Sonderdruck aus den MITTEILUNGEN DES DEUTSCHEN ARCHAOLOGISCHEN INSTITUTS ABTEILUNG KAIRO BAND 54 1998 @ VERLAG PHILIPP VON ZABERN - GEGRUNDET 1785 _ MAINZOn the Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau and its Canopic Equipment By Nan Sweuim and Aiba Dopson (lates 54-55) The 1957 discovery of the pyramid of the Thirteenth Dynasty king Ameny-Qemau at South Dahshur was one of the more important, yet most obscure, event: in the history of pyramid explera- tion, Incidents immediately following it provented any substantive publication of the monument ap- pearing until a decade after its discovery; the objects found have hitherto escaped publication alto- gether. This paper aims for the first time to reconstruct the events surrounding the find, consider the full architectural/historical context of the pyramid, building upon the pioneer work of Maracto- cu1o and Rinaior, and publish the material thatis known to have been recovered from it!) 1. The Discovery ‘The pyramid of Ameny-Qemau’} lies upon as and approximately a kilometre §,,W. of the pyra: looks Lake Dahsbur from the west ata di: all hill, 1.150 metres S.F. of the Bent Pyramid, of Ammonemes ITI at Dahshus (fig.1). It over. ince of soo metres, and the wadi leading to the lake from the south, at a similar distance, Its location seems to have escaped the notice of even such a keen spotter of ruined pyramids 2s Lerstus’). However, in 4957, an Americen scientist and publisher, Cranes Anmiion Muses, approached the Antiquities Service with a view to undertaking excavations at Dabshur and Matariya‘), Exeava- )) This paper’ origin: go hack over a decade, when Sean received photegeaphs ofthe cancpic are From the pyramid from th late Lasin Hanacitt They had been privieusly parsed to the ater for publication by the late Suarie Fao. We would eet thank various friends and collegios For their help isthe preparation af the paper, inclu (Gor drawing figare 5), Dove Haw (for contemporary press eating), Santa Taw (for sesearcs Jsneaune Dosnoworsi the Temporary Register fhe Egptian Mereum, Cer} Jom Lacon, Rais Mornoonen Asore Mnrooon (For haing memories ofthe stat Sue ‘870, Mi nant Noon See (fr Castors fom he Balan Kin Resour fr dicusin of probes of Seca In termediate Period dhronlogy) and Eownno F Ware, Part T andthe Appendices this paper ae the werk of Seu, while Dooson is pense forthe blk of Pa f I and TV 3) The second element of che nae, } wa origin ead 28 Tm, but now as gms, onthe bsisoF G. Posen, Les Aviarqusen Epes ker Kile ot Xlic ante, Sia '4 (9957), vast. The reading is usher diseased by 8. Quiee, Roel Power in the 3th Dyas, Mile Kingdom Seater, Quis. Nev Maen, i991) 125, wher he aldienally cor. chugs dha the rare cers rom the roto ees exther han Invest wore. On the proposal at the name should b incerpeed as ‘Qn sen of} Aen’ see K- Reon, Baad ofSingRaronb anda Noe on King Qomc, GM 156 (197), 5700, ad Belew p.30 3) See Appendix fora cussion of any connexion with te problenatic sracture, Ziegeyeamide No. LIX: ) A principal source forthe son ofthe evens suirounding the discovery of the pyramids Sax Gass autbio- traphiel Cee fs dems adorei dit Trompe ta néoopoe d Hernopois Towa el Gebel (Caro: Goverment Dring Offee, 178), 203-7, Other outer ae given in 1, below See also Doosox, The Stange Af of Dr Mes, KIT Ss 1997, Gor chs, bdo.320 Nabil Swelim and Aidan Dodson NAIK 54 tions began at Dahshur under Muses’ direction in association with Sant Gaora, south of the Black Pycamid of Ammenemes III, Sniaccx Farin, Chief Inspector for Lower Egypt, was also invalved in the work. Excavations initially revealed Old Kingdom mastabas, one of whic, belonging to a certain Ipi, contained a pair of standing, headless statues*). The final two weeks of work, however, brought to light what first appeased to be a mastaba, but on further investigation proved to be « pyramid). The discovery was made known via annual summaries of fieldwork”), but Muses’ sponsorship of the ‘work was shortly brought to 2 sudden baltat the end of the season’). On 20 June, Dr Muses was de- tained at Cairo airport, on charges relating to antiquities and currency allegedly found in his posses- sion?). ‘The most important charges were overturned at appeal in June 1958"), but Muses seems never to have returned to Egypt, and he apparently never completed the book he stated that he was ‘writing on his discovery"). Following this debacle, work at the site was abandoned. However, some time later, those parts of che pyramid substructure which had been exposed were exzmined in detail by Viro Maracrocuo and Cranst Riva, who published theie report ia ay68!), No further substantive work seems to have been carried out, although some sorutiny of the area was carried outin the mid 1970s"*). Apart from a discussion of the pyramid’s chronological placement'*) and an incomplete discussion of the objects found"), litte else appears to have been thus far published concerning this mast important structure, DL. ‘The Pyramid Complex THE PYRAMID The scanty ruins of Ameny-Qemaw’s pyramid are scattered around the central pit in which the substructure had been constructed. Maractocnio and Rinator were unable to locate any route for supplying materials such as white limestone, quartzite and bricks, and thus surmised that these sup- plies may have come along the wadi co the south. “To construct the superstructure of the monument, the site was prepared by removing the surface sand and uncovering the bed rock (fig.2). The levels in the west were a little higher than in the east. 5) Gans, Cher. 205, 29 ef PM IT, 8y5.The name of che tombs owner is reported in Rocky Mountain Nec Abereafee: RAN) 1 May ) Gana for some reason had doubts st ehe monumen?’s stats (ef. Dia ‘Anbu-Guaat, Last Excdoations, Onpenica- tion die sntauutée de Epic, Vie ot Tron Us Semi Geb, fom Tost Towa [Cait i984h who cals ita masaba bil onthe top ofthe bi) 7) H.B(acwsen), Anendaneen in Gis, Segaare, Memphis, Deksher, A/D 28 (1957-8), 47e-Bo base on information sven out by Stuns Hlssan on 2 September 137 atthe 24 Congress of Onertalits: Lecians, Onintlis NS 27, 8-3, aed a press release, supplemented by Hussan’srenacks The discovery also featured inthe contemporary press Dia ‘Anou-Grnen, Vere Teas Th, 5. 9) well ely Gana ad in varone pres pots, the events ase rsountid by EE Niners, NARCE 25 ly 1950) CE below feotrate ag and 336 ") RUN ay fone 1958 48, 1) RUN ayAps a8, 8 Mine has proposed an asooun for publication ina forthcoming sue of KMT: "2) Manaoroonio and Rava, Noten prawide i Ameny amt, Oriental NS 37 (oy 505-98 '5) D.Amoww /R-Senostanes, Dabicbar- Ester Grabngsiviht, MDAIK 31 (4575) 24, Abb. 5, Taf, The pois betocation of ro more pyran inthe sien wan nsted (fig) '*) Dopson The Tombref ke Kingraf the Thitcenth Dynasty inthe Menphits Nesopolr, ZAS 114 0987) 36-4 '5) Dopson, The Canopic Zquipmen ofthe Kings of Eqype (Landon, ay) (herefeer CEE], 3, 11475sox (On the Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau and its Canopie Equipment 3u Following this, three lange trenches were dug in the bed rock with a level bedding: two ran east west and the third joined them on the west side. Toward the east the pair of treaches ended in an open area roughly levelled by extracting the superficial reck and accumulating it on the limits of this side. ‘The crench surrounds a rough square, upon which the pyramid nucleus was built. ‘The top of this rough square was not level; thas, it decreased from 120cm at the south west corner to goem abo- ve the level of the south trench at the south east corner. ‘The nucleus brickwork is still in situ above this feature, which measures: West side 4s.so metres = 85.450 cubits South side 44.80 metres = 85.496 cubits Eastside 4520 metres = 86.259 cubits North side s4zometres 4558 cubits The outer walls of the trenches were covered with crude brickwork and a little limestone. ‘The width of the trench on eack side of the pyramid is: North side East side South side West side 6.50 metres 6.00 metres 5.85 metres 6.20 metres = 12.40 cubits = 41.45 cubits = 11.46 cubits 1.83 cubits ‘The level bedding and wich of the trenches surrounding the brickwork of the nucleus allows for a foundation, backing masoncy and outer facing for « pyramid of a base length of 100 cubits (52.0 metres)!*). The following pyramids have a base length ranging from 90-110 cubits, two of which date to the Thicteenth Dynasty, possessing the same base lengtht PYRAMID base length in cubits Gira Gla 90 Giza Gle 90 Giza Gib 94 Dahshur, Ammenemes LI 952) South Saqgara, Khendjer 400 Mazghunah, South Pyramid 100 Dahshur, Bent Pyramid ‘subsidiacy’”) 101 Sagqara, Unas a0 Mazghunah, North Pyramid 110) ‘The brickwork surrounding the trenches would have to be explained as either the foundation of the pavement or some element associated with the construction of the monument. ') Mansciocuo and Rivank introduced the option of + narrow pyramid court and a wavy thin wall of brick sur- rounding the monument: ck, Créetaie 97,320 ) Since the base-engck ofthis pyramd exceeds one filth ofthe base lenge of che Bent pyramid, one might question this morument’s trae classification as asulsiciary. On the other hand, the pyramics south of those of Cepbten and Useckaf alo show this peculiarity.oe 32 Nabil Swelim and Aidan Dodson MAK 54 5142 100 obits 2.0 Wo ebis 10 50 (cence pg ets Fig 2s Phi ofthe pyramid of Ameny-Qemaut2998 (On the Pyramid of Amen Qos andits Canopie Equipment 323 ‘THE TEMENOS In their report, Maractoctio and Rivatpt point out some destruction on the east side which could indicate the former presence of an upper temple. Icis difficult without any further clearance to determine details of a causeway or other elements of the pyramid complex. The north trench of the pyramid superstructure, however, is 6.50 metres wide for 26.26 metres from the west, and then sud- denly widens to 9.60 metres, as is shown in fig. 2, This widening is created by turning the outer brick- work 3 metres northward, then 8 metres exstward, after which itis lost for 11.50 metres, before reap- pearing, aligned with the first part, for 12.49 metres; the wench may have never been completed in the areas of these missing sections, Consequently, it is likely that this rectangular projection was in- tended for the stone foundation for a northern chapel; the building process will have been discon- timed at an early stage. ‘THE SUBSTRUCTURE The substructure was constructed in a roughly squared central pit. A ramp approaching from the east appears to be on the axis of the nucleus, with an entrance displaced a litle, 0.65 metres, to the south. The ramp and pit were probably excavated after the pyramid’s nucleus was set'*). The ramp began at the same level as the atea directly east of the nucleus and a little to the east of the side line"), Maractociio and Rinatpi were unable to measure either the descending angle of the ramp orthe depth of the pit ‘The rock wall of the ramp is level in the upper part of the north side and unfinished at the west end of the south side. There appear to be no traces of a connection between the descending ramp and the constructions in the central pit. Perhaps the work was discontinued, or finished off quickly with less care. Consequently the ramp that should have led to the substructure was filled in. ‘The substructure was entered by a narrow passage, blocked by dry masonry from an carly age, although the lower parts were neatly built in brick. To the east, masses of chippings and a large lime- stone block were found in situ. "The constructions that lay in the pit were lined with limestone blocks of approximately +.5 t0 0.60 metres thickness, a fill being observed between this masonry and the rock wall of the pit. ‘The basic scheme of the extant substructure is shown in fig, 3: ~ A sloping corridor (A) descends westwards, to be followed by a short horizontal passage (B); from this, a visitor would ascend 2 vertical shaft (C-D) to a second horizontal passage (D- E), stillin a westward direction, ‘This shafe would be closed at the top by a lange vertically dropping quartzite block, From the end of the horizontal passage, a second vertical shaft (E-F) ascends to a third horizontal vestward-leading passage ending in a north-south chamber (G). "The shaft was designed to be closed by a large quartzite block sliding from the south ~ From G, a stairway (H)”*) leads in a northward direction to.a second apartment (1). A second stairway leads out of this room in a westward direction to give access to the antechamher (J) In the antechamber the sarcophagus lid was stored until the burial tools place. ~ This lid was slid into the burial chamber (K) after the interment had taken place, closing the great quartzite monolith that combined the features of a sarcophagus and canopic chest, by containing separate cavities for the mummy and the canopic equipment, 'S) For the construction of the pyramid mucleus with a ‘onstruction gap" allowing continued access to the substructures cutting, ef, D.Anwoun, Building ix Egypt: Pharzonie Stone Maonry (New York and Oxford, 1991) 175-81 ") This means dhat it probably beran from thepyramid facing and onl support a hase length of soo cubits. 2) This area was badly damaged; stairway is surgested by Manicrociro and Rivaton324, Nabil Swelim and Aidan Dodson OAK 54 Fig.5: Reconstructed layout ofthe substructure of the pyramid of Ameny-Qemau (alter Masaoioaue and Rina) ~ The burial chamber would have been sealed off by « quartzite slab sliding from the west, and thus separating it from the antechamber. ‘The plan of the substructure is very similar to, but slightly less developed than that of the North Pyramid at Mazghuna. The two monuments should therefore be closely linked chronologically, with Ameny-Qemau’s regarded as the easlier™), IIL. The Canopic Equipment and other Finds From the nearly-contemporary tomb of Hor, we have a fairly good idea of the kind of material that was to be found in a king’s tomb of the Thirteenth Dynasty"?). Howeves, the devastated state ‘of Ameny-Qemau’s monument left little chance of substantial survivals; aside from a set of broken canopies, to be discussed shortly, only one fragment can be traced”*), Entered in the Cairo Museum ‘Temporary Register (TR) as 14, itis the edge of a flat calcite object, o.em thick, conceivably part *) CE, also below, pp. j26ff. and 330. For a full ditcusion of the relative dating of Thirteenth Dynasty pyramids, see Dopson, ZAS 114, 36-44, pace M. Lesnven, The Complete Pyrarsids (London, New York 1997), 184-7. 2) PM IP, 818-95. Dopsox, ZAS 114, 42 2) There remains very considerable uncertainty as regards the fate of much of the material recovered (cf. 0.25, below), and itis possible that other items may have been found, not susceptible at present to identification.998 (On the Pyramid of Ameny-Qemas and its Canopic Equipment 325 of an offering table, although such an item is absent from How's sepulchre. Trom the photograph in the Register“), it does not seem to be from a stela of the types found in that king's tomb"). ‘The ‘Ameny-Qemau fragment bears the end of « band of vext: 2] 7G, his is easly restored as having read [Ameny-Qema]u, wue [of voice]. ‘We have no clues as to where TR 244 originated within the pyramid, although the antechamber seems most likely; however, the remaining items certainly came originally from the burial chamber, its floor entirely filled by the giant combined sarcophagus/canopic chest. The actual canopic cavity lies at its south (loot) end, the normal orientation for such containers. Erom the parallel of the ap- proximately contemporary interment of Hor, one would assume that a wooden inner chest was for- erly present, but no fragments of such are recorded. On the other hand, remains of four calcite jars were recovered (ph 54-55, figs 4) A. Description Fragments making up complete jar, bearing the Imseti formula, incised and filled with blue/geeen pigment. Dimensions”): Height 26.5em, Diameter 20.5em Present Location: Uncertain®), Text: 3st sp ht br Isis, delimit your protection about Iniseti, who is in you; imiby br msti the honoured hefore Imseti, nsw inmy-qnivo m3 brw King Ameny-Qemay, trve of voice. B. Description Fragments making up almost complete jar, bearing the Hapy formula, in- cised and filled with blue/green pigment. Dimensions: Height 27.5 em, Diameter 215m. Present Location; Uncertain; a portion, made up of three glued fragments and measuring overall 13.9 x 8.2.x 0.12m, is Cairo TR Bt), It includes a large part of the text area. A piece of the rim, measuring 10% 1.8.m, with the top left- hand corner of the text panel, is TR 234 Text nbt-hret [stp 2. hr Nephthys, delimit your protection ahout Apo ntyime Hapy, who is in yous imshy br kpy the honoured before Hapy, [nfs imny-qmie ms" Gro King Ameny-Qemau, true of voice. C. Description: Fragments making up partial jar, with most of its upper part missing, bear- ing the Duamutef formula, incised and filled with blue/green pigment. “) Tehas nor thus far proved pessblet examine physically any itm recovered from the pyrami 2) Calta JE sonst °) The t-qua chick ie eles cf below p. 8 *) Estimated from scale on photograph ") Acconling to PM UP, 8, the canopic mater from th pyramid is preserved inthe Egyotian Museum, Cairo, une de the Temporary Regier mimes 23 bers of the block de not represent any of dhe maleval epresented in the Tani phewographs, Nothing of the present jar ap- However, aaeesdy noted, is notfrom eanope aad the eninng at peszeio be inthe Temporary Regt, 2) Ibis possible thatthe reason for the separation of certain fragirenis from the bulk ofthe jars is that they were caught pin the events following Muses arrest (ef RUN 13 April 958, 8),326 Nabil Swelim and Aidan Dodson MoAIK 54 “Two pieces bear numbers in ink?) ‘A637’, on fragment of shoulder, and “696m” on a rim sherd. Dimensions: Height ~ 19 + xan, Present Location: Uncertain; part of the shoulder (8.2m wide), with the upper parts of the left-hand text columns, is Cairo TR 2514, Text Lu lp shihe [.-.],delimityour protection about (..dwi-mutifaty img (Duamut]ef, who is in yous imnilhy br deot-mewef the honoured before Duamutef, se [..] King[...J D._ Description Fragments making up complete jar, bearing the Qebehsenuef formula cised and filled with blue/green pigment Dimensions: Height 26 em, Diameter 19cm. Present Location: Uncertain. Text: sige sip s1.t br Selget, delimit your protection about ghh-sn.zof uty int Qebehsenuef, who is in yous imiby br gbh-sm.cof the honoured before Qebehsenuef, nse inny-qritto mi“hrw King Ameay-Qemau, true of voice ‘There remains confusion as to whether anything of the lids were found, Epwarp F. Wenre re- marks that ‘the ias, as usual, had lids representing the four tons of Horus"), A contemporary newspa- per report also mentions ‘covers from four canopic jars found in the tomb’). However, no such ele- ments are included in the Faxip photographs, nor do they appear to be in the Cairo Temporary Re- gister. Their existence thus remains uncertain, DISCUSSION ‘The jars basically conform to the size, shape and textual content that becomes broadly standard from the latter half of the Twelfth Dynasty. ‘The precise textual formulation is that characterised by Serie as Type I1P™), whose distingui features are the writing out of the intial [] of ap-s2, to- gether with ending the first section with imt/t, rather than firt/t. The type specimens come from the reigns of Sesostris IIT and Ammenemes TI[, being the jars of Princesses Menet**) and Sithathoriu- ret). Given the problems in precisely fixing Ameny-Qemau within the Thirteenth Dynasty, itis inter~ esting to compare his jars with those of the fourteenth king, Hor"*}, and those of the latter’s daugh- The nature ofthe numbers marked on sherds is uncleas. They were presumably applied before arival at the Eeyp- téan Maseum since they do aot square with any ofthe namberingsystens used there }) NARGE 25, [1] In response to an enquiry, Profesor Were tel us: My recollection is that the description f gave of | ‘hers came solely from «conversation Thad with Sat Gab. [ rather doult now that the soppersofthe jar had the sninal headsof ‘the sos of Hons at this ery date, and perhaps the staterent made eas baed ona mention ofthe 4 tons onthe body ofeach jr. {donot remember ever actualy seing the jars’ (personal communication, 3 March 1956), °) Desver Past 24 July 1957 >) K Sem, Zar GeuchichtederEinbaleamiorung bi den Ayer, ued niger damit cenbendever Bruce (etl, +934, :#. The extsypes mentioned in this paper are reproduced at figures 5) 0G 4oos-6, from Dahshur (G.A. Retnen, Canopics (CCG) (Cairo, 1967], 34) 25) MMA 16.1.45-8, ftom Lahun (G.Brunzon, Lahm I: the Treasure [London, 1925], pls4)- %) CG goro-an Resute, Canopis, 1-43 CEKE, 46)1968 (On the Pyramid of Ameny-Cemis and its Cnonie Enipment Tous Typusv TeV: ypu Wi: Typusvi Fig. 5: Canopie ‘Types I Tb cones FAST IS @7]\ = Pool i vas ners 425 () ONS. cemsin _se, vena sence 57 formulas of che late Middle Kingdom (after Sere) I: Ameny-Quensu; Princesses Mens, Sithathornet ‘Typus IV: Hor, Sobkemsaf jas) Typss¥: Typus VI Hor (chest) Princess Nubheteptikhered (irs) ‘Typas VIL. Princess Nobetoptkhered (chest)328 Nabil Swelim and Aidan Dodson oan 54 ter, Nubheteptikhered””), Both individuals had been buried in tombs built into shaft-graves along the north side of the Dakshur pyramid of Ammenemes III”). Dimensionally, all the vases are very similac; likewise, their shapes conform to Middle King dom norms. In addition, the vipers all lack the rear of their bodies, and both kings’ jars have their bird signs deprived of legs. Taose of Nubheteptikhered lack birds altogether. These features clearly distinguish che Thirteenth Dynasty jars from the late Twelfth Dynasty group. However, no set is precisely the same as another in the area of text-formulas. The two kings jars are the most alike, but with differences which might point to Ameny-Qemau’s being the car lies), Hlor’s comply with Serun’s “Type TV, in failing to spell out 2, and using Ar for im). “This type persists into the Seventeenth Dynasty''), with the implication that jars bearing it should be later than those with ‘Type DIL, attested in only the ‘Twelfth and (now) Thirteenth Dynasties. Pointing in a similar direction is the fact that Hor’s chest™), and the jars of Nubheteptikhered, bear versions of the canopie formala (Types V and VI) which move a step further away from Type IL], dropping stp-s! ac che opening of the formula in favour of fp “wy ~ the concept of protective embea co"*) that becomes the core of most subsequent canopic formulae"). In addition, these two types add the phease dd-mduo (in) at the beginning, thus heralding the introduction that becomes normal from the Eighteenth Dynasty onwards. Of course, one should be careful of drawing any far- reaching conclusions from sucha small sample of material ‘Turning to the royal names inscribed on the jars of Hor and Ameny-Qemau, a number of inter esting points arise, One isthe fact that while Her employs the full ttle, nsw-bity, Ameny-Qemau is only called nsto"®), Looking at the full range of extant royal eanopic equipment, the vast majority use simply eu”, ranging from the carly Seventeenth Dynasty chest of Djehuty, through those of nid-Bighteenth Dynasty kings, down so Apries of the ‘Twenty-sixth Dynasty“*) Only a tiny number ‘use ineo-bity’, principally those of Tutankhaman (isolated use on two coffinettes only]”), Smen- 2) CG geor-to Reve, Canopies 7 5) PM IIE, 88-9, 29) "The fae that Fors texts sxe disposed over dece columns, vberess Ameny-Qemau’s are written i Four sof no =~ port, since four colsmas appear in he Twelth Dynasty (eg, Sithatnosiunet), contemporary with Hor (Nubbeteptithered), fl inthe early Eighteenth Dynasty (Abmes-Neferii JE afass [C. Lusguist, Some Dynasty 16 Canopic Jan fom Royal Har fale in the Caio Muenyon, JARCE 39, 199%, 1141) <0) ‘Tye later substitution might have bes ietended to emoveat east cae of the pcentaly-dangecous bird-signs from the texe On the other hand, the s!-goose remained (albeit halved), and the same effoctconld have been achieved by substict ing = for ys ouch a phonstio sting ofthe king's nomen hud avoided the use ofthe Homus-hawk, On the omission or inutilation of Beroglyplbe for prophylactic ceaions, see P.Lacath Suppresions et modifications de sgnes dans les textes fwd tire, ZAS 31 (933) 1-64 “dhe canopies painted on the inne id ofthe eanopie chest of King Sobkemaaf [Leiden AH 216: CAKE, 118, ? ) Calo JE 51266. CRE, 144 +>) fp is probably bes trunlate as enfold inthis context, gives thatthe usual eranalation of the word is hide’ (Fao rootn, CD, 169) sp-ot is used ip mostaubsequene formulactypes, bua a more subsidiary portion, with an ‘embracing’ clase atthe einning of text. +) By the Eighteerth Dynasty, hip is supplemested by other words with similar implicaionsy exe goddden/ genius airing usinga different sony see CEKE, 143}. The fst steps towards tis ate keeted (Serne’'s Type VID. “5) Gama vsed this to question Ameny-Qemau's regal status, regarding him as only a prince with de ile ‘matre du sud. hisattenpis co alsodesy tar te om was actally pyramid n.6, above $6, CERE, 16-6, 174-8. Gants arguments had Veen countered atthe time on similar grounds by Wente, NAKGE a5. $F) Cairo IE 687, 606. uly seen on de chest of Nubhetepti1998 (On the Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau and its Canepic Equipment po des**), Amenemopet (chest only)"*), and Harsiese®), That there can be no significance in this varia- tion is shown by the random nature of this distribution, although emphasising that ‘ne’ is clearly the fundamental designation for a deceased monarch. The same phenomenon of the general use of ‘nsw’ is also seen on royal coffins, the only extant users of ‘nsto-bity’ being Hor’), ‘faa II"), Tuth- mosis [**), Neferneferuaten™), and the Saite coffin provided for Mykerinos*) ‘The other difference concerns the choice of eartouches on the jars. On Hor’s, the prenomen is found on the Imseti and Duamutef jars, the nomen on those of Hapy and Qebehsenuef. Based on the Ameay-Qemau fragments in the Cairo ‘Temporary Register, which only preserve one (nomen} cartouche, together with remains of the Hapy formula, it had been assumed that a similar situation existed in Ameny-Qemau’s set, with the Imseti and Dusmutef jars adored with the king’s hitherso- unknown prenomen™). Howerer, the photographs here published show that all four jars bore the nomen. ‘This exclusive use of the nomen seems at first sight curious, since the prenomen is generally seen to be the usual mode of designating a king, where only one name is employed, from the end of the ‘Old Kingdom until the very end of the Third Intermediate Period and later, when the nomen comes to the fore”), However, looking at funerary equipment of the Second Intermediate Period, the situ- ation appears rather less singular. Taking canopies first, of the three extant Seventeenth Dynasty, only that of Iayotef V5) indudes a prenomen, albeit in the same cartouche as the nomen. Those of Djchuty*?) and Sobkemsaf 1°) carry only a nomen. Likewise, the coffins of Inyouef V"") and YI), together with Kamose, have only a nomen (without even a cartouche in the latter case)*), IV. The King ‘The discovery that all four canopic jars of Ameny -Qemau bore his nomen removes the main hope of easily ascertaining his prenomen, and thus tying him into the Thicteenth Dynasty through the Turin Canon or other documents, given his apparent absence under the guise of his nomen from ) Metropolitan Museum of Art 4760, and Pars, Aubert Collection. 2) Caio JE 8068 2) Cairo JE soe, The texts of ll these are proxided in CEKE, s¢8, 172, 176, 178. 2) Cairo CG 8106, 2) Cain CG s1c0r ») Cairo CG steas 54) Cairo JE 39627. °) British Museum EA 6617. Allorgial texts from royal coffins will be published in Dopson, The Cans and Canopic Equipment from the Tomb of Tutenthamus (in preparation) °) CEKE. 30 %) MLA Lean, Sate Royal Scubtures¢ Review, GM 80 (188), 69-70. Pasenhor, looking hack from the Year 57 of the reign of Shoshena V, vsesplin nomina in recounting hie royal ancestors (Losure AF 123: M Mauismr/G, Posenra/}. View courte, Cateloguedes stiles du Séapeum de Memphis, I [Pass 988), 32). 55)'Sokkemie-wepmaet: Louvre E2538) CERE, aso. 3) Rodin 75; CEE, 1 9) Solthomse-wadjthas (3) Leiden AH 2165 CEKE, 153. $) Lourre E303 2) Nubkhepecre (BM EA 6632) ©) Donsox, Coffins the laser situation, howeves, may be duc o lack of space on the ‘tock coffin, since the preceding ‘Tas I inches botk his eartouthes.Inyotef VII (Sekhemreetuhismaed, probably shoreved successor of Inyotef VI had bis preronen inscebed on hi coffin (Louvee E 30:0} one mnght imply that dhe pracce of using both prenomen and nomen was reverted win the litter half of the Sevemeenth Dynasty.330 Nabil Swelim and Aidan Dodson MDAK 54 any other monuments“). However, the implication of the canopic formulation, that he should pre- cede Hor, is wholly consistent with the typological position of Ameny-Qeman’s sarcaphagas/eano- pie chest amongst the period’s funerary monuments). “This places the pyramid between the Hawara monument of Ammenenies UWL and the North Pyr- amid at Mazghuna, which in tum precedes the Southern Mazghuna monument, and finally thet of Khendjer. The latter, and the tomb of Hor, are the only royal sepnlchres of the dynasty securely tied into its chronological structurs. Ameay-Qomau ought thas to fall amongst the first dozen kings of the Thirweenth Dynasty. In view of the extceme rarity of the “Qemau’ element in royal names, taere right seem a high likelihood chat it is he who is ceferred to in the nomen of King Hetepibre-Hor- nedjhiryotef-si-Qemau, known fcom material from near Asyut and the eastern Delta®*), If the latter monarch has been correctly identified with Turin VI.12's Sehetepibre, Ameny-Qemau would then lo: gically become the preceding Smenkare. However, this equation has been disproved by the discovery that the latcr’s nomen was actually Nebauni’) On the other hand, if one follows Rrnioxr in reading Ameny-Qemau’s name as meaning ‘Qe- mau, (sen of) Ameny’, taking che ‘Ameny’ as being Ammenemes V*), this would seem to imply that he had the prenomen Schetepibre (T.VL8), and was separated from his alleged ‘son’, Hornedjhicyo- tef, by the reigns of luefui, Ammenemes VI and Nebnuni, Ryvaotr nevertheless takes an alternative view of the Turin Sehetepibres, making VL8 Hornedjhiryotef and holding that the nomen of the king at VI12 remains unknown. This would leave Qemaw without a known prenemen, and also ab- sent from the Turin Canon®”), In the present state of knowledge itis difficult to definitively choose between these options, al~ though Dopson tends to lean towards the T.VL8 Schetepibre equation, Tn any cast, it is clear that Ameny-Qemau should be placed amongst the earlier kings of the Thirteenth Dynasty”) Appendix 1: Lersios Pyramid LIX is identified with the north pyramid of Mazghanah Nearly seventy alleged pyramids were logged by Cart Rican Le though a number have proven not to be actual py ‘Us’ great expedition, Al- nids’"), all but one have been identified by mod- “) CE, howerer, tbe curious fragmene published by Hans Gounuese, A prsztinginripion, JEA 45 (1955), 989, which say name him, as vas peinted out to me by Kins RYuotr (petsoral cormunicaton, 30 August 1996), For this piece, see also HL Pscuen/ Gnos, Ancient Eyptian Bpigapy and Pateagraphy’ (New York, 1987), 49. *) Donson, ZAS 134,40 ©) G.Dasesse, Remarpuer et wotes, RT 36 (3894), 253) A Kast, Rapport sar le nécopole dtrabe-sl-Borg, ASAE 5 (ago), Bos L-Hlasacia, Khata'ea- Qavtts Importance, ASAE 52 (1554 458-70, pLIX. Steven Quense would also cake the names as evidence for a father to son succession, although noting that there remains dhe possibility of Homedjbiryota’ fither being a nox-royal Qemau (HK Studer, 129} %) G.Casrer and G.Sousuassis, Déjot de dies dans fe santoaie di Nowe! Epite an Gebel Zeit, BIFAO 8: (1983), 280, plLLXTT. We thank Kt Rysotr fo this referenes, and for other poine discussed with Dopion in September 199 % Rewoer, GM 196 (1977) 975105 The Pelitical Situation in Egyné dain the Second Iniermedtate Pood ¢ 1800-1880 B.C (Copenliagen, 1997). 24 For the proposal thatthe compound namina ofthe Thisteesth Drassey represent filiations, see Roots, A Reconserston of Some Royal Nomens ofthe Thirteenth Dyna, GM 119 (9999), 10%, and Ronoe, op it 207. ©) Rynour, GM 156 (4087), og-teos 0. The Pola! Situation m Egoptdarg the Second Istermudicte Period eS 14508. (Copenhagen 1907), 11 and 2448, whereit is angued that thie ign icconcealed in the eufentey atT.VI7 9 For various older dzcuesions, of W-C. Haves, Egypt: fem the Dexth af mmevemes Ito Segemenve 12, CAEP Meh fi, 7, who prefered to make Ameny-Qoman identical with the well-known (Ameny-Inyoref JAmmenemes VI, and J-von Recarnars, Cnnyrchungen nn politichen Ceniehteder Zwciton Zoiehenzont in Agypien (Glickstac 364), 233 "4 Tor oxampla, L. KXXIIT-IV are the North and South Buildings ofthe Step Pyramid enclonsee.1998 ‘On the Pyramid of Ameny-Qemas aad its Casopic Equipment 331 m research, most recently Lal, the Brick Pyramid at Abu Rowash’?); that exception is L. LIX. This ‘monument has long puzzled us, and one might have initially speculated that it could represent the pyramid of Ameny-Qemau. Part of the problem has been a discrepancy in Leosius’ reports: on the plate in the Denkmiler itself”), itis stated to be ‘Sstlich’ of Dahshur (village); this is, however, cor ted to ‘west’ in the text volume produced after his death”) ‘The latter also gives other da ceming the monument, which is stated to be: con- ~ A destroyed pyramid clearly seen as a black square, the side of which measured 75 paces (= s8 metres = 110 cubits), oriented to the cardinal points and surrounded by a white circle (of stone chippings) several metres thick; = 3/4 hour's walk away from the southern COMMENT: a 3/4 hour’s walk away from the end of the main Dahshur necropolis. southern end of the main Dahshur necropolis (ie. the Bent Pyramid), should cover a dis- tance of about 3000 metres; this makes Ameny- Qemau’s pyramid too clese and brings us to the pyramids of Mazghunah (See Fig. x); = Closer to Dakshur village than L. LVI, COMMENT: there is more than one Dahshur: LVI and LVITI (the Bent Pyramid, its sub- i, Manshiyet Dahshur close to the Black Pys- sidiary and the Black Pyramid). ii, Zawiyet Dahshur close to the pyramids of Mazghunah (See Fig. 6b); iii, Dahshur village, close to the pyramids of Mazghunah (See Fig. 6b); = It lies in an Arab cemetery built of brick COMMENT: the site of the pyramid of and stone. Ameny-Qemau is bare of any modern cem- etery, Ernest Mackay’s work in 1912 at the northern pyramid of Mazghunah??), however, mentions a Coptic cemetery over the site of his excavation, and a dike (the Gisr Dahshur, ad- jacent to a drainage canal). For the latter, see Fig.b. Further to these statements Lersius’ plan of pyramid LIX is redrawn here as fig, 6a, and certain features lettered for further analysis: As apyramid oriented to the cardinal points. COMMENT: the chippings might, of course, and surrounded with chippings, a feature have been quarried away since Lepsius’ day, also mentioned in the text, the bricks recycled and every trace of the pyr amid’s base denuded B: another small pyramid COMMENT: this is most probably « queen's pyramid; subsidiary pyramids were not built subsequent to Sesostris I's monument at Lisht. ‘The relative position of this queen's pyramid is similar to the pyramid of the queen of Khend~ *%) Swuni, The Brick Pyramid at Abu Rew: No.1 by Lepr. Preliminary Study (Alexantia, 1987) 5) LD plas *) LD Text, 209(0.1) *) W.MLP. Pent, E. Macunvand G.A Wanswntt, The Labyrinth, Gerech and Mazghieeh (London, 192), 5Nabil Swelim and Aidan Dodson shetentByamia Cn * Distancesin this general rection ‘Mazghuanan e008 Danshur Vilage: 2590 m Figssbs Thenorth pyramid of Macghunah = Lepsive Lyramid LIK, MDAK 541998 (On the Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau and ts Canopic Equipmest 333 jer. This feature could have become buried af- ter Leestus' visit C: along white building COMMENT: this feature could also have be~ come buried after Lersius’ visit. causeway 50 metres wide. COMMENT: a broad causeway 30 metres wide is to be found at the Black Pyramid and something similar in the complex of Khendjer. At L-LIX this festure seems co be 50 metres wide and could have become buried subsequent to the drawing of Lerstus’ plan. E: an apparently rectangular building, with COMMENT: this feature could have become a path(?) descending in a north-westerly buried after Lersius’ visit. direction, Fs the desert edge lying at a distance of 30 COMMENT: in the description of Lepsius, metres from the pyramid there is no mention of Lake Dahshur which is 500 metres east of Ameny-Qemav’s pyramid. Tt may be noted that both pyramids of Mazghu- nah are at a distance of 300 metres from the edge of the desert which should remain a fea- ture unlikely to have changed over the past century-and-a- G: adike. COMMENT: cikes may be found alongside irrigation canals and drainage canals, and as basin division dikes. The one on the plate should be a basin dike insignificantly recorded on Fig.6b; but it could be a more important cone to the north. Such dikes have changed a little since the building of the High Dam at As- ‘wan and modern roads have been paved on top of many of them. H: an unidentified feature. COMMENT: this feature could have become buried after Lensies’ visit. Although few of the elements discerned by the Prussian expedition can be easily paralleled in the known components of any of the pyramid complexes south of the main Dahshur necropolis, the distinctly summary examinations carried cut in them makes this difficulty less significant than might otherwise be the case. More positively, however, one can safely exelude the equation of Lersivs LIX with the pyramid of Ameny-Qemau, and state that the balance of probability would point to its identity with the northern pyramid of Mazghunah. Appendix 2: Summary List of the Pyramids of the Thirteenth Dynasty Given the fact that the kings of the late Twelfth Dynasty and those of the Seventeenth all con- structed pyramids, one would assume the continuation of the tradition throughout the Thirteenth. However, the latter dynasty’s thirty-plus monarchs are matched by only eight potential kingly pyr- amids, leaving a considerable shortfall”) %) Cf.the tomb of Horas a pessible archetype for many of the ‘issng’ tomb,3M Nabil Swelim mé Aidan Dodson Dank 54 ‘Yo the Thirteenth Dynasty we can attribute ten actual pyramids, and two pyramidia in the Cai- ro Museum’) Mayghunah Mazghunal Mazghunah: Dabshur South Dahshur: South Saqqara: South Sagara’ South Saqaara: Pyramidlia in Cairo: Appendix North Pyramid (Lerstus LIX). pysamid of the queen(?) of the owner of Lrpstus LIX, South Pyramid, ‘Central’ pyramid of Ammenemes ? V ? (Lrrstus LIV). pyramid of Ameny-Qemau, pyramid of Khendjer (Lersvus XLIV) pyramid of the queen of Khendjer Unfinished Pyramid (Lerstus XLVI”). Merneferre Ay. Another from Ezbet Rushdi cl-Kibira (Tell el-Dab’a)”). Relative positions of Middle Kingdom Pyramids in Dahshur/Mazghunah azea ‘The following table gives the distances in metres between s pyramids, namely the Beat Pyramid, the Black Pyramid, Ameay-Qeman’s pyramid (A-Q), Mazghunah northern pyramid (MIN) and Mazghunah southern pyramid (MS). Bent Black AQ Bent Black AQ MS ° 1400 1450 3400 s4po ° +100 3450 tase 1100 ° Boo. 2330 3c00 3000 1800 ° 450 MN MS 3400 3450 2230 aso © Abstract “The publication of the canopic jars from the ‘Thirteenth Dynasty pyramid of king Ameny-Qe- ‘mau at South Dahshur, together with remarks on aspects of the sepulchre’s discovery and context amongst the royal tombs of the late Middle Kingdom. "The canopic jars and their inseriptions are discussed in connexion with other examples of the same general date from Dahsbus. ) The pyramid: axe mapped conveniently by Lovsex, Complete Fyramils(Lendon, New York, 97), 1. °5) Theownerhas now bee ieatified by Rrsoxr as beaing the Nebty-came Warde. 7°) Hanscom, ASAE 52, 471-95 Rynor, The Politica! Siinaiion in Egypt ding the Second butermediate Period c 180 1550 B.C, (Copenhagen 1997), 8 «46. 0.2545 argues strongly tat thes it: were the revue ofthe plundering of the Mem pit eval emetries by the Hyksos, who also transported maay other items of salptueto"Telle-Daba fe. CG 2).N. Swelim + A. Dodson TAFEL 55 4 é é