ovr.news
About

Egyptian researchers discover 2,600-year-old structure under Nile Delta

Read on gulfnews.com · 8 November 2026
Egyptian researchers discover 2,600-year-old structure under Nile Delta
Photo: gulfnews.com
3 related sources

Headline and summary by local AI

Egyptian researchers identified a massive mudbrick structure dating to the 26th Dynasty buried beneath the Nile Delta.

The team used satellite imagery, remote sensing, and underground electrical surveys to locate the site at Tell El Fara'in, an archaeological mound in the northwestern Nile Delta. The researchers analyzed data from the European Sentinel-1 satellite, which uses radar to detect surface changes. This technology revealed an underground anomaly measuring approximately 128 metres long and 62 metres wide.

While the upper layers of the site contained remains from the Ptolemaic and Roman periods, the primary discovery sat between three and six metres deep. The structure likely served as a tomb, a residence for priests, or a religious facility. Excavations uncovered ushabti figurines, a limestone altar with animal blood residues, and a ceramic figurine of Thoth, the god of wisdom.

A key finding occurred at a depth of six to seven metres, where the team found a thick layer of clean sand beneath the building's foundations. The researchers believe ancient engineers placed this sand to distribute the weight of the building, drain groundwater, and prevent the mudbricks from softening in the clay-rich soil. The discovery provides evidence that ancient builders understood soil behavior and environmental conditions long before modern geotechnical engineering.

The site is located near Buto, a major religious center that saw a revival during the Saite Period when Egyptian rulers regained power. This find demonstrates how modern satellite technology can locate hidden structures without extensive digging.

Selected and summarized by local AI How we work

More in Discovery

Browse all Discovery articles

Anything you want to add?

What made you doubt it?

What's wrong with this article?