the certainty of change

8/12/2019 The Certainty of Change

1/256

The certainty of change

A research into the interactions of the decoration

on the western walls of the cult chapels of the

mastabas at Giza during the Old Kingdom

Proefschrift

ter verkrijging van

de graad van Doctor aan de Universiteit Leiden,op gezag van Rector Magnificus prof.mr. P.F. van der Heijden

volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties

te verdedigen op woensdag 23 maart 2011klokke 13.45 uur

door

Leo Roeten

geboren te Den Haag

in 1945


2/256

Promotiecommissie:

Promotor: Prof.dr. J.F. Borghouts

Copromotores: Dr. R. van Walsem

Dr. P. van de Velde

Overige leden: Prof.dr. R. Halbertsma

Prof.dr. O.E. Kaper

Dr. J.D. Wieringa (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen)


3/256

i

The certainty of change

A research into the interactions of the decoration onthe western walls of the cult chapels of the mastabasat Giza during the Old Kingdom

VOLUME I:

Text


4/256

ii

Table of contents

Volume I

Compilations Table of contents ii

Technical terms and abbreviations vBibliography and bibliographical abbreviations viiiBibliography of the tombs xvIntroduction xixCompilation of (sub)themes xxi

Chapter I Architecture, decoration and interpretation.Introduction 1

I. The development of the superstructure of the mastabas at Giza 2II. The development of the decoration of the cult chapel 10III. The secular versus the non-secular content of (sub)themes 16IV. The etic versus the emic interpretation 21

Chapter II Preliminary considerationsI. The purpose of this research project 23II. The research project 25III. The catalogues 28IV. Considerations concerning chronology 33Appendix II.1. The decoration south of the false door 35

Chapter III The methods employed in the research projectI. Introduction 38II. Methods 38III. The co-occurrences between (sub)themes 43

IV. Co-occurrences of (sub)themes in relation to their location on the wall 47V. The cultic character of (sub)themes 53VI. The determination of the influence between two (sub)themes 56Appendix III.1. Various methods of calculating the difference factor Df 60Appendix III.2. The calculation of the difference factor (CPSD) of the

central field 61Appendix III.3. Some aspects of curves 63Appendix III.4. The making of a chronological ordering 70

Chapter IV The western wall of the cult chapelI. The (sub)themes on the western wall 73II. Preliminary study 75III. The chronological ordering of the (sub)themes 76IV. Preliminary conclusions 79

Chapter V The co-occurrence of (sub)themes on the western wallI. Considerations concerning the co-occurrence of the (sub)themes 81II. Conclusions about the co-occurrences on the western wall 83


5/256

iii

Chapter VI The locations of the (sub)themes on the western wallI. Considerations concerning the location of the (sub)themes on the

western wall 85II. The location of the (sub)themes on the wall sections 86III. The chronological development of the employment of the

main (sub)themes on the wall sections 91IV. The interaction between (sub)themes 1, 2 and 3 94V. CP and SWS values 96VI. Preliminary conclusions 99

Chapter VII The relation between the (sub)themes on the western wallI. Preliminary considerations 100II. The cultic character of (sub)themes 1, 2 and 3, and its chronological

development 103

III. Determination of the cultic character of the (sub)themes 105IV. The unifying function of (sub)themes 112V. The chronological development of the cultic character

of the western wall 116VI. Preliminary conclusions 119

Chapter VIII. The decoration of the false doorI. Preliminary considerations 121II. FO calculations 124III. Interactions in chronological development between (sub)themes

on the false door 128IV. Conclusions 136

Chapter IX The chronological development of the cultic character false doorand its parts The interaction between the western wall and the false door

I. The chronological development of the cultic character:preliminary considerations 138

II. The chronological development of the cultic character of the wholewestern wall 140

III. Conclusions 142Chapter X The interactions between the decoration of the western wall and

the false door. Further considerations about the magical food supplyI. Preliminary considerations 144II. Considerations relating to the food supply for the ka of the deceased 145III. Conclusions 150

Chapter XI The results, analysis and correlationI. Preliminary considerations 151II. Summary 152III. A compilation of the mutations of the (sub)themes throughout the

Old Kingdom 168


6/256

iv

Chapter XII ConclusionsI. Introduction 172II. Conclusions 172III. The signalling/guiding role. 178IV. Epilogue. 178

Volume II

Catalogues 182Tables 191Diagrams 205Chronological orderings 213Plates 217

Stellingen 233


7/256

v

Technical terms and abbreviations

Association The tendency of (sub)themes to be placed together on the same wall,or wall section, or on the false door or a part of it.

Attribute The separate parts which together form a (sub)theme.Bandwidth In a diagram every measurement (point) of a curve has an

uncertainty in both directions; for the whole curve this is depicted asa band of a certain width with the line of points approximately in themiddle. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Accuracy.html

Chronological ordering In this research project it is applied as a chronological ordering oftombs which is based on the midpoint of their use life.

Cluster / cloud A compilation of measured values gathered in a diagram.Combination The occurrence of the same (sub)theme on more than one wall

section or part of the false door(= multiple placement).

Co-occurrence The placing of two (sub)themes on the western wall or on a sectionof it.

Copied If a (sub)theme which is placed on wall A of the cult chapel, alsogets placed on wall B, while the original (sub)theme remains placedon wall A, the (sub)theme is said to have been copied from wallA onto wall B.

CP Abbreviation for Co-occurrence Percentage, the number of co-occurrences between two (sub)themes expressed as a percentage ofthe maximum number of co-occurrences possible between the twoof them.

CPSD Co-occurrence percentage surrounds discrepancy, a calculatedvalue giving the quantified difference between a CP value and the

CP values surrounding it in a table.Cultic Everything pertaining to the primary function of the cult chapel of

the tomb chapel.Cultic content A measure of the cultic character given as the number of

(sub)themes having a certain type of cultic character during a givenperiod.

Cultic character The type of function of the (sub)theme on the western wall or thefalse door. This is determined by the kind of interaction it has withthe prime (sub)themes.

Dissociation The tendency of (sub)themes not to be placed together on the samewall, or wall section, or on the false door or a part of it.

Elements of the western

wall

The functional parts of the western wall consisting of the false door

against the western wall and the remaining surface of this westernwall (also see western wall and whole western wall).

Emic The point of view when a system is studied employing criteria beinginherent to the system itself.

Etic The point of view when a system is studied employing criteria beinginherent to a system other than the system under study.

Focal (sub)theme The (sub)theme which can be considered to be the most importantof a group of (sub)themes.

FO Abbreviation for Frequency of Occurrence, the frequency with


8/256

vi

which a subject under study occurs in a population, expressed as apercentage of a defined number of attributes, the character of whichis determined by the subject under study (see chapter III, sectionII.1.1.).

Funerary All architectural expressions and cultic activities which are

connected with the burial of the tomb owner.Group (of (sub)themes), ascene

A conglomerate of (sub)themes in which several (sub)themes arestrongly connected with a (sub)theme serving as the focal point ofthe group (a focal (sub)theme (see infra)). The group serves toconvey an idea which cannot be expressed by any of the(sub)themes alone.

Guiding role The (sub)theme has the role of guiding visitors of the chapel to theoffering place in front of the false door.

Ideographic offering list The display of offerings and their quantities depicted next to theoffering table and written ideographically (Inventaropferliste).1

Importation A (sub)theme that is already present on an element of the westernwall of the chapel also appears on another element.

Introduction The appearance of a (sub)theme on a wall. It concerns a (sub)themethat, up to that point, has not been placed anywhere in the cultchapel.

No. Abbreviation for number(plural nos.).Non-ideographic offeringlist

The inventory of the furniture and other goods for the benefit of thedeceased that were placed in the tomb on the day of the burial.

Parts of the false door The component parts of the false door (panel, door jambs, etc.).Period A chronological unit defined in such a way as to fit a certain type of

research.Population A group of items which is the subject of an arithmetical study.Prime (sub)theme(main (sub)theme)

A (sub)theme that has a leading role on the false door and/or theremaining surface of the western wall. It constitutes:

1. The tomb owner sitting at the offering table.2. The tomb owner standing with members of his family.

Remaining surface of thewestern wall

The surface of the total western wall that is not taken up by the falsedoor(s). In the research project this term is often replaced by theterm western wall.

Ritual The total of cultic activities that take place in a cult chapel, andwhich were nearly always intended to be repeated on a daily basis,and certainly during (most of) the many festival days.

Scene A group of (sub)themes together depicting a decorative subject.Serekh type false doordesign

A false door of the type that is also called palace faade paneling(L, V, 568, Abb. 3, s.v. Scheintr).

Shift If a (sub)theme, which is originally placed on wall A of the cult

chapel, is moved to wall B, thereby disappearing from wall A, the(sub)theme is said to be shifted from wall A to wall B. For this theverb to transfer can also be used.

Signalling role The (sub)theme has the function to signal the ownership of the tombby means of depiction and text.

Sth (sths) Abbreviation for (sub)theme(plural = sths).

1Barta, Opferliste, 9. A small part of the inventory offering list that is placed next to or under the offeringtable.


9/256

vii

SWS Abbreviation for (Co-occurrence on the) Same Wall Section.Subperiod Part of a period (see above).(Sub)theme One of the (basic) items of the decoration of the western wall of the

cult chapel and the parts of the false door. With other (sub)themes itcan form a group or scene and it consists of attributes.

Symmetry In this study with the term symmetry is meant the opticalsymmetry of (sub)themes placed north and south of a physicallysignificant point or (real or fictitious) axis on the western wall (e.g.the false door) of the cult chapel.

Total western wall See: Whole western wall.Unifying function The function of a (sub)theme when it is placed between larger

(sub)themes, thus unifying them by filling up the open spacebetween them. This unification is not meant to equalize the sense ofthe two (sub)themes.

Use life The period during which a certain criterion (here a (sub)theme)) hasbeen employed in the material culture under study.

Wall sections (ws) The subdivisions in which the wall of a chapel (here the western

wall) can be divided and that are determined by the placement of thefalse door(s) on this wall.

Western wall Although as a rule the western wall consists of the false door(s) andthe wall not taken up by them, for the study at hand it is necessary todifferentiate between them. Consequently the surface of the westernwall that is not taken up by the false door(s) is either called thewestern wall or the remaining surface of the western wall.

Whole western wall The total western wall, consisting of the false door(s) and theremaining surface of the western wall.


10/256

viii

Bibliography and bibliographical abbreviations.2

AA Archologischer Anzeiger. Jahrbuch des Deutschen ArchologischenInstituts, Berlin

AEP LArt gyptien au temps des pyramides(Paris, 1999).F gyptologische Forschungen, Glckstadt, Hamburg, New York.Aldred,Art C. Aldred,Egyptian art(London, reprint 1996).Alexanian,Ritualrelikte N. Alexanian, Ritualrelikte an Mastabagrbern des Alten Reiches in H.

Gunksh and D. Polz (eds.) Stationen, Beitrge zur Kulturgeschichtegyptens (Mainz, 1998) 3 22.

Alexanian,Netjer-aperef

N. Alexanian, Dahschur II, Das Grab des Prinzen Netjer-aperef. DieMastaba II/1 in Dahschur(Mainz, 1999).

Alexanian,Residenznekropole

N. Alexanian und S.J. Seidlmayer, Die Residenznekropole von Dahschur.Erster Grabungsbericht MDAIK 58 (2002) 1 28.

Allen, non-royalafterlife

J.P. Allen, Some aspects of the non-royal afterlife in the Old Kingdom inM.Barta (ed.) The Old Kingdom art and archaeology. Proceedings of the

conference held in Prague, May 31 June 4, 2004 (Prague, 2006) 9-17.Altenmller,Hetepniptah

H. Altenmller, Das Grab des Hetepniptah (G 2430) auf dem Westfriedhofvon Giza, SAK 9(1981), 9-56.

Altenmller,Mehu H. Altenmller, Die Wanddarstellungen im Grab des Mehu in Saqqara(Mainz, 1998).

Arnold,Building D. Arnold,Building in Egypt, pharaonic stone masonry (New York, Oxford,1991).

Arnold, Pyramids D. Arnold, When the pyramids were built (New York, 1999).ASAE Annales du service des antiquits de lEgypte, Cairo.Assmann, Tod undJenseits

J. Assmann, Tod und Jenseits im alten gypten (Mnchen, 2001).

Badawy,Architecture A. Badawy,A History of Egyptian Architecture, Vol. I (Cairo, 1954).

Badawy,Iteti A. Badawy, The Tombs of Iteti, Sekhemankhptah and Kaemnofret at Giza(Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1976).

Badawy,Nyhotepptah A. Badawy, The Tomb of Nyhetep-ptah at Giza and the Tomb ofAnkhmahor at Saqqara(Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1978).

Baer,Rank and Title K. Baer, Rank and title in the Old Kingdom. The structure of the EgyptianAdministration in the fifth and sixth dynasty (Chicago, 1960).

BB Beitrge zur gyptischen Bauforschung und Altertumskunde (Wiesbaden).Baud, Critres M. Baud , A propos des critres iconographiques tablis par Nadine

Cherpion in N. Grimal (ed.),Les critres de datation stylistique lAncienEmpire (Cairo, 1998), 31-95.

Baud, Famille royale M. Baud, Famille royale et pouvoir sous lAncien Empire gyptien (Cairo,2005).

Baud,Abu Rawash M. Baud and N. Moeller A fourth dynasty royal necropolis at AbuRawash, EA, 28 (2006), 16-18.

Brta, Serdab M. Brta, Serdab and Statue Placement in the Private Tombs down to theFourth Dynasty, MDAIK 54 (1998) 65-75.

Barta, Opferliste W. Barta, Die altgyptische Opferliste von der Frhzeit bis zur griechisch-rmischen Epoche (Berlin, 1963).

2 The abbreviations employed for journals, bulletins etc. are the ones given in L, VII, XIV-XIX, s.v.Liste der afgekrtzt zitierten Zeitschriften und Reihen.


11/256

ix

Barta, Opferformel W. Barta, Aufbau und Bedeutung der altgyptischen Opferformel, F 24(Glckstadt, 1968).

BIFAO Bulletin de lInstitut Franais dArchologie Orientale, Cairo.BMFA Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.Bolshakov,Hinting A.O. Bolshakov, Hinting as a Method of OK Tomb Decoration, GM 139

(1994), 9-29.Bolshakov,Double A.O. Bolshakov, Man and his Double in Egyptian Ideology of the Old

Kingdom (Wiesbaden, 1997).Brovarski, Gmast 7 E. Brovarski, The Senedjemib Complex, Giza mastabas, Vol. 7 (Boston,

2001).Breasted,Ancientrecords

J.H. Breasted, Ancient records of Egyptian documents from earliest time tothe Persian conquest, Vol. I (Chicago, 1906).

Brunner-Traut,Seshemnofer III

E. Brunner-Traut,Die altgyptische Grabkammer Seshemnofer III aus Giza(Mainz, 1977).

CASAE Cahier des annales du service des antiquits de lEgypte, Cairo.Cherpion, Seneb N. Cherpion, De quand date la tombe du nain Seneb, BIFAO 84 (1984),

35-54.

Cherpion,Mastabas N. Cherpion, Mastabas et hypoges dAncien Empire(Bruxelles, 1989).Cherpion, Sentimentconjugal

N. Cherpion, Sentiment conjugal et figuration lAncien Empire inKunst des Alten Reiches,SDAIK 28 (Mainz, 1995), 33-47.

Cohen,Naakte mens. E. Cohen,De naakte mens in beeld(Utrecht, Antwerpen, 1979).Crowfoot Payne, tomb100

J. Crowfoot Payne, Tomb 100: the decorated tomb at Hierakonpolisconfirmed, JEA 59 (1973), 31-5.

CT R.O. Faulkner, The ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts (edition in one volume,Oxford, 2004).

Curto, Gli Scavi S. Curto, Gli Scavi italiani a El-Ghiza(Rome, 1963).DAuria,Mummies andMagic

DAuria, P. Lacovara and C.H. Roehrig (eds.), Mummies and Magic. TheFunerary Arts of Ancient Egypt(Boston, 1988).

Der Manuelian, Scroll P. Der Manuelian, Presenting the Scroll: Papyrus Documents in Tomb

Scenes of the Old Kingdom in P. Der Manuelian and R.E. Freed (eds.),Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, Vol. 2, (Boston, 1996), 561-588.

Der Manuelian, Slabstelae

P. Der Manuelian, Slab Stelae of the Giza Necropolis (New Haven,Philadelphia, 2003).

Der Manuelian, Gizaarchives

P. Der Manuelian, The Giza Archives Project, EA, 28 (2006), 31-33.

Dobrev, Tablesdoffrandes

V. Dobrev and J. Leclant, Les tables doffrandes de particuliers in N.Grimal (ed.) Les critres de datation stylistiques lAncien Empire (Cairo,1997) 143-57.

Dodson, Tomb A. Dodson and S. Ikram, The Tomb in Ancient Egypt(London, 2008).Dreyer, Umm el-Qaab G. Dreyer, et al. Umm el-Qaab. Nachuntersuchungen im frhzeitlichen

Knigsfriedhof. 5./6. Vorbericht, MDAIK 49 (1993), 23-62.

Dreyer, Grab U-j G. Dreyer, Umm el-Qaab I. Das prdynastische Knigsgrab U-j und seinSchriftzeugnisse(Mainz, 1998).

Dunham, Gmast 1 D. Dunham and W.K. Simpson, The Mastaba of Queen Mersyankh III, Gizamastabas, Vol. 1 (Boston, 1974).

Dunham,Zawiyet el-Aryan

Dows Dunham, Zawiyet el-Aryan. The Cemeteries adjacent to The LayerPyramid(Boston, 1978).

EA Egyptian Archaeology. The bulletin of the EES, London.Edel,MHwAxtj E. Edel,Inschriften des Alten Reichs III. Die Stele des MHwAxtj MO I

(1953), 327-333.


12/256

x

Edwards, Pyramids I.E.S. Edwards, The Pyramids of Egypt(Harmondsworth, 1985).El-Metwally,Grabdekoration

E. El-Metwally, Entwicklung der Grabdekoration in den altgyptischenPrivatgrbern (Wiesbaden, 1992).

Emery,Archaic Egypt W.B.Emery,Archaic Egypt(London, reprint 1991).Fikey, El - ,Rea-wer S.A. El-Fikey, The tomb of the vizier Rea-wer at Saqqara (Warminster,

1980).Fisher,Minor cemetery C.S. Fisher, The minor cemetery at Giza(Philadelphia, 1924).Fitzenreiter,Grabdekoration

M. Fitzenreiter, Grabdekoration und die Interpretation funerrer Rituale imAlten Reich in H.O.Willems (ed.) Social aspects of funerary culture in theEgyptian Old and Middle Kingdoms. Proceedings of the Internationalsymposium held at Leyden University 6-7 June 1996 (Louvain, 2001) 67-140.

FuB Forschungen und Berichte, Berlin.Gardiner, A.,Egypt A. Gardiner,Egypt of the Pharaohs, (London, Oxford, New York, 1961).GM Gttinger Miszellen, Gttingen.Goedicke,Darstellungen

H. Goedicke, Das Verhltnis zwischen kniglichen und privatenDarstellungen in Alten Reich, MDAIK 15 (1957), 57 67.

Hannig,gyptischesWrterbuch

R. Hannig, gyptisches Wrterbuch I, Altes Reich und Erste Zwischenzeit(Mainz, 2003).

Harpur,DETOK Y. Harpur, Decoration in Egyptian Tombs of the Old Kingdom (London,New York, 1987).

Harpur,Maidum Y. Harpur, The Tombs of Nefermaat and Rahotep at Maidum (Oxford,2001).

Hassan, Giza S. Hassan,Excavations at Giza,10 Vols., (Oxford, Cairo, 1932-1960).Haeny, Platten G. Haeny, Zu den Platten mit Opfertischszenen aus Heluan und Giseh,

BB 12 (Wiesbaden, 1971).Helck, Grabbesitz W. Helck, Wirtschaftliche Bemerkungen zum privaten Grabbesitz im Alten

Reich, MDAIK 14 (1956), 63-75.Helck, Talbezirken W. Helck, Zu den Talbezirken in Abydos , MDAIK 28 (1972), 95-99.

Henige, Pepy II D. Henige, How long did Pepy II reign?, GM 221 (2009), 41-8.Jnosi,Datierungsproblem

P. Jnosi, G 4712, Ein Datierungsproblem, GM 133 (1993), 53-64.

Jnosi,AEP P. Jnosi inLArt gyptien au temps des pyramides(Paris, 1999), 56-82.Jnosi, Giza P. Jnosi, Giza in der 4. Dynastie,Vol. I, Die Mastabas der Kernfriedhfe

und die Felsgrber (Vienna, 2005).JARCE Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, Boston.JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, London.JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Chicago.Jones,Index D. Jones, An Index of Ancient Egyptian Titles, Epithets and Phrases of the

Old Kingdom, 2 Vols.,(Oxford, 2000).Junker, Giza H. Junker, Giza, 12 vols. (Vienna, Leipzig, 1922-55).

Junker,Baukunst H. Junker, Von der gyptischen Baukunst des Alten Reiches ZS 63(1927), 1 14.

Kahl, Grabplatten J. Kahl, Zur Datierung der frhen Grabplatten mit Opfertischszenen,SAK, 24 (1997), 137-145.

Kanawati,Administration

N. Kanawati, The Egyptian Administration in the Old Kingdom(Warminster, 1977).

Kaiser, Talbezirken W. Kaiser, Zu den kniglichen Talbezirken der 1. und 2. Dynastie inAbydos und zur Baugeschichte des Djoser-Grabmals , MDAIK 25 (1969),1-21.


13/256

xi

Kaiser, Umm el-Qaab W. Kaiser and G. Dreyer, Umm el-Qaab. Nachuntersuchungen imfrhzeitlichen Knigsfriedhof. 2. Vorbericht, MDAIK 38 (1982), 211-269.

Kaiser,MastabaEntwicklung

W. Kaiser, Zur Entstehung der Mastaba des Alten Reiches in H. Gunkshand D. Polz (eds.) Stationen, Beitrge zur Kulturgeschichte gyptens(Mainz, 1998), 73 86.

Kanawati, el-Hawawish N. Kanawati, The Rock Tombs of el-Hawawish. The cemetery of Akhmim,Vol. III (Warminster, 1982).

Kanawati, Giza I N. Kanawati, Tombs at Giza, Vol. I (Warminster, 2001).Kanawati, Giza II N. Kanawati, Tombs at Giza, Vol. II (Warminster 2002).Kanawati,Burialchambers

N. Kanawati, Decoration of burial chambers, sarcophagi and coffins in theOld Kingdom, CASAE 34 (2005).

Kaplony,Methethi P. Kaplony, Studien zum Grab des Methethi (Bern, 1976).Kayser, Uhemka H. Kayser, Die Mastaba des Uhemka, ein Grab in der Wste (Hannover,

1964).Kees, Totenglauben H. Kees, Totenglauben und Jenseitsvorstellungen der alten gypter (Berlin,

1983).Kemp,Dating B.J. Kemp, Dating Pharaonic Cemeteries I. Nonmechanical Approaches to

Chronological ordering, MDAIK 31 (1975), 259-291.Kemp,Automaticanalysis

B.J. Kemp, Automatic Analysis of Predynastic Cemeteries: a New Methodfor an Old Problem, JEA 68 (1982), 5-15.

Kemp,Anatomy B.J. Kemp, Ancient Egypt, Anatomy of a Civilization(London, New York,1989).

Klasens, Stela A. Klasens, A stela of the second dynasty in the Leyden Museum ofAntiquities, OMRO XLVI (1965), 1-9.

L W. Helck and E. Otto,Lexikon der gyptologie, 7 vols. (Wiesbaden, 1975-1986).

Lauer, Saqqara J-Ph. Lauer, Saqqara, the royal cemetery of Memphis(London, 1976).LD, Text R. Lepsius,Denkmler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien, (text) 6 vols. (Berlin,

1849-1859).

LD R. Lepsius, Denkmler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien, (plates), 6 vols.(Berlin, 1849-1859).

LD,Erg. R. Lepsius, Denkmler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien, Ergnzungsband(Leipzig, 1913).

LG Lepsius Grab.Lehner,Development M. Lehner, The development of the Giza necropolis: The Khufu Project,

MDAIK 41 (1985), 109-143.Lehner, Giza mappingproject

M. Lehner and W. Wetterstrom (eds.), Giza Reports. The Giza PlateauMapping Project, Vol. 1 (Boston, 2007).

LMP R. van Walsem,Mastabase, the Leyden Mastaba Project (Louvain, Leyden,2008).

Mlek,Mastabas J. Mlek, Book review of Cherpion,Mastabasin DE 20 (1991), 93-100.

MDAIK Mitteilungen des Deutschen rcheologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo.MO Mitteilungen Orientforschung.Moroney, Figures M.J. Moroney, Facts From Figures(Harmondsworth, 1951).Mowinckel, Kultus S. Mowinckel, Kultus in K. Galling (ed.)Die Religion in Geschichte und

Gegenwart, Vol. IV (Tbingen, 1960), 120-6.Mhlmann,Ritus W.E. Mhlmann, Ritus in K. Galling (ed.)Die Religion in Geschichte und

Gegenwart, Vol. V (Tbingen, 1961), 1127-8.Mller,Monumentalarchitektur

H.W. Mller Gedanken zur Entstehung, Interpretation und Rekonstruktionltester gyptischer Monumentalarchitektur in gypten, Dauer und


14/256

xii

Wandel, SDAIK 18 (Mainz, 1985), 4-33.Mller, Kultkammer I. Mller, Die Ausgestaltung der Kultkammern in den Grbern des Alten

Reiches in Giza und Saqqara, FuB, 16 (1974), 79-96.Newberry,Nitocris P.E. Newberry, Queen Nitocris of the sixth dynasty, JEA, 29 (1943), 51-

4.

OConnor, Funeraryenclosures

D. OConnor, New funerary enclosures (Talbezirke) of the early dynasticperiod at Abydos, JARCE 26 (1989), 51-86.

OMRO Oudheidkundige Mededelingen uit het Rijksmuseum van Oudheden teLeiden (Leyden).

Oster,Bedeutungswandel

H. Oster, Der Bedeutungswandel des gyptischen Privatgrabes bis zumEnde des Alten Reiches(Munster, 1963).

Panofsky,Iconography E. Panofsky, Iconography inMeaning in the visual arts (Harmondsworth,1983), 51-67.

Petrie, Gizeh W.M. Flinders Petrie, Gizeh and Rifeh (London, 1907).PM, III1 Porter, B. and R.L.B. Moss, Topographical Bibliography of Ancient

Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs and Paintings,Vol. III, part I, (2nded,revised and expanded by J. Mlek, Oxford, 1994).

Polz,Recordingmethods

D. Polz Excavation and recording of a heban tomb. Some remarks onrecording methods in J. Assmann, G. Burkard and V. Davies (eds.),Problems and Priorities in Egyptian Archaeology (London, New York,1987), 119-140.

RAPH Recherches darchologie, de philologie et dhistoire, Cairo.Redford,Egypt D.B. Redford,Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times (Princeton, New

Jersey, 1992).Reisner,Historymastaba

G.A. Reisner, The history of the Egyptian mastaba in Mlanges Maspero,Vol. I, (Cairo, 1934), 579-584.

Reisner, TombDevelopment

G.A. Reisner, The Development of the Egyptian Tomb down to theAccession of Cheops(Cambridge Mass., 1936).

Reisner,Report G.A. Reisner, Report on the Egyptian Expedition during 1934-35, BMFA

XXXIII (1936), 69-77.Reisner,Royal stewards G.A. Reisner, A Family of Royal Estate Stewards of Dynasty V, BMFA,

37 (1939), 29-35.Reisner, Giza I G.A. Reisner, A History of the Giza Necropolis, Vol. I (Oxford, London,

1942).Reisner, Giza II G.A. Reisner, A History of the Giza Necropolis, Vol. II (Completed and

Revised by William Stevenson Smith, Cambridge (Mass.), 1955).Renfrew,Archaeology C. Renfrew and P. Bahn, Archaeology. Theories, Methods and Practice

(London, reprint 1994).Robins, Offerings G. Robins, Piles of offerings: paradigms of limitation and creativity in

ancient Egyptian art in C. Eyre (ed.), Proceedings of the seventh congressof Egyptologists, 1995 (Louvain, 1998) 957-963.

Roeder, Uhemka G. Roeder, Die Mastaba des Uhemka im Pelizaeus Museum (Wiesbaden,1927).

Roeten, Second style L.Roeten, Did a change in the canon of statuary and relief occur when thesecond style was introduced during the transition from the 5 th to the 6thdynasty, GM 212 (2007), 81-91(3-D stone statuary); GM 213 (2007) 63-8(3-D wooden statuary); GM 214 (2007) 119-25 (relief).

Roth, Funeral A.M. Roth, The Social Aspects of Death in S. DAuria, P. Lacovara andC.H. Roehrig (eds.), Mummies and Magic. The funerary arts of AncientEgypt(Boston, 1988), 52-9.


15/256

xiii

Roth,Akhmerutnesut A.M. Roth, Mastaba chapel of Akh-meret-nesut and his family inDAuria,Mummies and Magic (Boston, 1988).

Roth, Social change A.M. Roth, Social change in the fourth dynasty, JARC 30 (1993), 33-55.Roth,Mastabas A.M. Roth, review of Cherpion,Mastabas, JNES 53 (1994), 55-8.Roth, Gmast 6 A.M. Roth, A Cemetery of Palace Attendants. Including G 2084-2099, G

2230 + 2231 and G 2240 in W.K. Simpson and P. Der Manualian (eds.),Giza Mastabas,Vol. 6 (Boston, 1995).

Roth, Funerary ritual A.M. Roth, Funerary ritual in D.B. Redford (ed.), The OxfordEncyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (Oxford, 2001), 575-80.

Rusch, Grabsteinformen A. Rusch, Die Entwicklung der Grabsteinformen im Alten Reich, ZS 58(1923), 101-124.

SAK Studien zur altgyptischen Kultur, Hamburg.Schfer, Principles H. Schfer, (E. Brunner-Traut, ed., J. Baines, transl.),Principles of Egyptian

Art(Oxford, 1986).Scharff, Grabplatte A. Scharff, Eine archaische Grabplatte des Berliner Museums und die

Entwicklung der Grabplatten im frhen Alten Reich in Studies presented toF. Ll. Griffith(London, 1932), 346-57.

Shirai, Funerary cult Y. Shirai, Ideal and reality in Old Kingdom private funerary cults in M.Brta (ed.), The Old Kingdom art and archaeology. Proceedings of theconference, Prague, May 31 June 4, 2004 (Prague, 2006).

Schott,Friedhofsbruche

E. Schott, Friedhofsbruche in Giza in Festschrift Westendorf, Studien zurSprache und Religion gyptens, Vol. II (Gttingen, 1984), 1121-30.

SDAIK Sonderheft des Deutschen rcheologischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo.Simpson, Gmast 2 W.K. Simpson, The Mastabas of Qar and Idu, Giza Mastabas, Vol. 2

(Boston, 1976).Simpson, Gmast 3 W.K. Simpson, The Mastabas of Kawab, Khafkhufu I and II, Giza

Mastabas, Vol. 3 (Boston, 1978).Simpson, Gmast 4 W.K. Simpson, Mastabas of the western cemetery, part I, Giza mastabas,

Vol.4 (Boston, 1980).

Stadelmann, Pyramiden R. Stadelmann, Die gyptischen Pyramiden. Vom Ziegelbau zumWeltwunder(Mainz, 1991).

Stadelmann, Strenge Stil R. Stadelmann, Der strenge Stil der frhen vierten Dynastie in Kunst desAlten Reiches, SDAIK 28 (Mainz, 1995), 455 466.

Stevenson Smith,Sculpture

W. Stevenson Smith, A History of Egyptian Sculpture and Painting in theOld Kingdom(London, 1946).

Stevenson Smith,Artand Architecture

W. Stevenson Smith, The Art and Architecture of Ancient Egypt (revisededition with additions by W.K. Simpson, New Haven, London, 1981).

Strudwick, False door N. Strudwick, Some Remarks on the Disposition of Texts in Old KingdomTombs with particular reference to the False Door, GM 77 (1984), 35-49.

Strudwick,Administration

N. Strudwick, The Administration of Egypt in the Old Kingdom (London,1985).

Taylor, Coffins J.H. Taylor,Egyptian Coffins(Risborough, 1989).Vandier,Manuel I J. Vandier,Manuel darchologie gyptienne, Vol. I (Paris, 1952).Van Walsem,Interpretation

R. van Walsem, The Interpretation of Iconographic Programmes in OldKingdom Elite Tombs of the Memphite Area. Methodological andTheoretical (re)considerations in C. Eyre (ed.) Proceedings of the seventhcongress of Egyptologists, 1995 (Louvain, 1998), 1205-1213.

Van Walsem,Iconography

R. van Walsem, Iconography of Old Kingdom Elite Tombs. Analysis &Interpretation, Theoretical and Methodological Aspects (Leyden, Louvain,2005).


16/256

xiv

Van Walsem,Sense

R. van Walsem, Sense and Sensibility. On the Analysis and Interpretationof the Iconography Programmes of four Old Kingdom Elite Tombs in M.Fitzenreiter and M. Herb (eds.), Dekorierte Grabanlagen im Alten Reich.Methodik und Interpretation(London, 2006), 277-332.

Van Walsem,

Pragmatics

R. van Walsem, Meaningful places, Pragmatics from Ancient Egypt to

modern times. A Diachronic and Cross-cultural Approach in K. Zijlmans(ed.) Site-seeing. Places in Culture, Time and Space (Leyden, 2006), 111-45.

Weeks,Art K.R. Weeks, Art, Word and the Egyptian world view in K.R. Weeks (ed.),Egypt and the social sciences(Cairo, 1979) 59-81.

Weeks, Gmast 5 K.R. Weeks, Mastabas of Cemetery G 6000 in W.K. Simpson and P. DerManualian (eds.), Giza mastabas, Vol.5 (Boston, 1994).

Wiebach, Scheintr S. Wiebach, Die gyptische Scheintr, morphologische Studien zurEntwicklung und Bedeutung der Hauptkultstelle in den Privat-grbern desAlten Reiches (Hamburg, 1981).

Wilson, Funeralservices

J.A. Wilson, Funeral services of the the Egyptian Old Kingdom, JNES 3(1944) 201 18.

Wresz.,Atlas. W. Wreszinski, Atlas zur altgyptischen Kulturgeschichte, Vol. I-III(Leipzig, 1923-1938).

Wijvekate, Statistiek M.L. Wijvekate, Verklarende statistiek (Utrecht, Antwerpen, 1969).ZS Zeitschrift fr gyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde, Leipzig, Berlin.Ziegler, Pharaons Chr. Ziegler (ed.),Les Pharaons(French edition, Paris, 2002).


17/256

xv

Bibliography of the tombs.

name tomb owner PM, III1 reference

Akhmerutnesut 80-1 Reisner, Giza I,218, 314, 380-1; BMFA 13 (1913); Roth,

Akhmerutnesut,83-7; Wresz.,Atlas, III, plate 69.Akhtihotp 200-1 Reisner, Giza I,27-8, 322, 327, 328, 333, 341, 344; Der Manuelian,

Slab stelae,fig. 218; Stevenson Smith, Sculpture, plate 41; Harpur,DETOK, plan 38[394-5].

aAnk-haf 196 Reisner, Giza I, 299, 308, 322, figure 8, 122; Harpur,DETOK, plan39[394-5].

Akhetmehu 87 Reisner, Giza I, 285; Edel,Inschriften, 327-33.aAnkhmaarea 206 Reisner, Giza I, 238-9, 314; Harpur,DETOK, plan 69[406-7].Duaenhor 200 Reisner, Giza I, 49, 208-9, 328, fig. 118, 309; Harpur, DETOK,

plan 9[382-3]; LD, Plates, II, 82a.G 5030 145 Reisner, Giza I, 322; Harpur,DETOK, plan 42[394-5]; LD, Text, I,

71; LD,Erg.,XXXIXa.

G 7560 200 Reisner, Giza I,16, 210, 311, 322; Harpur, DETOK, plan 12[382-3].

Harzedef 191 Reisner, Giza I, 121, 125, 205, 308, 327, 338-9, 341, 343-4, fig.195; Harpur,DETOK, plan 10[382-3].

Hetepniptah 94-5 Badawy, Nyhotepptah, 1-7, figs.2-3a/b, plate 3; LD, Erg.,9, 10b;LD text 49-50; Junker, Giza,III, 40; Harpur, DETOK, plan117[430-1]; Altenmller,Hetepniptah.

Iasen 82 Simpson, Gmast 4, 18-23, plates XLI a,b,c, plate XLIIb; BMFA 32(1934) figs. 5, 7; Reisner, Giza I, 242, 314, 365-6; StevensonSmith, Sculpture, 55; Harpur,DETOK, plan 101[423].

Idu 185-6 Simpson, Gmast 2, 26-9, fig. 39-41; Bolshakov, Hinting, 9-29;Reisner, Giza I, 377-8

Irenrea 144-5 Junker, Giza,III, 156- 162.Iteti 193 Badawy,Iteti, 1-14, figs. 1-11, 13, 16, plates 1-10.Iti 174 LD, Text, I, 38; LD, Plates, I, 21; LD, Plates, II, 59; Reisner, Giza

I, 312.Itisen 252-3 Harpur,DETOK, plan 113[430-1]; Hassan, Giza,V, 263-74.Iymery 170-4 Harpur, DETOK, plan 16[384-5], 85[413]; Weeks, Gmast 5, 37-8,

fig. 31; Reisner, Giza I, 363-5.Kadua 244-5 Harpur, DETOK, plan 66[404-5]; Hassan, Giza,VI, 93-107, plates

XXXIX, XLII-XLV.Kaemsekhem 201-2 Harpur,DETOK, plan 11[382-3]; LD, Plates, II, 32; LD, Text,I, 84;

Reisner, Giza I, 322, 328, 337, 343.Kahif 76 Harpur, DETOK, plan 109[428]; Junker, Giza,VI, 94-153, plate

VIII; Stevenson Smith, Sculpture, 198.Kakhent --- Roth, Gmast 6, 88-9, fig. 55, plate 148.Kanufer 77-8 Harpur, DETOK, plan 48[398-9]; Reisner, Giza I, figs. 123, 206,

257-60.Kanenesut [I] 78-9 Harpur, DETOK, plan 50[398-9], 91[416]; Reisner, Giza I, 318,

322-3, 327, 331, 341, 345; Junker, Giza, II, 135-172, plate VI.Kanenesut [II] 79-80 Harpur, DETOK, plan 59[402-3]; Junker, Giza, III, 145-156;

Reisner, Giza I, 447.Kapi 69-70 Harpur, DETOK, plan 107[427]; Roth, Gmast 6, 99-104, plates


18/256

xvi

163-4, 167; Reisner, Giza I, 285, fig. 182.Kapunesut 135 Harpur,DETOK, plan 53[400-1]; Junker, Giza,III, 123-144.Kaseuza 159 Harpur,DETOK, plan 60[402-3], 94[418]; LD, Plates, II, 85b; LD,

Erg.,XXVIIa; Junker, Giza,VII, 158-178.Khemtnu 155 LD, Plates, II, 26d/e.

Khenit 162 Junker, Giza, VII, 241-245.Khentka 74-5 Reisner, Giza I, 430-2, plate 36c.Khuienptah 237 Hassan, Giza,VII, 35-40.Khufuaankh 129-30 Reisner, Giza I, plate 65b.Khnemu 121 Junker, Giza,VI, 190-194, plate 16a.Khufukhaaef [I] 188-90 Harpur,DETOK, plan 7[380-1], 84[413]; Simpson, Gmast 3, 16-7,

fig. 31-3;Reisner, Giza I, 308; BMFA 32 (1934), 1-12.Khufukhaaef [II] 190-1 Harpur, DETOK, plan 112[429]; Simpson, Gmast 3, 25-7, fig. 50;

Reisner, Giza I, 382.Meni [II] 107-8 Junker, Giza,V, 138-43.Meresaankh [III] 197-9 Harpur,DETOK, plan 14[384-5], 86[414]; Dunham, Gmast I, 18-9,

fig. 10;Reisner, Giza I, 225, 310, 331, fig. 131.

Merib 71-2 Harpur, DETOK, plan 43[396-7]; LD, Text,I, 46-9; LD, Plates, I,22; LD, Plates, II, 19-20; Der Manuelian, Slab stelae, figs. 108-9;Junker, Giza,II, 16, 121-35; Reisner, Giza I, 419-21.

Meruka 118-9 Junker, Giza,IX, 70-83.Meryreanufer(Qar)

184-5 Simpson, Gmast 2, 10-1, fig. 32.

Mersuaankh 269-70 Hassan, Giza,I, 104-14.Minzedef 203-4 Harpur, DETOK, plan 8[380-1]; LD, Plates, I, 26; LD, Plates,II,

33; Reisner, Giza I, 328, 331, 338, 343-4, 382.Neferbauptah 169-70 Harpur, DETOK, plan 56[400-1], 95[418]; Weeks, Gmast 5, 27-9,

fig. 21-3; LD, Plates, I, 21; LD, Plates, II, 58b; Reisner, Giza I,290, 314.

Nefer-Khuwi --- Roth, Gmast 6, 144-7, plates 191-5.Nefermaaet 183 Harpur, DETOK, plan 5[380-1]; LD, Plates, II, 17a; Reisner, Giza

I, 309, 331, 381.Nefer-mesdjer-Khufu

--- Roth, Gmast 6, 163-5, plates 202-7.

Nekhetka 240 Harpur,DETOK, plan 65[404-5]; Hassan, Giza,VII, 21-32.Nensezerkai 72 Junker, Giza,II, 97-121; Reisner, Giza I, 280.Nesemnau 209 Harpur,DETOK, plan 110[428]; LD,Erg.,XXXIII; LD, Plates,II,

92; Reisner, Giza I, 243, fig. 151.Nesutnufer 143-4 Harpur, DETOK, plan 47[396-7], 82[412]; Kanawati, Giza II;

Junker, Giza, III, 163-187.Niaankhrea[II] 223 Junker, Giza,XI, 79-87; LD, Plates,II, 91a.

Nihetepkhnum 50 Cherpion, Mastabas, plate 3-7; Der Manuelian, Slab stelae, fig.306.

Nikaurea 232-3 Harpur, DETOK, plan 40[394-5]; LD, Erg.,XXXV; Reisner, GizaI, 221, 310, 347.

Nikauhor 236-7 Hassan, Giza,IV, 189-94; LD, Text, I, 113; LD, Plates, II, 94d.Nikaukhnum 119 Junker, Giza,IX, 59-66.Nimaaetrea 282-4 Harpur, DETOK, plan 68[406-7], 92[417]; Hassan, Giza,II, 204-

220.Nimaaetrea-tut --- Roth, Gmast 6, 114-5, plate 64.


19/256

xvii

Niuty 133 Harpur, DETOK, plan 71[406-7]; LD, Erg.,XXX-XXXI; Reisner,Giza I, figs. 210-1.

Nufer [I] 137-8 Junker, Giza,VI, 26-73.Nufer 165 Junker, Giza,VIII, 66-88.Nufer 72-4 Harpur, DETOK, plan 6[380-1]; Reisner, Giza I, 201, 328, figs.

205, 241 plates 31-2.Person 48-9 Harpur, DETOK, plan 45[396-7], 88[415]; LD, Plates, II, 83b;

Reisner, Giza I,217, 329, 331.Ptahhotp 161 Junker, Giza,VII, 192-228.Raakhaaef aankh 207-8 Harpur, DETOK, plan 57[400-1]; LD, Plates,II, 8c, 10a, 11; LD,

Erg.,XXVIIa; LD, Text, I, 92-3; Reisner, Giza I,238, 314.Raawer [II] 162-3 Harpur,DETOK, plan 19[386-7]; LD, Plates,II, 84; Reisner, Giza

I, 370; Junker, Giza, III, 223-235.Redi --- Roth, Gmast 6, 70-2, plates 141-2.Ruzka 247 Hassan, Giza,VI(3), 125-131.Sa-ib 70 Roth, Gmast 6, 108-11, plates 178-80.Sedaug 52-3 Junker, Giza,IX, 107-18.

Sekhemka 53 Harpur, DETOK, plan 72[406-7]; Simpson, Gmast 4, 4-5, fig. 3;Reisner, Giza I, fig. 155.

Sekhemka 221-2 Junker, Giza,XI, 1-48.Sekhemkarea 233-4 Hassan, Giza,IV, 106-121; LD, Plates, II, 42b/c; LD, Erg.,

XXXVII; LD, Text,I, 110-1; Reisner, Giza I, 223, 310, fig. 128.Senenuka 68-9 Harpur,DETOK, plan 52[398-9]; Stevenson Smith, Sculpture, plate

45; Reisner, Giza I, 217, 311, 329, 335, 369.Seshemnufer [I] 142-3 Harpur,DETOK, plan 49[398-9], 90[416]; Kanawati, Giza I, 51-68;

LD, Plates, II, 27, 29; Junker, Giza, III, 33; Reisner, Giza I, 214,344, fig. 124, 197.

Seshemnufer [II] 146-8 Harpur,DETOK, plan 58[402-3]; Kanawati, Giza II, 51-64;Junker,Giza,III, 33; Reisner, Giza I, 328.

Seshemnufer [III] 153-4 Harpur, DETOK, plan 67[404-5]; Junker, Giza, III, 33, 192-214;Brunner-Traut, Seshemnofer III.

Seshemnufer 249 Harpur,DETOK, plan 64[404-5]; Hassan, Giza,VI, 201-206.Seshethotp 149-50 Harpur, DETOK, plan 46[396-7]; LD, Plates,II, 23; Junker, Giza,

II, plate XV-XVI, 172-195.Sethu 135-6 Harpur, DETOK, plan 20[386-7]; LD, Plates, II, 87; LD, Erg.,

XXVIIb; Reisner, Giza I, 334, 521-3, plates 74-5.Setka 160-1 Harpur,DETOK, plan 74[408-9]; Junker, Giza,VII, 192-222.Shepseskafaankh 175 Harpur, DETOK, plan 55[400-1]; Weeks, Gmast 5, 62, fig. 56-7;

BMFA 37 (1939), 30.Snefruhotp 96 Harpur,DETOK, plan 104[425]; Fisher,Minor Cemetery, 163-6.Snefrukhaaef 183-4 Reisner, Giza I, 309, 331, 381; LD, Text, I, 25; LD, Plates,II, 16.

Snefrusonb 125 Reisner, Giza I, 465, plate 57.Thentet 139 Curto, Gli Scavi, fig. 17.Thenti 141-2 Harpur,DETOK, plan 54[400-1]; LD, Plates, II, 30; Reisner, Giza

I, 214, 341, 343, 345.Tjeset --- Roth, Gmast 6.Wehemka 114-5 Harpur,DETOK, plan 51[398-9]; Roeder, Uhemka, 10-13; Kayser,

Uhemka,23-29; Cherpion, Sentiment,33-47.Wehemnefert 139-40 Curto, Gli Scavi, fig. 20.Weri 121 Junker, Giza,VI, 195-198.


20/256

xviii

Wonshet 139 Junker, Giza,I, 249-54; Der Manuelian, Slab stelae, fig. 162-3;Reisner, Giza I,334.

Zaty 204-5 Reisner, Giza I, 309, 327-8, 335, 337, 344-5, 382; Harpur,DETOK,plan 15[384-5].

Zaty 161 Junker, Giza, VII, 230-41, Abb. 95; LD, II, 86; Reisner, Giza I,

251, 312.


21/256

xix

Introduction *

In pharaonic Egypt it was important that after the demise and the burial of a person contact wasmaintained between the deceased and the society in which he/she once lived. To enable this, amonument was erected, with one of its functions being to mark the place where the deceased had

been buried and where the living could go, not only to revere the memory of the deceased, butalso to bring offerings.3

During the Old Kingdom the mastaba was the prevailing tomb form for the burial of a privateperson on the plateau of Giza, and to allow contact between the deceased and the living one of itsarchitectural features was a chapel. Whatever form the chapel took, a meeting place betweenthe deceased and the living was constructed on its western wall, which took, except for a shortperiod in the 4thdynasty, the form of a (false) door with an offering stone in front of it.4Thismeeting place was introduced because the basic idea had always been that the (non-royal)deceased actually lived in the tomb, albeit in a spiritual form.

The western wall and the false door placed against it, both elements of the western wall as a

whole, bore decoration, which must have been of crucial importance for the cult for the deceased,intended to occur on a regular basis in front of the false door. That this decoration was consideredessential can be deduced from the fact that every chapel (except those constructed during theshort period in the 4th dynasty already mentioned) was decorated, despite the doubtlessprohibitive cost. Evidently, a chapel without decoration was not considered fit for purpose.

There are many important questions to be posed about the cultic role of this decoration. Is thedecoration of just one of the elements of primary importance for the cult? Or are all the items ofthe decoration significant? Are changes on the false door and the remaining surface of the westernwall interconnected? And can reasons be deduced as to why these changes took place?

People living in pharaonic Egypt must have interpreted many aspects of the world in ways

fundamentally different from us. All the evidence leads to the conclusion that, although religionwas not seen then as a separate cultural subsystem as it is now, people then and there werenonetheless subjected, as we are here and now, to the all important and strongly interconnectedtriangle of climatic, economic and political change. It is not unlikely that changes in all three ofthese factors led to changes in the cult. Since these factors are strongly interdependent, changes inthe cult can be considered to have multiple causes too.

Changes in the decoration not only on the western wall, but also on all the other walls and on allarchitectural elements of the mastaba, have been studied and discussed by many scholars, butnearly always as independent and separate items, with each of these changes consequently beingexplained in many different ways. Therefore it appeared worthwhile, and possibly revealing, tostudy all these changes together, assuming them to be interdependent. This approach could lead

to a completely new and different set of conclusions.

* I would like to thank Mrs. Westcott (Montbarla, France) and Mr. Sexton (London) for their going overmy English.3Shirai, Funerary cult, 326 ff.4Renfrew,Archaeology, 359.


22/256

xx

To assess and quantify inter-scenic influence in this tomb decoration necessitated thedevelopment of a new mathematical methodology. The applicability of this approach has alreadybeen demonstrated in a similar type of research.5

Research has been begun in the present study by tackling the decoration of the elements of the

western wall, but the method could well be extended to the other walls of the chapel, the entrancethicknesses and even the faade of the mastaba. The reason that the western wall has been chosenfor initial study is that the decoration on this wall, the most important of all the walls of thechapel, is probably the one most prone to change,6and consequently it can serve as a test case.The results thus obtained can give rise to a working hypothesis which can be tested in furtherresearch on the other architectural elements of the mastaba. This methodology could eventuallylead to the discovery of connections joining the various elements of the cult chapel, thus revealingan intricate structure of closely knitted influences, and possibly opening the way to a hypothesisunifying all changes.

Of course the most common decoration scenes - those of the deceased engaged in variousactivities together with his family and the deceased sitting at the offering table - play a major role

in the cult chapel, but the mere fact that they are not the only scenes on that wall leads to theconclusion that the other scenes must also be included in the research.

An important point of investigation is whether or not all the scenes are placed there exclusivelyfor the cult itself or whether there are also scenes employed to signal and guide visitors to thechapel? Or indeed to help unify the scenes on the wall? They could be connected in this way withthe functioning of the cult chapel but not with the cult itself.

It could be the case that even on the western wall, the most cultic of all walls, some of the scenesare not directly connected with the cult itself. This leads to the question whether perhaps thescenes on the other walls do not have a cultic function at all., and that they are employed therejust to support or strengthen the cultic importance of the scenes with that role on the western

wall?

The reason the Old Kingdom has been chosen as the chronological unit of study is that it is aperiod of rapid cultural development. Therefore changes, if present, can be detected more easilythan in a period of attained cultural maturity.

The decision to study only the cult chapels of private tombs, and not include those of royal burialcomplexes, is based on the fact that during the major part of the Old Kingdom ideas about theafterlife of a private person were completely different from those about the afterlife of a king.Moreover, the extremely small number of such royal complexes, even for a period like the OldKingdom, prevents, within the context of this research project and the methods developed for it, astudy of the royal complexes as a separate, representative group.

5Roeten, Second style.6Harpur,DETOK, 1. It is stated here that the scenes of banqueting, offering bearers, priests, etc. are moreformal and as a consequence less prone to change. However, two types of change are possible, a changebased on freedom of interpretation, plainly visible in scenes depicting agricultural activities, fishing, thepreparation of food and goods, etc. and a change based on an alteration of ideas about one or more of theformal scenes. It is clear that the latter is the case for the western wall, while the former is the changetaking place on the other elements of the cult chapel.


23/256


24/256

xxii

36. Containers/standards for offerings (plate VIII.2).

The false door panel.

40. The tomb owner alone at the offering table (plate IV.11).

41. The tomb owner with another person at the offering table (plate VIII.4).42. The non-ideographic offering list (plate VIII.7).43. The offering formula (plateVIII.8).44. Name, titles (plate VIII.7).

The door recess.

50. The tomb owner, alone, standing or sitting (plate VIII.1).51. The tomb owner standing with another person (plate VIII.1).52. Text (plate VIII.6).

The architraves.

60. The tomb owner, alone, standing or sitting (plate VIII.1).61. The tomb owner with family (plate VIII.6).62. Name, titles (plate VIII.6).63. The offering formula (plate VIII.6).


25/256

Chapter I 1

Chapter I

Architecture, decoration and interpretation.

A short exposition is given of the following subjects:

1. The chronological development of the superstructure of mastabas and the ground plan of their cultchapels.

2. The chronological development of the decoration of the western walls of the cult chapels, and the falsedoor(s) placed against them.

3. The cultic versus secular content of (sub)themes and the emic/etic problem in their interpretation.Introduction.

Throughout Egyptian culture the purpose of an elite tomb has always been multiple.

1. It was a place to burya deceased person.2. As a monument it not only markedthe place of the burial, but it also demonstrated the earthly

status of the deceased and his family.1

3. It consolidatesthe place of the deceased in the society in which he/she used to live.24. It served as a place to bringofferings for the deceased person.In his compilation of tomb development Reisner formulates that there was a constant development inthe architectural design of tombs due to the utilization of new building techniques.3However, changesin funerary traditions and habits could also lead to the introduction of new building conventions inboth royal funerary complexes and those of private persons. The most important of these changes tookplace in the architecture of the area where the offerings for the deceased were deposited and in thelayout of the burial chamber.4 For this research project only the development of the cult chapel isconsidered, which can be divided into the development of the architecture of the cult chapel itself andthe development of the decoration therein.

1Van Walsem, Pragmatics, 129.2 Assmann, Tod und Jenseits, 15.3Reisner, Tomb Development, 5, section 3. The need for innovation can be considered to be a basic necessity ina culture, and the development of new building techniques is one of its many consequences. Reisners argumentthat building techniques are the cause of constant development is only true for lines of change which are directlyrelated to them. Some lines of change cannot possibly be linked to developments in building techniques,examples being the temporary habit of placing slab stelae in some cemeteries on the Giza Plateau, or theintroduction of decoration on the walls of the burial chamber.4An example of the influence of technical development on the architecture can be seen in the difference in size

of the single-chambered tomb B 10/15/19 and multi-chambered tomb U-j at Abydos (Ziegler, Pharaons, figure5, Dreyer, Umm el-Qaab, figure 4). In tomb B 10/15/19 the beams necessary to span the rooms were about 7 7.5 meters long (Kaiser, Umm el-Qaab, figure 2), in the older tomb U-j the maximum span was 3.5 meters. Inrooms 7, 10 and 12 of tomb U-j jars imported from Palestine have been found indicating that there was tradewith the Near East, thus opening the way to importing larger and stronger wood from the Lebanon (Dreyer,Umm el-Qaab, 34-35). The same is true for the development in the application of stone in construction. It wasduring the reign of Zoser (III.2) that for the first time various types of stone were employed for roofing, althoughonly 1.30 meters was spanned with limestone and 1.65 meters with granite. During the reign of Khufu (IV.2), byemploying thicker beams, already 5.25 meters could be spanned with the latter kind of stone (Arnold,Building,183). This clearly shows that in the period between Zoser and Khufu stone architecture was in an experimentalphase, not only testing new materials, but also trying out various designs.


26/256

Chapter I 2

I. The development of the superstructure of the mastabas at Giza.

On the Giza plateau, the mastaba, the prevailing tomb form, can be traced from Khufu, the secondking of the 4thdynasty, onwards (for a schematic view of the mastaba, see figures I.1 and I.19). 5Thebuilding activities of the kings of this dynasty must have destroyed most of whatever earlier tombsthen remained on the Giza Plateau.6This makes it impossible to determine the development of themastaba in the Giza necropolis during the period preceding the start of building the pyramid of Khufu.To remedy this, a possibility is to assume an identical development of non-royal tombs in thecemeteries of Giza and Saqqara.7

5A mastaba is a north-south oriented rectangular construction made from mud brick or stone. Its walls are steep,sometimes smooth, sometimes stepped. (L, III, 1214-31, s.v. Mastaba). The roof is probably flat, becausepart of the funeral ceremony appears to have taken place on the roof (figure I.18).6 The following information about tombs at Giza predating the 4 th dynasty can be found in the literature:Covingtons tomb (mastaba T) (PM, III, 294), a dynasty II or III mud brick mastaba (Reisner, TombDevelopment,155-6, figure 73; Lehner, Development, 115; Badawy, Architecture., 159, figure 103). PM, III,295 gives a tomb of the 2nddynasty that has later been covered by a 26 thdynasty mastaba. East of mastaba T a

platform was excavated which, according to W.M. Flinders Petrie, must have been the base of a funerary templebelonging to mastaba T (Petrie, Gizeh,1). Petrie also excavated at Giza a mastaba V, a mud brick mastaba datedto king Djet of the 1stdynasty (Reisner, Tomb Development, 30-1, figure 23; Emery, Archaic Egypt,73). Thismastaba is not mentioned in PM, III. Also see Jnosi, Giza, 75-6; Stadelmann, Pyramiden, 107-8 and Schott,Friedhofsbruche, 1123.7One difference in the development of the mastabas in the cemeteries of Saqqara and Giza is the employment ofthe mud brick exterior cult chapel in the necropolis of Giza which was seldom built in Saqqara (L, V, 400-409,s.v. Saqqara. Private tombs of the 4.-6. Dyn., 404). Contemporaneous cemeteries elsewhere in Egypt cannot betaken into account, because they were not situated in the vicinity of the royal residence, and this might causedifferences in chronological development. The residential cemetery of Heluan dates to the 1stand the 2nddynasty(L, II, 1115, s.v. Heluan) and cannot be introduced into the research project.

Figure I.1: Mastaba with anexterior mud brick chapel (fromJnosi, Giza,figure 2).

Figure I.2a: Funeraryenclosure Zunet ez-Zebib atAbydos.(from Kemp,Anatomy,plate2)


27/256

Chapter I 3

Until the construction of the pyramid of Khufu all mastabas were made from mud brick. It was withthis building material that the technical skill was acquired that made possible the further developmentof mastaba building during the later dynasties of the Old Kingdom.8Already during the 1stdynastystone being introduced as a building material for parts of the mastabas of the royal family.9 Theearliest known mastabas were excavated at Tarkhan and are dated to the 1stdynasty.

One of the oldest known mastabas with palace faade panelling is the one of queen Merytneit (figureI.2b).10Early in the first dynasty funerary enclosures with a palace faade panelling (Talbezirken) (figure I.2a)were developed in the royal necropolis of Abydos and built in the desert near the edge of the valley, 11a feature which was directly incorporated in the general design of the larger mastabas (figure I.2b).12The mastabas directly along the northern part of the eastern escarpment of the Saqqara plateau are allexamples of 1stdynasty mastabas, with the exception of some intrusive burials of the 2nddynasty.13Allthese mastabas have a palace faade paneling on all sides and are surrounded by one or more walls.14

In the 2nddynasty the walls of the mastaba were plain, save for two niches placed on its eastern wall.These niches were not equal in size, the larger being placed at the southern end of the wall. The formof the roof of the mastaba is not known as no mastaba with its roof still intact has ever been found. Itis possible that the roof had the vaulted form that was found in the wooden coffins of the 2 ndand 3rddynasties with a palace faade panelling (figure I.3),15and later in the stone sarcophagi of the 4thandthe 5thdynasties with the same type of decoration.16

8Reisner,History mastaba, 579ff.9Emery,Archaic Egypt, plates 14 and 17; tomb 3505: temp. Qaa (end 1stdynasty) and tomb 3506: temp. Udimu(middle 1stdynasty) (PM, III , 446).10PM, III, 444 -5 dates this tomb to queen Merytneit; Lauer attributes the tomb to her (Lauer, Saqqara, fig. 8,page 86-7), and so do Emery (Emery, Archaic Egypt, 66), and Stevenson Smith (Stevenson Smith, Art and

Architecture, fig. 16B).11Helck, Talbezirken;Kaiser, Talbezirken; OConnor, Funerary enclosures;Kemp,Anatomy, plate 2 (page 54).12It is not possible to determine whether the royal tombs of Abydos had the same serekhtype false door designbecause their superstructures disappeared due to time and human interference. All 1stdynasty tombs of Saqqarawere constructed with this type of paneling (Emery,Archaic Egypt, plates 5 and 6).13L, V, 387-400, s.v. Saqqara, Nekropolen der 1.-3. Dyn., Abb. 1, the mastabas QS 2103, 2105 and 3031 areall dated in the 2nddynasty (Reisner, Tomb Development, resp. 253, 70 and 250-1).14Ib. Abb. 2.15Although the main part of the (exterior) chapel of the mastaba of Kanufer (G 1203, PM, III 57) had a vaultedceiling, its roof was flat (Reisner, Giza I, figures 94a and b, and page 187[2].16Mller,Monumentalarchitektur,18, figures 15 and 19.

Figure I.2b: The reconstructionof mastaba S 3503, dated to theperiod of queen Merytneit (PM,III, 444-5; Emery, ArchaicEgypt, figure 30; date: 1st

dynasty), (detail from Lauer,Saqqara,figure 8).


28/256

Chapter I 4

Already in the 2nd dynasty a difference between the form of royal tombs and private elite tombsexisted, but this was more a difference in richness and grandeur than in underlying tradition. From the3rd dynasty onward a real architectural dichotomy based on a changing royal funerary traditiondevelops between these tombs. From this time onward the pyramid and its accompanyingconstructions constitute the royal funerary complex,17 while, throughout the Old Kingdom, themastaba remained the tomb for private individuals. Although early in the 3rddynasty private mastabaswere still being built with plain walls and two niches on the eastern wall, later in that dynasty palacefaade panelling returned, but almost exclusively on the eastern side of mastabas (an exception ismastaba T at Giza, which has palace faade panelling on all sides).18 In the necropolis of Giza thesouthern niche on the eastern wall, being the more important of the two,19had a simple, mud brick cultchapel in front of it (figure I.1),20which was replaced by a construction of stone from the reign of

Khufu onward.

21

This cult chapel showed the following development:

1. The exterior cult chapel became multi-chambered and eventually roofed over to protect theniche and the offering place in front of it (figure I.4a).

2. The next step was the incorporation of a niche inside the body of the mastaba, whicheventually became a cruciform cult chapel. Here also a mud brick building was placed in frontof the entrance (figure I.4b).22

17The first pyramid complex is the one of king Zoser at Saqqara (early 3 rddynasty); it still has a north-southorientation and its accompanying constructions are dummy temples (plates I.1 and I.2). It was from thebeginning of the 4thdynasty on that the royal funerary complex consisted of the east-west oriented complex ofthe pyramid with its temples (the pyramid complexes at Maidum and Dahshur) (plate I.3).18L, V, 387-400, s.v. Saqqara, Nekropolen der 1.-3. Dyn., 397; L, V, 400-409, s.v. Saqqara. Private tombs

of the 4. 6. Dyn.. According to Haeny, Platten, 164 the orientation of the false door was completelydetermined by the location of the tomb in the valley. A mastaba on the western bank has its false door(s) on itseastern wall, and on the eastern bank the false door(s) were placed on its western wall (Heluan). In L, V, 563-74, s.v. Scheintr, 567 it is proposed that the older tombs on the eastern bank on the Nile had their false dooron the western exterior wall of the superstructure.19Reisner, Tomb Development, 249.20The entrance to the chapel is mostly on its northern side (Junker,Baukunst, 9).21Jnosi, Giza, 154-5.22Stevenson Smith,Art and Architecture, figure 66. The cruciform cult chapel of Nefermaaet at Meidum wasoriginally not intended to be such. At first it was a normal niche, which was eventually turned into a cruciformchapel by means of adding another layer of mud brick against the wall of the mastaba (figure I.4b).

Figure I.3: A wooden coffin for acontracted burial, (Cairo, JE43794), 2ndor 3rddynasty. Taylor,Coffins, figure 4.Also see: Emery, Archaic Egypt,figure 77 and plates 24a, b.


29/256

Chapter I 5

3. Decoration in relief, carved in stone was introduced on sections of the false door and the wallsof the cult chapel (to be discussed in part II of this chapter).

All these developments can be dated to the transition from the 2ndto the 3rddynasty.The cruciform cult chapel was further developed during the 3 rddynasty.23The entrance into the cultchapel was constructed through the inner niche of the original false door on the eastern wall of themastaba. The cruciform cult chapel is an earlier development than the L-shaped cult chapel and, sincethe former was never generally adopted in Giza, this type of chapel remained almost completelylimited to the necropolis of Saqqara.24No proof can be found either that the predominant presence of the cruciform cult chapel in thenecropolis of Saqqara influenced the choice of the type of cult chapel eventually adopted in thenecropolis of Giza or that the cruciform chapel is the direct precursor of the L-shaped cult chapel,which would make the choice of the L-shaped chapel in the necropolis of Giza a logical step in thechronological development of the cult chapel.

With the start of the 4 thdynasty from a royal point of view the necropolis of Saqqara fell into disusebecause the kings of the 4thdynasty decided to build their mortuary complexes initially in Maidum andDahshur (Snefru (IV.1)),25and then on the Giza Plateau, the only exceptions being Raazedef (IV.3),

the successor of Khufu, who had his pyramid constructed in Ab Rawsh and Shepseskaf (IV.6), thelast king of the 4th dynasty whose pyramid is situated in the necropolis of Saqqara . 26 The Layer

23In Harpur,Maidum, 9 the cruciform cult chapel is called a north-south oriented chamber with an inner niche.24Harpur,DETOK,table 5.1 (page 315) shows that in the list of the cruciform and T shaped cult chapels in Gizaonly one cult chapel is really cruciform (Sekhemka, PM, III1, 221-2, plan XXXI).25This notation is an abbreviation of the first king of the 4 thdynasty (see table II.10).26Although the city of Memphis was the administrative capital from the 1stdynasty on, from the start of the 3rddynasty to the end of the 6thdynasty it was the royal residence too (L, IV, 24-41, s.v. Memphis, 27). Saqqarahad been the residential necropolis from the 1stup to and including the 3rddynasty. Snefru, the first king of the4thdynasty, moved the royal necropolis to Dahshur, and Khufu, his successor, moved it north of Saqqara (Giza).

N

Figure I.4a: A multi-chambered exteriorcult chapel. (G 1207) (after Jnosi, Giza,Abb. 17-2).

offering place

mud brick wall

Figure I.4b: The southern chapel of the

mastaba of Nefermaaet at Maidum.(detail from Harpur, Maidum, figure38).1stmud brick wall

niche

niche

2ndmud brick wall


30/256

Chapter I 6

Pyramid at Saujet el-Arjan cannot be included as an exception because it is not dated to the 4 thdynasty but to the 3rd.27

During the construction of the first pyramid on the Giza Plateau, several necropolises on the easternand western side of the pyramid were laid out.28The first to be built were cemeteries G 7000, G 4000,G 2000 and G 1200 (for a plan of the necropolis: see figure I.20).29The oldest cult chapels are those of the mastabas in cemetery G 1200, west of the pyramid of Khufu(see PM, III, plan VII). They have an exterior mud brick chapel in front of a slab stela in the easternwall of the mastaba (figure I.6). The slab stela appears only during a short period early in the reign ofKhufu.30The mastabas that were built in later periods of his reign had L-shaped interior cult chapels.However, the basic idea of the L-shaped cult chapel is already visible in the plan of the mud brickexterior cult chapels of the mastabas with a slab stela (figure I.6).31

The royal necropolis being in one place did not prevent contemporary high officials having their tombselsewhere. Methen (PM, III, 493-4), although a contemporary of Snefru, had his tomb constructed in thenecropolis of Saqqara.27The most probable date of the Layer Pyramid at Saujet el-Arjan (possibly build by king Kha-ba (Huni ?), ahardly known king of the 3rddynasty) is the end of the 3rddynasty (L, V, 495-7, s.v. Saujet el-Arjan; L, IV,1205-63, there 1217-8, s.v. Pyramiden, AR, also see Dunham,Zawiyet el-Aryan, IX-X).28 Jnosi, Giza, 91 proposes that either the complete layout of the mortuary complex of the first pyramid wasalready known, or that the construction of the complex had already been started, when the laying-out of theeastern necropolis was undertaken. Reisner called the necropolises west of the pyramid of Khufu the nucleuscemeteries (Reisner, Giza I, 13-4).

29Jnosi, Giza,figure 1. See also Jnosi,AEP, figure 34; Der Manuelian, Slab stelae, figure 174.30Most of the slab stelae have been found in cemetery G 1200 and the earlier mastabas of cemetery G 4000 (DerManuelian, Slab stelae, figure 175). In cemetery G 7000, east of the pyramid of Khufu, no slab stelae have beenfound. Haeny, Platten, proposes that the introduction of these slab stelae was not the result of a change in style,but the result of a delay in the construction of the outer casing of the newly built mastabas. Possibly the lack ofstone and/or labor force, due to the construction of the nearby pyramid, meant that the casing could not be maderight away. In order to make the mastabas fit for the burial and the cult of the deceased, as a temporary measure,slab stelae were placed in the cult chapels. 31 Jnosi, Giza, 283. According to Der Manuelian (Der Manuelian, Slab stelae, 36) four phases can bedistinguished in the construction of the chapel of mastaba G 1201 (Wepemnefert, PM, III, 57). During thesecond phase the construction of an exterior stone chapel in L-shape form was introduced.

Figure I.5: A cruciform cult chapel (Methen,PM, III, 493-4, plan XLIX, Saqqara, date:IV.E)(Harpur,DETOK,378, plan 2).

N


31/256

Chapter I 7

In the necropolis of Giza the slab stela is eventually replaced by a false door (figure I.7). Most of theearly L-shaped cult chapels had one false door on their western wall, but soon after a second false door

was added to this wall.32

According to Reisner the introduction of the exterior L-shaped cult chapel

32Strudwick,Administration, 41 indicates that the second false door was introduced during the reign of Khufu(IV.2). Reisner,History mastaba, 584 gives for the introduction of the second false door the start of the reign ofMenkaure. The addition of a second false door is not just the doubling of an architectonic feature; it reflects achange in basic ideas about funerary tradition and about the architecture of the tomb (Jnosi, Giza,284).

Figure I.7: An exterior mudbrick cult chapel (G 1201).(After Der Manuelian, Slabstelae, figure 7).

= slab stela

= false door

N

mud brick wall

= slab stela

Figure I.6: An exterior mud

brick cult chapel (G 1205).(After Der Manuelian, Slabstelae, figure 36).

N

mud brick wall

offering place


32/256

Chapter I 8

was a return to the form of the chapels as constructed in the pyramid complex of Zoser (III.1) atSaqqara (figure I.8).33The L-shaped interior cult chapel with one false door is, by far, the most frequently employed form onthe mastaba field east of the pyramid of Khufu at Giza.34This chapel could also be an exterior construction which was built against the eastern wall of themastaba (figure I.9).

From the reign of Khufu on, the L-shaped cult chapel was incorporated into the superstructure of themastaba. In the latter case an exterior building, made from mud brick or stone, would be erected infront of the entrance (figure I.10).35At the end of the reign of Menkaurea(IV.5) or early in the reign of Shepseskaf (IV.6) the L-shapedcult chapel with two false doors is introduced (figure I.11).36According to Harpur,37the L-shaped cult chapel with two false doors is the most common form on thecemeteries west of the pyramid of Khufu (IV.2).38

33Reisner, Giza I, 9. Reisner,History mastaba, 583.Stadelmann, Pyramiden, Abb. 12 shows that two forms ofextension were constructed in front of the chapels around the Heb-sed court. Despite their differences, the basicform of both types of rooms is L-shaped.34For a plan of the necropolis of Giza: see figure I.20. Harpur, DETOK, 64. Of 28 chapels on this cemetery 25have an L-shaped cult chapel with one false door (= 89%) and only 2 have two false doors (= 7%) (G 7510 and

G 7650), while one is cruciform (G 7540) (Jnosi, Giza, figure 3, page 85).35Jnosi, Giza, 193 mentions 16 mastabas on cemetery G 7000 (east of the pyramid of Khufu) of which 7 havean exterior building, of which 4 were built of stone.36Reisner, Giza I, 219. In table V.1.Vol.2 the tomb of Akhtihotp (PM, III, 200-1) has two false doors on thewestern wall and is dated to IV.2-4.37Harpur,DETOK, 64.38Contrary to the proposition in Reisner, Giza I, 219 and in Reisner,History mastaba, 583, it is concluded that atthe end of the reign of Khephren (IV.4), the L-shaped cult chapel with one false door was replaced by the samechapel with two false doors. This statement is in accordance with the claim that the introduction of the rock-cuttomb and the L-shaped cult chapel with two false doors was simultaneous (Reisner, Giza I, 219; Jnosi, Giza,305), a claim which does not imply a causal connection between the two.

Figure I.9: An exterior L-shaped cult chapel with onefalse door.(G 4430, PM, III1, 128, afterJnosi, Giza, figure 29)

N = False door

mud brick wall

Figure I.8: The ground-plan ofa chapel at the western side ofthe Heb-sed court of thepyramid of Zoser at Saqqara(detail from Stadelmann,Pyramiden, figure 12).

N


33/256

Chapter I 9

The southern niche on the eastern wall of the mastaba was the more important of the two niches placedthere.39Very often a construction in the form of a cult chapel was present in front of it, possibly either

to protect decoration and offerings or to provide privacy. The consequence of the introduction of asecond false door on the western wall of this cult chapel is the disruption of the original relationbetween the southern exterior niche, the eastern wall of the mastaba and the cult chapel in front of thesouthern niche. This is because the introduction of a second false door on the western wall of theconstruction in front of the southern niche turned this wall into a compacted equivalent of the easternwall of the mastaba itself, thus making the northern niche on this wall of the mastaba redundant.40Theoriginal function of the eastern mastaba wall now being lost, this function was transferred to thewestern wall of the interior or exterior cult chapel.

Starting during the reign of Menkaurea, rock-cut tombs were constructed in the quarry from which thestone for the pyramid of Khufu and partly for the pyramid of Khephren had been taken. 41These tombswere at first meant for the burial of members of the family of Khephren, and consisted of a cult chapelcut horizontally into the rock, a rock-cut substructure for the burial and in some cases buildings in

front of the entrance of the cult chapel.42

39See page 3 last alinea.40Sometimes this northern niche remained in use as an (additional) offering place for the deceased (G 5210, PM,III, 155), or for another person (LG 20 and LG 21, PM, III, 48-9).41This is the quarry situated south-east of the pyramid of Khephren (Lehner, Development, 121, fig. 3B; Lehner,Giza mapping project, Fig. 1.6). Tombs were constructed in this quarry from the reign of Mycerinos (IV.5) untilthe start of the 6th dynasty (Harpur, DETOK, 104; Reisner, Giza I, 219). For the problems around thenomenclature of tombs, See Van Walsem,Iconography, 10-11.42Reisner, Giza I, 219; Jnosi, Giza,301-2 and abb. 71.

Figure I.11: An interior L-shaped cultchapel with two false doors.(G 2150, PM, III1, 77-8, after Jnosi,Giza, figure 63).

N

= False door

mud brick wall

Figure I.10: The cult chapel of Khufukhaaef [I]. (G7140, PM, III, 188-9, after PM, III, plan XXX).

N

A B


34/256

Chapter I 10

The architecture of these chapels seems completely different from that of the L-shaped cult chapels asconstructed in the mastabas in the cemetery west of the pyramid of Khufu, yet it can be concluded thatboth types of cult chapels are based on the same concept, a conclusion supported by the fact that rock-cut tombs had two false doors too.43Also there was a resemblance between the tombs because often amastaba like structure was constructed on the escarpment above the entrance of the rock-cut tomb.44

In the course of the 5thdynasty other forms of cult chapel were introduced in Giza. These innovationsincreased the surface area available for decoration.45 A first step in this tendency to increase theavailable surface had already been made in Maidum during the reign of Snefru.46 The tendency toincrease the surface available for decoration culminated in the cult chapel with multiple rooms(Reisners type 12), the most famous being the mastabas of Kagemni and Mereruka at Saqqara, butsome examples can also be found in the necropolis of Giza. Examples include the superstructure of thetomb of Raawer (PM, III1, 265-9, plan XXXIII, date: VI), the mastaba complexes of the Kaemnefertfamily (PM, III1, 263-5, plan XXXIV, date: V.M or later),47 and the Senezemib family (see figureI.12).48

Figure I.12: Plan of the interior chapel of Senezemib (Mehi) (PM, III 1, 87-9; after Harpur, DETOK,441, plan 136; Brovarski, Gmast 7, plan 2).49

II. The development of the decoration of the cult chapel.50

The introduction of stone relief decoration on the walls of the cult chapels of mastabas during thetransition from the 2ndto the 3rddynasty is also part of the development of the cult chapel as a whole,and it is discussed as such.51The oldest examples of these reliefs in the cult chapels were the niche stones, the precursors of thelater slab stelae and the panels of the false door (figure I.13). Reisner dates them to the 3rddynasty, butin Giza the oldest of them can be dated to the reign of Khasekhemwy (last king of the 2 nddynasty).

43Jnosi, Giza, 316.44Reisner, Giza, 219 ; Jnosi, Giza, 297.

45Reisner, Giza I, 301-2. The introduction of the rock-cut tomb led to an increase of wall space available fordecoration (Jnosi, Giza,310).46The introduction of the cruciform cult chapel in the mastabas of Rahotep (PM, IV, 90-2) and Neferma et (PM,IV, 92-4) at Maidum.47Harpur,DETOK,270 [261] V.6-8E?48Apart from on the walls of the cult chapel (III), decoration is now also placed on the walls of antechamber IIand portico I.49It was impossible to place the entrance of the chapel in the eastern wall of the mastaba due to the presence of asouth-north oriented escarpment directly next to this wall (Brovarski, Gmast 7, 2).50The decoration of the false door is considered to be part of the decoration of the cult chapel.51L, V, 224-9, s.v. Relief.

N

= False door

IIII II


35/256

Chapter I 11

Other scholars suggest dates like I.L or II.E.52Haeny concludes that the ceiling stelae of Heluan areniche stones which were re-used in the burial chamber, although for a completely different purpose.53On these stones the iconography of the decoration is already identical to the one which is later placedon the panel of the false door. A precursor is the stela of Merka (1 stdynasty) on which the table withofferings is not depicted (figure I.14).54The oldest relief decorations found in situ are the wooden stelae in the tomb of Hesyrea(figure I.15).The oldest stone reliefs found in situ are the ones in the niches in the cult chapels of Kha abausokar andhis wife Neferhotep-Hathor (figures I.16a and I.16b, page 12).55All of these reliefs show the tombowner sitting in front of an offering table.

52Reisner,History mastaba,581. The indications E = early, L = late. Scharff, Grabplatte, 353, details that thetradition of adorning the panel with the tomb owner in front of the offering table goes back to the second half of

the 1st dynasty (a date based on a study of the stela of Berlin, inv. no. 23217). Vandier, Manuel I,736 ff.places this stela in the last part of the 1stdynasty (1.L) or at the start of the 2nddynasty (II.E).53Haeny, Platten, 150; Kahl, Grabplatten, 143.54The iconography of the panel, in later periods placed in the false door, consists of the tomb owner sitting at anoffering table laden with loaves. His/her name and title(s) are given, while around (sometimes above) the tableofferings are depicted in the form of ideograms.55Hesyrea, PM, III, 437-9, date: III.E (Vandier,Manuel I, 711 ff.); Khaabausokar, PM, III, 449-50, S 3073, dateaccording to PM, III: III.M IV.E; Reisner, History mastaba, 581: transition from 3rd to 4thdynasty. Harpur,DETOK, 275 [462] gives dynasty III. Bolshakov, Double, 34-5 concludes that the date of these tombs is notcertain, but mentions the 3rddynasty as the period in which the first decoration appears on the walls of the cultchapels.

Figure I.13: A niche stone, 2nddynasty.from Smith Art and Architecture

Figure I.14: Thestela of Merka, 1stdynasty, Saqqara,S 3505,PM, III, 446.(from Smith,Artand Architecture,figure 21).

Figure I.15: The stelaof Hesyrea. (Cairo,CG 1426, PM, III,437-9, Lauer, Saqqara,

late 27 .


36/256

Chapter I 12

Tombs were the primary site for the cult for the ka of the deceased: consequently a special place wherethe cult could take place was included in their architectural design.As it was of the utmost importance to identify who was buried in the tomb, at first the name and titlesof the deceased were given by inscribing them on a stone stela which was placed either in front of the

tomb or against its flat or niched wall.56

The stelae for private individuals soon came to include a

56An early example for royalty is the stela of king Djet found at Abydos (the 4thking of the 1stdynasty) (Emery,Archaic Egypt,plate 2b), examples of a later date for private individuals are the stelae in front of the southerncult niche of Netjer-aperef (date IV.1-2) (Alexanian, Netjer-aperef, plates 8a/b and 10) and Rahotep (date IV.1-2) (Harpur,Maidum, 50-1 and figure 61). Another early example is the stela of Merka (figure I.14) which showsthe tomb owner sitting but notin front of an offering table. His name and titles are placed above and in front ofhim. Already the mastabas of the 1stdynasty at Saqqara show that one of the palace faade doors at the southernend of the eastern wall was meant as an offering place (L, IV, 589-90, s.v. Opferstelle). In the tomb ofHesyrea (PM, III, 437-9, date : III.E) eleven of these stelae were placed in niches in the western wall of the

Figure I.16a: The false door niche of Khaabausokar.(PM, III, 449-50).(from Stevenson Smith,Art and Architecture, figure 49).

Figure I.16b: The false doorniche of Neferhotep-Hathor.(PM, III, 449-50).(from Stadelmann, StrengeStil, plate 59a).


37/256

Chapter I 13

depiction of the sitting tomb owner, but now with an offering table in front of him.57This featurewould remain dominant, whether used on a slab stela or on the panel of the false door. 58About thedecoration of both, Reisner concludes that from the start their decoration was executed in relief (late2nd early 3rddynasty). The name and titles of the tomb owner were not only placed on the slab stelaor on the panel of the false door,59but also on the architraves over the entrance of the interior chapeland over the false door.At an early stage of the development of these tombs, an open air cult chapel was built in front of thefalse door on the eastern wall of the mastaba.60Technically this rendered the false door a part of thewestern wall of the cult chapel.61As the cult chapel was originally meant as a shelter, without a directcultic meaning of its own, the eastern wall of the mastaba as a whole still retained its originalfunction.62The slab stela, and later the false door, were the most important features of the cult chapel. 63 Theprogram of the type of (sub)themes on the false door had been fixed from the period late 2nd early 3rddynasty.64Yet, some variations were possible and most of these were on the sides of the outer recessof the false door.

corridor cult chapel constructed at the eastern side of the mastaba (for one of these stelae: see figure I.15)(Vandier,Manuel I, 710 ff., Klasens, Stela, plate I).57 Smith, Art and Architecture, figures 31 and 32. In Barta, Opferliste,pages 6 and 22-3 it is stated that thistheme is placed on stelae from the second half of the 2nddynasty on. L, V, 1128-1133, s.v. Speisetischszene,indicates that the theme itself already existed on cylinder seals which can be dated to the 1 stdynasty.58On the stela of Netjer-aperef (Alexanian, Netjer-aperef, figure 21, plate 10) the tomb owner is depicted as astanding figure and not sitting in front of an offering table. The offering table theme itself had been placed on thepanel over the back of the southern niche of the mastaba (now nearly completely lost) (Alexanian, Netjer-aperef,58 ff. and figures 28 and 29). The stela was one of a pair in front of the niche and on it his name and titles weregiven. Beneath the effigy of the tomb owner goods were carried towards the cult chapel by personified estates.The simultaneous use of this type of stela and the panel show that the stela had no direct cultic function and mustbe considered as a precursor of the decoration which was in a later period placed on the eastern wall of themastaba at both sides of the entrance to the cult chapel.59The concept of a door allowing the kaof the deceased to move about, is probably already present in tomb U-jin Abydos witness slits in the walls between the chambers of the tomb (Dreyer, Umm el-Qab, 34-35 and figure4; Ziegler, Pharaons, 23, plate 5). Its concept might have been taken from the door of a house, but it was

primarily meant to give the ka the opportunity to pass from one room to another (L, VI, 659-676, s.v.Totenkult, Totenglauben). Discussion still continues as to whether the stela that was placed near the tomb laterbecame the slab stela that eventually developed into the panel of the false door, or whether in the 4 thdynasty thisfalse door panel was taken out of the false door and as such placed against the western wall of the cult chapelof the tombs at Giza (Junker, Giza, I,23 ff.; Heany, Platten, 152 ff.; Scharff, Grabplatte,346-357).60Reisner,History mastaba,580. No archaeological proof of the decoration of the walls of these mud brick cultchapels has been found. The slab stela and later the false door were the only decorated features there.61This was already the case in the 1stdynasty tomb mastaba 2038 at Tarkhan (Reisner, Tomb Development,71, figure 53). In Giza this can be seen in the plan of the mastabas with a slab stela against the eastern wall(Jnosi, Giza, figure 17).62The original function of the niche on the eastern wall of the mastaba was to make a connection between theworld of the living and that of the tomb owner in its interior or in the western world of the dead. Reisner calledthis niche (later the false door) the ka-door (Reisner, Giza I, 330), a term that has given rise tomisunderstanding, because Reisner gave the same name to the openings between subterranean compartments in

the tombs of the 1st dynasty at Abydos (Reisner, Tomb Development, 23; Dreyer, Grab U-j, plan tomb U-jbetween rooms 2 and 3, see also Ziegler, Pharaons, 23, plate 5).63El-Metwally, Grabdekoration,20, proposes that the false door in the form of a niche was introduced in theperiod II.L III.E.64An early example is the tomb of Hesyrea (PM, III, 437-439, date: III.E). On the eastern wall of the innercorridor of this cult chapel all the decoration has been painted. The eleven niches in the western wall of the innercorridor were painted and contained a wooden tablet showing a relief of the deceased with name and titles, oneof them showing the deceased sitting in front of a table with loaves and above it an early form of the offering listin which most of the offerings necessary for the cult are already given (wine, incense, the washing of the handsand a libation)(figure I.15). The decoration of the false door of Methen (PM, III, 493-4, date: IV.E) was alreadyfully developed (LD, II, 3 to 7; Cherpion,Mastabas, plates 1 and 2).


38/256

Chapter I 14

The first decoration to appear in the cult chapel was on the panel over the door in the niche. The nameand titles of the tomb owner were written on the other elements of the door and sometimes an offeringlist was placed on it.65The figure of the tomb owner was often placed in the center of the false dooreither standing or sitting.66

The above mentioned facts indicate that the first decoration to appear in the cult chapel was on thefalse door and only at a later stage decoration was introduced on the remaining surface of the westernwall.67The development of the decoration on the latter part of the western wall took place during the3rddynasty, witness the fact that the walls of the crucifo