History Podcasts

Stela of Ptahmay

Stela of Ptahmay

Stela of Nit-Ptah

The stela depicts four members of the same family: two males alternating with two females to create a pleasing chromatic contrast as a result of the different colors of their skins. Men were painted in ochre and women in light cream wash.

The head of the family, Nit-Ptah, is shown on the right, wearing a wide necklace, and a white kilt and holding a cane and a staff in his hands. The woman next to him is probably his wife Seni, who wears a patterned dress with colored beads that leaves one breast uncovered. She is adorned with a narrow necklace, bracelets and anklets. She sniffs at on open lotus flower and is holding a bud in her right hand.

The two figures at the end are identified in the inscriptions as Seni's children. The son is in the same attitude as his father and the daughter is wearing a green dress.

The inscriptions over the figures are decorated in black and invoke the god Ptah-Sokaris to provide offerings for the Ka of each member of the family.

Ancient Egyptian Law: Seeking Peace with Oneself, One’s Community, and the Gods

Polychrome relief of Kagemni in his own mastaba, Saqqara, Egypt. Kagemni was a vizier of pharaohs Djedkare Isesi and Unas (5th dynasty), and Teti (6th dynasty), 24th century BCE. / Photo by Sémhur, Wikimedia Commons

Ancient Egyptian culture flourished through adherence to tradition and their legal system

By Dr. Joshua J. Mark / 10.02.2017
Professor of Philosophy
Marist College

Ancient Egyptian culture flourished through adherence to tradition and their legal system followed this same paradigm. Basic laws and legal proscriptions were in place in Egypt as early as the Predynastic Period (c. 6000- c. 3150 BCE) and would continue, and develop, until Egypt was annexed by Rome in 30 BCE. Egyptian law was based on the central cultural value of ma’at (harmony) which had been instituted at the beginning of time by the gods. In order to be at peace with oneself, one’s community, and the gods, all one had to do was live a life of consideration, mindfulness, and balance in accordance with ma’at.

Humans are not always considerate or mindful, however, and history illustrates well how poorly they maintain balance and so laws were created to encourage people on the desired path. Since the law was founded on so simple a divine principle, and since it seemed clear that adhering to that principle was beneficial to all, transgressors were often punished severely. Although there are certainly cases of leniency shown to criminal suspects, the operative legal opinion was that one was guilty until proven innocent since, otherwise, one would not have been accused in the first place.

The law in ancient Egypt functioned just as it does in any country today: there was a set of agreed-upon rules which had been formulated by men who were considered experts in the field, a judicial system which weighed evidence of infractions of those rules, and police officers who enforced those rules and brought transgressors to justice.

No Egyptian law code has as of yet been found which corresponds to Mesopotamian documents like the Code of Ur-Nammu or Hammurabi’s Code but it is clear that one must have existed because precedent in deciding legal cases was set by the time of the Early Dynastic Period (c. 3150- c. 2613 BCE) as evidenced by their established use in the early years of the Old Kingdom (c. 2613-2181 BCE). These precedents were then used in judging cases during the Middle Kingdom (2040-1782 BCE) and onward through the rest of the country’s history.


Even if the specifics of their law code are unknown, the principles it derived from are clear. Egyptologist Rosalie David comments on this:

Compared with other ancient civilizations, Egyptian law has yielded little evidence for its institutions. It was, however, clearly governed by religious principles: Law was believed to have been handed down to mankind by the gods on the First Occasion (the moment of creation), and the gods were held responsible for establishing and perpetuating the law. (93).

At the top of the judicial hierarchy was the king, the representative of the gods and their divine justice, and just beneath him was his vizier. The Egyptian vizier had many responsibilities and one of them was the practical administration of justice. The vizier heard court cases himself but also appointed lower magistrates and, sometimes, involved himself with local courts if circumstances required it.

The legal system formed regionally at first, in the individual districts (called nomes) and was presided over by the governor (nomarch) and his steward. During the Old Kingdom, these regional courts were firmly consolidated under the king’s vizier but, as David notes, the judicial system in some form had existed previously:

Inscriptions in tombs and on stelae and papyri, which provide the earliest extant legal transactions, can be dated to the Old Kingdom. They indicate that the legal system was well developed by this date and suggest that there must have been a long period of experimentation beforehand. Egyptian law ranks with Sumerian as the world’s oldest surviving legal system and its complexity and state of development are on a level with ancient Greek and medieval law. (93).

The earliest form of the law at the regional level was probably quite simple but became more bureaucratic during the Old Kingdom. Even so, at this time, judges were often priests who conferred with their god to reach a verdict rather than weighing the evidence and listening to testimonies.

Sarcophagus with Ma’at, the personification of truth, balance, and order. / Photo by genibee, Flickr, Creative Commons

It was only during the Middle Kingdom that professional judges were installed to preside over courts and the judicial system operated on a more rational, recognizable paradigm. This period also saw the creation of the first professional police force which enforced the law, took suspects into custody, and testified in court.


The courts which administered the law were the seru (a group of elders in a rural community), the kenbet (a court on the regional and national level) and the djadjat (the imperial court). If a crime were committed in a village and the seru could not reach a verdict the case would go up to the kenbet and then possibly the djadjat but this seems a rare occurrence. Usually, whatever happened in a village was handled by the seru of that town. The kenbet is thought to have been the body which made the laws and meted out punishments on a regional (district) level as well as a national level and the djadjat made the final ruling on whether a law was legal and binding in accordance with ma’at.

In general, ancient Egyptians seem to have been law-abiding citizens throughout most of the culture’s history but, still, there were arguments concerning land and water rights and disputes over ownership of livestock or the rights to a certain hereditary job or title. Bunson notes how:

Egyptians waited in line each day to give the judges their testimony or their petitions. The decisions concerning such matters were based on traditional legal practices, although there must have been written codes available for study. (145).

The judges Bunson references were the members of the kenbet and every capital of each district had one in session daily.

Limestone stela of the chief of police, Ptahmay. From modern-day Egypt. New Kingdom, 18th Dynasty, circa 1300 BCE. (State Museum of Egyptian Art, Munich, Germany). / Photo by Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin, Creative Commons

The vizier was ultimately the supreme judge but most court cases were handled by lower magistrates. Many of the cases heard involved disputes over property following the death of the patriarch or matriarch of a family. There were no wills in ancient Egypt but a person could write out a transfer document making clear who should receive which portions of property or valuables. Then as now, however, these documents were often disputed by family members who took each other to court.

There were also instances of domestic abuse, divorce, and infidelity. Women could sue for divorce as easily as men and could also bring suits regarding land sales and business arrangements. Cases involving infidelity were filed by both sexes and the punishment for the guilty was severe.


Infidelity was considered a serious offense only if the individuals involved made it one. A husband whose wife had an affair could forgive her and let the matter go or he could prosecute. If he chose to take his wife to court, and she were found guilty, the punishment could be divorce and amputation of her nose or death by burning. An unfaithful husband who was prosecuted by his wife could receive up to 1,000 blows but did not face the death penalty. As the nuclear family was considered the basis for a stable community, adultery was a serious offense but, again, only if those involved brought it to the attention of the authorities or, in some cases, if a neighbor informed against them.

This same model seems to have been followed in other areas as well. It was the duty of the family to provide tomb offerings for their deceased loved ones and, if they did not have the time, they could hire someone else to do it. These replacements were known as ka-priestswho, for a price, would provide daily food and drink offerings at a tomb. As long as the family kept paying, a ka-priest was supposed to keep his position and even hand it down to his son. If a family stopped paying, the priest could simply move on or could sue the family for the continuance of the position and back pay. A family might also take a ka-priest to court for not fulfilling his sworn duties.

There were no lawyers in ancient Egypt. A suspect was interrogated by the police and the judge in court and witnesses were brought in to testify for or against the accused. Since the prevailing belief was that a person who had been charged was guilty until proven innocent, witnesses were often beaten to make sure they were telling the truth. Once one had been charged with a crime, even if one were finally found innocent, one’s name was kept on record as having been a suspect. As such, public disgrace seems to have been as great a deterrent as any other punishment. Even if one were completely exonerated of all wrong-doing, one would still be known in one’s community as a former suspect.

It was because of this that people’s testimony regarding one’s character – as well as one’s alibi – was so important and why false witnesses were treated so harshly. One might falsely accuse a neighbor of infidelity for any number of personal reasons and, even if the accused were found innocent, they would still be disgraced.

A false charge, therefore, was considered a grave offense and not only because it disgraced an innocent citizen but because it called into question the efficacy of the law. If an innocent person could be punished by a system which claimed divine origin then either the system was wrong or the gods were, and the authorities were not interested in having people debate those points. A false witness, therefore, was dealt with harshly: anyone who purposefully and knowingly lied to the court about a crime could expect any kind of punishment from amputation to death by drowning. Because of this situation, on the whole it seems every attempt was made to determine the guilt of a suspect and mete out the proper punishment.

Ram-headed Amun-Ra, Ashmolean, Oxford / Photo by Joanna Penn, Flickr, Creative Commons

In general, if the crime was serious – such as rape, murder, theft on a large scale, or tomb robbing – the penalty was death or disfigurement. Men found guilty of rape were castrated or had their penis amputated. Murderers were beaten and then fed to crocodiles, burned to death, or executed in other unpleasant ways. Thieves usually suffered amputation of the nose, hands, or feet. David notes the punishment for those who killed members of their own family:

Children who killed their parents underwent an ordeal in which pieces of their flesh were cut out with reeds before they were placed on a bed of thorns and burnt alive. However, parents who killed their children were not put to death but were instead forced to hold the dead child’s body for three days and nights. (94).


The problem of false witnesses was not so prevalent in the early centuries of the civilization but became more frequent with the decline of the Egyptian Empire and a loss of faith in the concepts which had regulated Egyptian society and culture for thousands of years. During the latter part of the reign of Ramesses III (1186-1155 BCE), belief in the primacy of ma’at began to break down when the pharaoh seemed less concerned with the welfare of his people than with his life at court.

The tomb worker’s strike at Deir el-Medina in 1159 BCE is the clearest evidence of the fracturing of a bureaucracy which had served the society for millennia. These workers were regularly paid in grain, beer, and other necessary items for which they relied on the government since they lived – at the government’s discretion – in an isolated valley outside of Thebes. When the wages failed to arrive, the workers went on strike and the officials were unable to handle the situation.

The pharaoh had failed to uphold and maintain ma’at and this affected everyone from the top down in the hierarchy of Egyptian social structure. Tomb robbing became more prevalent – as did false witnesses – and even law enforcement became corrupt. The testimony of a police officer was considered completely reliable but police during the latter part of the New Kingdom could accuse someone, have them sentenced, and then take whatever they wanted from the suspect’s possessions.

19th Dynasty copy of the Ipuwer Papyrus (known as The Lamentations of Ipuwer or The Admonitions of Ipuwer) in which a Middle Kingdom scribe laments the depths to which the country of Egypt has fallen. Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Leiden, The Netherlands. / Photo by Ibolya Horvath, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Leiden, Creative Commons

A letter from the reign of Ramesses XI (1107-1077 BCE) discusses two policemen who are accused as false witnesses. The author of the letter, a general in the army, instructs the recipient to have the two officers brought to his house where they will be examined and, if found guilty, will be drowned in baskets in the River Nile. The general, however, is careful to remind the letter’s recipient to drown the officers at night and to make sure they “do not let anybody in the land find out” (van de Mieroop, 257). This cautionary warning, and others like it, was made to try to cover up the corruption of the police and other officials. No amount of caution or cover-up could help, however, because the corruption was so widespread.

At this time, too, tomb robbers who were caught and convicted could buy their way out of jail and sentencing by bribing a police officer, bailiff, or court scribe with some part of the treasure they had stolen and then return to robbing tombs. Judges who were supposed to be handing down sentences might instead serve as fences for stolen goods. Viziers who were supposed to embody and uphold justice and balance were busy enriching themselves at the expense of others. As stated before, the pharaoh, who was supposed to be maintaining the foundation of his entire civilization, was more interested at this time in his own comfort and ego gratification than the responsibilities of his office.

Further, the final years of the New Kingdom and the succeeding era of the Third Intermediate Period (c. 1069-525 BCE) saw a return of the legal system to the Old Kingdom methodology of consulting a god regarding innocence or guilt. The Cult of Amun, regularly the most powerful in Egypt, had by this time almost eclipsed the authority of the throne. During the Third Intermediate Period, suspects would be brought before a statue of Amun and the god would render a verdict. This was accomplished by a priest either inside or behind the statue moving it one way or another to give an answer. This method of administering justice allowed for numerous abuses, obviously, since cases were now being heard by a priest hiding in a statue rather than an officially appointed judge in a court of law.

Although Egypt would see some bright moments in the return to law and order throughout the later periods, the legal system would never again function as efficiently as it had during the periods up through the New Kingdom. The Ptolemaic Dynasty (323-30 BCE) revived the practices and policies of New Kingdom administrative justice – as they did with many aspects of that period – but these initiatives did not last far beyond the first two rulers. The latter part of the Ptolemaic Dynasty is simply one long, slow, decline into chaos until the country was annexed by Rome in 30 BCE and became another province of their empire.

Infinite Blue

  • Lapis Lazuli
    Lapis lazuli is a naturally occurring, deep-blue stone that was long prized both as a material for carving and as a pigment for painting. Azurite was the only other deep-blue stone known to the ancient Eurasian world, but azurite was too soft to carve or polish, and when ground for pigment it was subject to color changes. Lapis was very much in demand throughout the Western world and Asia until the development of synthetic dyes.

For thousands of years, the sole source of lapis was a cluster of mines in what is now northeastern Afghanistan. The stone’s wide distribution offers evidence for the extent of international trade in the ancient world, as it appears in the deluxe arts of Mesopotamia and Egypt as early as the fourth millennium B.C.E. To reach Egypt, the stones would have traveled roughly five thousand miles, probably via a combination of river, land, and sea routes.

In the ancient Eurasian world, turquoise was sourced in Iran and the Sinai Peninsula and sent to points east and west. Hence in China the stone was associated with the exotic lands at the other end of the Silk Routes, and Europeans named the material pierre turquoise (Turkish stone) after Turks who used it in their jewelry. The stone was prized in ancient Egypt, where imitation turquoise in the form of faience was also prevalent.

The process of making indigo dye is remarkably similar worldwide, despite the variety of plants employed: leaves are fermented, and the resulting paste is used to create a liquid dye bath for fibers. At first this dye appears blue-green, but contact with the air oxidizes the indigo pigment and turns fibers the deep blue so valued around the world. Indigo is prized as a dye because it is resistant to fading. Another desirable feature is its versatility: it can be used to dye animal fibers, such as wool and silk, as well as plant fibers, such as cotton and linen.

By the eighteenth century, blue had become the most common color worn throughout Europe and was particularly favored among the fashionable classes. Prussian blue, the first modern synthetic pigment, had joined indigo as a source of blue coloration in textiles. When chemist William Perkin discovered the first synthetic aniline dyes in 1856, it heralded a new era of vivid, saturated colors in fashion, with blue being among the most prevalent.

In the mid- to late nineteenth century, European companies began to manufacture synthetic blue pigments. One of their uses was as a laundry agent, added to yellowed fabrics to make them appear whiter. &ldquoLaundry blue&rdquo is a generic term, and different manufacturers employed diverse pigments to create it, such as synthetic ultramarine, indigo, smalt, and Prussian blue. When combined with materials like starch or gum, the pigment could be pressed into cubes for easy transport and use.

The exhibition’s title draws on the connection between the color blue and ideas of spirituality in the book On the Spiritual in Art (1911&ndash12) by Russian artist and theorist Vasily Kandinsky. Blue is often associated with the spiritual, since blue is the color of the heavens. In addition, works of art utilizing blue often embody other symbolic meanings that have evolved over time in cultures dating back thousands of years, blue has signified not only the skies above, but also power, status, and beauty.

Yet as much as it may sometimes suggest the spiritual, this exhibition examining the color blue also pays close attention to earthly physical matter&mdashthe development of powdered pigments, liquid dyes, and other technological innovations that made it possible to produce blue in an artwork. The ability of cultures across the ages to make blue pigments, dyes, and glazes depended on the availability of raw materials dug up from the earth, such as lapis lazuli and cobalt, or extracted from plants, such as indigo. These materials, so often used to portray lofty ideas, were acquired by artists through the mundane reality of the marketplace, as new trade routes opened up to foreign lands. The spiritual and material aspects of blue thus combine to tell us stories about global history, cultural values, technological innovation, and international commerce. This cross-departmental survey includes objects from our holdings of Asian, Egyptian, American, Native American, African, and European art, among them paintings, sculpture, prints, drawings, the decorative arts, illuminated manuscripts, printed books, and contemporary art.

This is only the first phase of the exhibition, which will expand as subsequent chapters unfold, eventually almost filling the Museum’s first floor. These additions will amplify the themes and the scope of art on view. A selection of historical costumes from the renowned Brooklyn Museum Costume Collection, now housed in the Costume Institute at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, will join the exhibition in the spring of 2017. Infinite Blue is also enhanced by the loan of several key examples of contemporary art.

The materials used to make these lovely objects were not terribly rare, but the technologies were carefully guarded secrets. The blue decorations are composed of cobalt, a metal found throughout the world. Perfected by the Chinese and then emulated with varying degrees of success by ceramicists in other regions, the use of blue cobalt as the primary color for decoration of white vessels was actually a matter of practicality: cobalt is one of the only naturally occurring pigments that can survive the very high temperatures of a ceramic kiln.

Cobalt decorations are painted onto the surface of the vessel, then covered with a coating of clear glaze. When the piece is fired, the glaze fuses to the clay, sealing the decoration under a glassy layer. Because they would burn in the kiln, other colors have to be added later, on top of the glaze, where they are more likely to wear away. Cobalt-decorated wares were prized in part for their durability, but they were also beloved because other blue pigments were so rare and expensive: these ceramics were often the only blue objects in a home.

Porcelain&mdashwhite clay fired at high temperature&mdashis thought to have developed in the sixth century or somewhat earlier in northern China. The mineral cobalt was first imported into China as early as the eighth century. Mined at sites in the Arabian Peninsula, northwest Iran, and Western Asia, the raw material was transported through maritime and overland international trade along the Silk Routes. Initially an expensive material used only for high-status objects, cobalt became more readily available in the fifteenth century, when sources were found within China.

Blue-and-whites imported from China had been popular among Japanese buyers, for whom the Chinese developed special motifs and shapes. As a result, Arita wares initially showed a clear Chinese influence. Pieces made for the domestic Japanese market reflected the refined dining and entertaining practices that had found favor among the rising merchant class: wares were suitable for the tea ceremony or for meals served in an array of small dishes.

Cloisonné is a decorative technique of fusing colored glass to a metal surface. It was first developed in the Mediterranean basin around 1500 B.C.E. It became highly developed in the Byzantine Empire in the tenth and eleventh centuries and appears to have been transmitted to China via the maritime and overland Silk Routes. The earliest securely dated Chinese cloisonné is from the early fifteenth century. By the early Qing dynasty (1644&ndash1911), imperial workshops in the Forbidden City in Beijing created some of the most lavish and technically sophisticated cloisonné objects.

Starting in the early Ming dynasty, most Chinese cloisonné objects featured colorful motifs on a blue background. The turquoise color became so prominent that the generic Chinese term for cloisonné is Jingtai lan, or &ldquoThe Blue of the Jingtai Era,&rdquo referring to the reign of the Ming emperor Zhu Qiyu, known as the Jingtai emperor (ruled 1450&ndash57), who supposedly preferred this color.

Chinese craftsmen had the materials and the technology to make many other colors, but turquoise predominated. It may have represented a watery setting for the lotus flowers that often decorated these wares, or a heavenly setting for the Buddhist emblems that were also prevalent. Or it may show the influence of Tibetan decorative arts, which are extremely colorful and elaborate, often featuring turquoise stones.

Blue was frequently used as a background color for ancient architectural sculpture and wall paintings, and its resemblance to sky and water was recognized. However, blue appears to have been of little symbolic significance in early color systems. In the eyes of the Greeks and Romans, bright color of any kind was considered vulgar. This general view of color as decadent and deceptive continued to inform Western aesthetics after the fall of the Roman Empire in the fifth century. Mary was frequently dressed in a range of dark colors meant to convey her grief.

But over the next few centuries, as the cult of the Virgin grew, blue was transformed from a marginal to a major color in Western Marian imagery. Partly, this reflected the growing belief that color, a property induced by light, could thus serve as an expression of divine presence. Brilliant twelfth-century stained glass began to fill dark cathedrals with the heavenly colors thought to convey God’s radiance. The bright, clear blues (often derived from expensive cobalt) used for the Virgin’s robes were understood as signifying the celestial realm and thus her sanctity and purity as the queen of heaven.

Up until that point, plant-based blue dyes, such as day-flower and indigo, had been the only choice for printers in Japan, but those dyes tended to discolor quickly into shades of brown or green. Prussian blue, a synthetic pigment invented in Germany, is more vibrant and durable. The importation of this color expanded the realm of color possibilities for printers and allowed them greater freedom of expression: Katsushika Hokusai’s iconic woodblock print The Great Wave off Kanagawa (1830&ndash33) would not have been possible without this technological innovation.

Glass objects were prized as rare, precious luxury items throughout the ancient world. Glass beads, inlays, and tiny amulets date as early as Egypt’s Predynastic Period (circa 4000&ndash3100 B.C.E.). Formulated from the same ingredients as faience and the pigment known as &ldquoEgyptian blue,&rdquo but in different proportions, glass vessels and figurines were first manufactured in Egypt on a large scale during the Eighteenth Dynasty (circa 1479&ndash1425 B.C.E.). Using either copper compound or cobalt, artisans achieved many shades of blue.

Glass technology spread from Mesopotamia to Egypt and the Eastern Mediterranean and into Europe, although chemical analysis reveals a wide variety of formulas. When we see iridescence on ancient glass, it is usually a byproduct of burial, not an original or intended feature of how the glass was manufactured.

Often serving as a more affordable alternative to such semiprecious stones as turquoise and lapis lazuli, blue faience also carried significant meaning. Light blue color symbolized the life-giving waters of the Nile, as well as the sky. Accordingly, divinities linked with the sky are often portrayed with blue skin.

In colonial North America, English-made glass dominated the market, but as early as 1608, in Jamestown, Virginia, glass was being made here&mdashAmerica’s first industry. Glass production in the United States was limited until the Industrial Age, in the later nineteenth century, when large factories were established in Cambridge, Massachusetts Toledo, Ohio and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The spread of glass beads is closely tied to when and how Europeans colonized different regions of the world, starting in the 1500s. Explorers, conquerors, traders, and missionaries brought glass beads as one of many trade items. In turn, local tastes affected what Europeans produced, as indigenous artists in Africa and the Americas accepted or rejected certain bead shapes and colors.

Africa already had an early history of glass bead production and trade. However, beads remained scarce, and beadwork was primarily reserved for rulers and elites. But when mass quantities of European glass trade beads became available, African artists revolutionized their practices and elaborate beadwork flourished.

In the Americas, greater access to glass trade beads enabled women to cover entire surfaces of clothing and bags with colorful, intricate beaded designs. In Mexico and Central and South America, glass beads were treasured for embellishing ceremonial garments.

Several types of Chinese wares could assume a blue appearance. Some, like Jun ware, Qingbai wares, and later so-called clair de lune wares are almost always blue. Others, like Longquan and Guan wares, were more often green, with blue pieces a rarity. Chinese celadons were rarely decorated, reflecting the Confucian values of restraint, rectitude, and balance. Celadon glazes were also seen as emblematic of the past and became particularly popular during periods of upheaval at such times, China’s elite longed for the great golden ages of the past, when ritual jades and bronzes signified power.

Chinese celadons of various types were exported through-out Asia. Production of the objects later spread from China to other regions, most notably Korea, Japan, and Thailand. Some of Japan’s finest celadon wares favor a bluer tone, and that blue would be taken to further heights by twentieth-century Japanese ceramicists.

Although the manufacture of Egyptian blue is similar to that of glass and faience, it has certain distinguishing characteristics. Unlike faience, which has a glaze layer, Egyptian blue’s color is present throughout. And unlike glass, Egyptian blue is not glossy.

Producing Egyptian blue was a lengthy, laborious process that resulted in a bright blue paste, used to fashion objects, or a powder for making paint. Seldom were those objects as large as Bottle with Openwork Shell, shown here, a technical masterpiece made of several parts. More commonly, it was used for smaller figurines such as Heart Scarab with Scene of the Goddess Ma’at and a Phoenix.

Infinite Blue will be on view from November 25, 2016, through 2017 and is part of A Year of Yes: Reimagining Feminism at the Brooklyn Museum, a yearlong project celebrating a decade of feminist thinking at the Brooklyn Museum.

Opening to the public in four phases, Infinite Blue will expand throughout its run to represent the breadth of the Museum’s global collections, including objects from our holdings of Asian, Egyptian, African, American, Native American, and European art, among them paintings, sculpture, prints, drawings, the decorative arts, illuminated manuscripts, printed books, and contemporary art. The objects were selected for their beauty and historical significance as well as for their representative roles in the narrative of the color blue in art. Highlights include ceramic masterpieces from the Asian art collection never before exhibited illuminated manuscripts from the European collection costumes from the Brooklyn Museum Costume Collection at The Metropolitan Museum of Art images of Egyptian and South Asian blue-skinned deities and paintings that contemplate blue in nature, among many others. The installation will engage visitors from the moment they enter the Museum’s glass Pavilion with &ldquoUntitled&rdquo (Water), an expansive curtain of blue iridescent beads by Felix Gonzalez-Torres, and Liquidity Inc., an immersive video experience by Hito Steryl in the Museum’s Great Hall.

On view throughout the full run of the exhibition, the first iteration highlights some of the most remarkable works from the Museum’s acclaimed holdings. Such works include Wine Jar with Fish and Aquatic Plants, one of the finest examples of early Chinese blue-and-white porcelain in the world and six never before exhibited illuminated manuscripts that showcase the symbolic ways Christian iconography employed the color blue&mdashwhether to describe the Virgin Mary’s celestial mantle, heaven’s azure expanse, or the Holy Spirit’s divine aura.

Significant contemporary works include Joseph Kosuth’s 276 (On Color Blue), in which he reproduces in blue neon a quotation from philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein that questions our perception of blueness and five works from Byron Kim’s ongoing series of Sunday Paintings, which represent the sky on the day they were painted with a short text of activities from the artist’s life on that day.

Nancy Spector, Deputy Director and Chief Curator, states: &ldquoInfinite Blue is an inspiring demonstration of how Brooklyn Museum curators can work collaboratively across departments to examine the rich and intertwined history of world cultures. They are rethinking the global collection through the lens of blue, in order to illuminate shared cultural themes through the ages, such as trade, spirituality, symbolism, and material innovation. The goal is not to homogenize the representation of different world cultures but rather to demonstrate points of confluence as well as points of great, if not irreconcilable, difference. Blue will provide a connective tissue with which to examine how the color has been manifest physically and symbolically in cultures as far afield as ancient Egypt, Asia, and Africa to nineteenth-century European and American painting and decorative arts, to the art of the present.&rdquo

About A Year of Yes: Reimagining Feminism at the Brooklyn Museum
The exhibition is part of A Year of Yes: Reimagining Feminism at the Brooklyn Museum, which celebrates the 10th anniversary of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art through ten diverse exhibitions and an extensive calendar of related public programs. A Year of Yes recognizes feminism as a driving force for progressive change and takes the transformative contributions of feminist art during the last half-century as its starting point. The Museum-wide series imagines next steps, expanding feminist thinking from its roots in the struggle for gender parity to embrace broader social-justice issues of tolerance, inclusion, and diversity. A Year of Yes begins in October 2016 and continues through early 2018.

This exhibition is organized by a curatorial team including Yekaterina Barbash, Associate Curator of Egyptian Art Susan Beningson, Assistant Curator, Asian Art Joan Cummins, Lisa and Bernard Selz Curator, Asian Art Barry R. Harwood, Curator, Decorative Arts Deirdre Lawrence, Principal Librarian, Libraries and Archives Cora Michael, Associate Curator, Exhibitions Nancy Rosoff, Andrew W. Mellon Curator, Arts of the Americas and Lisa Small, Curator of European Painting and Sculpture, Brooklyn Museum, Eugenie Tsai, John and Barbara Vogelstein Curator of Contemporary Art, with guidance provided by Nancy Spector, Deputy Director and Chief Curator.

Generous support for this exhibition is provided by an anonymous donor and the Stavros Niarchos Foundation. Infinite Blue is part of A Year of Yes: Reimagining Feminism at the Brooklyn Museum, a yearlong series of ten exhibitions celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art. Leadership support is provided by Elizabeth A. Sackler, the Stavros Niarchos Foundation, the Calvin Klein Family Foundation, Mary Jo and Ted Shen, and an anonymous donor. Generous support is also provided by Annette Blum, the Taylor Foundation, the Antonia and Vladimer Kulaev Cultural Heritage Fund, Beth Dozoretz, The Cowles Charitable Trust, and Almine Rech Gallery.

Ancient Egyptian Government

The government of ancient Egypt was a theocratic monarchy as the king ruled by a mandate from the gods, initially was seen as an intermediary between human beings and the divine, and was supposed to represent the gods’ will through the laws passed and policies approved. A central government in Egypt is evident by c. 3150 BCE when King Narmer unified the country, but some form of government existed prior to this date. The Scorpion Kings of the Predynastic Period in Egypt (c. 6000-3150 BCE) obviously had a form of monarchial government, but exactly how it operated is not known.

Egyptologists of the 19th century CE divided the country’s history into periods in order to clarify and manage their field of study. Periods in which there was a strong central government are called ‘kingdoms’ while those in which there was disunity or no central government are called ‘intermediate periods.’ In examining Egyptian history one needs to understand that these are modern designations the ancient Egyptians did not recognize any demarcations between time periods by these terms. Scribes of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (c. 2040-1782 BCE) might look back on the time of the First Intermediate Period (2181-2040 BCE) as a “time of woe” but the period had no official name.

“Egypt’s form of government lasted, with little modification, from c. 3150 BCE to 30 BCE.”

The way in which the government worked changed slightly over the centuries, but the basic pattern was set in the First Dynasty of Egypt (c. 3150 – c. 2890 BCE). The king ruled over the country with a vizier as second-in-command, government officials, scribes, regional governors (known as nomarchs), mayors of the town, and, following the Second Intermediate Period (c. 1782 – c.1570 BCE), a police force. From his palace at the capital, the king would make his pronouncements, decree laws, and commission building projects, and his word would then be implemented by the bureaucracy which became necessary to administer rule in the country. Egypt’s form of government lasted, with little modification, from c. 3150 BCE to 30 BCE when the country was annexed by Rome.


The ruler was known as a ‘king’ up until the New Kingdom of Egypt (1570-1069 BCE) when the term ‘pharaoh‘ (meaning ‘Great House,’ a reference to the royal residence) came into use. The first king was Narmer (also known as Menes) who established a central government after uniting the country, probably by military means. The economy of Egypt was based on agriculture and used a barter system. The lower-class peasants farmed the land, gave the wheat and other produce to the noble landowner (keeping a modest portion for themselves), and the land owner then turned the produce over to the government to be used in trade or in distribution to the wider community.

Under the reign of Narmer’s successor, Hor-Aha (c. 3100-3050 BCE) an event was initiated known as Shemsu Hor (Following of Horus) which would become standard practice for later kings. The king and his retinue would travel through the country and thus make the king’s presence and power visible to his subjects. Egyptologist Toby Wilkinson comments:

The Shemsu Hor would have served several purposes at once. It allowed the monarch to be a visible presence in the life of his subjects, enabled his officials to keep a close eye on everything that was happening in the country at large, implementing policies, resolving disputes, and dispensing justice defrayed the costs of maintaining the court and removed the burden of supporting it year-round in one location and, last but by no means least, facilitated the systematic assessment and levying of taxes. A little later, in the Second Dynasty, the court explicitly recognized the actuarial potential of the Following of Horus. Thereafter, the event was combined with a formal census of the country’s agricultural wealth. (44-45)

The Shemsu Hor (better known today as the Egyptian Cattle Count) became the means whereby the government assessed individual wealth and levied taxes. Each district (nome) was divided into provinces with a nomarch administering overall operation of the nome, and then lesser provincial officials, and then mayors of the towns. Rather than trust a nomarch to accurately report his wealth to the king, he and his court would travel to assess that wealth personally. The Shemsu Hor thus became an important annual (later bi-annual) event in the lives of the Egyptians and, much later, would provide Egyptologists with at least approximate reigns of the kings since the Shemsu Hor was always recorded by reign and year.

Tax collectors would follow the appraisal of the officials in the king’s retinue and collect a certain amount of produce from each nome, province, and town, which went to the central government. The government, then, would use that produce in trade. Throughout the Early Dynastic Period this system worked so well that by the time of the Third Dynasty of Egypt (c. 2670-2613 BCE) building projects requiring substantial costs and an efficient labor force were initiated, the best-known and longest-lasting being The Step Pyramid of king Djoser. During the Old Kingdom of Egypt (c. 2613-2181 BCE) the government was wealthy enough to build even larger monuments such as the pyramids at Giza.

The most powerful person in the country after the king was the vizier. There were sometimes two viziers, one for Upper and one for Lower Egypt. The vizier was the voice of the king and his representative and was usually a relative or someone very close to the monarch. The vizier managed the bureaucracy of the government and delegated the responsibilities as per the orders of the king. During the Old Kingdom, the viziers would have been in charge of the building projects as well as managing other affairs.

Imhotep, the architect of Djoser’s Step Pyramid at Saqqara, represented as a seated scribe. The bronze figure dates from the Late Period when Imhotep was deified some 2,000 years after his death. / © Trustees of the British Museum

Toward the end of the Old Kingdom, the viziers became less vigilant as their position became more comfortable. The enormous wealth of the government was going out to these massive building projects at Giza, at Abusir, Saqqara, and Abydos and the priests who administered the temple complexes at these sites, as well as the nomarchs and provincial governors, were becoming more and more wealthy. As their wealth grew, so did their power, and as their power grew, they were less and less inclined to care very much what the king thought or what his vizier may or may not have demanded of them. The rise in the power of the priests and nomarchs meant a decline in that of the central government which, combined with other factors, brought about the collapse of the Old Kingdom.


The kings still ruled from their capital of Memphis at the beginning of the First Intermediate Period, but they had very little actual power. The nomarchs administered their own regions, collected their own taxes, built their own temples and monuments in their honor, and commissioned their own tombs. The early kings of the First Intermediate Period (7th-10th dynasties) were so ineffectual that their names are hardly remembered and their dates are often confused. The nomarchs, on the other hand, grew steadily in power. Historian Margaret Bunson explains their traditional role prior to the First Intermediate Period:

The power of such local rulers was modified in times of strong pharaohs, but generally they served the central government, accepting the traditional role of being First Under The King. This rank denoted an official’s right to administer a particular nome or province on behalf of the pharaoh. Such officials were in charge of the region’s courts, treasury, land offices, conservation programs, militia, archives, and store-houses. They reported to the vizier and to the royal treasury on affairs within their jurisdiction. (103)

During the First Intermediate Period, however, the nomarchs used their growing resources to serve themselves and their communities. The kings of Memphis, perhaps in an attempt to regain some of their lost prestige, moved the capital to the city of Herakleopolis but were no more successful there than at the old capital.
C. 2125 BCE an overlord known as Intef I rose to power at a provincial city called Thebes in Upper Egypt and inspired his community to rebel against the kings of Memphis. His actions would inspire those who succeeded him and finally result in the victory of Mentuhotep II over the kings of Herakleopolis c. 2040 BCE, initiating the Middle Kingdom.

Mentuhotep II reigned from Thebes. Although he had ousted the old kings and begun a new dynasty, he patterned his rule on that of the Old Kingdom. The Old Kingdom was looked back on as a great age in Egypt’s history, and the pyramids and expansive complexes at Giza and elsewhere were potent reminders of the glory of the past. One of the old patterns he kept, which had been neglected during the latter part of the Old Kingdom, was duplication of agencies for Upper and Lower Egypt as Bunson explains:

In general, the administrative offices of the central government were exact duplicates of the traditional provincial agencies, with one significant difference. In most periods the offices were doubled, one for Upper Egypt and one for Lower Egypt. This duality was carried out in architecture as well, providing palaces with two entrances, two throne rooms, etc. The nation viewed itself as a whole, but there were certain traditions dating back to the legendary northern and southern ancestors, the semi-divine kings of the predynastic period, and to the concept of symmetry. (103)

The duplication of agencies not only honored the north and the south of Egypt equally but, more importantly for the king, kept a tighter control of both regions. Mentuhotep II’s successor, Amenemhat I (c. 1991 – c.1962 BCE), moved the capital to the city of Iti-tawy near Lisht and continued the old policies, enriching the government quickly enough to begin his own building projects. His shifting of the capital from Thebes to Lisht may have been an attempt at further unifying Egypt by centering the government in the middle of the country instead of toward the south. In an effort which curbed the power of the nomarchs, Amenemhat I created the first standing army in Egypt directly under the king’s control. Prior to this, armies were raised by conscription in the different districts and the nomarch then sent his men to the king. This gave the nomarchs a great degree of power as the men’s loyalties lay with their community and regional ruler. A standing army, loyal first to the king, encouraged nationalism and a stronger unity.

Limestone head of Egyptian pharaoh Mentuhotep II, 11th Dynasty 2061-2010 BCE. The head comes from a column of the mortuary temple Deir el-Bahari at Thebes West. Mentuhotep II was the Theban king who ruled for half a century and reunified Egypt at the end of the First Intermediate Period 2134-2040 BCE. (Vatican Museums, Rome). / Photo by Mark Cartwright

Amenemhat I’s successor, Senusret I (c. 1971-c.1926 BCE) continued his policies and further enriched the country through trade. It is Senusret I who first builds a temple to Amun at the site of Karnak and initiates the construction of one of the greatest religious structures ever built. The funds the government needed for such massive projects came from trade, and in order to trade the officials taxed the people of Egypt. Wilkinson explains how this worked:

When it came to collecting taxes, in the form of a proportion of farm produce, we must assume a network of officials operated on behalf of the state throughout Egypt. There can be no doubt that their efforts were backed up by coercive measures. The inscriptions left by some of these government officials, mostly in the form of seal impressions, allow us to re-create the workings of the treasury, which was by far the most important department from the very beginning of Egyptian history. Agricultural produce collected as a government revenue was treated in one of two ways. A certain proportion went directly to state workshops for the manufacture of secondary products – for example, tallow and leather from cattle pork from pigs linen from flax bread, beer, and basketry from grain. Some of these value-added products were then traded and exchanged at a profit, producing further government income other were redistributed as payment to state employees, thereby funding the court and its projects. The remaining portion of agricultural produce (mostly grain) was put into storage in government granaries, probably located throughout Egypt in important regional centers. Some of the stored grain was used in its raw state to finance court activities, but a significant share was put aside as emergency stock, to be used in the event of a poor harvest to help prevent wide-spread famine. (45-46)

The nomarchs of the Middle Kingdom cooperated fully with the king in sending resources, and this was largely because their autonomy was now respected by the throne in a way it had not been previously. Art during the Middle Kingdom period shows a much greater variation than that of the Old Kingdom which suggests a greater value placed on regional tastes and distinct styles rather than only court approved and regulated expression. Further, letters from the time make clear that the nomarchs were accorded a respect by the 12th Dynasty kings, which they had not known during the Old Kingdom. Under the reign of Senusret III (c. 1878-1860 BCE) the power of the nomarchs was decreased and the nomes were reorganized. The title of nomarch disappears completely from the official records during Senusret III’s reign suggesting that it was abolished. Provincial rulers no longer had the freedoms they had enjoyed earlier but still benefitted from their position they were now just more firmly under the control of the central government.

The 12th Dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom (c. 2040-1802 BCE) is considered the ‘golden age’ of Egyptian government, art, and culture, when some of the most significant literary and artistic works were created, the economy was robust, and a strong central government empowered trade and production. Mass production of artifacts such as statuary (shabti dolls, for example) and jewelry during the First Intermediate Period had led to the rise of mass consumerism which continued during this time of the Middle Kingdom but with greater skill producing works of higher quality. The 13th Dynasty (c. 1802-c. 1782 BCE) was weaker than the 12th. The comfort and high standard of living of the Middle Kingdom declined as regional governors again assumed more power, priests amassed more wealth, and the central government became increasingly ineffective. In the far north of Egypt, at Avaris, a Semitic people had settled around a trading center and, during the 13th Dynasty, these people grew in power until they were able to assert their own autonomy and then expand their control of the region. These were the Hyksos (‘foreign kings’) whose rise signals the end of the Middle Kingdom and the beginning of the Second Intermediate Period of Egypt.


The later Egyptian writers characterized the time of the Hyksos as chaotic and claimed they invaded and destroyed the country. Actually, the Hyksos admired Egyptian culture and adopted it as their own. Although they did conduct raids on Egyptian cities such as Memphis, carrying statuary and monuments back to Avaris, they dressed as Egyptians, worshiped Egyptian gods, and incorporated elements of Egyptian government in their own.

The Egyptian government at Itj-tawi near Lisht could no longer control the region and abandoned Lower Egypt to the Hyksos, moving the capital back to Thebes. As the Hyksos gained power in the north, the Kushites advanced in the south and took back lands Egypt had conquered under Senusret III. The Egyptians at Thebes tolerated this situation until c. 1580 BCE when the Egyptian king Seqenenra Taa (also known as Ta’O) felt he had been insulted and challenged by the Hyksos king Apepi and attacked. This initiative was picked up and furthered by his son Kamose (c. 1575 BCE) and finally by his brother Ahmose I (c. 1570-c. 1544 BCE), who defeated the Hyksos and drove them out of Egypt.

The victory of Ahmose I begins the period known as the New Kingdom of Egypt, the best-known and most well-documented era in Egyptian history. At this time, the Egyptian government was reorganized and reformed slightly so that now the hierarchy ran from the pharaoh at the top, to the vizier, the royal treasurer, the general of the military, overseers (supervisors of government locations like work sites) and scribes who kept the records and relayed correspondence.

Limestone stela of the chief of police, Ptahmay. From modern-day Egypt. New Kingdom, 18th Dynasty, circa 1300 BCE. (State Museum of Egyptian Art, Munich, Germany). / Photo by Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin

The New Kingdom also saw the institutionalization of the police force which was begun under Amenemhet I. His early police units were members of the Bedouin tribes who guarded the borders but had little to do with keeping domestic peace. The New Kingdom police were Medjay, Nubian warriors who had fought the Hyksos with Ahmose I and were rewarded with the new position. The police were organized by the vizier under the direction of the pharaoh. The vizier would then delegate authority to lower officials who managed the various patrols of State Police. Police guarded temples and mortuary complexes, secured the borders and monitored immigration, stood watch outside royal tombs and cemeteries, and oversaw the workers and slaves at the mines and rock quarries. Under the reign of Ramesses II (1279-1213 BCE) the Medjay were his personal bodyguards. For most of their tenure, though, they kept the peace along the borders and intervened in citizen’s affairs at the direction of a higher official. In time, some of these positions came to be held by priests as Bunson explains:

The temple police units were normally composed of priests who were charged with maintaining the sanctity of the temple complexes. The regulations concerning sex, behavior, and attitude during and before all ritual ceremonies demanded a certain vigilance and the temples kept their own people available to ensure a harmonious spirit. (207)

The temple police would have been kept especially busy during religious festivals, many of which (such as that of Bastet or Hathor) encouraged drinking to excess and letting go of one’s inhibitions.

The New Kingdom also saw the reformation and expansion of the military. Egypt’s experience with the Hyksos had shown them how easily a foreign power could dominate their country, and they were not interested in experiencing that a second time. Ahmose I had first conceived the idea of buffer zones around Egypt’s borders to keep the country secure, but this idea was taken further by his son and successor Amenhotep I (c. 1541-1520 BCE).

The army Ahmose I led against the Hyksos was made up of Egyptian regulars, conscripts, and foreign mercenaries like the Medjay. Amenhotep I trained an Egyptian army of professionals and led them into Nubia to complete his father’s campaigns and regain the lands lost during the 13th Dynasty. His successors continued the expansion of Egypt’s borders but none more than Tuthmosis III (1458-1425 BCE), who established the Egyptian Empire conquering lands from Syria to Libya and down through Nubia.

By the time of Amenhotep III (1386-1353 BCE) Egypt was a vast empire with diplomatic and trade agreements with other great nations such as the Hittites, the Mitanni, the Assyrian Empire, and the Kingdom of Babylon. Amenhotep III ruled over so vast and secure a country that he was able to occupy himself primarily with building monuments. He built so many in fact that early Egyptologists credited him with an exceptionally long reign.

From the mortuary temple of Amenhotep III, Thebes, Egypt. 18th Dynasty, about 1350 BC / Trustees of the British Museum

His son would largely undo all the great accomplishments of the New Kingdom through religious reform which undercut the authority of the pharaoh, destroyed the economy, and soured relationships with other nations. Akhenaten (1353-1336 BCE), perhaps in an attempt to neutralize the political power of the priests of Amun, banned all religious cults in the country except that of his personal god Aten. He closed the temples and moved the capital from Thebes to a new city he built in the Amarna region called Akhetaten where he sequestered himself with his wife Nefertiti and his family and neglected affairs of state.

The position of the pharaoh was legitimized by his adherence to the will of the gods. The temples throughout Egypt were not just places of worship but factories, dispensaries, workshops, counseling centers, houses of healing, educational and cultural centers. In closing them down, Akhenaten brought the forward momentum of the New Kingdom to a halt while he commissioned new temples and shrines built according to his monotheistic belief in the one god Aten. His successor, Tutankhamun (1336-1327 BCE) reversed his policies, returned the capital to Thebes, and reopened the temples but did not live long enough to complete the process. This was accomplished by the pharaoh Horemheb (1320-1295 BCE) who tried to erase any evidence that Akhenaten had ever existed. Horemheb brought Egypt back some social standing with other nations, improved the economy, and rebuilt the temples that had been destroyed, but the country never reached the heights it had known under Amenhotep III.

The government of the New Kingdom began at Thebes, but Ramesses II moved it north to a new city he built on the site of ancient Avaris, Per Ramesses. Thebes continued as an important religious center primarily because of the Great Temple of Amun at Karnak to which every pharaoh of the New Kingdom contributed. The reasons for Ramesses II’s move are unclear but one of the results was that, with the capital of the government far away in Per Ramesses, the priests of Amun at Thebes were free to do as they pleased. These priests increased their power to the point where they rivaled the pharaoh and the New Kingdom ended when the high priests of Thebes ruled from that city while the last of the New Kingdom pharaohs struggled to maintain control from Per Ramesses.

Monumental lists of past kings expressed the living ruler’s legitimacy. Originally, Ramesses II was shown on the far right, honoring previous kings and the god Osiris. The kings were represented by their throne names, written inside oval “cartouches”. The upper surviving row, mentions little-known kings of the 7th and 8th Dynasties. The middle row lists those of the 12th, 18th, and 19th Dynasties. Rulers deemed unimportant or illegitimate, including ruling queens, have been omitted. / Photo by Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin


Egypt was again divided as it now entered the Third Intermediate Period (1069-525 BCE). The government at Thebes claimed supremacy while recognizing the legitimacy of the rulers at Per Ramesses and intermarrying with them. The division of the government weakened Egypt which began to degenerate into civil wars during the Late Period (c. 664-332 BCE). At this time, the would-be rulers of Egypt fought each other using Greek mercenaries who, in time, lost interest in the fight and started their own communities in the Nile River Valley.

In 671 and 666 BCE the Assyrians invaded and took control of the country, and in 525 BCE the Persians invaded. Under Persian rule Egypt became a satrapy with the capital at Memphis and, like the Assyrians before them, Persians were placed in all positions of power. When Alexander the Great conquered Persia, he took Egypt in 331 BCE, had himself crowned pharaoh at Memphis, and placed his Macedonians in power.

After Alexander‘s death, his general Ptolemy (323-285 BCE) founded the Ptolemaic Dynasty in Egypt which lasted from 323-30 BCE. The Ptolemies, like the Hyksos before them, greatly admired Egyptian culture and incorporated it into their rule. Ptolemy I tried to blend the cultures of Greece and Egypt together to create a harmonious, multinational country – and he succeeded – but it did not last long beyond the reign of Ptolemy V (204-181 BCE). Under Ptolemy V’s reign, the country was again in rebellion and the central government was weak. The last Ptolemaic pharaoh of Egypt was Cleopatra VII (69-30 BCE), and after her death the country was annexed by Rome.


The monarchial theocracy of Egypt lasted over 3,000 years, creating and maintaining one of the world’s greatest ancient cultures. Many of the devices, artifacts, and practices of the modern day originated in Egypt’s more stable periods of the Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms when there was a strong central government which provided the stability necessary for the creation of art and culture.

A wooden scribe’s palette from the New Kingdom, Egpyt. (Egyptian Museum, Castello Sforzesco, Milan) / Photo by Mark Cartwright

The Egyptians invented paper and colored ink, advanced the art of writing, were the first people to widely use cosmetics, invented the toothbrush, toothpaste, and breath mints, advanced medical knowledge and practices such as fixing broken bones and performing surgery, created water clocks and calendars (originating the 365-day calendar in use today), as well as perfecting the art of brewing beer, agricultural advances like the ox-drawn plough, and even the practice of wearing wigs.

The kings and later pharaohs of ancient Egypt began their reigns by offering themselves to the service of the goddess of truth, Ma’at, who personified universal harmony and balance and embodied the concept of ma’at which was so important to Egyptian culture. By maintaining harmony, the king of Egypt provided the people with a culture that encouraged creativity and innovation. Each king would begin his reign by ‘presenting Ma’at’ to the other gods of the Egyptian pantheon as a way of assuring them that he would follow her precepts and encourage his people to do likewise during his reign. The government of ancient Egypt, for the most part, kept to this divine bargain with their gods and the result was the grand civilization of ancient Egypt.

Archaeology, Classics and Egyptology

Of the nine ostraca, five papyri, and writing board which make up the surviving manuscripts of the Instruction of Ani, only three of the papyri, p. Boulaq IV, p. Deir el-Medineh I, and p. Saqqara, make use of rubrics. One is found in p. Saqqara, eleven in p. Deir el-Medineh I, and 14 in p. Boulaq IV. p. Chester Beatty V, which also contains excerpts from The Instruction of Ani, makes use of red ink to write the words ḥnꜥ ḏd to mark the beginning of its excerpt from Ani , but does not make use of rubrics within the excerpt itself. p. Guimet and the ostraca are verse-pointed, but do not make use of rubrics.

The single rubric found on line 5 of p. Saqqara marks the beginning of a phrase not found in either of the manuscripts which provide a parallel text for this section of Ani, and is thus difficult to classify in terms of its use in the manuscript.

p. Deir el-Medineh I writes phrases in red ink at rt. 1,5 2,2 2,7 3,3 3,6-7 4,3 4,7 5,5 6,3 7,1 and 7,6-7. These rubrics appear to mark changes in the flow of discourse which may be understood as the start of a new maxim.

p. Boulaq IV contains rubrics at 15,1 15,9-10 16,9-10 17,1 18,5-6 18,12 18,15 20,9 22,1-2 22,3 22,13-14 22,17-18 23,7 and 23,11-12. Only one of these – the rubric at 18,15 (p. Deir el-Medineh 1,5), is paralleled by a rubric in another manuscript.

The majority – those, at 15,1 15,9-10 16,9-10, 17,1 18,5-6 18,15 20,9 and 22,1-2 appear to mark changes in the flow of discourse similar in nature to those found in p. Deir el-Medineh, but spread less frequently. The last four rubrics indicate the alternation of speaker between Ani and his son Khonsuhotep. The rubric 22,3 appears to mark the end of the section. The rubric at 18,12 appears to highlight a phrase without any structural role.

Additionally, some phrases where it is clear that a new section of text begins from the other manuscripts, such as at 16,1 (Chester Beatty V 2,6) and 19,1 (Deir el-Medineh 2,2 Chester Beatty V 2,8), are written in black ink in p. Boulaq IV, and columns 19 and 21 of this papyus are entirely without rubrics.

At issue is whether the rubrics form part of the transmission process, and reflect a canonical structure, or are essentially the choice of the copyist, and reflect his own interpretations. If rubrics are the essentially personal choice of the copyist, then this must affect our understanding of the structure of the text.

The harpists’ songs from the Saqqara New Kingdom necropolis come from a variety of dates and tomb-contexts. The texts of these songs show little direct intertextuality or quotation between one another, but borrow from a common stock of themes also found at Thebes. The data from Saqqara is limited, and therefore does not allow for a particularly detailed discussion of transmission of the harpists’ songs at this site by itself. The greater quantity of material from Thebes, however, does allow the discussion of compositional process in the harpists’ songs. In particular, the four songs published by Wente appear to be the result of a compositional process of assembling the text from common formulae and stock phrases, or through ‘cut-and-paste’. These are features more broadly attested in Egyptian literary composition, and result in the ‘fragmentation’ which Eyre describes as characteristic of Egyptian literature. At a broader level, this may be reflected in the use of compositional ‘building-blocks’ in the arrangement of texts and images within tombs as whole.

Although some of the harpists’ songs at Saqqara, in particular those found in the tombs of Nebnefer and Tatia, show some similarities in decoration, there does not appear to be a direct copying of motifs for this scene between tombs. The cosmetic box of Ipy, and its scene of musicians, shows clear overlaps in design with late Eighteenth Dynasty tomb scenes in Thebes, and particularly the tomb of Nakht (TT 52), and the banquet scene from the chapel of Ptahmay. The harpist’s song in the chapel of Paatenemhab is partially preserved, but appears to be the same text as the ‘harpist’s song in the tomb of Intef’ on p. Harris 500. The two copies of the text appear to show little variation, and may indicate that this harpist’s song had canonical status. The harpist’s scene in the tomb of Raia appears to be unique. Rather than depicting a harpist singing to Raia, it depicts Raia singing to the gods. Although the song is badly damaged and the single surviving phrase is not attested elsewhere, its selection of motifs and expressions clearly belongs to the genre of harpists’ songs. The scene is placed over scenes of the funeral cortege, and for these reasons appears to depict Raia singing to the gods in the afterlife, rather than performing his job in this world.

The harpist’s songs appear to have a ritual context in accompanying offering. This offering occurs at a transitional moment for the deceased, likely the end of the funeral, when their mummy has been ritually reactivated by the ‘Opening of the Mouth’, and they are free to journey into the Netherworld. This context would plausibly explain the variety of texts found in the harpists’ songs, both of an ‘optimistic’ variety which praise the netherworld, and those which praise ‘making holiday’ in this life, or which cast doubt on the efficacy of funerary monuments. The offering context also appears to be connected with feasts held at the tomb at other times. These were likely held during festivals. Such feasts have often been assumed to take place during the ‘Beautiful Festival of the Valley’ in Thebes, but this context is unlikely to have held at Saqqara. The Festival of Sokar was one of the most prominent festivals in the Memphite region, but feasts may have taken place in the necropolis on many occasions during the year. The harpists’ songs appear to be connected to the ‘laying down of provisions’ and the making of offerings not only as part of the funeral but also at subsequent festivals, which may have been accompanied by banqueting at the tomb. It may be futile to seek for a single context for the harpist’s song, of any of the types identified in prior literature on the topic, however, owing to the variety of possible contexts for the songs. This may relate to the ‘multiplicity of approaches’, much-referenced in discussions of Egyptian religion, and the high degree of variation between manuscripts of Egyptian literary works. There may also be a more direct cause, however, in the individual choices made in the decoration of particular tombs, and perhaps in the performance of funerary rituals, as individuals and groups continuously reappropriate religious practices for their own use, “weaving individual life-cycles into long-term histories” (Kolen/Renes 2015: 21).

Through its three overlapping perspectives - practices, transmission, and landscape - the Walking Dead project aims to better understand religion at Saqqara, with particular focus on the New Kingdom. This paper pursues this aim by attempting to contextualise textual transmission in ancient Egyptian society, and by attempting to sketch, rather broadly, the importance of social and performative contexts to understanding the transmission of the Book of the Dead.

The paper aims to shed some further light on the decoration of monumental tomb-chapels with Book of the Dead texts and the decorative purposes of such scenes, which have traditionally been taken to magically provide for the deceased as a kind of ‘back-up’, or to function as a kind of speech-act, as argued elsewhere by Lara Weiss.

Drawing on recent work on the Pyramid Texts by Susanne Bickel, and on Egyptian funerary religion in the Old Kingdom by Mark Smith, as well as recent research on the performative context of literature and the material authority of written texts by Christopher Eyre, the paper argues in favour of understanding the Book of the Dead, like the the Pyramid Texts and the Coffin Texts, and leave aside other, more cosmological works, as a limited materialisation of religious practices which took place as part of spoken, performed, and ephemeral life in ancient Egypt.

The question of how we conceive of the Book of the Dead is absolutely central to the question of how we understand its transmission. Apparently ‘incorrect’ or variant texts may reflect differing contexts of use or origins for recensions, for instance, but the question is much broader, and the oral-performative context is at once extremely difficult to reconstruct, if this is at all possible, and absolutely central to considering the texts, their variations, and their transmission.

Stela of Ptahmay - History

• Hr.y-pD.t | im.y-rA ssm.wt | kTn tp.y | kTn tp.y n.y Hm=f | im.y-rA kTn.w n.w nTr nfr | im.y-rA xAs.wt | im.y-rA xAs.wt mH.wt | wpw.ty nsw.t r xAs.t nb.t

• Early Nineteenth Dynasty, temp . Seti I-Ramesses II.

• Rock-cut tomb at Saqqara North, above Abusir village. 113

The tombs built for bearers of the titles also held by Ry are, in the post-Amarna period, noticeably clustered in the section of the Saqqara necropolis south of the Unas causeway. 114 The same goes for Stablemasters. 115 In the tomb of Ry, a Stablemaster named Maia plays the role of officiant performing the offering and purification ritual in scene [9] . He is professionally associated with Ry and may therefore be counted as a member of his social circle. In the tombs surrounding Ry, more Stablemasters can be found. They feature as subsidiary figures in the iconographic programmes of tomb owners bearing more elevated titles of office. Both the brother and son of Pay, Ry’s neighbour, held the title. 116 The same goes for two sons of Tatia, Ry’s neighbour to the east. Tatia was a Wab Priest of the Front of Ptah and Chief of the Goldsmiths. 117 Further to the west, north of the tomb of Pay and built against the south-exterior wall of the tomb of Horemheb, lies the chapel of Khay II, another Wab Priest of the Front of Ptah. 118 A son of this priest, named Mose, also bore the title of 45 Stablemaster of the Lord of the Two Lands. 119

The tomb of Ry in its spatial context

What did the necropolis look like when Ry had his tomb constructed there, and how did it develop thereafter (Figs. 1, 2)? To answer this question, the spatial development of this section of the Unas South Cemetery will be briefly reviewed. Three phases of the cemetery’s development will be considered: first, the period shortly before Ry built his tomb second, the time period contemporaneous with Ry (i.e. construction of the tomb) and third, the time period following Ry’s death.

The first phase is most difficult to review, because we are rather ill-informed about the history of the necropolis at Saqqara before the Amarna period. Various sources indicate that tombs were built in the Unas South Cemetery during the reign of Amenhotep III. Early modern excavators found abundant tomb elements from that period. 120 Unfortunately, the locations of the finds were poorly recorded, if at all. Thus, the locations of their corresponding tombs have been lost. The information recorded on the tomb elements combined with a comparative study of provenanced finds could tell us something about who was buried where, but does not tell us anything about the structure of the cemetery at the time. It has been suggested that the pre-Amarna tombs were built as (partially) rock-cut tombs 121 and that the common Memphite freestanding temple-tomb superstructures represent a later phase in the development of this cemetery. Finds of mud bricks stamped with the prenomen of Amenhotep II (Aakheperure) are indicative of possibly the earliest building activities at the site. It is not at all certain whether these bricks were used in the construction of one or more private tombs, or derive from structures of a different nature. 122

We are on firmer ground in the second phase, namely the period when Ry started building his funerary monument. The earliest tomb structures excavated (in modern times) in the Unas South Cemetery span the Amarna Period reigns of Akhenaten and Tutankhamun. A number of these tombs are truly monumental. Thus, the plot selected by Ry 123 to build his tomb was surrounded by, at the time, fairly new monuments. Ry’s neighbour to the west was Pay, the Overseer of Cattle and Overseer of the King’s apartments at Memphis ( temp . Tutankhamun) 124 to the north stood the tomb of Meryneith, the Greatest of Seers (High Priest) and Steward in the Temple of the Aten in Memphis ( temp . Akhenaten– Tutankhamun) 125 and his neighbours to the east and south are thus far anonymous. 126 Moreover, within a radius of 50 m were the tombs of two of the most prominent officials of Tutankhamun’s tenure: Horemheb, the great General, and Maya, the Overseer of the Treasury. To these tombs, both of which have been archaeologically surveyed, we could add the prosopographic information recorded on tomb-elements deriving from the same section of the cemetery and now kept in museum collections worldwide. As a result, an image emerges of a cemetery reserved exclusively for courtiers. They include stewards of royal memorial temples, royal butlers, high ranking army officials, overseers of (royal) construction works, “harem” officials, and high priests. 127

The third phase pertains to the time period following the burial of Ry. The brief discussion here will be limited to developments in the early Nineteenth Dynasty. Changes were made to existing tombs and new chapels were sometimes added. As a result, the available spaces between pre-existing structures decreased. The son of Pay, Raia ( temp . Horemheb-Seti I), enlarged his father’s tomb by constructing an open forecourt. The free space between the tombs of Ry and Pay was clearly limited. Space constraints influenced the form and layout of the newly built annex. 128 The walled court is asymmetrical and it is aligned with the west face of Ry’s pyramid (Fig. 2). An axial approach to the new tomb entrance was not an option. Instead, the builders had to shift the doorway to the north. 129

In the areas to the north and east of the tomb of Ry, more chapels dating to the (early) Ramesside period dot the map. These chapels are all founded on a higher surface compared to the floor level of Ry, the result of an accumulation of tafl from the excavation of the underground burial spaces of the Ramesside chapels. Directly in front of the tomb of Pay and Raia stood a chapel of which today only the stela emplacement and tomb shaft survive. 130 In the same general area stood another two funerary monuments. The one built halfway between Meryneith and Ry is noteworthy. It comprises a four-sided stela 46 inscribed for a Stonemason named Samut. The stela stood there apparently without an accompanying superstructure – at least not one built in durable material, such as mud bricks. 131 The space east of Ry was occupied by a chapel built for a Priest of the Front of Ptah, Tatia. 132 A final chapel, numbered 2013/7, was positioned right against the south side of the east facade of Ry’s tomb. 133 This chapel also dates to the Ramesside period. The walls south of it may be of the same date. The nature of the relationship between the two needs to be further investigated in the field. The porch leading up to the entrance doorway of Ry’s tomb may have been constructed in conjunction with the building activities just described. In so doing, Ry, or rather those responsible for the tomb’s maintenance (perhaps members of his household), changed the approach to the monument. The new construction “funnelled” visitors from the north towards the south, and fenced off the tomb entrance from the tafl accumulating outside. The position of the shaft connected to the chapel built against the facade of Ry’s tomb (if identified correctly) suggests that the “dead-end road” leading up to it served as its courtyard.

Ry’s neighbour to the south: The Army General, Amenemone?

In the section dealing with the architecture of the tomb, it was noted that Ry had his tomb built against a pre-existing wall. The structure that wall belongs to has yet to be fully excavated. It is very likely that it is also a tomb. Judging from the monumental dimensions of the wall, the individual for whom it was built was a high-ranking official. That Ry built his tomb against it may indicate that the two men were closely associated in life. Their relationship could have been professional in nature or based on kinship. The question I would like to address here is: who was buried south of Ry?

The spatial distribution of tombs according to the titles held by their owners may help us to identify Ry’s southern neighbour. 134 The bearers of certain titles are clustered in specific sections of the Saqqara necropolis. 135 Starting from this observation, I have previously tried to identify the section of the necropolis where the “lost” tomb of Amenemone (late Eighteenth Dynasty, temp . Tutankhamun-Horemheb) was most likely situated. Amenemone held a great number of titles, including im.y-rA mSa wr (n.y nb tA.wy) , General (of the Lord of the Two Lands) and im.y-rA pr m/n tA Hw.t Mn-xpr-Ra di anx , Great Steward in/of the temple of Thutmosis III. 136 Stone elements deriving from his tomb are dispersed in many public and private collections around the world. 137 The only indication for its supposed location was given by Karl Richard Lepsius. In 1843, he noted that various blocks inscribed for Amenemone were reused in the masonry of houses at Abusir village. 138 His observation has led scholars to suggest that the lost tomb should be situated in the vicinity of that village in northern Saqqara. 139 In my view, the titles held by Amenemone suggest that his tomb was situated not in northern Saqqara, but in the Unas South Cemetery. 140 In precisely this section of the necropolis a number of (near-)contemporary, late Eighteenth Dynasty im.yw-rA mSa wr.w , Generals of the Army, built their tombs. The most prominent among them is the future king Horemheb. 141 It is also the section of the necropolis “inhabited” by a number of high officials who administered royal memorial temples at Saqqara and at Thebes. 142

With the identification of the tomb of Ry in precisely this section of the necropolis, additional evidence can be added to the discussion. Pivotal to the argument is the fact that, at an earlier stage in his career, Amenemone held office as Chief of Bowmen. It is very unusual for bearers of that title to rise to the rank of General. 143 The office usually paves the way to becoming an Overseer of Horses, as did Ry. In the immediate post-Amarna period some military officials made unusual steps in their careers. Amenemone’s unusual career has been explained in view of the administrative reformations implemented by Horemheb early in his reign. 144 These reformations also affected the organisation of the military, resulting in the sudden rise to prominence of a number of army officials. One of them was Paramessu, the future king Ramesses I, who started his military career as an Overseer of Bowmen. He first rose to the rank of Overseer of Horses and eventually shifted ranks to become General and later Vizier. 145 It has also been noted that the position of commander-in-chief of the army was occupied by only one official at any given time. 146 Thus in the reign of Horemheb, 47 Amenemone was the highest ranking official in charge of the army. He succeeded Horemheb, who had become king. At the same time, another official, Paramessu, took up Horemheb’s offices in the civil administration. 147

The contemporaries Amenemone and Ry held the same ranks in the army. All changed when Horemheb became king: Ry’s acquaintance (if assessed correctly) obtained the highest office in the army. Their close professional relationship in life may have led to their tombs being intentionally placed in close proximity to each other. The spot selected by Ry became prime cemetery real estate since it was located in close vicinity of the now-royal tomb of Horemheb. 148

From disiecta membra to writing a history of the early modern excavations at Saqqara

When was the tomb of Ry first excavated and how did the various tomb elements end up in museum collections around the world? This section is meant to provide a brief outline of the early modern excavation of the tomb by bringing together the collection histories of the individual tomb elements.

The first documented excavations at Saqqara date to the early 1820s. This was during a time of a growing interest in Ancient Egyptian antiquities, which led to a surge of art collectors, dealers, agents and gangs of local workmen exploiting the Saqqara plateau in search of valuables and collectables. Portable ancient Egyptian objects and inscribed tomb-elements were transferred to the private collections of Europeans living in Egypt. The subsequent sales of their private collections contributed to the dispersal of entire tomb structures. The tomb of Ry suffered this fate as well.

The relief-decorated blocks now held in the Egyptian Museum in Berlin were removed first. They entered the private collection of Giuseppe (Joseph) Passalacqua (1797–1865), an Italian horse-dealer who took to excavating and collecting antiquities in Egypt. 149 He built his collection in the early 1820s and offered it for sale in Paris in 1826. 150 In the following year, Friedrich Wilhelm III of Prussia acquired it for the Egyptian Museum in Berlin. The collection included stone elements from at least eighteen New Kingdom tombs located at Saqqara, mostly stelae. 151 At the time, the objects’ exact provenances were not recorded. Recent excavations in the Unas South Cemetery have unearthed tomb-elements deriving from the same tombs previously visited by Passalacqua. Relief-decorated blocks from the tomb of Wepwawetmes were found near the southwest chapel of the tomb of Horemheb 152 and perhaps south of the tomb of Ptahemwia, reused in the dry-stone wall around the shaft of Tatia, 153 and two blocks from the tomb of Panehsy were found south of the south exterior wall of Horemheb. 154 The stela of Ramose, Deputy of the Army, could be contextualised when the entire tomb was excavated north of the northwest chapel of Horemheb. 155 The small chapel of Khay, Gold Washer of the Lord of the Two Lands, is situated in the cramped space between the tombs of Horemheb and Ramose. 156 These finds suggest that the agents working for Passalacqua concentrated their excavations in the area south of the Step Pyramid. His illustrious contemporaries, Giovanni d’Anastasi and Giuseppe Nizzoli, did the same. 157 A few years after Passalacqua, in 1843, the expedition led by Prussian scholar Karl Richard Lepsius (1810–84) set up camp at Saqqara. Lepsius does not mention Ry, but we do know that he worked close by. Two stelae inscribed for Raia stood just a few steps west of the chapel of Ry. 158 Lepsius numbered the tomb LS 28 and indicated it on his map. The two stelae were subsequently taken to Berlin, where they received inventory numbers ÄM 7270 and 7271.

The Englishman Henry Abbott (1807–1859) was a former physician in the army of Muhammad Ali. 159 He settled in Cairo in 1838, where he acquired a collection of more than 1,200 objects. 160 This included the Brooklyn stela formerly in the courtyard of Ry’s tomb and the relief-decorated block from the entrance doorway. There is no information about the circumstances of their acquisition. Abbott narrates that he “found it an agreeable pastime to dive into the tombs of the ancients and rescue from the hands of the many pilferers such objects as appeared (…) worthy of notice”. 161 Others assured that “[m]any of the objects were found in tombs opened in the presence of Dr. Abbott”. 162 Whether or not Abbott was personally involved in the excavation of the stela is not known. We do know that he bought predominantly from dragomans and art dealers. Thus, he 48 may not have witnessed the stela and relief block being removed from the tomb. Since the two elements were located in close proximity at the entrance to the chapel, it is likely that they were both removed by the same (group of) excavator(s) at the same time. Abbott’s private collection was eventually shipped from Egypt to the U.S. in 1851–52. There it was acquired by the New York Historical Society (NYHS) in 1860. The NYHS collection was later transferred on loan to the Brooklyn Museum, which eventually purchased it in 1948.

The pyramidion of Ry was first thought to have come from Abydos. According to his own recollection, Auguste Mariette (1821–81), the first director of the newly founded Egyptian Antiquities Service, had excavated it there on the east slope of the central cemetery. 163 Curiously, in the Journal d’entrée of the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, it is noted that the object was found “at Memphis”. 164 The apparent mix-up has recently been cleared. Mariette’s unpublished inventaire , the precursor of the Journal d’entrée , lists the pyramidion among the finds he made at Saqqara in February 1861. 165 In the late 1850s and early 1860s, Mariette engaged in excavations south of the Step Pyramid at Saqqara to gather a collection for the soon-to-be-opened Boulaq Museum. 166

The tomb of Ry probably disappeared again below the desert sand soon after Mariette’s exploration. It was not until 1906-1907 that James Quibell (1867–1935) shifted attention to a previously unexplored area to the south of the Step Pyramid. 167 There, Egyptian sebakhin had uncovered a wall decorated with murals of the former Coptic monastery of Apa Jeremias. Quibell carried out large-scale excavations, which yielded many relief-decorated blocks of New Kingdom date. These blocks had been taken from the nearby tombs in the early centuries CE and reused in the construction of the monastery’s buildings. At the beginning of the twentieth century, undocumented and illicit digging probably continued, because new objects appeared on the art market after Quibell closed his excavations in 1912. The German Fr. Cleophas Steinhauser (1872–1927), who moved to Egypt in 1904 to become a friar in the Franciscan Order and cemetery keeper of the mission in 1907, gathered his collection of antiquities in the first two decades of the twentieth century. 168 He often had local villagers collect ancient objects which he then examined and eventually bought. It is not known exactly when, from whom or under what circumstances he got possession of the relief-decorated block from the tomb of Ry. 169 And it is not known when the block was removed from the tomb of Ry, or by whom. Steinhauser presented his collection, which amounted to more than 1,000 objects, to the Studium Biblicum Franciscanum in Jerusalem in the 1920s. 170 The collection is scheduled to be on permanent display in the Terra Sancta Museum. It is not known when the block was removed from the tomb of Ry, or by whom.

The virtual reconstruction of the tomb as presented in this article shows that a significant number of relief-decorated blocks and at least one stela are still missing. It is hoped that continued excavations at Saqqara and arm-chair archaeological work will improve our understanding of the monument, its place in the development of the Saqqara necropolis, and its early-modern excavation history.

This article was written with financial support of a Vidi Talent Scheme research grant awarded by the Dutch Research Council (NWO), dossier no. 016.Vidi.174.032. The project, The Walking Dead at Saqqara: The Making of a Cultural Geography , is hosted at the Leiden University Institute for Area Studies, School of Middle Eastern Studies (2017-2022). I would like to thank the Walking Dead team members, Lara Weiss and Huw Twiston Davies, as well as Barbara Aston, Maarten Raven, the two anonymous reviewers of the Rivista del Museo Egizio and its editor-in-chief, Federico Poole, for their kind feedback and suggestions on earlier drafts of this article and Robbert Jan Looman and Peter Jan Bomhof for access to the Saqqara photo archive at the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Leiden. The opinions expressed in this article as well as any mistakes obviously rest solely with the author. As a token of appreciation, I would like to dedicate this study to Geoffrey T. Martin, the initiator of the modern excavations in the Unas South Cemetery, who generously shared with me his personal archive of New Kingdom Memphite material. Photos kept in The Martin New Kingdom Archive allowed me to unlock the identity of the tomb owner discussed in the present paper.

Abbott, H. , Catalogue of a Collection of Egyptian Antiquities, the Property of Henry Abbott, M.D. Now Exhibiting at the Stuyvesant Institute, No. 659 Broadway, New York , New York 1854.

Álvarez Sosa, M., A. Chicuri Lastra, and I. Morfini , La Colección Egipcia del Museo Nacional de Belles Artes de la Habana / The Egyptian Collection of the National Museum of Fine Arts in Havana , Havana 2015.

Ashmawy Ali, A. , “The Administration of Horse Stables in Ancient Egypt”, Ä&L 24 (2014), pp. 121–39.

Assam, M.H. , Arte Egípcia: colecçao Calouste Gulbenkian , Lisbon 1991.

Assmann, J. , Liturgische Lieder an den Sonnengott: Untersuchungen zur altägyptischen Hymnik, I. (MÄS 19), Berlin 1969.

Assmann, J. , Ägyptische Hymnen und Gebete: eingeleitet, übersetzt und erläutert von Jan Assmann , Zürich 1975.

Assmann, J. , Sonnenhymnen in thebanischen Gräbern (Theben 1), Mainz 1983.

Aston, B.G. , “The Pottery”, in M.J. Raven, R. van Walsem, B.G. Aston, and E. Strouhal, “Preliminary Report on the Leiden Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2002: The Tomb of Meryneith”, JEOL 37 (2003), pp. 101–02.

Aston, B.G. , “Study of Pottery”, in M.J. Raven, H.M. Hays, B.G. Aston, L. Horáčková, N. Warner, and M. Neilson, “Preliminary Report on the Leiden Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2009: The Tombs of Khay II and Tatia”, JEOL 42 (2010), pp. 17–18.

Aston, B.G. , “Study of Pottery”, in M.J. Raven, H.M. Hays, B.G. Aston, R. Cappers, B. Deslandes, and L. Horáčková, “Preliminary Report on the Leiden Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2010: An Anonymous Tomb”, JEOL 43 (2011), pp. 13–14.

Aston, B.G. , “Study of Pottery’, in M.J. Raven, B.G. Aston, L. Horáčková, D. Picchi, and A. Bleeker, “Preliminary Report on the Leiden Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2013: The Tombs of Sethnakht and an Anonymous Official”, JEOL 44 (2012–13), pp. 20–22.

Aston, B.G. , “Pottery”, in M.J. Raven, L. Weiss, B.G. Aston, S. Inskip, and N. Warner, “Preliminary Report on the Leiden-Turin Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2015: The Tomb of an Anonymous Official (Tomb X) and Its Surroundings”, JEOL 45 (2014–15), pp. 16–17.

Baud, M. and É. Drioton , Le tombeau de Roÿ (tombeau no. 255) (MIFAO 57.1), Cairo 1928.

Berlandini-Grenier, J. , “Le dignitaire Ramesside Ramsès-em-per-Rê”, BIFAO 74 (1974), pp. 1–19.

Berlandini, J. , “Varia Memphitica III – Le general Ramsès-Nakht”, BIFAO 79 (1979), pp. 249–65.

Berlandini, J., “Les tombes amarniennes et d’époque Toutânkhamon à Sakkara. Critères stylistiques”, in Anonymous (ed.), L’égyptologie en 1979 : axes prioritaires de recherches, Tome II , Paris 1982, pp. 195–212.

Binder, S. , The Gold of Honour in New Kingdom Egypt (ACE-Stud. 8), Oxford 2008.

Blackman, A.M. , “The Nugent and Haggard Collections of Ancient Egypt”, JEA 4 (1917), pp. 39–46.

Boeser, P.A.A. , Beschrijving van de Egyptische verzameling in het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden te Leiden: De monumenten van het Nieuwe Rijk. Eerste afdeeling: Graven , The Hague 1911.

Boeser, P.A.A. , Beschrijving van de Egyptische verzameling in het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden te Leiden: De monumenten van het Nieuwe Rijk. Derde afdeeling: Stèles , The Hague 1913.

Bonomi, J. , Catalogue of a Collection of Egyptian Antiquities, the Property of Henry Abbott , Cairo 1846.

Bosticco, S. , Museo Archeologico di Firenze: le stele egiziane del Nuovo Regno , Rome 1965.

Botti, G. , I cimeli egizi del Museo di Antichità di Parma (Accademia Toscana di Scienze e Lettere "La Colombaria": studi 9), Florence 1964.

Botti, G. and P. Romanelli , Le sculture del Museo Gregoriano Egizio (Monumenti vaticani di archeologia e d'arte 9), Vatican 1951.

Daoud, K. , “The Tomb of the Royal Envoy Nakht-Min”, EA 38 (2011), pp. 7–9.

Daoud, K., S. Farag, and C. Eyre , “Nakht-Min: Ramesses II’s Charioteer and Envoy”, EA 48 (2016), pp. 9–13.

Davies, B.G. , Who’s Who at Deir el-Medina. A Prosopographic Study of the Royal Workmen’s Community (EU 13), Leiden 1999.

Davis, T.M. , The Funeral Papyrus of Iouiya (Theodore M. Davis’ Excavations 3), London 1908.

Dawson, W.R., U.P. Uphill, and M.L. Bierbrier , Who Was Who in Egyptology , 4 th rev. ed., London 2012.

Del Vesco, P., C. Greco, M. Müller, N. Staring, and L. Weiss , "Current Research of the Leiden-Turin Archaeological Mission in Saqqara. A Preliminary Report on the 2018 Season", RiME 3 (2019), DOI: https://doi.org/10.29353/rime.2019.2236 .

Del Vesco, P. and L. Weiss , “A Brief Report on the 2017 Season (2): The Leiden-Turin Expedition to Saqqara: Excavating to the North of Maya’s Tomb”, Saqqara Newsletter 15, pp. 19–26.

Díaz-Iglesias Llanos, L. , “Human and Material Aspects in the Process of Transmission and Copying the Book of the Dead in the Tomb of Djehuty (TT 11)”, in N. Staring, H.P. Twiston Davies, and L. Weiss (eds.), Perspectives on Lived Religion: Practices – Transmission – Landscape , Leiden 2019, pp. 147–64.

Djuževa, O. , “Das Grab des Generals Ameneminet in Saqqara”, in M. Bárta and J. Krejčí (eds.), Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2000 (ArOr-Suppl. 9), Prague 2000, pp. 77–98.

Dorman, P.F. , The Tombs of Senenmut: The Architecture and Decoration of Tombs 71 and 353 (PMMA 24), New York 1991.

Erman, A. , Ausführliches Verzeichnis der aegyptischen Altertümer und Gipsabgüsse , Berlin 1899.

Faulkner, R.O. , The Ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts: Spells 1–1185 & Indexes , Warminster 2004.

Fründt, E. , “Eine Gruppe memphitischer Grabreliefs des Neuen Reiches”, FuB 3/2 (1961), pp. 25–31.

Gaballa, G.A. , “False Door Stelae of Some Memphite Personnel”, SAK 7 (1979), pp. 41–52.

Galán, J.M. , “The Inscribed Burial Chamber of Djehuty (TT 11)”, in J.M. Galán, B.M. Bryan and P.F. Dorman (eds.), Creativity and Innovation in the Reign of Hatshepsut: Papers from the Theban Workshop 2010 (SAOC 69), Chicago 2014, pp. 247–72.

Gessler-Löhr, B. , “Reliefblock aus dem Grab des Generalissimus Amen-em-inet”, in E. Feucht (ed), Vom Nil zum Neckar: Kunstschätze Ägyptens aus Pharaonischer und Koptischer Zeit an der Universität Heidelberg , Berlin 1986, pp. 72–73.

Gessler-Löhr, B. , “Bemerkungen zur Nekropole des Neuen Reiches von Saqqara vor der Amarna-Zeit, I: Gräber der Wesire von Unterägypten”, in D. Kessler and R. Schulz (eds.), Gedenkschrift für Winfried Barta: Htp dj n Hzj (MÄU 4), Frankfurt am Main 1995, pp. 133–57.

Gessler-Löhr, B. , “Bemerkungen zur Nekropole des Neuen Reiches von Saqqara vor der Amarna-Zeit, II: Gräber der Bürgermeister von Memphis”, OMRO 77 (1997), pp. 31–61.

Gessler-Löhr, B. , “Pre-Amarna Tomb Chapels in the Teti Cemetery North at Saqqara”, BACE 18 (2007), pp. 65–108.

Gessler-Löhr, B. , “The Provenance of the Block and Ipy’s Tomb at Saqqara”, in S. Pasquali and B. Gessler-Löhr, “Un nouveau relief du grand intendant de Memphis, Ipy, et le temple de Ptah du terrain- baḥ ”, BIFAO 111 (2011), pp. 287–96.

Giovetti, P. and D. Picchi , Egitto: Splendore millenario. La collezione di Leiden a Bologna , Milano 2015.

Gnirs, A.M. , “Haremhab – ein Staatsreformator? Neue Betrachtungen zum Haremhab-Dekret”, SAK 16 (1989), pp. 83–110.

Gnirs, A.M. , Militär und Gesellschaft: ein Beitrag zur Sozialgeschichte des Neuen Reiches (SAGA 17), Heidelberg 1996.

Guksch, H. , Königsdienst: zur Selbstdarstellung der Beamten in der 18. Dynastie (SAGA 11), Heidelberg 1994.

Haring, B.J.J. , Divine Households: Administrative and Economic Aspects of the New Kingdom Royal Memorial Temples in Western Thebes (EU 12), Leiden 1997.

Hartwig, M. , Tomb Painting and Identity in Ancient Thebes, 1419–1372 BCE (Monumenta Aegyptiaca 10), Turnhout 2004.

Hawass, Z.H. , Secrets from the Sand: My Search for Egypt’s Past , New York 2003.

Hayes, W.C. , “A Writing-Palette of the Chief Steward Amenhotep and Some Notes on Its Owner”, JEA 24 (1938), pp. 9–24.

Hays, H. , “On the Architectural Development of Monumental Tombs South of the Unas Causeway at Saqqara from the Reigns of Akhenaten to Ramses II”, in M. Bárta, F. Coppens, and J. Krejčí (eds.), Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2010 , Prague 2011, I, pp. 84–105.

Herzberg, A. , “Zu den memphitischen Grabreliefs in der Sammlung des Ägyptischen Museums – Georg Steindorff – der Universität Leipzig”, ZÄS 143/1 (2016), pp. 34–59.

Herzberg, A. , “Grabstele des Ry und seiner Frau Maja”, in F. Kampp-Seyfried and M . Jung (eds.), China und Ägypten: Wiegen der Welt , Berlin 2017, pp. 198–99.

Hofmann, E. , Bilder im Wandel. Die Kunst der ramessidischen Privatgräber (Theben 17), Mainz 2004.

HTBM 8 = Edwards, I.E.S. , Hieroglyphic Texts from Egyptian Stelae, etc. Part 8 , London 1939.

James, T.G.H. , Corpus of Hieroglyphic Inscriptions in the Brooklyn Museum , Brooklyn 1974.

Johnson, W.R. , and Z. Hawass , "The Abusir Tutankhamun Relief Blocks: Origin and Context", in J. van Dijk (ed.), Another Mouthful of Dust. Egyptological Studies in Honour of Geoffrey Thorndike Martin (OLA 246), Leuven 2016, pp. 323–34.

Kákosy, L., T.A. Bács, Z. Bartos, Z.I. Fábián, and E. Gaál, The Mortuary Monument of Djehutymes (TT 32) (StudAeg Series Maior 1), Budapest 2004.

Katary, S.L.D. , “Cultivator, Scribe, Stablemaster, Soldier: The Late-Egyptian Miscellanies in Light of P. Wilbour”, in J.K. Hoffmeier and E.S. Meltzer (eds.), Egyptological Miscellanies: A Tribute to Professor Ronald J. Williams , Chicago 1983, pp. 71–93.

Kawai, N. , “Ay Versus Horemheb: The Political Situation in the Late Eighteenth Dynasty Revisited”, JEH 3/2 (2010), pp. 261–92.

Laboury, D. , “On the Master Painter of the Tomb of Amenhotep Sise, Second High Priest of Amun Under the Reign of Thutmose IV (TT 75)”, in R. Jasnow and K.N. Cooney (eds.), Joyful in Thebes: Egyptological Studies in Honor of Betsy M. Bryan (Material and Visual Culture of Ancient Egypt 1), Atlanta 2015, pp. 327–37.

Lacau, P. , Stèles du Nouvel Empire , CGC Nos 34001–34064, 34065–34189, Cairo 1909–16.

Lacher, C., Das Grab des Königs Ninetjer in Saqqara: architektonische Entwicklung frühzeitlicher Grabanlagen in Ägypten (AV 125), Wiesbaden 2014.

L D = Lepsius, C.R. , Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien , Leipzig 1897–1913.

Löhr, B. , “Aḫanjāti in Memphis”, SAK 2 (1975), pp. 139–87.

Löhr, B. and H.W. Müller , Staatliche Sammlung Ägyptischer Kunst , Munich 1972.

Lucarelli, R. , The Book of the Dead of Gatseshen. Ancient Egyptian Funerary Religion in the 10 th Century BC (EU 21), Leiden 2006.

Lüscher, B. , Totenbuch Spruch 149/150 (Totenbuchtexte - Synoptische Textausgabe nach Quellen des Neuen Reiches 6), Basel 2010.

Málek, J. , “An Early Eighteenth Dynasty Monument of Sipair from Saqqâra”, JEA 75 (1989), pp. 61–76.

Manniche, L. , Egyptian Art in Denmark , Copenhagen 2004.

Mariette, A. , Monuments divers recueillis en Egypte et en Nubie , Paris 1872.

Mariette, A. , Catalogue général des monuments d’Abydos découverts pendant les fouilles de cette ville , Paris 1880.

Martin, G.T. , The Tomb-Chapels of Paser and Ra’ia at Saqqâra (EES EM 52), London 1985.

Martin, G.T. , Corpus of Reliefs of the New Kingdom from the Memphite Necropolis and Lower Egypt , London 1987.

Martin, G.T. , The Memphite Tomb of Horemheb, Commander-in-Chief of Tut’ankhamūn, I: The Reliefs, Inscriptions, and Commentary (EES EM 55), London 1989.

Martin, G.T., The Hidden Tombs of Memphis. New Discoveries from the Time of Tutankhamun and Ramesses the Great , London 1991.

Martin, G.T. , The Tomb of Tia and Tia: A Royal Monument of the Ramesside Period in the Memphite Necropolis (EES EM 58), London 1997.

Martin, G.T. , The Tombs of Three Memphite Officials: Ramose, Khay and Pabes (EES EM 66), London 2001.

Martin, G.T. , The Tomb of Maya and Meryt, I: The Reliefs, Inscriptions, and Commentary (EES EM 99), London 2012.

Milde, H. , The Vignettes in the Book of the Dead of Neferrenpet (EU 7), Leiden 1991.

Milde, H. , “ ‘Going Out into the Day.’ Ancient Egyptian Beliefs and Practices Concerning Death”, in J.M. Bremer, T.P.J. van den Hout, and R. Peters (eds.), Hidden Futures. Death and Immortality in Ancient Egypt, Anatolia, the Classical, Biblical and Arabic-Islamic World , Amsterdam 1994, pp. 15–34.

NYHS = Catalogue of the Egyptian Antiquities of the New York historical Society , New York 1915.

Ockinga, B.G. , Amenemone, the Chief Goldsmith: A New Kingdom Tomb in the Teti Cemetery at Saqqara (Australian Centre for Egyptology: Reports 22), Oxford 2004.

Ockinga, B.G. , “Evidence for New Kingdom Tomb Structures in the Teti Pyramid Cemetery North: Insights from the Macquarie Excavations”, in L. Evans (ed.), Ancient Memphis ‘Enduring is the Perfection’: Proceedings of the International Conference held at Macquarie University, Sydney on August 14-15, 2008 (OLA 214), Leuven 2012, pp. 371–95.

Oeters, V. , “The Tomb of Tatia, Wab -priest of the Front of Ptah and Chief of the Goldsmiths”, in V. Verschoor, A.J. Stuart, and C. Demarée (eds.), Imaging and Imagining the Memphite Necropolis: Liber Amicorum René van Walsem (EU 30), Leiden 2017, pp. 57–80.

Otto, E. , Das ägyptische Mundöffnungsritual (ÄgAbh 3), Wiesbaden 1960.

Pasquali, S. , Topographie cultuelle de Memphis 1. a- Corpus: Temples et principaux quartiers de la XVIII e dynastie (Cahiers « Égypte Nilotique et Méditerranéenne » 4), Montpellier 2011.

Pasquali, S. , “Les fouilles d’Auguste Mariette à Saqqara (1858–1875). Les tombeaux du Nouvel Empire”, in M. Bárta, F. Coppens, and J. Krejčí (eds.), Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2015 , Prague 2017, pp. 557–82.

Pasquali, S. and B. Gessler-Löhr , “Un nouveau relief du grand intendant de Memphis, Ipy, et le temple de Ptah du terrain- baH ”, BIFAO 111 (2011), pp. 287–96.

Passalacqua, J. , Catalogue raisonné et historique des antiquités découvertes en Égypte , Paris 1826.

Piccirillo, M. , Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Jerusalem , Jerusalem 1983.

Polz, D. , “Die Särge des (Pa)-Ramessu”, MDAIK 42 (1986), pp. 145–66.

Polz, D. , Der Beginn des Neuen Reiches: zur Vorgeschichte einer Zeitenwende (SDAIK 31), Berlin 2007.

Poole, F. , “Flawed and Fine? The Statue of Hel in the Museo Egizio, Turin (Cat. 7352)”, RiME 3 (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.29353/rime.2019.2808 .

Quibell, J.E. , Excavations at Saqqara (1906-1907) , Cairo 1908.

Quibell, J.E. , Excavations at Saqqara (1908-9, 1909-10): The Monastery of Apa Jeremias , Cairo 1912.

Quirke, S. , Going Out in Daylight: prt m hrw . The Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead: Translation, Sources, Meanings (GHP Egyptology 20), London 2013.

Raedler, C. , “Rank and Favour at the Early Ramesside Court”, in R. Gundlach and J.H. Taylor (eds.), Egyptian Royal Residences: 4. Symposium zur ägyptischen Königsideologie / 4 th Symposium on Egyptian Royal Ideology, London, June 1 st –5 th 2004 (KSG 4/1), Wiesbaden 2009, pp. 131–51.

Raedler, C. , “ ‚Kopf der Schenut‘ —politische Entscheidungsträger der Ära Ramses’ II.”, in H. Beinlich (ed.), 6. Symposium zur ägypischen Königsideologie / 6 th Symposium on Egyptian Royal Ideology „Die Männer hinter dem König “ (KSG 4/3), Wiesbaden 2012, pp. 123–50.

Rammant-Peeters, A. , Les pyramidions égyptiens du Nouvel Empire (OLA 11), Leuven 1983.

Ranke, H. , Die ägyptischen Personennamen , Glückstadt 1935.

Raue, D. , “Zum memphitischen Privatgrab im Neuen Reich”, MDAIK 51 (1995), pp. 255–68.

Raven, M.J. , The Tomb of Pay and Raia at Saqqara (EES EM 74), Leiden 2005.

Raven, M.J. , “A Brief Report on the 2013 Season”, Saqqara Newsletter 11 (2013), pp. 5–11.

Raven, M.J. , “A Brief Report on the 2017 Season (1): The South Sector”, Saqqara Newsletter 15 (2017), pp. 10–18.

Raven, M.J. et al., Five New Kingdom Tombs at Saqqara , forthcoming.

Raven, M.J. et al., The Tombs of Ptahemwia and Sethnakht (PALMA 22), Leiden forthcoming.

Raven, M.J., B.G. Aston, L. Horáčková, D. Picchi, and A. Bleeker , “Preliminary Report on the Leiden Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2013: The Tombs of Sethnakht and an Anonymous Official”, JEOL 44 (2012–13), pp. 3–21.

Raven, M.J., H.M. Hays, B.G. Aston, L. Horáčková, N. Warner, and M. Neilson , “Preliminary Report on the Leiden Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2009: The Tombs of Khay II and Tatia”, JEOL 42 (2010), pp. 5–24.

Raven, M.J., H.M. Hays, B.G. Aston, R. Cappers, B. Deslandes, and L. Horáčková , “Preliminary Report on the Leiden Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2010: An Anonymous Tomb”, JEOL 43 (2011), pp. 3–18.

Raven, M.J. and R. van Walsem , The Tomb of Meryneith at Saqqara (PALMA 10), Turnhout 2014.

Raven, M.J., R. van Walsem, B.G. Aston, and E. Strouhal , “Preliminary Report on the Leiden Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2002: The Tomb of Meryneith”, JEOL 37 (2003), pp. 71–89.

Raven, M.J., V. Verschoor, M. Vugts, and R. van Walsem , The Memphite Tomb of Horemheb, Commander-in-Chief of Tutankhamun, V: The Forecourt and the Area South of the Tomb with Some Notes on the Tomb of Tia (PALMA 6), Turnhout 2011.

Raven, M.J., L. Weiss, B.G. Aston, S. Inskip, and N. Warner , “Preliminary Report on the Leiden-Turin Excavations at Saqqara, Season 2015: The Tomb of an Anonymous Official (Tomb X) and Its Surroundings”, JEOL 45 (2014–15), pp. 3–17.

Raver, W.S. , “The Sad Egyptological Career of Dr. Henry Abbott, M.D.”, BES 13 (1997), pp. 39–45.

Regulski, I., C. Lacher and A. Hood, “Preliminary Report on the Excavations in the Second Dynasty Necropolis at Saqqara: Season 2009”, JEOL 42 (2010), pp. 25–53.

Roeder, G. , Ägyptische Inschriften aus den Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, II: Inschriften des Neuen Reichs , Leipzig 1924.

Saleh, M. , Das Totenbuch in den thebanischen Beamtengräbern des Neuen Reiches: Texte und Vignetten (AV 46), Mainz 1984.

Schneider, H.D. , The Memphite Tomb of Horemheb, Commander-in-Chief of Tut’ankhamūn, II: A Catalogue of the Finds (EES EM 60), Leiden 1996.

Schneider, H.D. , The Tomb of Iniuia in the New Kingdom Necropolis of Memphis at Saqqara (PALMA 8), Turnhout 2012.

Schneider, H.D., G.T. Martin, J. van Dijk, B.G. Aston, R. Perizonius, and E. Strouhal , “The Tomb of Iniuia: Preliminary Report on the Saqqara Excavations, 1993”, JEA 79 (1993), pp. 1–9.

Schneider, H.D., G.T. Martin, J. van Dijk, B.G. Aston, R. Perizonius, and E. Strouhal , “The Tomb-Complex of Pay and Rai'a: Preliminary Report on the Excavations, 1994 Season”, OMRO 75 (1995), pp. 13–31.

Schulman, A.R. , “The Egyptian Chariotry: A Reexamination”, JARCE 2 (1963), pp. 75–98.

Schulman, A.R. , Military Rank, Title, and Organization in the Egyptian New Kingdom (MÄS 6), Berlin 1964.

Sheikholeslami, C.M. , “Some Theban Choachytes of the Third Intermediate Period”, in C. Jurman, B. Bader, and D.A. Aston (eds.), A True Scribe of Abydos: Essays on First Millennium Egypt in Honour of Anthony Leahy (OLA 265), Leuven 2017, pp. 415–44.

Staring, N. , “A Relief from the Tomb of the Memphite Mayor Ptahmose in the Nasher Museum of Art at Duke University”, BACE 25 (2014), pp. 117–46.

Staring, N. , “The Tomb of Ptahmose, Mayor of Memphis: Analysis of an Early Nineteenth Dynasty Funerary Monument at Saqqara”, BIFAO 114/2 (2014), pp. 455–518.

Staring, N. , “The Personnel of the Theban Ramesseum in the Memphite Necropolis”, JEOL 45 (2014–15), pp. 51–92.

Staring, N. , “The History and Topography of a New Kingdom Necropolis”, in P. Giovetti and D. Picchi (eds.), Egypt: Millenary Splendour. The Leiden Collection in Bologna , Milan 2016, pp. 210–15.

Staring, N. , “The Tomb of Ptahemwia, ‘Great Overseer of Cattle’ and ‘Overseer of the Treasury of the Ramesseum’, at Saqqara”, JEA 102 (2016), pp. 145–70.

Staring, N. , “The Mid-Nineteenth Century Exploration of the Saqqara New Kingdom Necropolis”, in V. Verschoor, A.J. Stuart, and C. Demarée (eds.), Imaging and Imagining the Memphite Necropolis: Liber Amicorum René van Walsem (EU 30), Leiden 2017, pp. 95–113.

Staring, N. , “Toward a Prosopography of New Kingdom Tomb Owners in the Memphite Necropolis”, in M. Bárta, F. Coppens, and J. Krejčí (eds.), Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2015 , Prague 2017, pp. 593–611.

Staring. N. , “Keys to Unlocking the Identity of ‘Tomb X’: Introducing Horemheb’s Army Official, Ry”, Saqqara Newsletter 16 (2018), pp. 31–46.

Staring, N. , “Piecing Together the Dispersed Tomb of Ry at Saqqara”, EgArch 54 (2019), pp. 41–45.

Stewart, H.M. , “Traditional Egyptian Sun Hymns of the New Kingdom”, BIA 6 (1966), pp. 29–74.

Tawfik, S. , “Recently Excavated Ramesside Tombs at Saqqara, 1. Architecture”, MDAIK 47 (1991), pp. 403–09.

Torrini, B. , “From Egypt to the Holy Land: First Issues on the Collection of the Egyptian Collection in the Studium Biblicum Franciscanum , Jerusalem”, in G. Rosati and M.C. Guidotti (eds.), Proceedings of the XI International Congress of Egyptologists, Florence Egyptian Museum, Florence, 23-30 August 2015 , Oxford 2017, pp. 656–60.

Van Dijk, J. , “The New Kingdom Necropolis of Memphis: Historical and Iconographical Studies” (PhD thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen), Groningen 1993.

Van Dijk, J. , “Hymnen aan Re en Osiris in Memphitische graven van het Nieuwe Rijk”, Phoenix 42/1 (1996), pp. 3–22.

Van Dijk, J. , “A Statue of Yupa and His Wife Nashaia in the New Kingdom Necropolis at Saqqara”, in J. Van Dijk (ed.), Another Mouthful of Dust: Egyptological Studies in Honour of Geoffrey Thorndike Martin (OLA 246), Leuven 2016, pp. 91–106.

Weiss, L. , “New Evidence of Amenhotep II at Saqqara”, Saqqara Newsletter 13 (2015), pp. 46–50.

Weiss, L., “I am Re and Osiris”, in V. Verschoor, A.J. Stuart, and C. Demarée (eds.), Imaging and Imagining the Memphite Necropolis. Liber Amicorum René van Walsem (EU 30), Leiden and Leuven 2017, pp. 215–29.

Willeitner, J. , “Ein neu entdecktes Grab bei Abusir in Ägypten”, AW 24/3 (1993), p. 258.

Youssef, M.M. , “Die Ausgrabungen südlich des Grabes des Nachtmin in Sakkara-Nord”, Sokar 23 (2011), pp. 84–89.

Youssef, M.M. , “The New Kingdom Tomb-Chapels at the Teti Cemetery in Saqqara, According to Recent Discoveries” (PhD thesis, Cairo University), Cairo 2017.

Zivie, A.-P. , La tombe de Maïa, mère nourricière du roi Toutânkhamon et Grande du Harem (Bub. I.20) (Les tombes du Bubasteion à Saqqara 1), Toulouse 2009.

Zivie, A.-P. , “Amenhotep III et l’Ouest de Memphis”, in L. Evans (ed.), Ancient Memphis: ‘Enduring Is the Perfection’: Proceedings of the International Conference Held at Macquarie University, Sydney on August 14–15, 2008 (OLA 214), Leuven 2012, pp. 425–43.

Zivie, A.-P. , “Le vizir et père du dieu ‘Aper-El (‘Abdiel)”, in G. Capriotti Vittozzi (ed.), Egyptian Curses 1: Proceedings of the Egyptological Day Held at the National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Rome, 3 rd December 2012 in the International Conference “Reading Catastrophes: Methodological Approaches and Historical Interpretation. Earthquakes, Floods, Famines, Epidemics Between Egypt and Palestine, 3 rd – 1 st Millennium BC. Rome, 3 rd – 4 th December 2012, CNR – Sapienza University of Rome ” (Archaeological Heritage & Multidisciplinary Egyptological Studies 1), Rome 2014, pp. 85–99.

Zivie, A.-P. , “Pharaoh’s Man, ‘Abdiel: The Vizier with a Semitic Name”, BAR 44/4 (2018), pp. 23–31, 64–65.

Fig. 13a

Tomb of Ry, inner sanctuary, south wall: relief-decorated block Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum ÄM 7277. Photo ©SMB Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung/Sandra Steiß.

This is the head-end of scene [5]. It depicts the lower part of the front leg of a striding male, the tomb owner, facing right (north). He wears a long, plain garment and sandals. This scene mirrors that in [8].

[5] Inner sanctuary, south wall: Block Berlin ÄM 7277(Fig. 13b)

Limestone H. 42.5 cm, w. 110.5 cm, Th. 12 cm Bibliography: Passalacqua, Catalogue raisonné, 1826, p. 73 [1406] Martin, Corpus of Reliefs, 1987, pp. 21–22, [43], pl. 16 Staring, Saqqara Newsletter 16 (2018), figs. 5–6 Staring, EgArch 54 (2019), fig. on p. 43.


1 NON-ROYAL STATUES NEW KINGDOM Dynasties XVIII-XX Stone. Man with a deity A High priest of Memphis, right forearm and lower legs lost, with two hands probably of a seated deity touching the wig at back, uninscribed, black granite, probably temp. Ramesses II, in Grenoble, Musée des Beaux-Arts, Inv Moret in Revue Égyptologique N.S. i (1919), [xii] pl. v [upper left] Kuény, G. L Égypte ancienne au Musée de Grenoble 13th p. [26] fig. id. and Yoyotte, Grenoble, musée des Beaux-Arts. Collection égyptienne (1979), No. 29 fig. See Tresson, Cat. descriptif 51 [26]. Stone. Groups Amenmosi Jmn-ms 1ṫ ae, wife Neferesi(?) Nfr-3st(?) eh M! SB (?), and Panehesi P3-nḥsjj H!7.e and wife Iay J3jj 1!11, all seated, with sons and daughters in relief, Dyn. XIX, in Athens, National Archaeological Museum, 21. Tzachou-Alexandri, O. The World of Egypt in the National Archaeological Museum (1995), 127 [xxvii, 1] fig. Text, Mallet in Rec. Trav. xviii (1896), 12 [546]. Names and titles, Lieblein, Dict. No

2 484 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM Statue group, Ptahmay Ptḥ-mjj #!< P 11, wab-priest of the roof of Ptah lord of truth, with his wife Hatshepsut Ḥ3t-&scaronps(w)t G! 4 Se!, Songstress of Amun, etc., on his left, and daughter Nehy(t) Nhjj(t) 1t1K$!11, Noblewoman of the Great House, on M his right, all seated, with small figures of son Ramosi R i-msw V 4 aek, Servant of the Great House, and daughter Henut-demit Ḥnwt-dmjt < T! f ]1 f!, Songstress of Amun, both standing, with scenes in relief on back of seat, Dyn. XIX, in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, (Probably from Saqqâra.) Aeg. und Vorderasiat. Alterthümer Taf. 18 Ausf. Verz. 136 Abb. 28 Capart, L Art ég. (1911), pl. 168 Hunger, J. and Lamer, H. Altorientalische Kultur im Bilde Abb. 19 Schäfer, Äg. Kunst 27 fig. 2 id. in Die Antike iii (1927), 191 Taf. 14 (repr. in Ägyptische und heutige Kunst und Weltgebäude der alten Ägypter 9 Taf. 1) Fechheimer, Plastik (1914), 28, 42, 47, 57 Taf. 66-7 (1923), 28, 41, 47, 57 Taf. 66-7 Woermann, K. Geschichte der Kunst aller Zeiten und Völker i (1915), Abb. 51 Strömbom, S. Egyptens Konst 162 fig. 137 Pijoán, Summa Artis iii (1945), 440 figs Anthes, Meisterwerke ägyptischer Plastik Taf. xviii (as Dyn. XVIII) id. Aegyptische Plastik in Meisterwerken Taf. 24 (as Dyn. XVIII) Vandier, Manuel iii, 647 pl. cxlviii [3] (from Fechheimer) (as temp. Sethos I) Firchow, Aegyptische Plastik 26 Abb. 12 (as temp. Amenophis III) Führer (1961), 71 Abb. 43 Hornemann, Types vi, pls (as from Memphis) Allam in Das Altertum 16 (1970), fig. on 70 Kleiner Führer durch die Ausstellung des Ägyptischen Museums [n.d.], 45 Abb. 11 (1981), 43 Abb. 11 (as temp. Ramesses II) Burkhardt in Das Altertum 34 (1988), 69 Abb. 1 Finneiser, K. in Äg. Mus. (1991), No. 90 fig. (as temp. Ramesses II and from Saqqâra) Gardiner MSS (photos.). Upper part or head of Nehy(t), Schäfer, Das Bildnis im Alten Ägypten Abb. 14 [a, b] Weigall, Anc. Eg. Art fig. on 261 [left] (as temp. Sethos I) Ranke, The Art of Ancient Egypt and Breasted, Geschichte Aegyptens (1936), 114 (as Dyn. XVIII) Wenig, Die Frau pl. 76 [left]. Text, Aeg. Inschr. ii, 6-8 Seyffarth MSS. v Names and titles, Lieblein, Dict. No See Brugsch, Uebersichtliche Erklaerung (1850), 34-5 [1] Steindorff, G. in The Journal of the Walters Art Gallery v (1942), 10 n. 10 (as early Ramesside and from Memphis) Amenhotep Jmn-ḥtp 1ṫ/, First prophet of Pta h, and his wife Meryt Mrjjt L11!, Songstress of Amun, both seated, with small figure of daughter Takhat T3-h. it!! m +!, Songstress of Amun, standing between them, and other children in relief on front and sides of seat, with text mentioning Amun-Re in Karnak, Mut, and Hathor in Thebes, end of Dyn. XVIII or early Dyn. XIX, in Bologna, Museo Civico Archeologico, (Probably from Thebes.)

3 485 Curto, L Egitto antico 74 [31] Tav. 20 *Ferri, A. Il Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna (1973), 11 [IV, 2] fig. on 13 [lower] Pernigotti in Il Carrobbio iv (1978), Tav. ii, iii fig. 2 id. Statuaria 44-6 [14] Tav. x, liii-lv id. in Morigi Govi, C. and Vitali, D. Il Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna (1982), 130 [B] col. pl. on 50 id. La collezione egiziana 77 fig. M. P. C[esaretti] in Il senso dell arte No. 76 fig. Petrie Ital. photo. 124 H. W. Müller Archive 5 [105/1, 4, 6, 8 317/26, 28, 30]. See *Nizzoli, G. Catalogo dettagliato [etc.] (1827), [2] Kminek-Szedlo, Cat (some text) Ducati, Guida 50 [Q] Vandier, Manuel iii, Mainakht M3j-nh.t 6 t # B!`, Sculptor of Amun, wife Amenemonet Jmn-m-jnt 1ṫ P 1 p t! (upper part lost) on his left and son Kharuef Hrw.f M < h on his right, with a small daughter and son between them, early Dyn. XVIII, in Bologna, Museo Civico Archeologico, Pernigotti in Il Carrobbio iv (1978), Tav. i fig. 1 id. Statuaria 32-3 [5] Tav. iii, xxxii, xxxiii (as probably temp. Tuthmosis I and from Thebes) id. in Morigi Govi, C. and Sassatelli, G. Dalla Stanza delle Antichità al Museo Civico 200 [89] fig. and pl. facing 192 id. La collezione egiziana 65 fig. (as temp. Tuthmosis I or II and from Thebes) P. P[iacentini] in Il senso dell arte No. 45 fig. (as probably temp. Tuthmosis I or II and from Thebes) Feucht, Das Kind im Alten Ägypten 418 Abb. 42 (as No. 473). Upper part of Mainakht, Bresciani, Collezione 50-1 Tav. 24 (as temp. Tuthmosis I and from Thebes). See *Nizzoli, G. Catalogo dettagliato [etc.] (1827), 17 [2] Kminek-Szedlo, Cat (some text) Curto, L Egitto antico 73 [27] (as Setnakht and late Dyn. XVIII) id. in Pelagio Pelagi, artista e collezionista (Bologna, Museo Civico, April-June 1976), No. 473 (as mid-dyn. XVIII) Pernigotti in Morigi Govi, C. and Vitali, D. Il Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna (1982), Siamun S3-jmn 1ṫ G!, Overseer of the great fortress of the Great Green, Overseer of the fortresses of the northern foreign countries, etc., son of Ay ijj 4 11 (mother), with wife Bakt B3kt =?! (upper part lost) on his left and Saa S-i3 B = 4 +, Scribe of documents, on his right, all seated, with [Saa s wife Karifi Krf? Mh! 7 7 standing], 1st half of Dyn. XVIII, formerly in R. Rochette, A. Raifé, A. G. B. Schayes and É. Fétis collns., now in Brussels, Musées Royaux d Art et d Histoire, E Capart in Rec. Trav. xxii (1900), [1] pl. facing 136. Text, Speleers, Rec. inscr. 35 [117]. See Lenormant, Description des antiquités. collection. Raifé (1867), No. 2 bis Vandier, Manuel iii, 654 Lefebvre, F. and Van Rinsveld, B.

4 486 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM L Égypte. Des Pharaons aux Coptes Amenhotep Jmn-ḥtp 1ṫ/, Scribe of food-offerings of Amun at Karnak, and wife seated, with daughter Mutnefert Mwt-nfrt! M.e! standing, and family in relief on back, text mentioning Amun, Atum lord of the Two Lands in Heliopolis, Hathor mistress of Heliopolis, etc., fragmentary, sandstone, Dyn. XVIII, in Cairo Mus. CG See Borchardt, Statuen ii, iii, 123 iv, 6, 21, 24 (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, Senhotep Sn(.j)-ḥtp t 7 /!#, Scribe of the cadaster, with wife Sentnefert Sntnfrt 7!e! and son Senusert S-n-wsrt O B M B! t, Scribe of the cadaster, all seated, fragments of seat with legs and base, with text mentioning Amun-Re i lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, sandstone, Dyn. XVIII, in Cairo Mus. CG See Borchardt, Statuen iii, 163 iv, 57 (text) Man (head lost), woman (upper part of head lost) and [another person] seated, red sandstone, Dyn. XVIII, in Cairo Mus. CG 980. (Bought in Cairo.) See Borchardt, Statuen iv, 14 Vandier, Manuel iii, Man and woman (faces lost), and [another person], with text mentioning Amun-Re lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands and Mut mistress of Asher, schist, Dyn. XVIII, in Cairo Mus. CG See Borchardt, Statuen iv, 31 (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, Man and woman (names lost), with small son standing, and other children, including daughters Mutyu Mwtjjw.!11K and Hatmert Ḥ3t-mrt, in relief on sides of seat, mid-dyn. XVIII, in Cannes, Musée de La Castre, Inv. YIP 14. (Modern copy in Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Ägyptisch-Orientalische Sammlung, ÄS 5771=8408.) Duringe, A. Étude sur quelques monuments égyptiens du Musée archéologique de Cannes (Musée Lycklama) (1907), 6 pl. i Margaine, A.-M. L Égypte ancienne (Petits

5 487 guides des Musées de Cannes, 1), No. 1 figs. and front cover. See Le Nil et la société égyptienne No. 134 (as probably post- iamârna). (Copy Vienna ÄS 5771=8408, Rogge, Statuen N.R figs.) Amenmosi Jmn-ms with wife (or mother) and father, all mummiform, diorite, Dyn. XVIII, in Chicago IL, Field Museum of Natural History, A See Vandier, Manuel iii, 665 (as granite) Man and two women, upper part, small remains of text on man s kilt, with wide back pillar, diorite, mid-dyn. XVIII, in Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Æ.I.N Koefoed-Petersen, Cat. des statues 33 [57] (as 28 in error) pl. 67 (as granite and Dyn. XVIII-XIX) Vandier, Manuel iii, 667 pl. cxlvi [2] (from Koefoed-Petersen) (as granite) Jørgensen, M. Egypt II ( B.C.). Catalogue. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 78-9 [19] fig. (as temp. Amenophis II to Tuthmosis IV). See Schmidt, Den. Æg. Sam. (1899), [A.68] (1908), 144 [E.77] (both as granite and Dyn. XVIII-XIX) Man and two women seated, 2nd half of Dyn. XVIII, in Leiden, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Inv. AST.69. Boeser, Beschreibung v, 10 [22] Taf. x Bremmer, Eg. kunst No. 13 Hornemann, Types v, pl (as sandstone) Vandier, Manuel iii, 671 [D. 97] pl. cxlviii [1] (from Boeser) (as temp. Amenophis II) Schneider and Raven, De Egyptische Oudheid 84 [72] fig. (as temp. Amenophis II) H. D. Sch[neider] in Eggebrecht, Aufstieg No. 298 fig. (as temp. Amenophis II) id. Beeldhouwkunst in het land van de farao s 51 [18] fig. See Leemans, Descr. rais. 58 [D. 97] Boeser, Cat. (1907), 68 [77] A Group statuette of Minmosi Mnw-ms 7ae, Steward of the god s wife, etc., wife and daughter, all seated, heads and parts of legs and base lost, with son Minmosi Mnwms 7ae, First prophet of Osiris, in relief on back of seat, probably temp. A Tuthmosis III to Amenophis II, in London, British Museum, EA De Meulenaere in MDAIK 37 (1981), Taf. 50-1 Robins, G. Reflections of Women in the New Kingdom: Ancient Egyptian Art from The British Museum

6 488 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM (Atlanta, Georgia, Michael C. Carlos Museum, Emory University, 4 February - 14 May 1995) (San Antonio, Texas: Van Siclen Books), No. 21 figs. and on 40. Text, Sharpe, Eg. Inscr. 2 Ser. 80 [D]. See Guide, 4th to 6th 128 [63] Family group statue of Amenemonet Jmn-m-jnt 1ṫ P1 p t! j, Chief of the Medjay, Overseer of works on the monuments of His Majesty etc., son of Unn ufer Wnnnfr B t e, First prophet of Amun, and Esi 3st!! _, Chief of the harîm of Amun, with twenty-two mummiform figures of relatives (nine in high relief on front, nine in relief on back, and two on each side) and twenty-four names, cartouches of Ramesses II, black granite, temp. Ramesses II, in Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, Sharpe, Eg. Inscr. 2 Ser. 38 [lines 1-29] Brugsch, Thes [17] figs. Lipi½ska in Études et Travaux iii (1969), 42 fig. 3 Moursi, Die Hohenpriester des Sonnengottes [etc.], 61-3 Taf. vii, viii Barocas, C. in Civiltà dell Antico Egitto in Campania 19 fig. 2 R. P[irelli] in Cantilena and Rubino, La Collezione egiziana. Napoli 35-7 [2] fig. 3 [1] Tav. i id. in Borriello, M. R. and Giove, T. (eds.), The Egyptian Collection of the National Archaeological Museum of Naples (2000), fig. on 31 Trapani, M. in BSÉG 19 (1995), 52 [1] fig. 1 (as diorite) id. in Memnonia vii (1996), 123-4, , pls. xxxiv-xxxvi (as diorite) Álvarez Perris, L. N. in Revista de Arqueología xxii [243] (2001), fig. on 52. Part, Vassalli MSS. f. Hr = G. Lise in Rassegna di studi e di notizie (Milan, Castello Sforzesco), xiii (1986), 399 [Nr] fig. 25. Text, Kitchen, Ram. Inscr. iii, [1]. Names and titles, Lieblein, Dict. No See Marucchi in Ruesch, A. (ed.), Museo Nazionale di Napoli. Antichità. Guida (1911), [337] id. Naples National Museum. Excerpt of the Guide [1925], 60 [246] Reisner, G. A. in JEA vi (1920), 45-7 de Franciscis, A. Guida del Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli (1963), 27 (as basalt) Tiradritti, F. in L egittologo Luigi Vassalli ( ). Disegni e documenti nei Civici Istituti Culturali Milanesi Statuette of [Amen]ked [Jmn-]ḳd

] f r+, Keeper of the chamber of Amun, wife > Nebtyunet Nbt-jwnt! < t! Q and small daughter Mutnefert Mwt-nfrt between them, all seated, with texts mentioning Amun and Hathor, mid-dyn. XVIII, in New York NY, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Hornemann, Types v, pl. 1422 Fischer, H. G. in MMJ 8 (1973), 24 n. 55 fig. 27 A. K. C[apel] in Capel, A. K. and Markoe, G. E. (eds.), Mistress of the House, Mistress of Heaven. Women in Ancient Egypt (1996), 50-1 [2] fig. See Hayes, Scepter ii,

7 Neferhabef Nfr-ḥb.f and wife Taiu T3jw seated, with son Benermerut Bnr-mrwt >ML! (dedicator) seated on the ground, temp. Amenophis II-III, in Paris, Musée du Louvre, A 57 [N.58]. De Clarac, Musée de sculpture v, pl. 997A [2558F] Texte v, 302-3 Vandier, Manuel iii, 671 pl. cxlvii [2] Archives phot. E.679. See de Rougé, Notice des monuments (1883), 32-3 Boreux, Guide ii, 452 Vandier, Guide (1948), 52 (1952), Hekanufer Ḥḳ3-nfr nne h M and wife Merytmut Mrjt-mwt. u!! seated, with small son standing and daughter seated, much damaged, probably late Dyn. XVIII, in Paris, Musée du Louvre, A 58. Vandier, Manuel iii, 671 pl. cxlvii [4] Archives phot. E.695. Names, Pierret, Rec. inscr. ii, 19. See de Rougé, Notice des monuments (1883), 33 Boreux, Guide ii, Statuette, Esinefert 3st-nfrt!! _ e M!, King s great wife (of Ramesses II), and sons m Khaemweset H. a-m-w3st 1p and Rameses Ra-ms-sw Vae7, General, etc., with text mentioning Ḥwt K3-hnm-ntrw T 4 S36 and Sokari-Osiris lord of the Two Lands, fragment, red sandstone, temp. Ramesses II, in Paris, Musée du Louvre, N Text, Pierret, Rec. inscr. ii, 84 Kitchen, Ram. Inscr. ii, 854 [310] part, Drioton, É. in ASAE xli (1942), 29 [lower]. See Pierret, Cat. No. 633 Gomaà, Chaemwese 96 [110] (suggests from Saqqâra) Berlandini Keller, J. in Les Dossiers d Archéologie 241 (March 1999), Kheru Hrw, wife Bakt B3kt and small son before offering stand, probably temp. Amenophis II or Tuthmosis IV, in Paris, Musée du Louvre, E Vandier, Manuel iii, 675 pl. cxlvi [4]. See id. Guide (1973), Amennakht Jmn-nh.t 1ṫ#`, Child of the nursery. of the treasury of the temple of Nebmaetre (Amenophis III) (upper part lost), and wife Ir(t)iabtes Jr(t)-j3bt.s < M:q B! 7, praised by Hathor mistress of Dendera, both seated, and small

8 490 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM son standing next to Amennakht s right leg, with son Peshedu P3-&scarond H`f: and daughter Wert Wrt DM! in relief on back of seat, and with texts mentioning Mut mistress of Asher and altar of Amun-Re, Ptaḥ-Sokari-Osiris and Mut, temp. Amenophis III, formerly in J. Huston colln. and at Sotheby s in 1973, now in Paris, Musée du Louvre, E Sotheby Sale Cat. Dec. 3, 1973, No. 55 pl. xiii The Burlington Magazine cxv [848] (Nov. 1973), Advertisements, fig. on lxxix [lower right] La Revue du Louvre xxv (1975), Chronique des Amis du Louvre Oct.-Nov. 1975, fig. on i Gazette des Beaux- Arts lxxxvii (1976), Suppl. March 1976, fig. 3 on 2 Desroches Noblecourt in La Revue du Louvre xxvi (1976), figs. 1-4, 6-8 Barbotin, C. in Aménophis III (Connaissance des Arts no. hors série, 1993), fig. 16 on 19 B. L[etellier] in Des mécènes par milliers. Un siècle de dons par les Amis du Louvre. Musée du Louvre, Paris, 21 avril - 21 juillet 1997, 192 [14] fig v Sheri &Scaronrj M1E, Scribe, and wife Sitamun S3t-jmn 1ṫ G! seated, and small son(?) Amenemopet Jmn-m-jpt 1ṫ P M! standing between them, with brother Amenemopet Jmn-m-jpt 1ṫ 11M!, Scribe (dedicator of statue), wife and another woman in relief on back of seat, with text mentioning Amun-Re, sandstone, mid- Dyn. XVIII, in St Petersburg, State Hermitage Museum, (Acquired from Ibrahim Bedîr, French consular official at Naqâda.) Mat e, Iskusstvo Drevnego Egipta iii. Novoe Tsarstvo (1947), pl. xxv [2] Lapis and Mat e, Drevneegipetskaya skul ptura 73-5 [69] pl. i figs. 43-4 Landa and Lapis, Eg. Antiq. pl. 33 (as limestone) Feucht, Das Kind im Alten Ägypten 417 Abb. 41. Some names, Lieblein, Dict. No See Golénischeff, Inventaire (as limestone) Vandier, Manuel iii, P Mahu Mḥ U +, Head of the stable, headless, wife Dedia Ddj3 ] ]1!, Songstress of Mut, and small daughter Tawah(t) T3-w3ḥ(t)!!=<, Songstress of Amun, with son Amenmosi Jmn-ms 1ṫ ae in relief between parents, late Dyn. XVIII or Dyn. XIX, in Stockholm, Medelhavsmuseet, NME 89. Peterson in Orientalia Suecana xix-xx (1970-1), [xxi] Abb. 10, 11 (as New Kingdom or 3rd Int. Period). See Lieblein, Katalog öfver egyptiska fornlemningar i National-museum (1868), 33-4 (as sandstone) Pawer P3-wr HD M and wife Mut Mwt! / (dedicator of statue) seated, with small

9 491 son Simut S3-mwt! /G 4 (headless) kneeling between them, and daughter in relief on left side of seat, mid-dyn. XVIII, in Turin, Museo Egizio, Cat Vandier, Manuel iii, 681 pl. cxliii [2] (as temp. Tuthmosis III) E. L[eospo] in Robins, Beyond the Pyramids. Egyptian Regional Art from the Museo Egizio, Turin (Emory University Museum of Art and Archaeology, Atlanta, 24 Oct March 1991), Cat. 50 figs. Donadoni Roveri, Museo Egizio fig. on 34 [lower right] Petrie Ital. photo Text, Maspero in Rec. Trav. iv (1883), 145 [xviii] (as Dyn. XX). Names, Lieblein, Dict. No See Orcurti, Cat. ii, 59 [301] Fabretti, etc. R. Mus. di Torino i, Man and woman seated, with small daughter seated between them, mid-dyn. XVIII, in Turin, Museo Egizio, Cat Petrie Ital. photo See Orcurti, Cat. ii, 61 [302] Fabretti, etc. R. Mus. di Torino i, 419 Farina, Il Regio Museo (1931), 11 [25] (1938), 11 Vandier, Manuel iii, Meryptah Mrjj-ptḥ #!<L11, Royal scribe of the altar of the Lord of the Two Lands (TT387), wife(?) Kafi Kf? h! 4 4, Songstress of Amun, and Siesi S3-3st G4!! _, Overseer of craftsmen of the Lord of the Two Lands, all seated, with text mentioning lords of Thebes, front of base with feet of men lost, calcareous sandstone, temp. Ramesses II, in Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Ägyptisch-Orientalische Sammlung, ÄS 48. (Probably from TT 387.) Vandier, Manuel iii, 682 pl. cxlviii [2] (as mid-dyn. XVIII) Komorzynski, Erbe 157-8, 199 Abb. 47 Satzinger, Äg. Kunst 39 Abb. 18 id. in Jahrb. Wien 79, N.F. xliii (1983), 7-18 Abb. 1, 2, 5-9 id. Das Kunsthistorische Museum in Wien. Die Ägyptisch-Orientalische Sammlung (1994), 38-9 Abb. 23 id. in Haja, M. (ed.), Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna. Guide to the Collections (1989), 34 fig. [lower] Rogge, Statuen N.R figs. See Uebersicht (1895), 35 [xxiii] (1923), 10 [xxiii] ! Simut S3-mwt G. Overseer of the royal sandals of Amun, jb 1qy of Amun (two figures) and wife Henuy Hnwjj $ t b K11, all seated and lower part only, with sons and daughters in relief on sides of seat, end of Dyn. XVIII or early Dyn. XIX, in Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Ägyptisch-Orientalische Sammlung, ÄS 5047.

10 492 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM Rogge, Statuen N.R figs. Text, von Bergmann, Hieroglyphische Inschriften [etc.], 7 Taf. v. Names and titles, Lieblein, Dict. No Wahib W3ḥ-jb =< d 4, Jeweller of Amun (head lost) and wife Teroy Trjj gm 4 11 seated, and son (head lost) standing between them, with text mentioning altars of Amun-Re and Mut, sandstone, mid-dyn. XVIII, in Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Ägyptisch-Orientalische Sammlung, ÄS Jaro s9-deckert, Statuen figs. See von Bergmann, Übersicht der aegyptischen Alterthümer des k. k. Münz- und Antiken-Cabinetes (1876), 38 [47] Amennakht Jmn-nh.t 1ṫ`. Head of custodians, etc., between daughter Hatmert Ḥ3t-mrt G M!! 4 5 and son Nefersekheru Nfr-sh.rw eh Me B + M 5, Overseer of the treasury, all seated, heads lost, with text mentioning Amenophis I and A hmosi Nefertere J iḥ-ms Nfrt-jrj, Dyn. XIX, seen by N. de Garis Davies in Davies MSS Stone. Two men m Khaemweset H. i-m-w3st P >, Governor of the Town and Vizier, Greatest of the directors of craftsmen of Ptah, etc., and another man, temp. Ramesses IX-X, in Aix-en-Provence, Musée Granet, S. Barbotin, Ch. in Musée Granet, Aix-en-Provence. Collection égyptienne (1995), 76 [15] fig. Name and titles, Weil, A. Die Veziere des Pharaonenreiches 117 [42, f] Maystre, Les grands prêtres de Ptah de Memphis 285 [85] some, Davies MSS. 2.1 [upper]. See Devéria in Gibert, H. Musée d Aix, Bouches-du-Rhône. Première partie comprenant les monuments archéologiques [etc.] (1882), 17 [15] (repr. in Bibl. Ég. iv, [15]) Paa P3-i3 H = , Lector-priest of Min, etc., seated, and boy standing, but now only seat and feet left, with text (graffito?) mentioning Amun-Re, probably Dyn. XVIII, in Cairo Mus. CG 1161.

11 493 See Borchardt, Statuen iv, 85 (text) (as Middle Kingdom) Vandier, Manuel iii, 591 (as Middle Kingdom) Fischer, The Orientation of Hieroglyphs i, 92 [3] Two men kneeling with naoi of Osiris, brown marble, Dyn. XIX-XX or later, in Chicago IL, Field Museum of Natural History, A Hornemann, Types iv, pl (as Dyn. XIX). See Vandier, Manuel iii, 664. Man and woman Standing. Stone Pair statue, man and woman, late Dyn. XVIII to early Dyn. XIX, in Baltimore MD, Walters Art Museum, Steindorff, Cat. 44 [119] pl. xviii The Walters Art Gallery Bulletin 35 [6] (Nov.- Dec. 1982), fig. on 1st p. (as Dyn. XIX) Donadoni, S. L Egitto (1981), fig. on 221 [left] (as Ramesside). See Vandier, Manuel iii, 647 (as Ramesside) Pentawer P3-n-t3-wr(t) t!!d # M, wab-priest of Amenemopet, etc., and woman Shedsu[t]awer(t) &Scarond-sw-[t]3-wr(t)

!D M`f7K, base with feet only, Dyn. XX-XXI, in Cairo Mus. CG See Borchardt, Statuen iv, 133 (text) Man (lower part lost) and a Songstress of Am un (lower legs lost), with text mentioning Amun-Re and A hmosi Nefertere J iḥ-ms Nfrt-jrj (mother of Amenophis I), Dyn. XIX-XX, in Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum, E.SU Tenro-amun Tnr-jmn g t! 4`1ṫ and wife Wiay Wj3jj :1!11, with text mentioning gods including Pta h great of strength, Hathor mistress of the Southern Sycamore and Mut mistress of Asher, red sandstone, early Dyn. XIX, in Leiden, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Inv. AST.24.

12 494 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM Leemans, Aeg. Mon. ii, 11 [D.76] pl. xviii Boeser, Beschreibung v, 9-10 [21] Taf. x Bremmer, Eg. kunst No. 25 (as Dyn. XVIII) Hornemann, Types v, pl. 1166 Vandier, Manuel iii, 670 pl. cxlii [2] (from Boeser) Seipel, Ägypten No. 461 fig. (as Dyn. XIX-XX). See Leemans, Descr. rais [D. 76] Boeser, Cat. (1907), 68 [82] Statuette of Pendua P3-n-dw3 # t_>, wab-priest in front of Amun, holding t standard of Amun-Re, and wife Nasha N&scaron! ( =, Songstress of Amun, with son Amenemopet Jmn-m-jpt in relief, basalt, Dyn. XIX, in Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, 178. R. P[irelli] in Cantilena and Rubino, La Collezione egiziana. Napoli 43 [1.8] fig. 4 Tav. iii R. P[irelli] in Borriello, M. R. and Giove, T. (eds.), The Egyptian Collection of the National Archaeological Museum of Naples (2000), 29 fig. on 30 (as 180). See Marucchi in Ruesch, A. (ed.), Museo Nazionale di Napoli. Antichità. Guida (1911), 127 [362] id. Naples National Museum. Excerpt of the Guide [1925], 62 [261] (both as Late Period) Pair statuette, Amenemhet Jmn-m-ḥ3t 1ṫ 1G4, Overseer of the great enclosure, etc., and wife Ahmosi Beketam un Jaḥ-ms B3kt-jmn a =?! 1ṫ, King s ornament, heads lost, calcite, mid-dyn. XVIII, in New York NY, Metropolitan Museum of Art, See MMA Bull. viii (1913), 22 (as Dyn. XII-XVIII) Pair statuette of a wab-priest of Bubastis mistress of Bubastis (Tell Basṭa), name lost, and wife Itesres Jt.s-rsw 1 BnK<!h, with other names added recently, diorite, early Dyn. XVIII, formerly in London, Spink & Son Ltd., now in New York NY, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Connoisseur cl [603] (May 1962), Advertisements, fig. on lxxii Fischer, H. G. in MMJ 9 (1974), figs. 35-8, See Hayes, W. C. in MMA Bull. N.S. xxii (1963-4) Annual Report , 65 [bottom] A Scribe of the treasury of Ptah, First prophet of Pta h-tatanen (name lost) and his wife Neferupta h Nfrw-ptḥ, Songstress of Hathor mistress of the eee #!<

13 495 Southern Sycamore, with his daughter in relief and text mentioning Pta h, Sekhmet and Hathor mistress of the Southern Sycamore, Dyn. XVIII or XIX, in Paris, Musée du Louvre, A 61. Text, Devéria squeezes, Gal. Nat. Londres, 22 some, Pierret, Rec. inscr. ii, 49. See de Rougé, Notice des monuments (1883), 34 Vandier, Manuel iii, Hori Ḥrwj %1, Head of scribes of the altar in the Temple of Millions of Years of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt Baenr e-meriamun (Merneptah) in the domain of Amun in the west of Thebes, etc., son of Amenemonet Jmn-m-jnt 1ṫPp! j, Scribe of the district(?) of the town, and wife Nefertere Nfrt-jrjj e1 M!7, Songstress of Amun at Karnak, with text mentioning Am un-re lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, foremost of Karnak and Mut the Great, mistress of Asher, red granite, temp. Merneptah, in Paris, Musée du Louvre, A 68 [N.69]. Millin, A. L. Aegyptiaques ou Recueil de Quelques Monuments Aegyptiens Inédits (1816), pls. v-viii de Clarac, Musée de sculpture iii, pl. 290 [2550] Texte v, 299 Richer, Le Nu fig. 6 Encycl. phot. Louvre pl. 99 Vandier, Manuel iii, 672 pl. cxlii [6] Champollion, J. The World of the Egyptians fig. on 69 Kanawaty in BSFÉ 104 (1985), 32 pl. iv [c] id. in Mémoires d Égypte. Hommage de l Europe à Champollion fig. on 146 Berger in Archéologia 265 (Feb. 1991), fig. on 30 [upper, left] Seipel, Gott, Mensch, Pharao Kat. 139 fig. Archives phot. E. 53. Text, Pierret, Rec. inscr. i, 7-9 Kitchen, Ram. Inscr. iv, [82] some, Devéria squeezes, Gal. Nat. Londres, 12. Names and titles, Lieblein, Dict. No Name and two titles, Brugsch, Thes [110 (A, 68)]. See de Rougé, Notice des monuments (1883), 37 Vandier, Guide (1948), 24 (1952), 25 (1973), Bekenkhons B3k-n-h.nsw =? tb t 7, First prophet of Amun, son of Amenemopet Jmn-m-jpt 1ṫP 1!M #, headless and lower legs lost, with wife (headless) holding aegis of Hathor, granite, temp. Setnakht to Ramesses III, in Rome, Università, Museo del Vicino Oriente Antico. (Probably from the Theban area.) Sist, L. M. C. in Reineke, W. F. (ed.), First International Congress of Egyptology, Cairo, October 2-10, Acts Taf. lxxxii-lxxxiii. See Newberry in PSBA xxv (1903), 362 [c] (as temp. Ramesses II) Upper part of man (head and right shoulder lost) and woman, with text mentioning

14 496 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM Hathor mistress of Crocodilopolis (Gebelein), end of Dyn. XVIII, in Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Ägyptisch-Orientalische Sammlung, ÄS 51. Rogge, Statuen N.R figs Upper part of man, with right lappet of wig of woman and her right hand round his waist, from a pair standing or seated statue, granodiorite, Dyn. XIX, in Paris, Drouot- Montaigne, in Drouot-Montaigne Sale Cat. March 17-18, 2003, No. 640 fig. (as Ramesside) Kaemweset K3-m-w3st! i P>! Q, Fan-bearer of the Lord of the Two Lands, and wife Renpeten(t)opet Rnpt-n(t)-jpt ' t 51 #!, Royal sistrum-player of (the statue of) Usermaetre-setepenre (Ramesses II) Montu in the Two Lands, schist, temp. Ramesses II, formerly in M. Nahman and Omar Pasha Sultan collns. Collection de feu Omar Pacha Sultan, Le Caire. Catalogue descriptif (1929), i, Art égyptien No. 345 pl. xlviii de Ricci MSS. D.62, (as basalt). Names and titles, Clère in Kêmi xi (1950), 33 (from de Ricci MSS.) Kitchen, Ram. Inscr. ii, 451 [163, 4, C] Tjay T3jj O11m, Royal scribe, General, and wife Tuia Twj3! K1!, lower part, granite, late Dyn. XVIII or Dyn. XIX, at Sotheby s in Sotheby Sale Cat. July 10, 1979, No. 150 fig. May 13, 1980, No. 105 fig Khensmosi H. nsw-ms Bt7a, wab-priest in front of Amun, Overseer of works on all monuments of Amun, lower part damaged, and wife Merytmut Mrjt-mwt, Songstress of Amun, probably temp. Ramesses II, formerly on loan to Brooklyn NY, Brooklyn Museum of Art, L , then at Sotheby s (New York) in Sotheby (New York) Sale Cat. Feb. 8-9, 1985, No. 21 fig. Seated. Stone

15 497 Man and woman, inscribed but names lost, upper part, mid-dyn. XVIII, in Aberdeen, Anthropological Museum, See Reid, R. W. Illustrated Catalogue [etc.] (1912), 180 (as Dyn. XVIII or XIX) Upper part of a Royal scribe (name lost) with [wife?], with text mentioning Ptah- Sokari, black granite, Dyn. XIX, in Baltimore MD, Walters Art Museum, (Probably from the Memphite area.) Steindorff, Cat. 43 [117] pls. xxiii, cxii. See Vandier, Manuel iii, Djehuti Dḥwtjj :! 7, Butcher of the Temple of Amun, and wife Ahhotep J iḥ- ḥtp ] /, with scenes in relief on sides and back of seat, and text mentioning Amun- Re, early Dyn. XVIII, in Baltimore MD, Walters Art Museum, Steindorff, Cat [116] pls. xxiii, cxii Simpson, The Face of Egypt No. 22 figs. See Vandier, Manuel iii, Pair statuette, man and woman seated, feet and front of base lost, small, Dyn. XIX, in Baltimore MD, Walters Art Museum, Steindorff, Cat [118] pl. xxxv (as Dyn. XIX-XX) Hill, D. K. in Archaeology 11 (1958), fig. on 276 [upper]. See Vandier, Manuel iii, Amenemhet Jmn-m-ḥ3t 1ṫPG! Iuti Jwtj 1Kg1, Steward of the first prophet of Amun, etc., and wife Amenemopet Jmn-m-jpt 1ṫP M!, Songstress of Amun, with text mentioning Amun-Re and Mut, granite, 1st half of Dyn. XVIII, in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, (Probably from Thebes.) Hornemann, Types v, pl. 1204 K. H. P[riese] in Eggebrecht, Aufstieg No. 180 fig. Text, Aeg. Inschr. ii, Names and titles, Lieblein, Dict. No See Brugsch, Uebersichtliche Erklaerung (1850), 33 [1] Ausf. Verz. 136 (as sandstone) Führer (1961), 57-8 Vandier, Manuel iii, 647 (as sandstone) Amenhotep-user Jmn-ḥtp-wsr 1ṫ /OeM`, Doorkeeper of the granary, and wife Tentwadj(et) T3-nt-w3d(t) -t! -K, with son and daughter in relief on front of seat, and text mentioning Am un-re of Karnak, Mut and Hathor, quartzite, mid-dyn.

16 498 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM XVIII, in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, (Probably from Thebes.) Fechheimer, Kleinplastik 13 Taf. 50 (as sandstone) Firchow, Aegyptische Plastik 25-6 Abb. 10 (as sandstone or granite and temp. Tuthmosis IV) Hornemann, Types v, pl. 1200 Michalowski, Art fig. 374 Egyiptomi mu1vészet No. 44 fig. 15 K. H. P[riese] in Eggebrecht, Aufstieg No. 179 fig. (as temp. Amenophis II) Art Treasures. Exhibition. Tokyo Cat. No. 50 fig. (as temp. Amenophis II) Finneiser, K. in Äg. Mus. (1991), No. 56 fig. Andreu, Images de la vie quotidienne en Égypte au temps des pharaons fig. on 14 [lower] (as No. 2258). Text, Aeg. Inschr. ii, 3-4. See Ausf. Verz. 135 (as sandstone) Führer (1961), 57 (as sandstone) Vandier, Manuel iii, 647 (as sandstone and probably temp. Amenophis II) Neferhor Nfr-ḥr e : 4, Head of the custodians of scribes of the granaries of the Great House, etc., and wife Wiay Wj3jj K1!11, Songstress of Horus, Dyn. XIX, formerly in G. d Athanasi colln. and at Sotheby s in 1837, now in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, Vandier, Manuel iii, 648 pl. cxliv [1] Hornemann, Types v, pl (as Dyn. XVIII). Text, Aeg. Inschr. ii, 5. See Sotheby Sale Cat. (D Athanasi), March 13-20, 1837, No. 576 Exhibition Catalogue of Giovanni d Athanasi s Collection of Egyptian Antiquities [etc.] (1837), No. 528 Brugsch, Uebersichtliche Erklaerung (1850), 35 [3] Ausf. Verz Führer (1961), Merymaet Mrjj-m3 it L11*, Mayor of Djarukha, and wife Nefertere Nfrt-jrjj e h M! 1 M 7, Songstress of Amun (headless), with text mentioning Min lord of Ipu, etc., Dyn. XIX, in Bologna, Museo Civico Archeologico, (Probably from Akhmîm.) Kminek-Szedlo, Saggio filologico per l apprendimento della lingua e scrittura egiziana [etc.] (1877), 81-2 Tav. x [3] Pernigotti, Statuaria 52-4 [19] Tav. xiv, xv [1], lxvii-lxix (as probably from Thebes) id. in Morigi Govi, C. and Sassatelli, G. Dalla Stanza delle Antichità al Museo Civico 201 [92] fig. id. La collezione egiziana 81 fig. (as from Thebes) M. P. C[esaretti] in Il senso dell arte No. 88 fig. (as probably from Thebes) Gabolde, M. in BIFAO 94 (1994), figs. 1, 2 (as end of Dyn. XVIII) H. W. Müller Archive 5 [I/14 II/736-42]. See Kminek-Szedlo, Cat. 151 (some text) Vandier, Manuel iii, 649 Pernigotti in Morigi Govi, C. and Vitali, D. Il Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna (1982), 130 [E] (as probably from Thebes)

17 499 Amennakht Jmn-nh.tw 1ṫ # # B!K` Nakht Nh.t B!`, Official ( j3wtj) of the M jmj-prwj, etc. (face lost), and wife Riya Rjjj3 7 1!, Songstress of Amun lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, black granite, mid-dyn. XVIII, in Bologna, Museo Civico Archeologico, (Probably from Thebes.) Curto, L Egitto antico 70 [14] Tav. 16 (as Middle Kingdom) Pernigotti, Statuaria 43-4 [13] Tav. ix, li, lii (as end of Dyn. XVIII) Petrie Ital. photos See Kminek-Szedlo, Cat (some text) Ducati, Guida 59 [middle] Vandier, Manuel iii, 649 Pernigotti in Morigi Govi, C. and Vitali, D. Il Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna (1982), 136 (as end of Dyn. XVIII) Mery Mrjj L11, Standard-bearer, and wife Suiro Sr 7K 7 M 4, basalt, late Dyn. XVIII, in Bologna, Museo Civico Archeologico, Curto, L Egitto antico 73 [26] Tav. 16 Pernigotti, Statuaria [9] Tav. vii [2], xliv, xlv (as mid-dyn. XVIII) Petrie Ital. photos See Kminek-Szedlo, Cat Unnufer Wnn-nfr B t e h M (left arm lost) and wife (head, right shoulder and arm lost), with text mentioning Mut in the Thinite nome, 2nd half of Dyn. XVIII, in Bologna, Museo Civico Archeologico, (Probably from Abydos.) Pernigotti, Statuaria 41-3 [12] Tav. viii, xlix, l. See *Nizzoli, Catalogo dettagliato [etc.] (1827), 19 [5] Kminek-Szedlo, Cat Pair statuette of W. W. K

, Overseer of peasants of Am un, and a Songstress of Mut (name lost), seated, with text mentioning Amun, very fragmentary, late Dyn. XVIII, formerly in H. J. Anderson and New York Historical Society collns., now in Brooklyn NY, Brooklyn Museum of Art, E. Text, James, Corpus i, 118 [268] pl. lxviii. See NYHS Cat. 74 Vandier, Manuel iii, Upper part of man and hand of wife, with names of Amun-Re and remains of text on back pillar, Dyn. XIX, in Cairo Mus. CG 847. See Borchardt, Statuen iii, (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, 658.

18 500 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM Upper part of man and left hand of wife on his shoulder, sandstone, Dyn. XVIII, in Cairo Mus. CG 857. See Borchardt, Statuen iii, 123 Vandier, Manuel iii, Upper part of man (face destroyed) with part of right arm and hand of wife, New Kingdom, in Cairo Mus. CG 858. See Borchardt, Statuen iii, 124 Vandier, Manuel iii, Man (upper part lost) and woman. emopetnefer. m-jpt-nfr

P1!Me # h M (left arm lost), probably Dyn. XIX, in Cairo Mus. CG 863. See Borchardt, Statuen iii, (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, A King s wab-priest and wife, faces destroyed and base with feet lost, with text mentioning Amun-Re and Hathor, sandstone, early Dyn. XVIII, in Cairo Mus. CG 937. See Borchardt, Statuen iii, (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, A Prophet of Amenophis H d 4 (deified Amenophis I), and woman Mutwebent(?) t Mwt-wbnt(?)!.Kq V! Y>, Songstress of Amun, both seated, upper parts and feet of woman lost, sandstone, Dyn. XIX-XX, in Cairo Mus. CG 975. (Probably from Deir el-medîna.) See Borchardt, Statuen iv, 11 (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, Pahekaemsasen P3-ḥḳ3-m-s3.sn HnPS n B t 5, Overseer of foreign countries, and wife Duy Dwjj ]K11, both seated, upper parts lost, with text mentioning Amun- Re and Hathor chieftainess of Thebes, black granite, temp. Amenophis II, in Cairo Mus. CG 989. See Borchardt, Statuen iv, 17 (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, Penwah P3-n-w3ḥ # t=<+, Scribe of the accounts of grain, and wife Meryt

19 501 Mrjjt M! 11, both seated, upper parts and base with feet lost, with text mentioning Mut mistress of Asher and Thoth lord of Mendes(?), sandstone, Dyn. XVIII, in Cairo Mus. CG 1003 (JE 27955). (Said to come from Saqqâra or Sheikh iabd el-qurna.) See Borchardt, Statuen iv, 21-2 (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, 659. Names and title of Penwaḥ, Lieblein, Dict. No Upper part of woman, from seated pair-statue, remains of text on back pillar, Dyn. XVIII-XIX, in Cairo Mus. CG See Borchardt, Statuen iv, 34 (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, Hori Ḥrwj %1, Deputy of the temple of Amun-Re (probably TT 28), and woman, upper parts and base with feet lost, sandstone, Dyn. XIX-XX, in Cairo Mus. CG See Borchardt, Statuen iv, 70 (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, Khaut H. 3wt,, Baker of Hathor(?), and wife, with children in relief on seat, Dyn. XIX, in Cologny, Fondation Martin Bodmer. Chappaz and Poggia, Collections égyptiennes publiques de Suisse fig. on Man and [wife Mi. Mj. ]1

, Songstress of the mistress of the Southern Sycamore], with upper parts, lower legs and base lost, dedicated by son Huy U Ḥjj +11, First prophet of. represented in relief on side of seat, with text mentioning Ptah, Sokari of Shetyt and Osiris, greywacke, Dyn. XIX-XX, in Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Æ.I.N. 85. Koefoed-Petersen, Cat. des statues 48-9 [79], 82, 85 pl. 91 (as grey sandstone) Jørgensen, M. Egypt II ( B.C.). Catalogue. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek [125] fig. (as Dyn. XX). Text, Koefoed-Petersen, Rec. inscr. 18 [85]. See Schmidt, Den. Æg. Sam. (1899), [A.73] (1908), [E.82] (both as grey sandstone and Dyn. XIX-XXVI) Man (text now illegible, Huy, Overseer of the storehouse ) and wife, Dyn. XIX, in Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Æ.I.N. 935.

20 502 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM Mogensen, Coll. ég. 19 [A 73] pl. xviii (as Dyn. XVIII-XIX) Koefoed-Petersen, Cat. des statues 43 [68] pl. 82 Jørgensen, M. Egypt II ( B.C.). Catalogue. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek [112] figs. on 187, 275 (as Dyn. XIX-XX). See Schmidt, Den Æg. Sam. (1908), [E.65] Vandier, Manuel iii, Nebihermeshaef Nb.j-ḥr-ms9 i.f >!! : 4, 5 h and wife Hepy Ḥpjj F # 11, with text mentioning Hathor chieftainess of Thebes, New Kingdom, in Copenhagen, Thorwaldsen Museum, 352. Text, Piehl, Inscr. hiéro. 1 Sér. xci-xcii [I] Madsen in Sphinx xiii (1910), 51 [352] Gell MSS. i. 3 verso [lower left]. See Müller, L. Thorvaldsens Museum. Tredie afdeling. Oldsager (1847), Nebseny Nb.snjj > B t 511 and wife(?), much damaged and restored, sandstone, mid- Dyn. XVIII, in Cortona, Museo dell Accademia Etrusca, 74. Botti, Le Antichità egiziane del Museo dell Accademia di Cortona ordinate e descritte (1955), 62-3 [74] Tav. v, vi. See id. Le Antichità egiziane raccolte nel Museo dell Accademia Etrusca di Cortona in Nono Annuario dell Accademia Etrusca di Cortona N.S. ii (1953), 29 Vandier, Manuel iii, Man and woman, with [offering-table?] in front of them, remains of text, Dyn. XIX, formerly in Farnham (Dorset), Pitt Rivers Museum, and at Sotheby s in and Sotheby Sale Cat. July 10, 1979, No. 102 fig. May 13, 1980, No. 106 fig. May 19, 1986, No. 148 pl. viii Mery Mrjj L11, Measurer of Amun (head and right arm lost), son of Khaut H. 3wt!- 4, same title, with wife Tuy Twjj K! 11, and text mentioning Amun, the Ennead at Karnak and altar of Mut, sandstone, 2nd half of Dyn. XVIII, in Florence, Museo Archeologico, Alinari photo Petrie Ital. photo Names and titles, Lieblein, Dict. No See Rosellini, Breve notizia degli oggetti. riportati dalla Spedizione letteraria Toscana (1830), 77-8 [97] Migliarini, Indication 50 Schiaparelli, Mus. Arch. Firenze [1513] (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, 668 (as 1513 [1803]).

21 Man and woman, Dyn. XVIII, in Florence, Museo Archeologico, H. W. Müller Archive 8 [II/1270]. See Schiaparelli, Mus. Arch. Firenze [1516] Vandier, Manuel iii, 669 (as 1516 [1804]) A Head of. and wife, upper part, Dyn. XVIII, in Florence, Museo Archeologico, See Rosellini, Breve notizia degli oggetti. riportati dalla Spedizione letteraria Toscana (1830), 37 [37] Migliarini, Indication 16 Schiaparelli, Mus. Arch. Firenze 218 [1517] (text) Vandier, Manuel iii, 669 (as 1517 [1805]) :ae Djehutimosi Dḥwtj-ms, Great one of the council of Thoth lord of Hermopolis Magna, etc. (head lost) and wife(?) Ia J3 1!, quartzite, temp. Tuthmosis IV to Amenophis III, in Hildesheim, Roemer- und Pelizaeus-Museum, Pelizaeus- Museum Echnaton, Nofretete, Tutanchamun (Ausstellung Roemer-Pelizaeus-Museum Hildesheim, 15. Juli Sept. 1976), No. 91 fig. Schmitz, B. in Altenmüller, H. and Germer, R. (eds.), Miscellanea Aegyptologica Wolfgang Helck [etc.], [1] Abb. 1 Taf. viii, ix Man and woman, early Dyn. XIX, in Leiden, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Inv. AST.4. Boeser, Beschreibung v, 6 [14] Taf. viii Raven in OMRO 71 (1991), pl. 1 [2, 2nd from right] on 26. Upper parts, H. W. Müller Archive 12 [89/12, 13] (reversed). See Leemans, Descr. rais. 57 [D. 92] Boeser, Cat. (1907), 69 [93] Vandier, Manuel iii, 671 [D. 92] Ahmosi J iḥ-ms ]ae and wife, probably Dyn. XVIII, formerly in F. W. von Bissing colln. S.282, now in Leiden, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, F.1938/ Amenwah Jmn-w3ḥ 1ṫ = and woman Beketwerner B3kt-wrnr =?! D M M tm 5 4, much damaged, Dyn. XIX, formerly in Liverpool, Liverpool Museum, M (lost

23 = x T 505 k3, with text mentioning Amun-Re, probably temp. Tuthmosis I, in London, British Museum, EA Drower in The Listener March 7, 1963, fig. on 416. Text, Sharpe, Eg. Inscr. 2 Ser. 80 [C, 2-9, 11, 12]. See Guide, 4th to 6th 126 [60] Pair statuette of seated Peshedu P3-&scarond H`f, Bearer of &scaronf v h # 444 of Amun, son of t Nakht Nh.t # B, Bearer of &scaronf, and wife Ruiu Rwjw 7!` 4 1:, Sistrum-player of Mut, with text mentioning Am un lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, Mut and Sekhmet mistress of Asher, Dyn. XVIII, in London, British Museum, EA Text, Sharpe, Eg. Inscr. 2 Ser. 80 [B and C, 1, 10] Hiero. Texts viii, 37-8 pl. xxxii [right]. See Guide, 4th to 6th 126 [59] Vandier, Manuel iii, Pair statuette, Khaemweset H. a-m-w3st m1>, Overseer of the fields, etc., and > a wife Nebttaui Nbt-t3wj!, seated, with text mentioning Montu-R e in Hermonthis, Tjenent and Inyt, probably temp. Amenophis III, in London, British Museum, EA (formerly EA 41603). (Probably from Armant.) Guide, Eg. Collns. (1909), 115 pl. xiii (as Dyn. XIX) Gosse, A. B. The Civilization of the Ancient Egyptians fig. 147 Budge, The Mummy (1925), pl. ix [2] (as 2301) Strachey, R. in Hammerton, J. A. Universal History of the World i, fig. on 371 [upper left] (as Dyn. XIX) Pijoán, Summa Artis iii (1945), fig. 581 (as in Berlin Museum) Farid, A. in MDAIK 39 (1983), 66-9 Taf. 13, 14 figs. 8-11 Putnam, J. and Davies, W. V. (eds.), Time Machine. Ancient Egypt and Contemporary Art fig. 26 (as Dyn. XIX) Robins, G. Reflections of Women in the New Kingdom: Ancient Egyptian Art from The British Museum (Atlanta, Georgia, Michael C. Carlos Museum, Emory University, 4 February - 14 May 1995), No. 5 fig. id. ib. (San Antonio, Texas: Van Siclen Books), No. 5 figs. and front cover id. The Art of Ancient Egypt (1997), 144 fig. 166 Andrews, C. A. R. in Eternal Egypt. Treasures from the British Museum (Hong Kong Museum of Art, , etc.), Cat. 11 fig. id. in Egyptian Treasures from the British Museum (Shanghai, 1999), No. 8 fig. id. in Egyptian Treasures from the British Museum (Santa Ana, California, The Bowers Museum of Cultural Art, 2000), 34-5 fig. and fig. on 6-7 Russmann, E. R. Eternal Egypt. Masterworks of Ancient Art from the British Museum (2001), Cat. 56 fig. The Walters Magazine 56 [3](Summer 2003), fig. on

24 506 PRIVATE STATUES - NEW KINGDOM Upper part of pair statue, man and woman, probably seated, with text on back, 2nd half of Dyn. XVIII, in London, Petrie Museum, Burlington Cat. (1895), 10 [52] pl. xxiii [186] Page, Sculpture No. 75 figs Man and woman (upper part lost), Dyn. XIX, in Manchester, The Manchester Museum, David, Cult of the Sun. Myth and Magic in Ancient Egypt pl t Niay Nj3jj 1!11b, Scribe of the accounts of gold of the Lord of the Two Lands, and mother(?) Esi 3st!! _, with text mentioning the altar of Re, early Dyn. XIX, formerly in V. Golenishchev colln. 1424, now in Moscow, State Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, I.1.a (Bought in Luxor.) Mal mberg and Turaev, Opisanie [49] pl. vii [1] figs. 2, 3 Pavlov, Egipetskaya skul ptura 51-3 frontispiece (= pl. 31a) (as Dyn. XVIII) id. and Mat e, Pamyatniki pl. 40 (as Dyn. XVIII) id. and Khodzhash, Egipetskaya plastika 19, 36, 104 figs. 59, 60 Hodjache, Antiquités pl. 31 (caption interchanged with pls. 27-8) Shurinova, Iskusstvo Drevnego Egipta fig. on 22. See Vandier, Manuel iii, Amenamer Jmn-i3-mr 1ṫ = M, Servant of Amun, and wife Mutakhet Mwt-3h.t.9B, with granddaughters in relief on sides of seat, and text mentioning Amun-Re lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, and Mut, temp. Amenophis III, formerly in V. Golenishchev colln. 1059, now in Moscow, State Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, I.1.a Mal mberg and Turaev, Opisanie 34-7 [48] pl. vii [2] (as Dyn. XIX) Pavlov, Skul pturny)i portret 40-1 and 34th pl. (as Dyn. XIX) id. Egipet. Putevoditel (1945), frontispiece id. Egipetskaya skul ptura pls. 30-1 id. and Khodzhash, Egipetskaya plastika 19, 33, 35-6, 104 figs. 56-7 Khodzhash in Byulleten VOKS No. 8 (103) (Aug. 1956), fig. on 29 id. (= Hodjache), Antiquités pls (caption interchanged with pl. 31) Bogoslovskii in Vestnik drevnei istorii, 1970, No. 1 (111), pls. id. Slugi faraonov, bogov i chastny)kh lits fig. 15 Sée, Grandes villes fig. on 203. Upper part, Pavlov and Mat e, Pamyatniki pl. 41. See Vandier, Manuel iii,

25 507 Djehutemhab Dḥwtj-m-ḥb : P!7M, General of His Majesty, etc., and wife Iay J3jj 1!11, Songstress of Wepwaut (headless), with text mentioning Am un-re, Southern Wepwaut, Mut and Hathor mistress of Medjed, sandstone, temp. Ramesses III, in New Haven (Conn.), Yale University Art Gallery, YAG Scott, Anc. Eg. Art No. 73 fig. and col. pl. on 78 A. K. C[apel] in Capel, A. K. and Markoe, G. E. (eds.), Mistress of the House, Mistress of Heaven. Women in Ancient Egypt (1996), 174 [94] fig. (as probably from Asyûṭ) Man (lost from waist down) and woman(?) (only left shoulder remains), text on back, grey granite, Dyn. XVIII, in New Haven (Conn.), Peabody Museum of Natural History, YPM Scott, Anc. Eg. Art No. 121 fig. See id. The Past Rediscovered: Everyday Life in Ancient Egypt. A Checklist of the Exhibition Sept. 29, Sept. 30, Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University No U Upper part of seated pair-statue of Huy Ḥjj +11, General, etc., and wife(?) Nay t N3jj!11, Songstress of Amun, steatite, late Dyn. XVIII or early Dyn. XIX, formerly in Sir Alan Gardiner colln., now in Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, Ashmolean Museum. Report of the Visitors 1964, 17 pl. ii [b] (as late Dyn. XVIII) Moorey, P. R. S. Ancient Egypt (1970), pl. 14 (1988), pl. 19 (1992), col. pl. ix (as Dyn. XVIII) Wensu Wn-sw B t?`7k, Scribe of the Southern City, Scribe of the accounts of grain of [Amun] (TTA.4), and wife [Amenhotep] [Jmn-ḥtp] [ 1ṫ/!# ], sandstone, probably temp. Tuthmosis III, in Paris, Musée du Louvre, A 54. (Probably from TT A.4.) *Manniche in Carlsbergfondet, Frederiksborgmuseet, Ny Carlsbergfondet Årsskrift (1985), fig. on 46 [right] id. Lost Tombs 85 pl. 22 [38] (as A 55) Archives phot. E.55. Some text, Devéria squeezes 6169, i.28 (as stela). Names and titles, Pierret, Rec. inscr. ii, 47 of Wensu, Brugsch, Thes [106]. See de Rougé, Notice des monuments (1883), 31-2 Boreux, Guide i, 55 Vandier, Guide (1948), 22 (1952), 23 (1973), 32 id. Manuel iii,

Watch the video: Είσαι το Ταίρι μου HD - Επ. 22 (January 2022).