynastic period these were more
individual, family, or other small unit phenomena, rather than the transplantation of
large groups. Given the archaeological and
biological evidence, we believe that the most
likely and most parsimonious explanation
for the magnitude of the distances between
Cemetery T and the other cemeteries is that
of inbreeding within a segment of a population. Ruling or elite classes or lineages often
have preferential, within group, marriage
rules. Thus, genetic drift could account for
the greater than expected distance between
this group and the general population. Al-
though the data lead us to conclude that
Cemetery T represents a ruling or elite segment or lineage of the local population at
Naqada, rather than an elite immigrant
population, the problem of small samples
tempers the reliability of this interpretation
and necessitates caution until further evidence is forthcoming.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The data upon which this article is based
were collected at the Department of Biological Anthropology, Cambridge University.
We thank Dr. Robert Foley and staff of the
department for their kindness and cooperation, and Dr. George Mann for his improvements to our working conditions. We thank
Marnie Bartell for assisting with the data
collection and entry, and Robert Wenke for
commenting on an earlier draft of this paper. Two anonymous reviewers provided
very helpful suggestions for the improvement of the paper. This research was supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council of Canada research grant
to Nancy Lovell.
LITERATURE CITED
Anderson W (1992) Badarian burials: Evidence of social
inequality in Middle Egypt during the early predynastic era. J. Amer. Res. Cent. Egypt 29:5146.
Arkell AJ, and Ucko PJ (1965) Review of predynastic
development in the Nile Valley. Curr. Anthropol.
6:145-166.
Bard K (1988)A quantitative analysis of the predynastic
burials in Armant cemetery 1400-1500. J. Egyptian
Archaeol. 74:39-55.
Bard K (1989)The evolution of social complexity in predynastic Egypt: An analysis of the Naqada cemeteries. J. Med. Archaeol. 2t223-248.
Bard K (1992) Toward a n interpretation of the role of
ideology in the evolution of complex society in Egypt.
J . Anthropol. Archaeol. 11:l-24.
Bass WM (1987) Human Osteology: A Laboratory and
Field Manual. Third edition. Columbia: Missouri Archaeological Society.
Berry AC, and Berry RJ (1972) Origins and relationships of the ancient Egyptians. Based on a study of
non-metric variations in the skull. J . Human Evol.
1 :199-208.
Berry AC, Berry FLJ, and Ucko PJ (1967) Genetical
change in ancient Egypt. Man2:551-557.
Case H, and Payne J C (1962) Tomb 100: The decorated
tomb at Hierakonpolis. J. Egyptian Archaeol. 48:518.
Crichton JM (1966) A multiple discriminant analysis of
Egyptian and African Negro crania. Papers of the Pea-
BIOLOGICAL DIFFEREbTTIATION AT NAQADA
body Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard
University 57r47-67.
Davis W (1983) Cemetery T at Naqada. Mitteilungen
Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo
39t17-28.
De Morgan J (1896-97) Recherches sur les Origines de
L'Egypte. 2 VOIS.Paris: Leroux.
Fawcett CD, and Lee A (1902) A second study of the
variation and correlation of the human skull, with
special reference to the Naqada crania. Biometrika
1:40%467.
Green RF, and Suchey J M (1976)The use of inverse sine
transformations in the analysis of non-metric data.
Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 45331-68.
Greene DL (1967) Dentition of Meroitic, X-Group and
Christian Populations from Wadi Halfa, Sudan. University of Utah Anthropology Papers (Nubian Series
No. 1). Salt Lake City: University of Utah.
Greene DL (1972) Dental anthropology of early Egypt
and Nubia. J . Human Evol. 1:315-324.
Greene DL (1982)Discrete dental variations and biological distances of Nubian populations. Am. J . Phys.
Anthropol. 58t75-79.
Griswold WA (1992) Measuring social inequality at Armant. In R Friedman and B Adams (eds.):The Followers of Horus. Egyptian Studies Association Publication No. 2, Oxbow Monographs 20. Oxford: Oxbow
Books, pp. 193-198.
Hassan FA (1988) The Predynastic of Egypt. J. World
Prehistory 2:135-185.
Hoffman MA (1979) Egypt Before the Pharaohs. New
York: Dorset Press.
Irish JD, and Turner CG I1 (1990) West African dental
affinity of late Pleistocene Nubians: Peopling of the
Eurafrican-South Asian triangle 11. Homo 41:42-53.
Johnson AL (In prep) Small sample sizes and the MMD
statistic: A Monte Carlo simulation.
Keita SOY (1990) Studies of ancient crania from northern Africa. Am. J . Phys. Anthropol. 83:3548.
Keita SOY (1992) Further studies of crania from ancient
northern Africa: An analysis of crania from First Dynasty Egyptian tombs, using multiple discriminant
functions. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 87:245-254.
Kemp BJ (1973) Photographs of the decorated tomb at
Hierakonpolis. J . Egypt. Archaeol. 59t36-43.
Kemp B J (1991) Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization. London: Routledge.
Morant GM (1925) A study of Egyptian craniology from
prehistoric to Roman times. Biometrika 17:l-53.
433
Nichol CR, and Turner CG I1 (1986) Intra- and interobserver concordance in classifying dental morphology.
Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 69.299315.
Pearson K (1985) Regression, heredity, and panmixia.
Phil. Trans. 187(A):279-281.
Petrie WMF (1901) Diospolis Parva: The Cemeteries of
Abadiyeh and Hu. London: Egypt Exploration Fund
Publication No. 20.
Petrie WMF, and Quibell J E (1896) Naqada and Ballas
1895. London: Bernard Quaritch.
Sjevold T (1973) The occurrence of minor non-metrical
variants in the skeleton and their quantitative treatment for population comparison. Homo 24~204-233.
Sofaer JA, Smith P, and Kaye E (1986) Affinities between contemporary and skeletal Jewish and nonJewish groups based on tooth morphology. Am. J .
Phys. Anthropol. 7Ot265-275.
Turner CG I1 (1986) Dentochronological separation estimates for Pacific Rim populations. Science 232:11401142.
Turner CG 11, and Markowitz MA (1990)Dental discontinuity between Late Pleistocene and recent Nubians:
Peopling of the Eurafrican-Asian triangle I. Homo 41:
32-41.
Turner CG 11, and Scott RG (1977) Dentition of Easter
Islanders. In AA Dahlberg and TA Graber (eds.): Orofacial Growth and Development. The Hague: Mouton,
pp. 229-249.
Turner CG 11, Nichol CR, and Scott RG (1991) Scoring
procedures for key morphological traits of the permanent dentition: The Arizona State University dental
anthropology system. In MA Kelley and CS Larson
(eds.): Advances in Dental Anthropology. New York:
Wiley-Liss, pp. 13-31.
Ubelaker DH (1989) Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, analysis, interpretation. Second Edition. Washington: Taraxacum.
Warren E (1897) An investigation on the variability of
the human skeleton with special reference to the
Naqada race. Phil. Trans. Royal SOC.189:135-227.
Wenke R J (1989) Egypt: Origins of complex society.
Ann. Rev. Anthropol. IBr129-155.
Wenke RJ (1991) The evolution of early Egyptian civilization: Issues and evidence. J. World Prehistory
5t279-329.
White TD (1991) Human Osteology. San Diego: Academic Press.
Документ
Категория
Без категории
Просмотров
2
Размер файла
567 Кб
Теги
egypt, differentiation, dental, biological, predynastic, analysis, naqada, morphological, traits
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа