Dynasty Xiii Kingship in Ancient

DYNASTY XIII KINGSHIP IN ANCIENT EGYPT:
A STUDY OF POLITICAL POWER AND ADMINISTRATION THROUGH AN

INVESTIGATION OF THE ROYAL TOMBS OF THE LATE MIDDLE KINGDOM
Dawn Landua-McCormack
A DISSERTATION
In
Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations
Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
2008
Supervisor of Dissertation
dx^
raduate Group Chairperson
^zk^)
UMI Number: 3346149

Copyright 2008 by
Landua-McCormack, Dawn
All rights reserved.
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI
UMI Microform 3346149
Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC
789 E. Eisenhower Parkway
PO Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
COPYRIGHT
Michelle Dawn McCormack
2008
For Jim and Hayden
in
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the members of my dissertation committee including Josef
Wegner and David Silverman of the University of Pennsylvania and Kim Ryholt of the
University of Copenhagen. Their support, advice, comments, and forthcoming articles
have made this project possible and have greatly enhanced the results. Josef Wegner and
David Silverman have been invaluable mentors during my undergraduate and graduate
education at the University of Pennsylvania, and to them, I will be forever indebted.
I would also like to thank the Department of Near Eastern Languages and
Civilizations and the Kolb Society, which provided financial support for my graduate
education as well as the US State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
for an ARCE Fellowship, which supported my archaeological fieldwork at Abydos in
2003.
The archaeological component of this project was a part of the PennsylvaniaYale-Institute of Fine Arts Expedition to Abydos, directed by Dr. William Kelly Simpson
and Dr. David O'Connor, to whom I am also grateful. I would also like to extended my
gratitude to the Egyptian authorities at the time of my project: Dr. Zahi Hawass,
Secretary General; Mr. Zein el-Abdin Zaki, Director General of the Sohag Antiquities
District; Mr. Mohammed Abdelaziz, Chief Inspector, Balliana; and Mr. Sayyed
Mohamed Abd el-Rahman, Inspector of Antiquities. I am likewise indebted to the
wonderful people in the ARCE offices both in the United States as well as in Egypt as
well as my excavation crew from the 2003 season including Peter Cinquini, Emily
Cocke, Mads Nielsen, Leslie Warden, Kei Yamamoto, and the late Stine Rossel. I would
iv
also like to thank Matthew Adams and Mary-Ann Wegner for their many years of
support.
Finally, I would like to thank my friends and family, especially my parents,
Herman and Christie Landua, and my husband, James McCormack, for their many years
' of support-, encouragement and patience.
ABSTRACT
DYNASTY XIII KINGSHIP IN ANCIENT EGYPT:

A STUDY OF POLITICAL POWER AND ADMINISTRATION THROUGH AN
INVESTIGATION OF THE ROYAL TOMBS OF THE LATE MIDDLE KINGDOM
Dawn Landua-McCormack
Josef Wegner
Over fifty kings ruled in a period between 150 and 170 years during Dynasty XIII in
ancient Egypt; some rulers held the throne for only a few years. This study reviews the
chronological sequence of these kings and their means of legitimization and succession.
It also examines the royal funerary monuments, which provide information regarding
kingship at this time. Besides the six known tombs at Sakkara, Mazghuna, and Dahshur,
other, unexcavated sites in the Memphite region likely provide additional burials for the
many kings without known funerary monuments. Also, the excavation and investigation
of the artifacts from tomb S9 and the analysis of the plan of S10 at South Abydos reveal
that these monuments have the same characteristics as the others to the north and belong
to a single corpus. Beginning with the Hawara monument of Amenemhet III and ending
with Merneferre Ay's pyramidion, which was found in the Delta, the substructures of the
royal pyramids have similar plans with some features that may indicate that they may
form a physical representation of the netherworld, placing the king within the weskhet
court of Osiris. The size of the pyramids, though small compared to those of previous
vi
periods, and their exclusive use by rulers, demonstrate that kings remained at the apex of
society. This study identifies three phases within Dynasty XIII. The first group of kings
emphasizes its actual or symbolic connection to Dynasty XII through the use of double
names including "Amenemhet." The second phase includes rulers who explicitly
expressed their non-royal lineages and may have come from families with ties to the
military while the final kings lost the north and south to Dynasties XIV (northwest Delta)
and XVI (Thebes). This study ends with the presentation of a model outlining a possible
scenario for the fall of Dynasty XIII, including climate change, the decrease of economic
power, the increased power of officials and foreigners, and the loss of territory.
vn
Table of Contents
Introduction
Chapter 1 -Issues of Chronology

I. Introduction
. II.. The Place of Dynasty XIII in Ancient Egyptian History
III. The Chronology of the Dynasties within the Late Middle
Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period
IV. Internal Chronology of Dynasty XIII
V. Conclusions
Chapter 2 - Royal Legitimacy and Succession in Dynasty XIII
I. Introduction
II. Legitimacy in Dynasty XIII
III. Succession
IV. Conclusions
5
6
24
61
97
99
99
112
149
Chapter 3 - The Late Middle Kingdom Royal Funerary Monument Corpus

I. Introduction
II. The Development of the Late Middle Kingdom Royal Tomb
Type: The Pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara
III. The Pyramid of Woserkare Khendjer (Lepsius XLIV)
at South Sakkara
IV. The "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara (Lepsius XLVI)
V. The Pyramid ofAmenyQemau (DAS 18)
VI. The Pyramid at North Mazghuna
VII. The Pyramid at South Mazghuna
VIII. The Shaft Tomb ofAwibreHor at Dahshur
IX. The Tomb Model
X. Characteristics of the Late Middle Kingdom Royal Funerary Monuments
XI. Other Proposed Sites
XII. Conclusions
191
208
217
226
241
252
256
268
293
Chapter 4 - The Late Middle Kingdom Royal Tombs at South Abydos

I. Introduction
II. Weigall's Excavations of S9
III. Weigall's Excavations of S10
IV. Problems with Weigall's Plans
V. Recent Excavations at S9
VI. Owners of Tombs S9 and S10 at Abydos
VII. Conclusions
295
301
305
309
314
358
365
vm
152
154
166
Chapter 5 - Analysis of the Late Middle Kingdom Royal Funerary Monuments and
Their Impact on the Current Understanding of Dynasty XIII Kingship
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
Introduction
Chronological Order of the Late Middle Kingdom Royal Tombs
Tombs of Royal Women and Private Officials
The wsMTomb Type
The Significance of Selected Components of Late Middle Kingdom
Royal Tombs
*
VI. The Destruction of the Tombs
VII. Tombs of Dynasty XVII
VIII. Conclusions
Chapter 6 - Administration, Officials, and Operation of Kingship
I. Introduction
II. The Top Three Offices in the Late Middle Kingdom Governmental
Structure
III. Filiation and the Question of Relationships between Kings
IV. Conclusions
Chapter 7 -Conclusions: The Fall of Dynasty XIII
I. Introduction
II. Phase 1
III. Phase 2
IV. Phase 3
V. Conclusions
367
367
377
386
393
402
406
408
411
411
427
454
456
456
468
474
476
Appendices
Appendix I: King Lists
Appendix II: Measurements from Late Middle Kingdom Tombs
Appendix III: Charts Showing the Level Changes Representing the Twelve
Hours of the Night
480
485
496
Bibliography
504
Index
544
IX
Tables
Chapter 1
1. The Kings of Dynasty XII
2. The generational correlations as defined by Bennett
11
46
Chapter 2
1. Kings possibly related to the fratrilineal line of Neferhotep I
118
Chapter 3
1. Size comparisons between the width of the coffin and that of the passages 238
leading to the sarcophagus chamber at South Mazghuna
Chapter 5
1. Dodson's chronological proposal for the Late Middle Kingdom
royal funerary monuments
2. Diagram showing the hours and their associated components within
each monument
Chapter 6
1. The known and possible viziers of Dynasty XIII whose previous
positions have been discovered.
2. The known and possible treasurers of Dynasty XIII whose previous
positions have been discovered
3. The chronology of the filiative markers for the Late Middle Kingdom
4. Correlations in the nomens and prenomens of kings of Dynasty XIII
5. Dynasty XIII kings showing filiation according to Ryholt
6. List of kings with family links in the order of Ryholt's list
7. List of kings with modifications to Ryholt's list
Chapter 7
1. The phases of Dynasty XIII using Ryholt's list of kings as modified in
Chapter 1
Appendix I
1. Ryholt's List of Dynasty XIII Kings
2. Franke's List of Kings
3. Von Beckerath's List
369
390
418
420
430
440
442
443
445
457
480
482
483
Appendix II
1. Pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara
485
2.
3.
4.
5.
487
489
490
492
Pyramid Complex of Woserkare Khendjer

Subsidiary Pyramid of Woserkare Khenjer
The Southern Pyramid at South Sakkara
Pyramid of Ameny Qemau
x
6. North Mazghuna
7. South Mazghuna
493
494
Figures
Chapter 1
1. The relationships of Dynasties XIII-XVII according to this study
Chapter 3
1. Map showing the locations of excavated Late Middle Kingdom pyramids
2. The substructures of the tomb of Senwosret II at Lahun and the arced
tunnels of Senwosret III from South Abydos and Dahshur 3. Plan of the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara
4. The structure of the saddle roof in the tomb of Amenemhet III at Hawara
and the mechanics of the sand lowering system
5. The Pyramid Complex of Woserkare Khendjer at South Sakkara
6. The Pyramid of Woserkare Khendjer
7. Plan of one portcullis in the tomb of Khendjer
8. Subsidiary pyramid of the Khendjer pyramid complex
9. The Pyramid of unknown ownership at South Sakkara
10. The pyramid of Ameny Qemau
11. The interior of the pyramid of Ameny Qemau
12. The substructure of North Mazghuna
13. The Pyramid at South Mazghuna
14. Plan of the sarcophagus of the pyramid at South Mazghuna
15. Plan of the shaft tomb of Awibre Hor
16. The contents of the tomb of Awibre Hor
17. The tomb model from the funerary complex of Amenemhet III at Dahshur
18. Map showing the locations of the potential Late Middle Kingdom
royal funerary monuments
19. Map showing the location of known and selected potential Late Middle
Kingdom royal pyramids at Sakkara, Dahshur, and Mazghuna
Chapter 4
1. Map of the site of Abydos including the mortuary complex of
Senwosret III, tombs S9 and S10, and the site of Umm el-Gaab
2. Weigall's plan of S9 and S10 in relation to the tomb of Senwosret III
3. The substructure of S9 at South Abydos
4. The substructure of S10
5. View of excavations in the local southeast of S9
6. Plan showing the results of the 2003 excavations season at S9 at
South Abydos
7. The local southeastern corner of the enclosure wall of S9
16
153
156
161
163
169
175
177
184
194
210
212
220
229
237
243
245
253
269
275
296
298
303
308
315
316
320
8. The sinusoidal wall of S9
326
9. The remains of the cult structure of S9

10. The large plaster pit
11. The exposure of the subsurface elements of S9 in 2003
12. Pottery found in the smaller of the two foundation deposits
327
329
330
335
xn
13. The second foundation deposit

14. The brick deposit
15. Pottery from S9 dating to the Roman Period
16. S9 Late Middle Kingdom pottery fabric distribution
17. The Late Middle Kingdom open Nile and Marl A3 forms from S9
18. Examples of closed Nile vessels from the Late Middle Kingdom at S9
.19. Closed marl forms from S9, dated to the Late Middle Kingdom
20. Examples of other ceramic forms found at S9
21. Fragments of inscribed, gilded plaster
336
339
343
344
345
347
348
349
356
Chapter 5
1. The hieroglyph for wsht"broad court"
388
Chapter 7
1. Model of the factors leading to the demise of Dynasty XIII
477
Appendix III
1. The Pyrmaid of Amenemhet III at Hawara
2. The Pyramid of Khendjer at South Sakkara
3. The Pyramid at South Mazghuna
4. The Pyramid of Ameny Qemau
5. Mastaba S9 at South Abydos (Option 1)
6. Mastaba S9 at South Abydos (Option 2)
7. The Tomb Model from Dahshur
8. S10 at South Abydos
9. The Subsidiary Pyramid of Khendjer at South Sakkara
10 . The Pyramid at North Mazghuna (Option 1)
11 . The Pyramid at North Mazghuna (Option 2)
12,. The "Unfinished" Pyramid (Option 1)
496
497
497
498
498
499
499
500
500
501
501
502
502
503
Xlll
Introduction
Dynasty XIII is a period in ancient Egyptian history, in which over 50 kings ruled
in only 150-170 years. With some rulers reigning for only months, many questions arise
concerning kingship at this time. Unfortunately, few scholars have undertaken any
comprehensive studies of Dynasty XIII alone.1 Instead, as in the latest work by Ryholt,
this era is incorporated into a more general analysis of the Second Intermediate Period.2
Also, most scholars who have studied the nature of Dynasty XIII have focused upon
textual sources, such as the Turin King-List. However, archaeological remains, such as
the known funerary monuments of the period, rarely figure significantly in these works.3
This study begins with an analysis of the chronological placement of Dynasty
XIII, as well as the order of the kings within it. The work of several experts in the period
has changed the understood relationship between Dynasty XIII and those of the Second
Intermediate Period.4 In turn, this new arrangement allows for a better understanding of
In 1918, Weil published a study including a comprehensive review of Dynasty XIII (the first part of the
book addresses the Hyksos) (R. Weill, La Fin du Moyen Empire Egyptien (Paris, 1918), pp. 267-519).
Though much material in this book is out-of-date, it still has valuable insights, free from many of the
misconceptions of later scholars.
2
K.S.B. Ryholt, The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period c. 1800-1550 B.C.
(Copenhagen, 1997). See also J. von Beckerath (Untersuchungen zur politischen Geschichte derzweiten
Zwischenzeit in Agypten, AF 23 (New York, 1964)) and the outdated work of H. Stock (Studien zur
Geschichte undArchdologie der 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens (New York, 1942)).
3
Note that Ryholt does include some cultural material from excavations in his work, but his primary focus
is textual evidence (Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 2). Many of his interpretations of objects from
archaeological settings have been questioned by other scholars (D. Ben-Tor, "Seals and Kings," BASOR
315 (1999), pp. 162-189;D. Polz, Der Beginn des Neuen Reiches (Berlin, 2007)). O'Connor and
Silverman expressed the importance of archaeological evidence in the reconstruction of kingship during the
First and Second Intermediate Periods (D. O'Connor and D.P. Silverman, "Introduction," in D. O'Connor
and D.P. Silverman, eds., Ancient Egyptian Kingship, Probleme der Agyptologie 9 (New York, 1995), pp.
XXVI-XXVII). Note D. O'Connor's article concerning the use of archaeological material to reconstruct
political structure in the Old to Middle Kingdoms (ending at Dynasty XII) (D. O'Connor, "Political
Systems and Archaeological Data in Egypt: 2600-1780 B.C.," World Archaeology 6 (1974), pp. 15-38).
4
C. Bennett, "A Genealogical Chronology of the Seventeenth Dynasty," JARCE 39 (2002), pp. 123-151.
J.P. Allen, "The Second Intermediate Period in the Turin Kinglist," Paper Presented at the British Museum
the nature of the end of Dynasty XIII and eliminates difficulties with conflicting evidence
such as that found in the Stela of Horemkhauef, where a text refers to a king in Itjatawy in
a time when this Middle Kingdom capital was thought to have already fallen.5 Also, the
order of the kings of Dynasty XIII has changed with each successive work. The present
study critiques the most recent reconstruction by Ryholt and refines it for use in the
following sections.6
Another important issue in the study of Dynasty XIII kingship is the presumption
that the rulers were unrelated to their predecessors. Thus, there is a question as to how
new kings were chosen and how both designated heirs and usurpers legitimized their
reigns during such a turbulent political period. Starting in the Old Kingdom, rulers added
the "son of Re" name (prenomen) to their titulary, suggesting that all kings were
considered to be the progeny of the sun god (divine birth).7 In Dynasty XIII, kings may
have used this concept more overtly to justify their ascent to the throne, especially for
those who did not have royal biological parents.
The central focus of this study includes a detailed analysis of the known and
proposed royal funerary monuments, beginning with that of Amenemhet III (Dynasty
XII) at Hawara. Other tombs include the pyramid of Khendjer and the unfinished tomb
of an unknown king at South Sakkara, the monument of Ameny Qemau and the shaft
tomb of Awibre Hor at Dahshur, and the pyramids at North and South Mazghuna. Two
monuments at South Abydos are also added to this group. All of these tombs share
Egyptological Colloquium: The Second Intermediate Period (13th-17th Dynasties), Current Research,
Future Prospects, 14 July-16 July, 2004.
5
W.C. Hayes, "Horemkha'uef of Nekhen and His Trip to IT-Towe." JEA 33 (1947), pp. 3-11.
6
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 197.
7
For a discussion of divine birth with references, see Chapter 2, Section II.B.
common architectural features, some of which may have served ideological functions
related to the nature of the afterlife of the kings. During Dynasty XIII, the use of a
particular architectural plan (the wsht tyô) to express the nature of the netherworld is
exclusive to kings and denotes a difference in social status from even the highest
officials, whose tombs are relatively insignificant in comparison to the way they were in
other periods of Egyptian history.8
In order to understand the demise of Dynasty XIII, the trends in the political and
economic power of the kings must be traced through time. A study of the backgrounds of
non-royal kings, viziers, and treasurers should provide important insights. Though there
is limited information concerning only a small selection of these royal individuals, three
distinct phases can be identified. The kings who comprise the first group are related to
those of Dynasty XII or who legitimized their reigns through suggesting such a
connection. Next is a group of kings with possible military backgrounds who took the
throne. Eventually, they formed ties to influential local families through marriages and
political appointments. Finally, the last rulers are ephemeral kings, who lost large
portions of their territory to rival Dynasties XIV and XVI.
The final section of this study focuses on a discussion of an anthropological
For this concept for late Dynasty XII tombs, see U. RoBler-Kohler, "Konigliche Vorstellungen zu Grab
und Jenseits im Mittleren Reich, Teil I: Ein, Gottesbegrabnis' des Mittleren Reiches in koniglichern
Kontext: Amduat, 4. und 5. Stunde," in R. Gundlach and W, Seipel, eds., Dasfriihe agyptische Konigtum
(Wiesbaden, 1999), pp. 73-96; J. Wegner, "Beneath the Mountain-of-Anubis: Ancient Egypt's First Hidden
Royal Tomb," Expedition 48 (2006)," p. 17; The Mortuary Temple ofSenwsoretlll, Publication of the
Pennsylvania-Yale-Institute of Fine Arts Expedition to Egypt 8 (New Haven, 2007), pp. 199, 392, 393;
"The Tomb of Senwosret III at Abydos and Considerations on the Emergence of the Royal Amduat Tomb,"
in J. Wegner and D. Silverman, eds., Archaism and Innovation: Studies in the Culture of Middle Kingdom
Egypt, Yale Egyptological Studies vol. 8, New Haven and Boston, 2009. See also L. Gestermann,
"Konigliche Vorstellungen zu Grab und Jenseits im Mittleren Reich, Teil II," in R. Gundlach and W,
Seipel, eds., Dasfriihe agyptische Konigtum (Wiesbaden, 1999), pp. 97-110.
model, which attempts to explain the fall of Dynasty XIII. The contributing factors
affecting the status of kingship in the period may include fluctuation in the level of the
annual Nile inundations, economic problems, the loss of power to local families and
foreign officials, and the impact of developing states to the north and south.
Since in the past, many scholars have overlooked the developments ofDynasty
XIII, it is hoped that the present study will inspire an increased interest in the problems of
this complex period. Unfavorable economic and political conditions during Dynasty XIII
appear to have resulted in the evolution of new practices along with an ideological
framework to support them.9
For this concept for late Dynasty XII tombs, see J. Wegner, "Mountain-of-Anubis," pp. 199, 392, 393.
Chapter 1
Issues of Chronology
I. Introduction
The chronology of Dynasty XIII is a topic which has been an important part of the
numerous investigations of the Second Intermediate Period. Scholars have employed
different systems in order to define this era, its relationship to other dynasties, and its
own internal chronology.10 The relationships between Dynasty XIII and the other
political groups of this era are important to define in order for the readers to understand
the arguments presented in this thesis as well as the problems faced by these kings. The
internal chronology aids in determining the nature of royal power through Dynasty XIII
by providing a basis for evaluating the status of rulers and officials and the trends in the
expression of royal power through the construction of funerary monuments and their
internal and external layouts and programs.
This chapter provides an overview of the most current information available
concerning the chronological issues for this period and discusses terms related to this
time period. It also contains an evaluation of the sources and theories concerning the
relationship between Dynasty XIII and other groups of kings in the Middle Kingdom and
Second Intermediate Period. Finally, it addresses the internal history and chronology of
Dynasty XIII.
For example, see D. Franke, "Zur Chronologie des Mittleren Reiches. Teil II: Die sogenannte "Zweite
Zwischenzeit" Altagyptens," Orientalia 57 (1988), pp. 245-274; Ryholt, Political Situation; Von
Beckerath, Untersuchungen.
II. The Place of Dynasty XIII in Ancient Egyptian History

Scholars generally use the term "Kingdom" to refer to a main division of
dynasties and "Intermediate Period" to describe the intervening eras, sometimes with
rival dynasties, which they categorize by the perceived degree of geographical, political,
and economic control attributed to the institution of kingship.11 Thus, eras, such as the
Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms, encompass dynasties with relatively stable
governmental organization. Though dynastic regimes may have changed periodically,
the means of stable succession continued while the administrative structure and the
borders of the state remained intact. However, in the Intermediate Periods, dynastic
power became compromised by internal and/or external factors, such as climatic change
or the infiltration of foreigners. During these times, Egypt often broke up into multiple
polities that competed with one other for resources while state-sponsored products, such
as works of art and literature, declined in both quantity and quality.
Egyptologists have sometimes remarked how the above, modern terminology is
often inadequate for describing time periods, cultural remains, and, most importantly for
this study, political units.12 In some cases, these terms have influenced the interpretation
11
J. Bourriau, "Beyond Avaris: The Second Intermediate Period in Egypt Outside the Eastern Delta," in
E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives (Philadelphia, 1997), p. 159;
Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals (Cambridge, 1988), p. 53. For examples of the standard definitions of
Kingdoms and Intermediate Periods, see M.-A. Bonheme and A. Forgeau, Pharaon: Les Secrets du
Pouvoir (Paris, 1988), p. 43; D. O'Connor, "Ancient Egypt: Egyptological and Anthropological
Perspectives," Anthropology and Egyptology, Monographs in Mediterranean Archaeology 8 (Sheffield;
England, 1997), p. 14; J.E. Richards, "Modified Order, Responsive Legitimacy, Redistributed Wealth:
Egypt, 2260-1650 BC," in J.E. Richards and M. Van Buren, eds., Order, Legitimacy, and Wealth in Ancient
States (Cambridge, 2000), pp. 37-38.
12
D.B. Redford, "The Historiography of Ancient Egypt," in K. Weeks, ed., Egyptology and the Social
Sciences (Cairo, 1979), pp. 16-18; W.K. Simpson, "The Dynasty XIII Stela from the Wadi Hammamat,"
MDAIK 25 (1969), p. 154; P. Vermis, "Sur les Graphies de la Formule "L'Offrande Que Donne le Roi" au
Moyen Empire et a la Deuxieme Periode Intermediare," in S. Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies
(Whitstable, 1991), p. 152; J. Bourriau, "Patterns of Change in Burial Customs during the Middle
of archaeological, architectural, artistic, and textual evidence, resulting in the

misunderstanding of the political environment, which existed in the ancient Egyptian
state at any point in time.13
One of the eras impacted by the use of the labels, "Kingdoms" versus
"Intermediate Periods," is Dynasty XIII.14 This relatively large group, made up of over
fifty kings, occupies a span of time, lasting roughly 150 years.15 It follows Dynasty XII,
which was composed of eight monarchs who ruled close to 200 years, often considered to
be one of the most stable periods in ancient Egyptian history.16
Kingdom," in S. Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies (Whitstable, 1991), pp. 3-5. For the Second
Intermediate Period specifically, see Franke, "Zur Chronologie," pp. 245-246, 248. In the late Old
Kingdom, art style changes before the problems of the First Intermediate Period emerged (E. Russman, "A
Second Style in Egyptian Art of the Old Kingdom," MDAIK 51, pp. 269-279; E. Brovarski, "False Doors
and History: The First Intermediate Period and Middle Kingdom," in J. Wegner and D. Silverman,
eds., Archaism and Innovation: Studies in the Culture of Middle Kingdom Egypt, Yale Egyptological
Studies vol. 8, New Haven and Boston, 2009. Thus, the idea that art styles reflect political circumstances is
not reliable.
13
W.V. Davies, "The Dynastic Tombs at Hierakonpolis: The Lower Group and the Artist Sedjemnetjeru,"
in W.V. Davies, ed., Colour and Painting in Ancient Egypt (London, 2001), p. 121; "Sobeknakht of Elkab
and the coming of Kush." Egyptian Archaeology 23 (2003), pp. 4-5; G.E. Kadish, "Historiography," in
D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 1 (Oxford, 2001), p. 108.
14
S. Quirke, "An Investigation into Problems of Thirteenth Dynasty Kingship with Special Reference to
Papyrus Bulaq 18," dissertation, Christ's College, 1986, pp. 1-2; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. l,n.l. Note
that Ryholt realigns the dynasties of the Second Intermediate Period and makes Dynasty XIII a true part of
this grouping.
15
W. Grajetzki, The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt (London, 2006), p. 63. Kitchen argues that Dynasty
XIII was composed of 51 kings, who reigned for 152 years, noting the correlation of this number with
Manetho's 153 years (K.A. Kitchen, "The Basics of Egyptian Chronology in Relation to the Bronze Age,"
in P. Astrom, ed., High, Middle or Low?: Acts of an International Colloquium on Absolute Chronology
Held at the University of Gothenburg, 20th-22nd August, 19871 (Gothenburg, 1987), pp. 44-45). J.P.
Allen states that the Turin King-List records 51 kings with the addition of two rulers being probable and
more being somewhat less possible (J.P. Allen, "The Turin Kinglist," in D. Ben-Tor, "Seals and Kings,"
BASOR 315 (1999), pp. 50, 51); Ryholt believes that there were 51 kings in the Turin King-List with at
least six being assigned to lacunae (only one of which is preserved) (Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 72).
Recent studies suggest that some amendments may need to be made in the length of Dynasty XIII as one
considers an overlap between Dynasties XIII and XVII. See the discussion below.
16
For the accomplished reputation of Dynasty XII in modern and ancient times, see J. Assmann, The Mind
of Egypt: History and Meaning in the Time of the Pharaohs (New York, 2002), p. 118; J. Baines, "Ancient
Egyptian Concepts and Uses of the Past: 3rd and 2nd Millennium BC Evidence," in R. Layton, ed., Who
Needs the Past: Indigenous Values and Archaeology, One World Archaeology 5 (London, 1989), p. 140; J.
Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 75; D. Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," in J.M. Sasson, ed.,
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, 2 (Peabody, MA, 1995), p. 735; N. Grimal, A History of Ancient
Egypt (Cambridge, 1992), p. 181; W.K. Simpson, "Twelfth Dynasty," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford
Scholars discussing this time period in older publications tended to emphasize and
exaggerate the differences in fortune between these two dynasties.17 Gardiner stated that
the relatively long lengths of reigns in Dynasty XII were indicative of the prosperity of
the Egyptian polity, while in Dynasty XIII, "the land was in a state of dire havoc and
1 Q
con&sion, its rulers murdering and replacing one another with extreme rapidity."
Meanwhile, Hayes claims that the kings of Dynasty XIII were not "as wise as their
predecessors" and that "the instability of the royal succession had a detrimental effect on
the prosperity of the country."19
In reality, little justification exists for such pointed criticism of the kings of this
period. The first half of Dynasty XIII seems to follow much the same pattern as the
previous one, with the exception of relatively long reigns, while the later years appear
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), pp. 453, 457. Quirke argues that a dynastic reign of two
hundred years is not only rare in ancient Egypt but also extremely uncommon in human history (S. Quirke
The Administration of Egypt in the Late Middle Kingdom (Whitstable, 1990), p. 216; "Royal Power in the
13th Dynasty," in S. Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies (Whitstable, 1991), p. 138). This notion is based
upon the work of E. Barnarvi ("Mythes et Realite Historique: Le Cas de la Loi Salique," Histoire,
Economie et Societe 3 (1984), p. 330). Later generations of Egyptians also believed Dynasty XII was a
"classical" age in their history (J. Baines, "Kingship, Definition of Culture, and Legitimation," in D.
O'Connor and D.P. Silverman, eds., Ancient Egyptian Kingship (New York, 1995), p. 22).
, 17 For similar examples for the First Intermediate Period, see Richards, "Modified Order," p. 38.
18
A. Gardiner, Egypt of the Pharaohs (New York, 1961), p. 149. Wilson includes Dynasty XIII in a
chapter called, "The Great Humiliation" (J.A. Wilson, The Culture of Ancient Egypt (Chicago, 1956), pp.
154-165). Gardiner refers to the entire Second Intermediate Period as a "dark age" (Gardner, Pharaohs, p.
66). Similarly, Fakhry labels Dynasty XIII, "dark period" (A. Fakhry, The Pyramids (Chicago, 1961), p.
233). B. Bell has labeled the period the "Little Dark Age" (B. Bell, "Climate and the History of Egypt: The
Middle Kingdom," AJA 79 (1975), p. 260).
19
W.C. Hayes, The Scepter of Egypt I (New York, 1953), p. 341.
20
G. Callender, "The Middle Kingdom Renaissance (c.2055-1650 BC)," in I. Shaw, ed., The Oxford
History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford, 2000), p. 148; A. Dodson, Monarchs of the Nile (London, 1995), p. 68;
. Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p. 746; R.J. Leprohon, "Middle Kingdom, Overview," in K.A.
Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 52; Quirke,
"Investigation," p. 2; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 190-191; D.P. Silverman, "Unity and Power. The
Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period," in Z. Hawass, Tutankhamun. The Golden King and the
Great Pharaohs (Washington, 2008), pp. 38-39. Kemp charts the lengths of reigns of the Dynasty XIII
kings as being primarily between two and four years with reigns often or more years being rare (B.J.
Kemp, "Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period c. 2686-1552," in B.G. Trigger, et
al., eds., Ancient Egypt: A Social History (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 149, 152, Fig. 142.111).
to have been characterized by a string of short-lived, possibly unrelated kings with little
power. Nonetheless, throughout the dynasty, the administration remained intact with
91
offices often passing from father to son.' Also, as the period began, there was no abrupt
change in the capital, material culture, or the cults, to which the kings gave their
attention. 2 Thus, a dilemma arises when scholars attempt to place Dynasty XIII into
either the Middle Kingdom or the Second Intermediate Period, usually resulting in
assigning some of the kings to the former with the rest to the latter.
Nonetheless, the
point of this distinction within the line of kings varies from one scholar to the next.
94
Over the course of Dynasty XIII, Egypt broke into at least three polities.
At this
point, by definition, the Second Intermediate Period began. However, this distinction
does not reflect the continuity in the governmental system, which existed from Dynasty
XII into the era of the following group of kings. Another term, "Late Middle Kingdom,"
is often used in studies to designate the time from Senwosret III through the beginning of
Dynasty XIV (likely following Merneferre Ay), the first kings to separate from the state
Grajetzki, Middle Kingdom, pp. 64, 66-67; Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 5; Callender,
"Renaissance," p. 171; A.R. David, The Pyramid Builders ofAncient Egypt (London, 1996), p. 197;
Grimal, History, p. 171; W.W. Hallo and W.K. Simpson, The Ancient Near East: A History (New York,
1971), p. 249; W. Helck, Geschichte des alten Agypten, Handbuch der Orientalistik I (Leiden, 1968), p.
117; W.J. Murnane, "The History of Ancient Egypt: An Overview," in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the
Ancient Near East, II (Peabody, MA, 1995), p. 701; G.P.F. van den Boom, The Duties of the Vizier (New
York, 1988), p. 346; M. Verner, The Pyramids: The Mystery, Culture, and Science of Egypt's Great
Monuments (New York, 2001), p. 434.
. .
.
22
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 148; P.A. Clayton, Chronicles of the Pharaohs (New York, 1994), pp. 9091; Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p. 746; W.C. Hayes, "Notes on the Government of Egypt in
the Late Middle Kingdom," JNES 12 (1953), pp. 32, 33, 35, 38, 39; Hayes, Scepter, p. 341; Murnane,
"Overview," p. 701; Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 123, 125; "Second-Intermediate Period," in D.B. Redford,
ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), p. 260; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 79;
J. von Beckerath, "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," LA, VI 1986), pp. 1443-1444.
23
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 148; D. Franke, "Middle Kingdom," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2 (Oxford, 2001), p. 393; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 129; "Second
Intermediate Period," p. 261. Other scholars* following earlier sources, place all of Dynasty XIII into the
Second Intermediate Period. For example, see M. Bietak, "Second Intermediate Period, Overview," in
K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 54.
24
See Chapter 1, Section III.B.4.
centered at Itjatawy.
In this study, "Late Middle Kingdom," will refer to the kings from Senwosret III
through the end of Dynasty XIII. The extension of the definition of this term is intended
to emphasize the link in location of the capital as well as the presence of a cultural
tradition associated with these rulers. In this way, this group can be discussed as a whole
without regard for the modern designations between the Middle Kingdom and the Second
Intermediate Period.
II.A. The Defining Characteristics of the Late Middle Kingdom

II.A.1. The Structure of the Bureaucracy during the Late Middle Kingdom and the
Question of Reforms in the Reign of Senwosret III
Evidence suggests that the structure of the administration of Dynasty XIII
developed directly from that of the later rulers of the preceding group of kings (Table
1.1). This phenomenon is not surprising especially since these rulers continued to reside
at the Middle Kingdom capital, Itjatawy, which Sehotepibre Amenemhet I had
established in the Memphite region during his reign at the beginning of Dynasty XII.26 In
For example, see W. Grajetzki, Two Treasurers of the Late Middle Kingdom, BAR International Series
1007 (Oxford, 2001), p. 1; S. Quirke, Titles and Bureau of Egypt 1850-1700 BC (London, 2004), p. 7.
26
Di. Arnold, "Royal Cult Complexes of the Old and Middle Kingdoms," in B.E. Shafer, ed., Temples of
Ancient Egypt (Ithaca, NY, 1997), p. 76; Baines, "Concepts," p. 140; Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets,
p.104; Callender, "Renaissance," pp. 158-159; Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p. 737; Hallo and
Simpson, Ancient Near East, pp. 244-245; Hayes, Scepter, p. 172; E. Hornung, History of Ancient Egypt
(Edinburgh, 1999), p. 50; Kemp, "Social History," p. 80; Leprohon, "Overview," p. 48; Silverman, "Unity
and Power," p. 36; Simpson, "Twelfth Dynasty," p. 454; R. Stadelmann, "Palaces," in D.B. Redford, ed.,
The Oxford Encyclopedia ofAncient Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), p. 14; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 71
For the evidence that Itjatawy is near Lisht, see F. Arnold, "Settlement Remains at Lisht-North," in M.
Bietak, ed., Haus undPalast im Alten Agypten, Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften
Senkschriften der Gesamtakademie 14 (Vienna, 1996), p. 13. For a list of the occurrences of the name of
the capital, its meaning, as well as its location, see W.K. Simpson, "Studies in the Twelfth Egyptian
Dynasty, I-II," JARCE 2 (1963), pp. 53-57. It is possible that Amenemhet first resided at Memphis before
10
fact, it may be the case that the division between these two dynasties was not apparent at
the time and may be the result of later reflection upon the events of the period.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Sehotepibre Amenemhet I
Kheperkare Senwosret I
Nubkaure Amenemhet II
Khakheperre Senwosret II
5.
6.
7.
8.
Khakhaure Senwosret III

Nymaatre Amenemhet III
Maakherure Amenemhet IV
Sobekkare Nefrusobek
Table 1.1. The Kings of Dynasty XII.
In several studies, scholars have drawn a distinct ideological line between the
policies of Senwosret III and his predecessors, seeing him as a revolutionary force, who
changed the administrative system in order to increase his own power and to make the
overall structure of the government more efficient.27 However, other authors have
questioned the rapidity and degree to which these changes actually occurred, citing
examples of these supposed innovations at an earlier date and challenging former
interpretations of the evidence altogether.28
establishing Itjatawy as he may have begun the construction of a pyramid at Sakkara (Do. Arnold,
"Amenemhet I and the Early Twelfth Dynasty at Thebes," MMJ26, (1991), p. 20, n. 102; D.P. Silverman,
Non-Royal Burials in the Teti Pyramid Cemetery and the Early Twelfth Dynasty," in J. Wegner and D.
Silverman, eds., Archaism and Innovation: Studies in the Culture of Middle Kingdom Egypt, Yale
Egyptological Studies vol. 8, New Haven and Boston, 2009).
21
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 1; Middle Kingdom, p. 57-58; Grimal, History, p. 167; Hallo and Simpson,
Ancient Near East, pp. 247-248; Hornung, History, pp. 64-65; R.J. Leprohon, "Royal Ideology and State
Administration in Pharaonic Egypt," in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, I (Peabody,
MA, 1995), p. 282; Leprohon, "Overview," pp. 50-51; Richards, "Modified Order," p. 44; van den Boom,
Duties of the Vizier, p. 346. For a practical view of the changes of Senwosret III in light of the opposition
to this theory, see D.M. Doxey, Egyptian Non-Royal Epithets in the Middle Kingdom (Boston, 1997), pp.
24-25.
28
Callender, "Renaissance," pp. 167, 175; R. Delia, "A Study of the Reign of Senwosret III," dissertation,
Columbia University, 1980, pp. 164-169; D. Franke, "The Career of Khnumhotep III of Beni Hasan and the
So-Called 'Decline of the Nomarchs,"' in S. Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies (Whitstable, 1991), pp.
51-67; L. Gestermann, "Der politische und kulturelle Wandel unter Sesostris III.-Ein Entwurf," in L.
Gestermann and S. Hotabi, eds., Per aspera as astra (Kassel, 1995), pp. 31-50; W. Grajetzki, Die Hochsten
Beamten der Agyptischen Zentralverwaltung zur Zeit des Mittleren Reiches (Berlin, 2000), p. 251; RJ.
11
As part of his reforms, Senwosret III is thought to have reorganized the

administrative system in order to focus more of the authority and power within the
national umbrella and away from the local governments. Thus, local officials, or
nomarchs, who had transferred their offices from father to son over generations were cut
off from their hereditary rites, which had allowed them to gain increasing amounts of
power and wealth. Instead, all local appointments became the responsibility of the state
with approval being granted by the king.29 Titles of offices were modified accordingly
with one of the key examples being in the change in designation of the local officials
from nomarchs (hry-tp-cf) to mayors {hlty-c).
The largest component of the administrative structural changes sometimes
attributed to Senwosret III was that the system of warets which included the "head of the
south" (tp-rsy) along with other offices such as the "bureau of the vizier" (hlnttty), the
"bureau for the distribution of manpower" (tin ddrmt) and the "white house" ipr-hd)
(the name for the treasury).
The "head of the south" refers to the entity in Thebes,
Leprohon, "The Reign of Amenemhet III," dissertation, University of Toronto, 1980, p. 231; E. Pardey,
"Provincial Administration," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 1 (Oxford,
2001), p. 19; Quirke, Titles and Bureau, pp. 8-9; J.E. Richards, "Mortuary Variability and Social
Differentiation in Middle Kingdom Egypt," dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1992, pp. 33-34; D.
Spanel, "Beni Hasan," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia ofAncient Egypt, 1 (Oxford, 2001),
pp. 176-177; D. Warburton, "Officials," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2
(Oxford, 2001), p. 578.
29
Note that Cruz-Uribe believes that the power of the nomarchs was shifted to the vizier (E. Cruz-Uribe
"The Fall of the Middle Kingdom," VA 3 (1987), pp. 107-112). See also Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p.
282.
30
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 255; Burial Customs in Ancient Egypt: Life in Death for Rich and Poor
(London, 2003), p. 54; Middle Kingdom, p. 57-58; Helck, Geschichte, pp. 128-129; Warburton, "Officials,"
p. 578. For studies of Late Middle Kingdom titles, see O.D. Berlev, "Les Pretendus 'Citadins' au Moyen
Empire," Rd'E 23 (1971), pp. 23-48' Doxey,Egyptian Non-Royal Epithets; H.G. Fischer, Egyptian Titles of
the Middle Kingdom: A Supplement to Wm. Ward's Index (New York, 1985); S. Quirke, "The Regular
Titles of the Late Middle Kingdom/' Rd'E 37 (1986), pp, 107-130; The Administration of Egypt: W.A.
Ward, Index of Egyptian Administrative and Religious Titles of the Middle Kingdom (Beirut, 1982).
31
In older literature, the warets of the north and south were also included in this list. However, Quirke has
shown that these were local offices rather than national ones (Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, pp. 3-
12
which paralleled the capital of Itjatawy in the north and included the area from Akhmim
south to Nubia.32 It may be the case that a set of national offices was located here though
positions of the highest officials were not duplicated. This situation likely facilitated the
formation of Theban Dynasty XVI in the latter part of Dynasty XIII.
The result of the administrative restructuring often attributed to Senwosret III is a
final shift in power in Dynasty XII from the provincial and local elite to the state and the
king. This centralization supposedly not only created loyalty totitleruler but also
decreased the ability of nomarchs and military officials to accumulate wealth through
maintaining powerful offices over generations. Thus, threatening families could, in
effect, be cut off from their income and power by assigning the same office to different
groups throughout Egypt as the position became open. The disappearance of large,
elaborate local elite tombs is cited as being a visible result of these changes.33
Franke discusses the career of Khnumhotep III, whose career demonstrates the
4). For an early and slightly outdated explanation of the waret system, see Hayes, "Notes on the
Government," pp. 31-33. See also Gestermann, "Der politische und kulturelle Wandel," pp. 36-37; W.
Helck, Zur Verwaltung des Mittleren undNeuen Reichs. Register. Zum 60. Geburtstag des Verfassers
zusammen gestelltvon den Mitarbeitern der Agyptologischen Abteilung an der Universitat Hamburg
(Leiden, 1958), pp. 180-182, 192-193; Leprohon, "Some Remarks on the "Administrative Department"
(wart) ofthe Late Middle Kingdom," JSSEA 10 (1979-1980), pp. 161-171; "Amenemhet III," pp. 231-233;
S.T. Smith, "Administration at the Egyptian Middle Kingdom Frontier: Sealings from Uronarti and Askut,"
in T.G. Palaima, ed., Aegean Seals, Sealing and Administration, Aegaeum 5 (Liege, 1990), pp. 210-211.
Quirke divides administrative titles into the following groups: palace, treasury, bureau ofthe vizier, bureau
ofthe fields, organization of labor, local administration, and military (Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 186,
185-187; "Regular Titles."; Titles and Bureau, p. 25).
Quirke, Titles and Bureau, pp. 116-118.
"Examples include Khety (Dynasty XI), Amenemhet (Senwosret I) and Khnumhotep II (Amenemhet II) at
Beni Hasan; Djehutihotep (Amenemhet II-Senwosret III) at Bersha; Ukhhotep III (Senwosret III) at Meir;
Djefhapy (Senwosret I) and Djefhapy II (Amenemhet II) at Assuit; Nekhetankhu (Deir Rifa); and Wakha II
(Amenemhet III) at Qaw el-Kabir (Silverman, "Unity and Power," p. 37; "The Tombs of the Nobles in the
Middle Kingdom," in Z. Hawass, ed., Pyramids. Treasures Mysteries and New Discoveries in Egypt,
Vercelli, Italy, 2003, p. 364; W.S. Smith, Art and Architecture ofAncient Egypt (New Haven, 1981), pp.
189-201.)
13
shift from localized to centralized, state power during Dynasty XII.
Khnumhotep Ill's
father was a nomarch with a relatively large decorated tomb at Beni Hasan. Instead of
following his father as nomarch, Khnumhotep III obtained high-ranking offices
(including vizier) in the court of Senwosret III. His tomb is at Dahshur rather than at
Beni Hasan.
In some recent studies, which contest the theories discussed above, the changes in
titles and administrative shifts are argued to be less sudden and of less importance than
originally thought.35 The wealth of certain local officials is seen as a part of the overall
economic prosperity of the Middle Kingdom. After Senwosret HI and his successor
Amenemhet III, these favorable conditions took a downward turn, and not only did the
local officials show less affluence, but kingship also suffered. Thus, overall economic
conditions rather than political circumstances determined the decrease in resources
available to the local elite. Also, the conversion from nomarch to mayor had already
begun in early Dynasty XII,36 and Franke believed that during the earlier part of this era,
all of the assets acquired through warfare, mining, and trading went directly into the royal
purse.37 Over time, the wealth, which local officials had collected during the First
Intermediate Period, diminished, causing them to be unable to purchase monuments.
Thus, the disappearance of the nomarchs from historical sources hinges less on a drastic
change in policy than upon the natural course of the economic status of individuals, who
had taken advantage of the weak state of kingship prior to Dynasty XII, but had lost
access to resources when the administration was again centralized. Meanwhile, those,
34
Franke, "The Career of Khnumhotep III," pp. 56-65.

Delia, "Study," pp. 164-169.
36
Delia, "Study," p. 168; Helck, Zur Verwaltung, pp. 208-214; Pardey, "Administration," p. 18.
37
Franke, "The Career of Khnumhotep III," pp. 51-67; "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p. 743.
35
14
whose work brought them to the court, were able to increase their economic holdings.
Another aspect to the so-called reforms of Senwosret III lies in the political
policies of the previous kings of Dynasty XII.38 Amenemhet I began the process by
shifting the local governments as well as the temple cults from more regional
organization to that of the towns and villages by appointing governors. Nomarchs were
still allowed to exist in certain strategic areas, and some of their families became very
powerful. However, they still remained under the thumb of the king.
Senwosret II changed the policy further by educating the children of powerful
families within the court.39 When a child of this status had passed into adulthood, he, as a
loyal companion of the king, was placed in the national government. Thus, the office and
title of nomarch began to slowly disappear.40 By the time of Senwosret III, there were at
least two known nomarchs remaining in Bersha and Elephantine.41 Also, there is an
additional nomarch (Wakha II) with a large tomb at Qau el-Kebir from the reign of
Amenemhet III, well after the time when the owners of this type of large private funerary
structure supposedly no longer existed.
Thus, the eventual eradication of the nomarchs
may have had little to do with the policies of Senwosret III himself but rather successive
changes by his predecessors extending into the reign of his successor.
The system of warets also appears to have begun to emerge prior to the reign of
Senwosret III. The term, "head of the south" (tp-rsy), was first used in Dynasty XI. It is
unclear whether certain titles associated with the office of the treasury existed prior to the
38
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 175; Spanel, "Beni Hasan," pp. 176-177.

Callender, "Renaissance," p. 175; Franke, "The Career of Khnumhotep III," pp. 51-67.
40
Franke, "The Career of Khnumhotep III," pp. 51-67.
41
See note 31 above.
42
D. Franke, Personendaten aus dem Mittleren Reich (Weisbaden, 1984), p. 150, Doss. 200. See also, note
31 above.
39
15
reign of Senwosret III, and some may have emerged even later in Dynasty XII.
Likewise, the intricate relationship between the sectors of the Egyptian administration
may not have matured until Dynasty XIII.44
North
Itjatawy
Avaris
Avaris
Thebes
J
| Thebes
Political Capital
South
Figure 1.1. The relationships of Dynasties XIII-XVII according to this
study. The territorial extent is represented along the vertical axis while
the horizontal (from left to right) indicates the passage of time.
Though the administrative changes in the reign of Senwosret III may not be as
easily categorized as once thought, it is clear that his reign did usher in innovations in the
structure of the government.45 Quirke argues that the reforms of Senwosret III served to
1
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 51.

Callender, "Renaissance," p. 175; S. Quirke, "Thirteenth Dynasty," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), p. 397.
45
Some titles, such as such as the overseer of the bee men (imy-r bitiw), are only found under Senwosret
III; the titles begun in this reign, which extend into Dynasty XIII, appear to be those mainly associated with
16
specify more strictly the roles of officials rather than to quell any administrative threats to
the throne.46 Interestingly, shifts in cultural material also occur at this time (such as
scarabs and pottery), but these changes appear to be due to a time of increased
development than a politically orchestrated event.47 It is possible that the affluence of the
era required an expanded state bureaucracy. This basic governmental structure continued
well into Dynasty XIII, which was able to survive through many unfortunate
circumstances before finally succumbing to the Hyksos after 150 years (Fig. l.l). 48
II.A.2. Continuity in Royal Tombs and Developments in Religion

Cultural traditions, including ceramic assemblage, artistic style, and religious
practices continued to evolve seamlessly from Dynasty XII to Dynasty XIII. As it
pertains to kingship, however, the most solidly distinct material within the Late Middle
Kingdom is the design of the substructure of the royal tomb from the reign of Senwosret
Ill's son, Amenemhet III through that of Merneferre Ay of Dynasty XIII.49
Amenemhet III built two pyramid complexes, one at Dahshur and the other at
Hawara. After the former was abandoned due to structural problems,50 this king built the
latter according to a completely different model. Though there are some common
work in Nubia and activity at Abydos (Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 250-252).
Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, pp. 2-3.
Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, pp. 5-6, n. 3. For a discussion of cultural and political changes, see
Gestermann, "Der politische und kulturelle Wandel," pp. 31-50.
48
For the fall of Dynasty XIII according to the traditional scholarly views, see R. Gundlach,
R."Grundgegebenheiten der nationalen und internationalen Situation des agyptischen Reiches: Bin
Krisenmodell," In R. Gundlach and A. Klug, eds., Das dgyptische Konigtum im Spannungsfeldzwischen
Innen- undAufienpolitik im 2. Jahrtausendv. Chr. Wiesbaden, 2004, pp. 79, 84-85, 86.
49
See Chapter 3 for references. .
50
Di. Arnold, Der Pyramidenbezirk des Konigs Amenemhet III. in Dahschur. Band I: Die Pyramide,
Archaologische Veroffentlichungen, Deutsches Archaologisches Institut Abteilung Kairo 53 (Mainz,
1987), pp. 83-84.
46
17
features with the monuments from the two previous reigns, the substructure of the
pyramid at Hawara with its plan, portcullis, and sarcophagus types became the prototype
for the known royal funerary monuments of Dynasty XIII. Unlike earlier in Dynasty XII,
the Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary corpus is relatively standardized with minor
variations. The consistency in plan may denote a solidification of the religious principles
related to the king's resurrection and afterlife in the netherworld.51
Since the Late Middle Kingdom royal tomb type likely extends from Amenemhet
III to the Dynasty XIII king Merneferre Ay, a detailed analysis of these monuments is
imperative.5 The few known royal pyramids from this period are the largest monuments
constructed by the Dynasty XIII kings. Thus, they may provide insights into the nature
of kingship at this time as well as the economic strength of individual rulers.
Though the tombs of the kings of late Dynasty XII-XIII are incompletely known,
their features are similar enough to indicate that any interruptions in the ability of kings
to construct a relatively large funerary monument did not affect the desire for a pyramid.
Since the Late Middle Kingdom royal tomb type began in Dynasty XII, it is important for
this study to begin with the monument of Amenemhet III at Hawara and to continue from
there to the developments of Dynasty XIII. Thus, in this study, the term "Late Middle
Kingdom" is derived from political structure as well as ideological concepts related to
kingship as visible through the royal tombs of the period.53
51
See Chapter 5, Section IV.

See Chapters 3-5.
53
Note that the Late Middle Kingdom tomb type refers to monuments from the Hawara pyramid of
Amenemhet III into Dynasty XIII but does not include the tombs of Senwosret III or that of Amenemhet III
at Dahshur.
52
18
II.A.3. Art Styles

During the reign of Senwsoret III, the art style for royal statuary changed from the
depiction of generalized forms to that of a sort of realistic portraiture.54 Though the body
continued to be generalized, the face was rendered with the features of the king including
heavy eyes, down turned lips, defined cheekbones, and large ears, which seem to convey
a dignified leader slightly worn from his responsibilities, a theme also conveyed in the
literature of the time.55 Amenemhet III continued this style, eventually, establishing a
different visage after the first half of his reign.56 From his reign, into Dynasty XIII,
subtle mannerisms, with the focus on the eyes, are characteristic of these works of art.
However, in Dynasty XIII, the rendering of the face became less individualized.57
The quality of both royal relief and statuary continued into Dynasty XIII from the
time of Senwosret III.58 However, as time passed, the careworn expressions yielded to
standardized smiles or simple indifference.59 Interestingly, private people sometimes
^ W.S. Smith, Art and Architecture, p. 179; Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 37. For the concept of
"generalization, see J. Baines, Visual and Written Culture in Ancient Egypt (Oxford, 2007), pp. 294-295.
For remarks on portraiture, see ibid. pp. 224-225.
55
W.S. Smith, Art and Architecture, pp. 183-189; W.K. Simpson, "Egyptian Sculpture and TwoDimensional Representation as Propaganda," JEA 68 (1982), pp. 270; E. Russmann "A Historical
Overview of Egyptian Art," in E. Russmann, ed., Eternal Egypt (Los Angeles, 2001), p.19; "Aspects of
Egyptian Art," in E. Russmann, ed., Eternal Egypt (Los Angeles, 2001), p. 35-36; G. Robins, Egyptian
Statues, (Buckinghamshire, 2001), p. 45; Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 37-39; Hayes, Scepter, p.
199; Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, p. 157. For and examples of the literature from the period, see M.
Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 1 (Berkeley, 1973), pp. 135-169.
Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 38.
57
Silverman, "Unity and Power," p. 44. Bourriau notes that many of the royal statues have yet to be
published fully (Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 53)
58
W.S. Smith, Art and Architecture, pp. 217-218; Baines, Visual and Written Culture, pp. 224-225; 321324.
59
Silverman, "Unity and Power," p. 44; Russmann, "Historical Overview," p. 19; "Aspects," p. 36. See,
for example, E. Russmann, "Bust of a King," in E. Russmann, ed., Eternal Egypt (Los Angeles, 2001),
p.lll.
19
used the style of Senwosret III and Amenemhet III in their own statuary at this time.
They also continued with the block statue form which had become popular in Dyansty
XII as well as the cross-legged style.61 Starting with Senwosret III, the number of private
stelae greatly increased, and the style changed to a more abstract form that some consider
to be of a lesser quality.62 However, as in the late Old Kingdom,63 a style, which
continued into Dynasty XIII (along with the large numbers of stelae), evolved.
II.B. The Separation of Dynasties XII and XIII

The last two reigns of Dynasty XII, Maakherure Amenemhet IV and Sobekkare
Nefrusobek were far less spectacular than those of their ancestors, and the locations of
their tombs are not known. It is generally assumed that Amenemhet IV was the son of
his predecessor, however Ryholt theorized that Amenemhet III adopted him into the royal
family due to his observation that his mother, Hotepti, held the title of king's mother
alone (and not queen).64
Regardless of whether or not Amenemhet IV was a member of the Dynasty XII
For example, see "Ptahemsaf," in E. Russmann, ed., Eternal Egypt (Los Angeles, 2001), pp. 114-117,
#41.
61
Robins, Egyptian Statues, pp. 28-29; Hayes, Scepter, p. 213, Fig. 130. For block statues, see R. Schulz,
Die Entwicklung und Bedeutung des. kuboiden Statuentypus I-II (Hildesheim, 1992).
62
R. Freed, "Representation and Style of Dated Private Stelae of Dynasty XII," dissertation, New York
University, 1976, pp. 98-108. For negative comments about the style of the stelae of this period, see
Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, pp. 53-54, 61-62, #48; Hayes, Scepter, pp. 346, 344-347, Fig. 227.
63
E. Russmann, "A Second Style in Egyptian Art of the Old Kingdom." MDA1K51 (1995), pp. 269-279;
E. Brovarski, "A Second Style in Egyptian Relief of the Old Kingdom," in S. Thompson and P. Der
Manuelian, eds., Egypt and Beyond, Providence, 2008, pp. 49-89
64
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 209, 210, 213, 294-295. See also Grajetzki, Middle Kingdom, p. 61;
Helck, Gvschichte, p. 117; G. Robins, "Queens," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), p. 108. Other scholars report that Amenemhet IV was related to his predecessors.
For Amenemhet IV as the brother of Nefrusobek and son of Amenemhet III, see Murnane, "Overview," p.
701. Valloggia argues that there was a coregency between Amenemhet III and Amenemhet IV (M.
Valloggia, "Amenmhet IV et sa Coregence avec Amenemhet III," RdE 21 (1969), pp. 113-133).
20
family, there is little doubt that a traditional heir was not available upon the death of
Amenemhet IV since Amenemhet Ill's daughter, Nefrusobek, took the throne. She
deliberately emphasized her relationship to her father, in order to legitimize her reign. In
this effort, she continued the work on his mortuary temple at Hawara.65
The relationships between Amenemhet III and his immediate successors and the
initial kings of Dynasty XIII remain unclear. However, it is likely that a shift in royal
power occurred and that some confusion as to the mechanics of succession within the
office of kingship existed. The primary lines of evidence available for study in modern
times are the king-lists (gnwf) from ancient sources.
In ancient times, lists of kings in Egypt served a purpose other than history in the
modern sense of the word.66 Thus, if a king was unfavorable or unfamiliar, he might be
omitted from the work entirely. The Turin King-List {Papyrus Turin 1874 verso), the
Sakkara King-List and the history of Manetho all list Nefrusobek as the last ruler of
Dynasty XII. The king lists at Abydos omit her along with all of the following rulers of
Callender, "Renaissance," pp. 169, 170; "Materials for the Reign of Sebekneferu," Proceedings of the
Seventh International Congress of Egyptologists (Leuven, 1998).
66
The Egyptians had no conception of recording history in the modern sense (Bonheme and Forgeau, Les
Secrets, p. 59).
A. Gardiner, The Royal Canon of Turin (Oxford, 1959). For photographs of the document, see G. Farina,
II Papiro dei re Restaurato (Rome, 1938). For other publications of this document as well as comments on
the two previously listed, see Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 9-10, n. 19. See also Ryholt, Ryholt, "The
Turin Kinglist," pp. 135-155; "The Turin King-List or So-Called Turin Canon (TC) as a Source for
Chronology," in E. Hornung, R. Krauss, and D. Warburton, eds., Ancient Egyptian Chronology, (Boston,
2006), pp. 26-32. For a physical description of the papyrus as well as its content, see D.B. Redford,
Pharaonic King-lists, Annals and Day-Books, SSEA 4 (Mississauga, 1986), pp. 2-18. For suggestions of
amendments to the Dynasty XIII section, see W. Helck, "Anmerkungen zum Turiner Konigspapyrus," SAK
19 (1992), pp. 174, 176-178. Ryholt has rejected these changes (Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 21). For
further bibliographic information, see M. Bellion, Catalogue des Manuscrits Hieroglyphiques et
Hieratiques et des Dessins, sur Papyrus, Cuir ou Tissu, Publies ou Signales (Paris, 1987), pp. 253, 283.
21
/TO
the Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period,
and record Ahmose (Dynasty
XVIII) as the king who ruled directly after Amenemhet IV.

Of the sources, only the Karnak and the Turin King-Lists contain the names of the
rulers of the Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period. Unfortunately, the
former list is made up of fragmentary mix of kings from Dynasties XII, XIV, and XVI,
all of whom may not have been in true chronological order in the original composition.
Meanwhile, the Turin King-List, which is a compilation from earlier sources, originated
from an unknown provenience and was composed during the reign of Ramses II (Dynasty
XIX).71 This list appears to be organized according to the location of the capital as well
as along family lines and other criteria that are not fully understood.72
In the Turin King-List (7.4), a clear distinction is made between the kings of
Dynasties XII and XIII with the use of the heading: "the kings who followed(?) after
the... of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Sehotepibre, l.p.h." (nswyt [...] -si [...
nswt-\bity [... s.ht}p-ib-rc cah wdisnb)P
The reasons for this division are unclear, as
the first kings of Dynasty XIII are likely related to their predecessors; they seem to
Redford, Pharaonic King-lists, pp. 19-21; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 29. For the possible
meaning of the omission of rulers from king-lists, see M.-A. Bonheme, "Kingship," in D.B. Redford, ed.,
The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2 (Oxford, 2001), p. 238.
69
Gardiner, Pharaohs, p. 147; von Beckerath, "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1442.
70
W.M.F. Petrie, A History ofAncient Egypt I (London, 1894), p. 200; Redford, Pharaonic King-lists, pp.
29-34; K. Sethe, Urkunden der 18. Dynastie/bearb. undiibersetzt von Kurt Sethe, IV (Leipzig, 1914), pp.
608-610; Weill, La Fin du Moyen Empire, p. 4; H.E. Winlock, The Rise and Fall of the Middle Kingdom in
Thebes (New York, 1947), pp. 93-94; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 26-27, 70.
71
K.A. Kitchen, "King Lists," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2 (Oxford,
2001), pp. 234-235; A. Roccati, "Turiner Konigspapyrus," in W. Helck and E. Otto, eds., LA, VI
(Wiesbaden, 1986), pp. 809-810; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 32-33; Winlock, Rise and Fall, p. 94.
72
Redford, Pharaonic King-lists, p. 162; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 25, 71; K. Ryholt, "The
Turin Kinglist," A&L14 (2004), p. 138.
73
Ryholt, "The Turin Kinglist," p. 142; "So-Called Turin Canon (TQ as a Source for Chronology," p. 29;
J.P. Allen, "Second Intermediate Period."
74
Quirke, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 260; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 394.
22
draw upon their names and traditions from Dynasty XII as a means of legitimization
whether or not there was actually a familial connection.
Ryholt has suggested that the change in groupings is due to the loss of the eastern
Delta to Dynasty XIV at the end of the reign of Nefrusobek. In this scenario, which
several scholars have argued against,75 it is a later judgment concerning the period which
resulted in the division between the two groups. The kings of early Dynasty XIII would
have likely viewed themselves as legitimate members of the Amenemhet line continuing
their rule from Itjatawy. Ryholt's interpretation of double names as indicators of filiation
links the Dynasty XIII kings directly to their predecessors (to be discussed below).
Whether or not the initial kings of Dynasty XIII were related to those of Dynasty
XII, it is certain that later rulers were not of royal ancestry. Some of these kings
emphasized this reality possibly indicating that there may have been some dissatisfaction
with the status quo. In the end, this group of kings is made up of a great number of rulers
about whom little is known, including their ancestry. It is likely that the change in
designation at the point between Nefrusobek and the following kings was a decision
made by scribes in the New Kingdom when these rulers were viewed negatively for their
perceived negligence and eventual loss of the unified Egyptian state.76 Thus, in order to
adequately understand the nature of kingship at this time as well as its cultural
manifestations (such as royal funerary monuments), it is necessary to recognize the
75
For example, see Ben-Tor, "Seals and Kings," pp. 55-60. For K. Ryholt's rebuttal to these criticisms,
see "The Date of Kings Sheshi and Yaqubhar and the Rise of the Fourteenth Dynasty." in W.V. Davies, ed.,
The Second Intermediate Period (13th-l 7th Dynasties), Current Research, Future Prospects. London,
Forthcoming.
76
For this reason, New Kingdom Egyptians omitted the Dynasty XIII kings' names from the Sakkara, Sety
I, and Ramses II king-lists along with the Second Intermediate Period dynasties through the reign of
Ahmose. The Sety I and Ramses II lists (both from Abydos) also lack that of Nefrusobek. For references
for these documents, see the discussion above.
23
unobstructed links between the latter part of Dynasty XII and Dynasty XIII up to
Merneferre Ay as reflected in the use of the term "Late Middle Kingdom."
III. The Chronology of the Dynasties within the Late Middle Kingdom/Second
Intermediate Period
Unfortunately, the king-lists from Ancient Egypt do not always reflect the
chronological relationships between dynasties. Instead, each group of rulers is listed
sequentially as if no overlaps occurred. In some records, the untraditional kings, such as
those of the Amarna Period, or those from contemporary dynasties are omitted. Thus, it
is impossible to use these types of texts exclusively in order to determine chronological
relationships between groups of kings, since they were composed for ritual rather than
historical purposes. Other types of evidence, however, do provide important clues to the
nature of the political situation in the Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period.
The following sections will discuss the nature of the dynasties of this time period as well
as their chronological relationships.
III.A. Dynasties of the Second Intermediate Period

III.A.1. Dynasty XIV
Dynasty XIV is an ephemeral group of rulers, possibly including Sheshi, Nehesy
and over fifty others, centered at Tell el Dab'a.77 Only one of these kings, Nehesy, who
77
M. Bietak, "Zum Konigsreich des aA-zH-Ra Nehesi," SAX 11 (1984), pp. 59-60, 72-73; "Canaanites in
the Eastern Nile Delta," in A.F. Rainey, ed., Egypt, Isreal, Sinai (Tel Aviv, 1987), p. 50; Avaris, The
Capital of the HyksosRecent Excavations at Tell el-Dab'a, The Raymond and Beverly Sackler Foundation
Distinguished Lecture in Egyptology 1 (London, 1996), pp. 40-41; "The Center of Hyksos Rule: Avaris
(Tell el Dab'a)," in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives
24
ruled less than one year, left significant monuments, all of which are in this region.
Some scholars have attributed this dynasty to a group of Asiatics though Egyptian rulers
as well as Libyans and Nubians have also been considered.79 It is possible that the
members of Dynasty XIV may have gained their power by holding important positions in
the administration, possibly during the more powerful reigns of the Late Middle
Kingdom, when Avaris served as an important economic center in the trade with lands to
the east.80 Since the region around Avaris seems to have had a primarily Asiatic
- population by Dynasty XIII due to the abundance of Near Eastern material culture, it is
likely that at least some of the Dynasty XIV rulers belonged to this group.
Though the Dynasty XIV kings may have been foreign, they may have wanted to
project themselves as having emerged from Dynasty XIII, whether literally or through the
ideology of the state they had previously served. Thus, since these kings and their
families likely came from the Dynasty XIII administration of this area, it is probable that
even the Egyptians viewed them differently than the truly foreign kings (Dynasty XV),
who followed them, as reflected in the Turin King-List (see below).
(Philadelphia, 1997), p. 109; "Overview," p. 54. Manetho claimed that this dynasty ruled from Xois
(Gardiner, Pharaohs, p. 147; W. Helck, Untersuchungen zu Manetho und den agyptischen Konigslisten,
Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Agyptischen Konigslisten (Berlin, 1956), p. 36).
However, the association of this site with a group of kings was a later development and does not reflect
reality (D.B. Redford, "Textual Sources for the Hyksos Period," in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New
Historical and Archaeological Perspectives (Philadelphia, 1997), p. 25). Redford has proposed that these
kings represent a list of ancestors of the Dynasty XV rulers or the son of Khayan or Apepi of Dynasty XV
(D.B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal (Princeton, 1992), pp. 106-107; "The Hyksos," pp. 25, 26).
78
Bietak, "Zum Konigsreich," pp. 59-60, 68-71; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 198, 252. The other kings
are represented primarily through seals and sealings.
79
For example, see J. Bourriau, "The Second Intermediate Period (c.1650-1550)," in I. Shaw, ed., The
Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (New York, 2000), pp. 190, 192; A. Loprieno, "NhsJ"der Siidlunder"?," in
H. Guksch andD. Polz, eds., Stationen Betrdge zur Kulturgeschichte Agyptens (Mainz, 1998), pp. 185-219;
D. O'Connor, "The Hyksos Period in Egypt," in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New Historical and
Archaeological Perspectives (Philadelphia, 1997), p. 53; Redford, "The Hyksos," pp. 3-4; Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 5.
80
For example, Helck suggests that Nehesy was a Nubian who rose to power through the military (Helck,
Geschichte, p. 124).
25
III.A.2. Dynasty XV: The Hyksos

From archaeological and textual research, it is known that, a group of six kings,
who were not connected directly to the previous immigrants at Avaris, emerged in the
eastern Delta and ruled for 108 years. The term, "hekaw khasut" (hkiw-hiswt, meaning
"rulers of foreign lands") was used by at least the first three kings of this dynasty, with
the last few rulers adopting parts of the Egyptian titulary,82 and was then later applied to
all of these Asiatic kings in the Turin King-List, which is how current scholars derive the
term "Hyksos."83 By the time of Manetho, this term was used mistakenly to refer to an
ethnic group, which did not exist in reality, rather than to this group of kings.84
In tradition possibly dating back to Kamose (end of Dynasty XVII), the Egyptians
claimed that the Hyksos had invaded the country, destroying temples and monuments and
inciting terror into all those, whom they encountered.85 Rather than the sudden invasion
recorded in later literary works, this rise to power of these foreign rulers may have been
peaceful,86 though the final stages could have been violent.87 Much later, in the
Bietak, "The Center of Hyksos Rule: Avaris (Tell el Dab'a)," in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New
Historical and Archaeological Perspectives (Philadelphia, 1997), p. 104.
82
D.B. Redford, "The Hyksos Invasion in History and Tradition," Orientalia 39 (1970), pp. 7-8, 14-15;
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 18, n. 35, 119-150. The summation of the years refers to the kings as the
"Hyksos" in 10/29 in Ryholt's reconstruction.
83
M. Bietak, "Hyksos," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2 (Oxford, 2001),
p, 136; W. Helck, Die Beziehungen Agyptens zu Vorderasien im 3 und 2 Jahrtausend v. chr. 2. verbesserte
Auflage, Agyptologische Abhandlungen 5 (Wiesbaden, 1971), p. 90; Kemp, "Social History," p. 154. For a
list of the examples of this term outside of the Second Intermediate Period, see Redford, "The Hyksos," pp.
19,25.
84
Bietak, "Hyksos," (2001), p. 136; Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, pp. 98, 100.
85
Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 109-110; L. Habachi The
Second Stela of Kamose (Glilckstadt, 1972), p. 49; W. Helck, Historische-Biographische Text der 2.
Zwischenzeit undNeue Texte der 18. Dynastie, KA.T (Weisbaden, 1975), pp. 84-85, lines 84-85.
86
M. Bietak, "Egypt and Canaan During the Middle Bronze Age," BASOR 281 (1991), pp. 27-72; "Hyksos
Rule," pp. 87, 97; "Hyksos," p. 142; Bourriau, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 188; A. Leahy, "Ethnic
Diversity in Ancient Egypt," in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, 1 (Peabody, MA,
1995), p. 230; O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," p. 56; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 128; J. van Seters, The
Hyksos: A New Investigation (New Haven, 1966), pp. 121-126.
26
Ptolemaic Dynasty, Manetho (as transmitted through Josephus) states that the Asiatics
marched into Egypt, taking the country without a fight during the reign of Tutimaios of
Dynasty XIII.88 According to this account, Salitis established himself as a king in
Memphis after which the Hyksos rulers moved their capital to Avaris. Then, these kings
burned all of the cities, destroyed the temples, and tortured and enslaved the Egyptian
population.89 Later, the Theban kings were able to drive the Hyksos back to Avaris, and
the foreigners were allowed to leave the land.90
Redford has been one of the prime proponents of the theory that the Hyksos
actually did take Egypt through the use of an overpowering invasion (as described by
Manetho), suggesting that this scenario matches the contemporary events and political
climate in the Near East.91 However, other scholars have questioned the accuracy of this
account, which was written over a millennium after the events it describes.92
Some scholars have proposed that the legend of the Hyksos began to be combined
with other traumatic events in Egyptian history. Assmann suggests such a coalescence of
historical facts occurred in Dynasty XIX when facets of the religious revolution of the
Grimal, History, p. 186; Vemer, Great Monuments, p. 434.
Tutimaios has been equated to Dedumose. Though some scholars had placed this king into Dynasty
XIII, based upon their preconceptions of the events of the period, Ryholt places two kings of this name in
Dynasty XVI and suggests that the ruler may be listed in Turin King-List 8,21 as a prenomen with .. .ms-re.
However, he believes that the Tutimaios reference in Manetho is a misunderstanding and is not actually
present (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 327-329). See also Ben-Tor, "Seals and Kings," p. 68, n. 17; Hallo
and Simpson, Ancient Near East, p. 250; Kemp, "Social History," p. 154; Quirke, "Thirteenth Dynasty," p.
396; Redford, "The Hyksos Invasion in History and Tradition," p. 2; "The Hyksos," pp. 2, 19; Weill, La Fin
du Moyen Empire, pp. 233-234.
89
M. Bietak, "Hyksos," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York,
1999), p. 377; "Hyksos," (2001), p. 136; Leahy, "Ethnic Diversity," p. 230; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 127.
90
Kemp, "Social History," p. 155.
91
Kemp, "Social History," pp. 154-155; Redford, "The Hyksos Invasion in History and Tradition," pp. 2-3;
Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, pp. 105-106, 111; "The Hyksos," pp. 2,19. See also Bietak, "Overview," p. 55;
Grimal, History, p. 186.
92
K.A. Kitchen, "The Historical Chronology of Ancient Egypt. A Current Assessment," Acta
Archaeologica 67 (1996), p. 1; A.B. Lloyd, "Manetho," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology
of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 464; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 2-3, n.2, 137.
88
27
extraordinary king, Akhenaten, who worshipped the Aten while neglecting the other
gods, became integrated with the memory of the Hyksos.93 For example, in the Quarrel
ofApophis and Sekenenre, the former is said to have worshipped Seth at the exclusion of
other gods, something that had not been claimed before.94 It is likely that later in
Egyptian history events such as foreign rule by other groups including the Assyrians, the
Babylonians and the Persians, were also combined with the memory of the Hyksos.95
Thus, it is imperative to use these sources with extreme caution.
Redford points to earlier sources, such as the Kamose Carnarvon Tablet and
Hatshepsut's Speos Artemidos inscription, which both refer to destruction caused by the
Hyksos.96 Thus, he believes that the Josephus version of Manetho is viable, though this
conclusion has been criticized lately by Ryholt.97 In fact, royal and private, funerary
statuary, found at Tell el-Dab'a and abroad and dated to the Middle Kingdom, may
indicate that at least some of the stories concerning the destruction and looting of
monuments by the Hyksos may have occurred.98
93
J. Assmann, Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism (London, 1997), pp. 2829,41.
94
Redford, "The Hyksos," pp. 17-18. Note that The Hyksos did worship many Near Eastern gods at Avaris
(Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, p. 117). For a translation of this text, see W.K. Simpson, The
Literature of Ancient Egypt (New Haven, 1973), pp. 77-80.
95
Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, p. 101; T. Save-Soderbergh, "The Hyksos Rule in Egypt," JEA 37
(1951), pp. 56,60-61,63,69.
96
Bietak, "Hyksos," (1999), p. 379; Bourriau, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 201; G.H. Carnarvon and
C. Howard, Five Years' Explorations at Thebes. A Record of Work Done 1907-1911 (London, 1912), pp.
36-37; A. Gardiner, "The Defeat of the Hyksos by Kamose: The Carnarvon Tablet, No. I," JEA 3 (1916),
pp. 95-110; "Davies' Copy of the Great Speos Artemidos Inscription," JEA 32 (1946), pp. 47-48, line 3738; Helck, Geschichte,p. 134; Die Beziehungen Agyptens, p. 89; Habachi, Second Stela, p. 49; F.T. Mioso,
A Reading Book of Second Intermediate Period Texts, The Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities
Publications 9 (Toronto, 1981), pp. 35-41; Redford, "The Hyksos Invasion in History and Tradition," pp. 56; Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, pp. 101-102; "The Hyksos," pp. 16-17; H.S. Smith and A. Smith, "A
Reconsideration of the Kamose Texts," ZAS 103 (1976), p. 59; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 110;
Weill, La Fin du Moyen Empire, pp. 217-218.
97
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 3, n.2.
98
Bietak, "Hyksos," (2001), p. 136; S.T. Smith, "Model for Imperialism," p. 154.
28
Scholars also continue to engage in the debate concerning the territorial extent of
the Hyksos rulers. Some researchers believe that the Hyksos controlled all of Egypt for
at least a brief time period, mainly due to blocks inscribed, with the names of Khayan
1
(granite) and Apepi (limestone) found south of Thebes at Gebelein." Other items
mentioning Apepi within Egypt include one dagger in the Memphite necropolis and two
possibly from Thebes; an alabaster vase, inscribed with the name of the king's daughter
Heritt, found in a tomb thought possibly to be that of Ahmose-Nefertari; an adze from
Sumena (north of Gebelein); a palette from Abydos; an inscription from the Third
Intermediate Period listing him as the king under whom the ancestors of a priest served;
and a sistra with name of this king shown in a Ptolemaic relief at Dendera.100 Some of
these smaller objects may have arrived in the south through the exchange of gifts or trade
with the Hyksos to the north while others may have been booty from the war with
Other scholars suggest that the south remained autonomous under the rule of
99
Bietafc, "Hyksos;" (1999), p. 377; "Overview," p. 55; J.H. Breasted, A History of Egypt (New York,
1912), p, 218; R.A. Giveon, "The Hyksos in the South," in M. G6rg, e&, Pontes atque Pontes: Eine
Festgabe fur Hellmut Brunner (Wiesbaden, 1983), p. 155; Helck, Geschichte, p. 134; HistorischeBiographische, pp. 54, no. 71; Hornung, History, pp. 71-72; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 120,134-136,
326-327; T. Save-Soderbergh, Agypten undNubien: Ein Beitragzur Geschichte altdgyptischer
Aussenpolitik (Lund, 1941), p. 128; "Hyksos Rule," p. 55; R. Weill, "Complements pour "La Fin du Moyen
Empire Egyptien"," BIFAO 32 (1932), p. 36; B. Williams, "Archaeology and Historical Problems of the
Second Intermediate Period," dissertation, University of Chicago, 1975, p. 1250.
L. Borchardt, Die Mittel zur Zeitlichen Festlegungvon Punkten der Agyptischen Geschichte undlhre
Anwendung, Quellen und Forschungen zur Zeitbestimmung der Agyptischen Geschichte 2 (Cairo, 1935),
pp. 95-114, PL 112, 112a; Giveon, "South," pp. 156-157, 158, 160-161; D. Polz, "Theben und Avaris. Zur
"Vertreibung" der Hyksos," in H. Guksch and D. Polz, eds., Stationen Betrage zur Kulturgeschichte
Agyptens (Mainz, 1998), pp. 223-224.
101
D. Polz, "Die Hyksos-Blocke aus Gebelen: zur Prasenz der Hyksos in Oberagypten," in E. Czerny, et al.,
eds., Timelines: Studies in Honour of Manfred Bietak, 1 (Dudley, MA, 2006), pp. 239-247. Note that the
Rhind Mathematical Papyrus likely arrived in Thebes after the wars with the Hyksos, as it refers to
invaders from the south and has the name of Apepi upon it (Giveon, "South," pp. 157-158).
29
Dynasty XVII.102 In fact, many researchers now believe that the Hyksos never actually
ruled south of Cusae/Hermopolis, where the Kamose Stelae I and II located their border
1fi'X
late in Dynasty XVII during the battles against the Hyksos. ' They suggest that the
blocks of Khayan and Apepi may have been moved to Gebelein from the Delta at a later
date.104
Regardless of their territorial extent, the Hyksos may have used many of the same
titles for members of their government as traditional Egyptian kings, though there may
have been significant differences in the actual operation of this foreign administration. 5
For example, the office of vizier seems to have been rejected, while that of treasurer
appears to have flourished during the reign of the Hyksos kings, with Har {hii), who had
a West Semitic name, being a likely example, since his sealings have been found in
Lower Egypt as well as Canaan.106 At this point, it is uncertain how the office of the
treasurer in the Hyksos government correlated to that in Egypt, as will be discussed in
Chapter 6.
102
Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 21.

Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 82-97, no. 119; Mioso, A Reading Book, pp. 42-53; O'Connor,
"Hyksos Period," p. 56; Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, p. 118; "The Hyksos," p. 13; van Seters, A
New Investigation, p. 166; von Beckerath, "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1443.
104
Hornung, History, pp. 71-72; Kemp, "Social History," p. 159; O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," pp. 56-57;
Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 126-127; Ryhblt, Political Situation, pp. 326-327; von Beckerath,
Untersuchungen, pp. 148-149. Though some scholars have argued that these blocks could have been
moved to this location from elsewhere, Kemp suggests that such an action would have been unnecessary
since this site is located near a quarry (Kemp, "Social History," p. 159). The granite material used in the
block of Khayan may show that this ruler also reached the area around the First Cataract (Ryholt, Political
Situation, pp. 135, n. 480). There is also Hyksos material at Nefrusi in Middle Egypt (Bietak, "Hyksos,"
(1999), p. 377; "Overview," p. 54).
105
For example, the Dynasty XV kings used cartouches
106
R.A. Giveon, "Hyksos Scarabs with Names of Kings and Officials from Canaan," Cd'E 49 (1974), P .
225. For sealings of this official, see Bietak, "Hyksos," (2001), pp. 139-140; Helck, Zur Verwaltung, pp.
79-80; Hornung, History, p. 72; G.T. Martin, Egyptian Administrative and Private-name Seals Principally
of the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period (Oxford, 1971), pp. -78-85, numbers 984-1088a;
. Redford,.Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, p. 116, Ryholt dated this treasurer to the reign of the Dynasty XIV
king Sheshi (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 60-61). However, Ben-Tor argues against his seal typology
which places Har in this reign (Ben-Tor, "Seals and Kings," p: 61).
103
30
The Hyksos seemed to have adhered to their own tradition, though some scholars
have emphasized the ways in which they adopted Egyptian customs (cartouches,
literature, hieratic and hieroglyphic scripts, sculptural styles, and the worship of the god
Seth in the Delta).107 At the same time, however, they may have continued to worship
one of their own gods (Ba'al), speak their own language and censtruct their kingdom in
their own ways.108 In essence, the Hyksos were a group of foreign kings, who attempted,
at least on the surface, to balance their native practices with the customs they inherited
from their predecessors at Tell el-Dab'a. Unfortunately, it is difficult to discern the exact
nature of their entry into Egypt and their territorial extent, due to the propaganda of the
New Kingdom and the sources from over one thousand years later.
III.A.3. Dynasty XVI

According to Africanus, Dynasty XVI is viewed as being a group of rulers with
fifteen or more West Semitic names found on seals. It is presumed that they were
kinglets, which were subservient to the Hyksos rulers, in the Palestinian region.109 In
Near Eastern government installations, unlike that of Egypt, small city-states were ruled
Grimal, History, p. 186; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 148-150.

D.B. Redford, "The Concept of Kingship During the Eighteenth Dynasty," in D. O'Connor and D.P.
Silverman, eds., Ancient Egyptian Kingship (New York, 1995), pp. 158-159; van Seters, A New
Investigation, pp. 171-180.
109
Bietak, "Hyksos Rule," p. 113; "Overview," p. 55; "Hyksos," pp. 136, 139; Bourriau, "Second
Intermediate Period," p. 193; Hallo and Simpson, Ancient Near East, p. 250; Hornung, History, p. 72;
Redford, "The Hyksos Invasion in History and Tradition," pp. 19-21; Pharaonic King-lists, p. 240; Ryholt,
108
Political Situation, p. 104, n. 347; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 137-144; "Zwischenzeit, Zweite,"
p. 1444. Kemp has written that vassal city-states existed both in southern Palestine and the Delta and were
composed of Egyptian and foreign rulers (Kemp, "Social History," pp. 154, 159, 177-178). Quirke believes
that this dynasty was simply a later interpretation of kings' names and does not reflect a true group of rulers
(Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 127, 129; "Second Intermediate Period," p. 260). Ryholt argues that these
"kings" are made up of the seals of non-contemporary rulers, amuletic use of kings' names, and phrases
proclaiming aspects of the god Re (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 62-65).
31
by kings, who, in turn, pledged their allegiance to one overriding and powerful ruler.110
In the city state model, the high-king demanded taxes in return for protection and
controlled the interaction of the more minor kinglets. This sort of system was completely
foreign to the Egyptians who had a true nation state with one sovereign,111 under which
local officials and administrators worked. Nonetheless, it has been suggested that
Dynasties XIV and XVI represent city-states in the Delta and Southern Palestine, some of
these being non-Egyptian.112
Ryholt has recently proposed another model for the identity of Dynasty XVI,
resurrecting an idea originally proposed by Winlock.
He rejects the identification of
Manetho's Dynasty XVI as being Hyksos and instead adopts the notion in Eusebius'
version that they were Theban and ruled the region between Hu and Edfu.UA He
believes that a group of fifteen Egyptian kings, which is normally associated with the
beginning of Dynasty XVII, ruled from Thebes, filling a power void left after the fall of
Dynasty XIII. In his historical reconstruction, the Dynasty XIII territory broke into
smaller polities after the Hyksos made their way to Memphis. Ryholt does not believe
that there were any Palestinian or Delta city-states related to Dynasty XV, stating that
there is no evidence for this sort of system.
However, he does note that the lack of
scarab seals of princes may indicate that there was indeed some non-Egyptian
Hallo and Simpson, Ancient Near East, pp. 172-178.

Baines, "Definition," p. 3; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 127; Redford, "The Hyksos Invasion in History
and Tradition," p. 18.
112
Kemp, "Social History," pp. 154, 159, 177-178; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen,p. 10.
113
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 5-6, 151-162; Winlock, Rise and Fall, pp. 99-100, 104. For the
chronology of this period (as early Dynasty XVII), see C.J. Bennett, "The First Three Sekhemre Kings of
the Seventeenth Dynasty," GM143 (1994), pp. 21-28.
114
Ryholt, Political Situation; p. 159.
115
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 43,49, n. 131.
111
32
administrative system involved here.

While some scholars have accepted Ryholt's claim that Dynasty XVI is a separate
group from the Dynasty XVII kings,117 others have questioned whether any proof exists
to suggest that such a separation existed.118 Meanwhile, Allen has accepted the Theban
nature of Dynasty XVI without adhering to Ryholt's chronological modification of the
Second Intermediate Period and his placement of the other dynasties within it.119
Unfortunately, it is impossible to ascertain the exact nature of the rule of these early
Theban kings, as modern knowledge of them is entirely fragmentary.
At this point, there is no solid evidence that the kings of Dynasty XVI ruled from
anywhere other than Thebes. Nonetheless, it is likely that these rulers represent a group
quite different from that of Dynasty XVII in its economic situation, territorial extent, and
general policy. The modern myth that these kings were Asiatic vassals of Dynasty XV
has greatly hampered the understanding of the Late Middle Kingdom/Second
Intermediate Period. However, works like that of Ryholt have opened the doors to
reexamining these issues, allowing today's scholars to overcome these assumptions and
reinterpret the evidence.120
116

J.P. Allen, "Turin," pp. 49, 52. D. Redford also believed that this dynasty was Theban (D.B. Redford,
Akhenaten, Heretic King (Princeton, 1984), p. 101; Egypt, Canaan and Isreal, p. I l l ; "The Hyksos," pp. 8,
27-28, n. 55). O'Connor has also accepted this identification (O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," p. 52).
118
T. Schneider, "Uberlegungen zur Chronologie der Thebanischen Konige in der Zweiten Zwischenzeit,"
in E. Czerny, et al., eds., Timelines: Studies in Honour of Manfred Bietak, 1 (Dudley, MA, 2006), pp. 299305; A. Spalinger, "Review of The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period, c.
1800-1550 B.C.," JNES 60 (2001), p. 297.
119
J.P. Allen, "Turin,"," p. 52.
120
J.P. Allen, "Turin," pp. 48-49; Spalinger, "Review," pp. 296, 298.
117
33
III.A.4. Dynasty XVII

Traditionally, scholars have defined Dynasty XVII as the term for the Dynasty
XIII kings, once they had moved the capital from Itjatawy to Thebes under the duress of
the Hyksos rulers.
However, there is currently no evidence that there was a direct
relationship between the last kings of the latter and the first rulers of the former.122 Thus,
these Theban kings, though possibly related in some manner to the Dynasty XIII rulers,
do not seem to have been derived directly from them.
Interestingly, Polz found a shaft tomb near the center of the pyramid of king
Nebkheperre Intef at Dra Abu el-Naga, the royal cemetery of Dynasty XVII.123 Due to
the fact that this tomb dates to the middle of Dynasty XIII, Polz suggests there might be
some familial relationship between these individuals especially since great lengths were
taken to avoid cutting into the earlier shaft.124 Thus, the officials from the south, who
participated in the administration of Dynasty XIII may be the families from which the
kings of Dynasty XVII emerged. Many of these officials had married Dynasty XIII
princesses, linking their descendents distantly to the preceding kings.125
121
Bourriau, "Beyond Avaris," p. 159; A. Dodson, The Canopic Equipment of the Kings of Egypt (New
York, 1994), p. 36; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga: The Decline & Fall of the Royal Pyramid," KMT 5
(1994), p. 32; Grimal, History, p. 187; Hallo and Simpson, Ancient Near East, p. 250; Hornung, History, p.
70; Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 127, 229; "Second Intermediate Period," p. 260; Ryholt, Political Situation,
pp. 167-183; von Beckerath, "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1443.
122
D. Polz, "Seventeenth Dynasty," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia ofAncient Egypt, 3
(Oxford, 2001), p. 273; Spalinger, "Review," p. 298. Note that in Chapter 6 of this thesis, an analysis of
nomen and prenomen of each king may indicate that there are some familial links between dynasties XIII
and XVII. No Dynasty XVII kings are preserved in the Turin King-List (Ryholt, Political Situation, p.
167).
123
Kemp, "Social History," p. 159; Quirke, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 264.
D. Polz and A. Seiler, Die Pyramidenanlage des Konigs Nub-Cheper-Re Intef in Dra'Abu el-Naga,
Deutsches Archaologisches Institut Abteilung Cairo 24 (Mainz, 2003), pp. 18, 20, 24, 33-37, Abb. 15.
125
See Chapter 6, Section II.F.
34
The territory of the Dynasty XVII kings appears to have been the area between
Elephantine and Cusae (or possibly even Abydos).126 Unfortunately, this location was
the northern border of the Theban state when the war with the Hyksos occurred; it may
not reflect a constant boundary. As mentioned on the section concerning Dynasty XV
above, inscribed blocks at Gebelein may indicate that the Hyksos held this same area for
at least a short period. In fact, some scholars have proposed that the Hyksos had a vassal
relationship with Dynasty XVII, as well as other kinglets, and that these southern
monarchs were required to pay oppressive taxes and tribute to the Asiatic rulers,127 but
these arguments are not convincing with the evidence currently available.
Textual sources mention the raids of groups of unspecified foreigners upon
Kemp, "Social History," p. 159; Quirke, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 264. See the Carnarvon
Tablet in Gardiner, "Carnarvon Tablet," p. 108; Smith and Smith, "A Reconsideration," pp. 59, 61, 69-70.
There may have been a Dynasty XVII garrison (IWyi) at Abydos (D. Franke, "An Important Family from
Abydos of the Seventeenth Dynasty," JEA 71 (1985), pp. 175-176; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 171). The
Hyksos may have had a stronghold at Hermopolis, and the SecondKamose Stela refers to the Cynopolite
nome as a place where the Hyksos had ruled (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 172-1732, 1175, Fig. 1716).
For the phases of the war, see Polz, "Theben und Avaris," pp. 220-222.
127
Bietak, "Hyksos Rule," p. 113; H. Goedicke, The Quarrel ofApophis andSeqenenrea (San Antonio,
1986), pp. 6-9, 17, 35; Leahy, "Ethnic Diversity," p. 231; Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, pp. 111,115116, 119; "The Hyksos," p. 26; A.E.P. Weigall, A History of the Pharaohs 2 (New York, 1927), p. 139.
This system was common in the kingdoms and city-states of Syria-Palestine. See Bietak, "Hyksos,"
(2001), p. 139. David suggests that the last kings of Dynasty XIII may have been vassals under the Hyksos
(David, Builders, p. 198). See also Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 36; W.C. Hayes, "Egypt: From the
Death: From the Death of Ammenemes III to Seqenenre II," in I.E.S. Edwards, et al., eds., Cambridge
Ancient History, II (1) (Cambridge, 1973), p. 55; van Seters, A New Investigation, pp. 167-170. For a
similar conclusion regarding Dynasty XIV, see G. Greenberg, "Manetho RehabilitatedA New Analysis of
His Second Intermediate Period," DE 25 (1993), p. 21. As this theory relates to Dynasty XVI in Palestine,
Dynasty XVII in Thebes and other groups in Middle Egypt and the Delta, see Bietak, "Hyksos," (1999), p.
377; "Hyksos," (2001), p. 139. For Dynasty XVII, see Redford, "Concept," p. 166; S.T. Smith, "People," in
D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia ofAncient Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), p. 30; J. von Beckerath,
"Theban Seventeenth Dynasty," in E. Teeter and J.A. Larson, eds., Gold of Praise. Studies Wente, Studies
in Ancient Oriental Civilization 58 (Chicago, 1999), p. 21. For Thebes and Nubia (Kush) with the
possibility of others, see Leahy, "Ethnic Diversity," p. 230. For the Delta and the control of the Nubian and
Hyksos rulers over the south and the north, see Murnane, "Overview," p. 702. Redford explores various
options for the many kings found on seals as well as the possible vassal relationship between the Hyksos
and the Dynasty XVII kings (Redford, "The Hyksos," pp. 25-26). See also Hornung, History, pp. 71-72;
Kemp, "Social History," pp. 158-159; Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, pp. 111,119; von Beckerath,
"Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1444; Weigall, Pharaohs, pp. 137-139, 141, 167.
128
O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," pp. 56-57; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 325-326.
35
Thebes and other areas of Egypt. Ryholt argues that Ahmose used a storm metaphor to
refer to the looting of Thebes by Dynasty XV in the Unwetterstele.
This document
refers to the destruction of temples, tombs, and pyramids. However, in the region of
Thebes, it is possible that at least some of these raids were conducted by Nubians rather
than Asiatics as indicated in the inscription of Sobeknacht recently published by V.
Davies.130 Thus, it would appear that if the Hyksos did rule Southern Egypt, it was only
for a short period of time. Alternatively, they may have conducted military campaigns
into this part of the country, setting up monuments but never actually controlling the
territory.
In the end, the Egyptian kings at Thebes engaged in warfare against the Hyksos as
well as the Kushites. The first of these kings, Sekenenre Tao II seems to have been killed
in combat due to a wound he suffered from an Asiatic hand axe.131 Later, his son or halfbrother Kamose continued the battle, which did not end until Tao's son Ahmose was
ruler, and the Hyksos were driven back into western Asia and the Nubian territories were
reacquired. The areas to the north were likely not stabilized until the reign of Amenhotep
I.
III.B. Theories Concerning the Chronology of the Second Intermediate Period

The chronology of the dynasties within the Second Intermediate Period is
important in the study of the kingship of Dynasty XIII. The timing of the loss of
, 129 Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 143-148.
130
Davies, "Sobeknakht of Elkab," p. 6; "Sobeknakht's Hidden Treasure." British Museum Magazine 46

(2003), pp. 18-19.
131
Bietak, "Hyksos," (1999), pp. 378-379; "Overview," pp. 55-56; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 177; J.
Harris and E. Wente, An X-Ray Atlas of the Royal Mumies, (Chicago, 1980), pp. 68, 289, 295, 300-301.
36
territories to new governments both native and foreign is crucial to the understanding of
the events within Itjatawy at any point. For many years, outdated assumptions regarding
the nature of Dynasties III-XVII have impeded the advancement, of the understanding of
the political events of this era. More recently, however, new theories have emerged
which are revolutionizing the current thinking concerning the relationships between these
dynasties.
III.B.l. Traditional Theories

Traditionally, scholars have argued that the kings of Dynasty XII and the first part
of Dynasty XIII (up until the reign of Merneferre Ay) ruled all of Egypt.
At this point,
a group of rulers (Dynasty XIV) separated from the Egyptian government, forming their
own kingdom in the Eastern Delta, while Dynasty XIII continued to rule from the Middle
Kingdom capital at Itjatawy. Later, a group of strong Asiatic kings took over this region,
and drove the Dynasty XIII sovereign to the Theban area, marking the beginning of
Dynasty XVII. Meanwhile, the Dynasty XV kings set up a group of minor rulers,
Dynasty XVI, in the Delta and to the east. Over all of these areas, the Hyksos held
varying degrees of authority until the rulers of Dynasty XVII began a revolt. Eventually,
the Asiatic kings (Dynasty XV) were thrown out of Egypt, and once again, a native group
132
Franke, "Zur Chronologie," pp. 258-259; Helck, Die Beziehungen Agyptens, pp. 91-93; Grajetzki,
Middle Kingdom, p. 65; J. von Beckerath, Handbuch der Agyptischen Konigsnamen (Mainz, 1999), pp.
284-286. Von Beckerath places the beginning of Dynasty XIV around eighty years after the start of
Dynasty XI11 (von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 71-78, 81, 221; "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1443). Note
that Kemp theorized that Dynasty XIV was actually one of many vassal city-states (including Dynasty
XVI) under Dynasty XV (Kemp, "Social History," pp. 154, 159, 177-178). Quirke states that the names of
the two kings, Nehesy and Merdjefare, of column 8 in the Turin King-List only appear in the eastern Delta
("Royal Power," pp. 125, 129; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 394). For similar dates for the beginning of
Dynasty XIV, see Verner, Great Monuments, p. 434. See also Grimal, History, p. 184; O'Connor, "Hyksos
Period," pp. 46, 48, 56.
37
of monarchs, Dynasty XVIII, ruled the entire country.
III.B.2. Extensive Fragmentation

Though slight variations of the traditional theory exist, the basic idea is consistent
and has been quite influential in scholarly literature down to the present. Some scholars
have also expanded on the nature of other possible groups and their relationship to the
Hyksos, arguing that Egypt fragmented into many polities during the Second
Intermediate Period. Proposed capitals for such entities include Thebes, El Kab, Edfu,
Gebelein and Abydos.133 The evidence is most prolific for an Abydos Dynasty though
doubts as to the existence of this group of kings still remain.134
III.B.3. Ryholt's Chronology

In 1927, Weigall had suggested that Dynasties XIII and XIV (at Xois) were
contemporaneous with a Dynasty XV that was evolving during this time.135 Later,
Winlock had proposed that Dynasty XIV began at the end of Dynasty XII.136 Most
133
Franke, "Zur Chronologie," pp. 257, 259; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 163, n. 595; 163-166, 168.
Bourriau, "Second Intermediate Period," pp. 186, 203; Polz and Seiler, Pyramidenanlage, pp. 44-47; Sethe,
Urkunden der 18. Dynastie, pp. 29-31. Save-Soderbergh believed that Dynasty XIII fell into separate
entities prior to the reign of Khasekhemre Neferhotep I, when order was restored again (Save-Soderbergh,
"Hyksos Rule," pp. 53-55).
134
Evidence for an Abydos Dynasty includes names which seem to refer to this region or its gods:
Wepwawetemsaf and King Sekhemkhutawyre Pantjeny "the Thinite" found on stelae (W.M.F. Petrie,
Abydos II, Egypt Exploration Fund 24 (London, 1903); W.A. Ward, Essays on Feminine Titles of the
Middle Kingdom and Related Subjects (Beirut, 1986), pp. 43-44). See also Ryholt, Political Situation, p.
191. For doubts concerning the existence of an Abydos Dynasty, see J.P. Allen, "Turin," p. 49; Spalinger,
"Review," p. 298. Bennett points out that though Wepwawetemsaf s nomen contains the name of a god of
the Thinite region, his prenomen follows the Dynasty XVII pattern (Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology,"
pp. 123, 130-131). See E.A.W. Budge, Hieroglyphic Texts from Egyptian Stelae &c, in the British Museum
IV (London, 1913), p. 9, PI. 25. Redford does not believe in the fragmentation of the Egyptian state into
these localized dynasties (Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 25).
135
Weigall, Pharaohs, pp. 137-139, 141, 167.
136
Winlock, Rise and Fall, pp. 95-96.
38
recently, Ryholt has argued that Dynasty XIV emerged during the reign of Nefrusobek,
the last king of Dynasty XII and continued through much of Dynasty XIII.137 Ryholt
bases his chronological framework upon textual and archaeological evidence, some of
which has been questioned by other scholars.
Ryholt considers, with some hesitation, that the "palace" <at Tell el-Dab'a may
have served as the home of a Dynasty XIV king, but this large house likely belonged to a
high-ranking Asiatic official in the Egyptian administration during the Late Middle
Kingdom.139 A structure with a plan similar to this one has been found at Abydos and
was used by the Late Middle Kingdom mayors, who lived there.140 Thus, it is likely that
the building at Tell el-Dab'a was first constructed as a mayor's house; whether or not it
was used as a palace during Dynasty XIV is uncertain.141
Ryholt's chronology varies greatly from most of those proposed by other
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 5, 34, 184-204, 294. For references to traditional chronological
reconstructions, see Chapter 1, Section III.B.l.
138
Ben-Tor, "Seals and Kings," pp. 47-74. For Ryholt's response to these objections, see "The Date of
Kings."
139
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 104-105. Bietak and his associates have claimed that this building is a
palace, possibly of Hotepibre Qemau Saharnedjeritef (Bietak, "Canaanites in the Eastern Nile Delta," in
A.F. Rainey, ed., Egypt, Isreal, Sinai (Tel Aviv, 1987), p. 50; "Der Friedhof in einem Palastgarten aus der
Zeit des spaten mittleren Reiches und andere Forschungsergebnisse aus dem ostlichen Nildelta Tell elDab'a 1984-1987," A&L 2 (1991), p. 57; "Egypt and Canaan," p. 34; "Connections Between Egypt and the
Minoan World: New Results from Tell el-Dab's/Avaris," in W.V. Davies and L. Schofield, eds., Egypt, the
Aegean and the Levant: Interconnections in the Second Millennium BC (London, 1995), p. 19; Avaris, The
Capital of the HyksosRecent Excavations at Tell el-Dab'a, The Raymond and Beverly Sackler Foundation
Distinguished Lecture in Egyptology I (London, 1996), pp. 21-30; "Zum Raumprogramm agyptischer
Wohnhauser des Mittleren und des Neuen Reiches," in M. Bietak, ed., Haus undPalast im Alten Agypten,
Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Senkschriften der Gesamtakademie 14 (Vienna, 1996), p.
30; "Hyksos Rule," pp. 100-105; "Tell ed-Dab'a, Second Intermediate Period," in K.A. Bard, ed.,
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology ofAncient Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 779; D. Eigner, "A Palace of the
Early 13th Dynasty at Tell el-Dab'a," in M. Bietak, ed., Haus undPalast in alten Agypten, Osterreichische
Akademie der Wissenschaften Senkschriften der Gesamtakademie 14 (Vienna, 1996), pp. 73-80). See also
T. Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen (Zurich, 1994), p. 128.
140
J. Wegner, "Excavations at the Town of "Enduring-is-the-throne-of-Khaaure-Maa-Kheru-in-Abydos" A
Preliminary Report on the 1994 and 1997 Seasons," JARCE 35 (1998), pp. 4,24-25.
141
For objections to the "palace" label of the structure at Tell el-Dab'a, see O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," pp.
53, 64, n. 15. F. Arnold used the phrase, "so-called 'palace'" (Arnold, "Settlement," p. 15).
39
scholars.
As mentioned above, Ryholt believes that Dynasties XIII and XIV proceeded
at the same time and that the emergence of the latter was the defining difference between
Dynasties XII and the former.143 Eventually, the Hyksos arrived at Avaris and removed
the Dynasty XIV kings as well as those of Dynasty XIII in the Memphite region. At this
point, there was a power void in Upper Egypt, where an Abydos Dynasty and Dynasty
XVI (in Thebes) emerged. Soon thereafter, the Hyksos began to move southwards,
removing the Abydos Dynasty and briefly taking control over the entire country. Finally,
the Thebans (Dynasty XVII) reemerged as the power in the south and slowly prepared to
remove the Hyksos from the Delta.
Ryholt's examination of the Second Intermediate Period is a revolutionary
work.144 Though some conclusions may not be certain with the current evidence, this
study has succeeded in breaking down the walls surrounding traditional thought. Since
the publication of this study, other scholars continued to recognize flaws in the traditional
theories regarding the chronology of this era and formulated their own proposals.
III.B.4. Theories Concerning an Overlap between Dynasties XIII and XVII

The perilous state of the Turin King-List in the late Dynasty XIII to Dynasty XVI
positions, along with a lack of material from this period in general, leaves considerable
room for interpretation into the relationships between the dynasties of the Late Middle
Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period.145 When evidence is available, it sometimes
creates problems with the traditional understanding of the period. For example, a stela
142
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 132-133, 140.

144
Spalinger, "Review," p. 296. 298.
145
von Beckerath, "Theban," p. 22.
143
40
describes how Horemkhauef, a priest who was from the El Kab region, traveled to
Itjatawy and came into the presence of the king, late in Dynasty XIII or the beginning of
Dynasty XVI/XVII.146 This problematic inscription has perplexed scholars studying the
Second Intermediate Period. How could there be a ruler in Itjatawy at a time when
Dynasty XIII was no longer supposed to exist?
Perhaps it may be better to propose that Dynasty XIII and Dynasty XVI/XVII
were contemporaneous. In other words, the Hyksos ruled a portion of Syria-Palestine
and parts of the Delta, Dynasty XIII held the area from Memphis to Assuit, and the kings
of Dynasty XVI reigned from Assuit to the southern extent of Egypt. Dynasty XVI may
have regarded Dynasty XIII as a needed buffer from the growing power of the Hyksos.
This sort of relationship might have allowed for the peaceful movement of a traveler like,
Horemkhauef, to Itjatawy, where he came into contact with the king. Biographical texts
often record contact or association with a royal figure,147 and the fact that the ruler was
not the sovereign of the area, from which the man had come, may not have been
important.
Interestingly, King Sankhenre Mentuhotep of Dynasty XVI was referred to as the
146
Bourriau, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 198; W.C. Hayes, "Horemkha'uef," p. 4, PL 2, lines 9-10;
Scepter, p. 347; Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 49-50, no. 68; Kemp, "Social History," p. 149; M.
Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature I, pp. 129-130; Mioso, A Reading Book, pp. 17-19; Quirke, "Royal
Power," p." 125; Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 4; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 79; Simpson, "Studies," pp. 54,
55, Table 51.L; C. Vandersleyen, Les Guerres dAmosis (Brussels, 1971), p. 208; von Beckerath,
Untersuchungen, pp. 75-77. For information related to the selection of Horemkhauef for this important
mission, see J. Baines, "Practical Religion and Piety," JEA 73 (1987), pp. 89-90.
147
For example, Rewer was granted a stela by king Neferirkare in the Old Kingdom when he fell over the
ruler's staff during an important religious ceremony (J.P. Allen, "Re'wer's Incident," in A.B. Lloyd, ed.,
Studies in Pharaonic Religion and Society in Honor of J. Gwyn Griffiths, Occasional Publications 8
(London, 1992), pp. 14-20; H. Goedicke, "The Origin of the Royal Administration," L'Egyptologie en
1979: Axes Prioritaires de Recherches, 2 (Paris, 1982), pp. 125-126). Another example is the inclusion of a
copy of a letter from the young king Pepi II (Dynasty VI) in the decoration of the tomb of Harkhuf. See
Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 1, pp. 26-27;K. Sethe, Urkunden des Alten Reiches (Leipzig,
1933), pp. 128-131. See also, A.M. Gnirs, "Die Agyptische Autobiographic," in A. Loprieno, ed., Ancient
Egyptian Literature (New York, 1994), p. 221.
41
"king within Thebes,"
This epithet may imply the existence of more than one
Egyptian king. While it is possible that the second ruler was a Dynasty XIV or XV king,
it is also feasible that this designation confirms that Dynasty XIII continued at Itjatawy,
resulting in two legitimate Egyptian rulers.
New evidence has recently come to light that shows that this hypothesis could be
integral in understanding the Second Intermediate Period. Davies has recently analyzed
Horemkhauef s tomb at Hierakonpolis along with others contemporaneous to it there and
at El Kab.149 He has discovered that the tomb of Horemkhauef and that of Sobeknakht as
well as others were decorated by the same artist, Sedjemnetjeru.150 He determined this
identification through the presence of the image and name of the artist himself within the
scenes in the tombs as well as paleography, style and technique. Others have also
observed that the lector-priest, Harmeni is attested in both the tombs of Horemkhauef and
Sobeknakht.151
Davies found a stela of Sobeknakht, which places him in the latter part of Dynasty
XVII. Thus, since Sedjemnetjeru and Harmeni link Horemkhauef to a time near that of
Sobeknakht, it may be the case that the latter also can be dated to Dynasty XVII. Thus,
the dating of this stela along with the contemporary tomb of Sobeknakht at El Kab,
through the current study being undertaken by Davies of the British Museum, may
1 8
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 154, 160. For the publication of this stelae, see P. Vemus, "La Stele du
Pharaon Mntw-htpih Kamak: un Nouveau Temoignage sur la Situation Politique et Militaire au Debut de
la D.P.I.,'? Rd'E40 (1989), pp. 140-161; "A propos de la stele du pharaon Mntw-htpih Karnak," Rd'E 41
(1990), p. 221.
149
Davies, "Hierakonpolis," pp. 113-125.
150
Davies, "Hidden Treasure," pp. 18-19; "Hierakonpolis," pp. 113-125, "Sobeknakht of Elkab,"pp. 4-5.
Note that in the latter article, Davies did not yet have the stela of Sobeknakht and, thus, continued the
previous dating of Horemkhauef to late Dynasty XHI/early Dynasty XVII.
151
Ryholt, Political Situation; pp. 79-80, n. 240; P. Vernus, "La Pretre-Ritualistee Ar-/22/'Redacteur de la
Stele de hr-m-hcw.f?' Hommages a Francois Daumas (Montpellier, 1986), pp. 590-591.
42
ultimately determine the nature of the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period.
The newly cleaned tomb of Sobeknakht also revealed that the Nubians (Kushites)
attacked Southern Egypt and proceeded at least as far as El Kab.153 However, the date of
this military movement was not late Dynasty XIII but well into Dynasty XVI/XVII.
-Thus, the stela recording the trip to Itjatawy is now later than previously thought and
even more of a hindrance to traditional thinking. Unless the stela is pure fiction, there
was a king in Itjatawy after the start of Dynasty XVI. Dynasty XIII was still continuing,
and the list of over fifty kings may have extended over more than 150 years! Though the
names and regnal lengths of the end of Dynasty XIII are not preserved in the Turin KingList, it does not mean that there were no successful strings of local rulers. Their names
may not have been remembered because their territory was relatively small.
III.B.4.a. Considerations of the Overlap between Dynasties XIII and XVI/XVII
Prior to the presentation of a formal theory including the overlap between
Dynasties XIII and XVI/XVII by Bennett in the 2002 JARCE, other scholars had briefly
contemplated this issue. Originally, such ideas were not accepted, as most researchers
adhered to the idea that Dynasty XVII was simply the continuation of Dynasty XIII at
Thebes. However, closer to the time of Bennett's article, it is clear that many scholars
were beginning to come to the same conclusion.
Under one scenario for the revised chronology of the Second Intermediate Period,
152
At this point, Davies suggests that Horemkhauef lived during late Dynasty XIII to early Dynasty XVII
while his successor, Sobeknakht, possibly had a long life extending to the end of Dynasty XVII (W.V.
Davies, "El-Kab and Kerma: The Tomb of Sobeknakht," Paper Presented at the British Museum
Colloquium: The Second Intermediate Period (13th-17th Dynasties), Current Research, Future Prospects,
14July-16 July, 2004.
153
Davies, "Sobeknacht," pp. 18-19.
43
Hayes adhered to the idea that the Hyksos took Memphis and that the Dynasty XIII kings
retreated to Thebes, where they continued to rule. Then, Dynasty XVII (XVI), which
was different from its predecessor emerged independently.154 Hayes also asserts that it is
likely that the progeny of Dynasty XIII continued to rale beneath the Theban kings in
various locations in Upper Egypt. In fact, Hayes suggests that the dynasty (as listed in
the Turin King-List) continued for an additional 17 years, as it overlapped with Dynasty
XVII (XVI). According to him, this situation occurred within the 153 years attributed to
the Dynasty XIII by Manetho (using the revised date to be discussed below). Thus, in
this theory, though it is suggested that Dynasty XIII continued along side Dynasty
XVI/XVII, the capital did not remain at Itjatawy.
In 1981, in an article concerning Nubian pottery in Egypt, Bourriau posits that an
overlap existed between Dynasties XIII, XV, and XVII (XVI).155 She suggests that the
discrepancy of the terminology used to describe cultural units versus political ones did
not allow for this option at the time of her article. Thus, she does not develop the idea
further.
In 2001, Spalinger stated:
The famous Stele Juridique, for example, seems to me to imply a state of affairs
in Upper Egypt in which an independent group of kings existed a few decades
before the end of Dynasty XIII. In other words, it is possible that an independent
house of Thebes arose when Dynasty XIII was extremely weak and considerably
reduced in size after the successful seizure of Memphis by the first Hyksos
warrior-king?"156
He also notes that it is possible that other groups of local kings may have existed.
154
Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 53.

J. Bourriau, "Nubians in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period: An Interpretation Based on the
Egyptian Ceramic Evidence," in Do. Arnold, ed., Studien zur altagyptischen Keramik (Mainz an Rhein,
1981), p. 27.
156
Spalinger, "Review," p. 298.
155
44
It is important to note that though Spalinger allows for Dynasty XIII to continue into the
Second Intermediate Period, he is not suggesting a long period of time for this situation.
More recently, Polz has suggested that Dynasties XIII and XVII may overlap due to the
separation of generations in Stele Juridique as well as ceramic material from Dra Abu elNaga.157
IILB.4.b. Bennett's Theory

In an article written roughly the same time as Spalinger's comments, Bennett has
addressed the overlap issue, claiming that Dynasty XVI (his Dynasty XVII), a
"secessionist provincial regime,"158 began ten to thirty years before the end of Dynasty
XIII.159 The bulk of Bennett's argument centers around the genealogies of the El Kab
governors, covering a period from the middle of Dynasty XIII until the reign of
Hatshepsut in the New Kingdom, found in the Stele Juridique, the family of Queen
Mentuhotep, the ancestry of Sobeknakht II from his tomb, and that of Reni. Though the
junction between these various family and personal career histories is often debated,
Bennett finds a methodological solution, using generations of 255 years, which
demonstrates that the Dynasty XIII and Dynasty XVI kings likely overlapped due to the
time necessary for regnal lengths to have occurred. Thus, though some of the details of
157
Polz and Seiler, Pyramidenanlage, pp. 44-47. Note that, due to a delay in the release of JARCE 2002,
Polz' article preceded the publication of Bennett even though the dates are reversed. For the stela, see
Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 65-69, no. 98. For another statement concerning the survival of
Itjatawy, see Stadelmann, "Palaces," p. 14.
158
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," p. 123.
159
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 123-155; "Sekhemre Kings," p. 28. Note that although
Kitchen did not propose an overlap with Dynasty XVI/XVI1, he did acknowledge the possibility that
Dynasty XIII could be extended a decade or more (from 150 years) as future data required, something
needed for Bennett's reconstruction (Kitchen, "Historical Chronology," p. 7).
45
the reconstruction of this genealogy may be problematic, the conclusions derived from it
require further attention in order to create a more accurate understanding of the
chronology of the Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period.
Generation/ King
Year
OfficiaIs/(Group/Office)
1. 1712
1701
Wahibre Ibiaw/
Merneferre Ay
Ibiaw (B/vizier)
2. 1677
Merhotepre (Ini)
Senebhenaf (B/vizier)
Sobekhotep (B/hereditary princess)
Ay I (A,C/gov. El-Kab, vizier)
Reditenes (A/king's daughter)
-start of Dynasty XVII3. 1650
Sekhemresementawy Sobekmose (C/gov. El-Kab)

Djehuty
Monruhotep (B/queen)
Ay the Younger (A/gov. El-Kab)
Aymeru (A,C/gov. El-Kab, vizier)
4. 1637
Sewadjenre
Nebiriau
Kebsi (A/gov. El-Kab)

Sobeknakht I (A, C/gov. El-Kab)
Neferu (C/hereditary princess)
end of Dynasty XIII5. 16201611
Seuserenre
Bebi-Ankh
Sobeknakht II (C/gov. El-Kab)

Reditenes (C/hereditary princess)
Table 1.2. The generational correlations as defined by Bennett. Group A is that

from Stele Juridique, B is from the Montuhotep Genealogy, and C is from
Sobeknakht IPs tomb (El Kab T10). The dates are based on the rough ranges given
by Bennett and are meant to serve as relative markers to illustrate his hypothesis.
The part of Bennett's work, which is of concern in this study focuses on three
documents (Table 1.2). The earliest information is found in the Genealogy of Queen
46
Mentuhotep.
Bennett states that Mentuhotep's grandfather, Ibiaw, was the "overseer of
the compound" {imy-rhnrt) under the Dynasty XIII king, Wahibre Ibiaw,161 and was
vizier during the reign of this same king or the next, Merneferre Ay. Meanwhile, he
notes that Mentuhotep's father, Senebhenaf,1 2 who was married to the hereditary
princess Sobekhotep, served in this same position under the latter king as well as possibly
into that of Merhotepre Ini. Mentuhotep herself married a Dynasty XVI king,
Sekemresementawy Djehuty, whose exact placement is not known. Bennett suggests that
Mentuhotep may have married Sekemresementawy Djehuty during the reign of
Merneferre Ay before he became king at a later date.163 Nonetheless, the time between
these generations allows for a maximum of thirty to thirty-five years for the remaining
twenty-four or more Dynasty XIII kings.164
Stele Juridique provides the next line of evidence in Bennett's study.165 This
document serves to trace the right of Kebsi to sell his position of the governor of El-Kab
to his "brother" (whether biological or generational),166 Sobeknakht II.167 In this lineage,
Ay I, who was the grandfather of Kebsi, a governor of El-Kab, served as the vizier of
160
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 126-128; "Sekhemre Kings," p. 28.

Franke, Personendaten, pp. 74, Doss. 62; 387, Doss. 660; 388, Doss. 661; L. Habachi, "The Family of
the Vizier Ibi' and His Place among the Viziers of the Thirteenth Dynasty," SAK 11 (1984), pp. 120-121,
124-125; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 77, 259, 306.
162
Franke, Personendaten, p. 388, Doss. 661; M.F.L. Macadam, "A Royal Family of the Thirteenth
Dynasty," JEA 37 (1951), pp. 24-25.
163
For the identity of Montuhotepti as the wife of Djehuty, see Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 167, n. 601.
164
Ryholt attempts to place Djehuty within his proper place within Dynasty XVI by using this same type of
reasoning (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 152, 259-260). However, his reconstruction is linear and does
not reflect an overlap between Dynasties XIII and XVI.
165
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 128-129; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 234; A. Spalinger,
"Remarks on the Family of Queen fic.s-nbivand the Problem of Kingship in Dynasty XIII," Rd'E 32
(1980), pp. 110-111.
166
For the use of this term outside of familial contexts, see D. Franke, "Altagyptische
Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen im Mittleren Reich," dissertation, Universitat Hamburg, 1983, p. 311;
167
Franke, Personendaten, p. 339, Doss. 565.
161
47
Merhotepre Ini.168 His first son, Ay the Younger, was a governor, who died without
having any heirs. Thus, this position transferred to another son of Ay I and a king's
daughter (likely the offspring of Merneferre Ay169), Reditenes. This son, named Aymeru,
also became a vizier. Bennett suggests that Aymeru served the Dynasty XVI king,
1 i-l A
Sekhemresementawy Djehuty.
Kebsi then inherited the office of governor, which he
sold to Sobeknakht in the first year of the reign of Sewadjenre Nebiriau.171

It seems strange that the vizier of a Dynasty XIII king transferred his office to his
son under the Theban kings (Dynasty XVI). Since no other viziers are known in
Dynasties XVI or XVII until the reign of Kamose, it may be the case that Aymeru was
actually the last vizier of Dynasty XIII. Kebsi's sale of the office of governor may reflect
the loss in the fortunes of the family which had held a relatively large amount of power at
the end of Dynasty XIII.
The next relevant ancestry comes from the tomb of the governor of El Kab,
Sobeknakht II.172 Bennett correlates this series of governors with the names in Stele
168

C. Bennett, "The King's Daughter Reditenes," GM151 (1996), pp. 21-22; "Genealogical Chronology,"
p. 138.
170
For a dating after Sobekhotep VI, see Franke, Personendaten, p. 339, Doss. 565. Habachi believes he
was a vizier during Dynasty XVI/XVII (Habachi, "Vizier Ibi'," p. 125).
17
:' Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," p. 124; For Sobeknakht, see Franke, Personendaten, p. 387, Doss.
660.
72
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 133-134. A stela within the tomb of Sobeknakht II at El Kab
has the name of Sekhemresewadjtawy (Sobekhotep III) as well as that of the owner, and some scholars
have dated the tomb to this reign (Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 16, no. 24; C.R. Lepsius,
Denkmdler III (Leipzig, 1900), PL 13b). See also Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 344; Weigall, Pharaohs, p.
212; Hayes, "Horemkha'uef," p. 3, n. 2; Quirke, "Investigation," p. 169. Bennett cites this dating as a
mistake (Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 131, n. 137). However, he does not explain the
appearance of the prenomen Sekhemresewadjtawy in the tomb. See J.J. Tylor, Wall Drawings and
Monuments of El Kab: The Tomb of Sobeknekht 2 (London, 1896), PI. 7.
16?
48
Juridique, though some argue that this group follows the earlier one.
In this document,
- Ay II is followed by the governor Sobekmose before Aymeru of the same generation.

After Aymeru, this account skips Kebsi and lists Sobeknakht I, who is married to the
hereditary princess Neferu. Next, Sobeknakht II, who is wed to the hereditary princess
Reditenes, inherits the office of governor of El Kab. Finally, his son, Sobeknakht III
becomes governor. Bennett explains the differences in the Sobeknakht account and that
in Stele Juridique as being due to the fact that the former lists the important governors in
his ancestry while the latter serves as a legal document. His reconstruction, however, is
likely though uncertain.
The Sobeknakht II genealogy and its position in the Second Intermediate Period is
important due to the fact that the tomb of this official has been linked through artistic
style and signature (Netjerusedjem) to that of Horemkhauef, the man, whose stela records
his visit to Itjatawy, where a king was seated.174 Thus, if one is to believe that the later
part of Dynasty XIII and a section of Dynasty XVI were contemporary, then the
chronological placement of the Sobeknakht family is crucial. According to Bennett's
scheme, which is, by necessity, built upon many uncertainties, Sobeknakht II is dated to
Seuserenre Bebiankh (1620-1611).175 Davies also dates this tomb to late Dynasty
XVI/XVII with the span of 1575-1550 BC, after the start of the war with the Hyksos.176
Thus, it would appear that, at this point, Davies supports a later date than does
173
For example, Ryholt posits that they are separate groups since Aymeru, the son of Ay in Stele Juridique,
was a vizier, while the Aymeru in the Sobeknakht tomb inscriptions is not listed as having held this office
(Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 240).
174
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," p. 131; Williams, "Problems," pp. 90-91. Note that Kitchen dates
Dynasty XIII to 1795 to 1638/1627 with the possibility of the group of kings extending a bit later (Kitchen,
"Historical Chronology," pp. 7-8, 11). 175
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 131, 141, 155.
176
Davies, "Sobeknacht," p. 18.
49
Bennett.177
>
Bennett notes that the evidence for Dynasty XIII kings being in the Theban area
includes the following rulers after the reign of Merneferre Ay: Merkaure Sobekhotep VII,
Sewedjare Mentuhotep, Sewahenre Senebmiew, Sekhaenre, Montuser, Dedumose, and
Djedankhre Montuemsaf.178 However, according to Ryholt's study of the Turin KingList, the final three of these rulers belong to Dynasties XVI rather than Dynasty XIII.
Also, half of the others (Sewahenre Senebmiew and Sekhaenre) remain unplaced. Thus,
after the reign of Sewedjare Montuhotep {Turin King-List column 8,20), no precise
information concerning the territory of the Dynasty XIII kings can be obtained.
In the past, scholars had rejected the idea that there was an overlap due to the
presence of Dynasty XIII names at sites in the south. For example, O'Connor states:
Moreover, it does not seem likely that the Thirteenth and Seventeenth Dynasties
overlapped in time. The members of both dedicated a variety of structures, stelae,
and statuary at both Abydos and Thebes, and it is hard to imagine that the one
should have permitted the other to do so, if they were to any degree contemporary
in time.180
However, much of the confusion lies in the placement of kings without known
position in the Turin King-List. The fragmentary state of this text in its section dealing
with late Dynasty XIII and Theban Dynasty XVI clouds the understanding of the era at
hand. However, further information from the Turin King-List, such as the study Ryholt
has undertaken, can certainly aid in settling this confusion. Also, it may be the case that
the list of kings is incomplete, leaving out rulers who were confined to the Memphite
177
Bennett, "Genealogical.Chronology," p. 155.

Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," p. 128; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 63-65.
179
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 356-357, 359, 390-391, 400, 402. See also Kemp, "Social History," pp.
150-151, Table 152.151.
180
O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," p. 52.
178
50
region.
Bennett argues that there were five to twenty-five years between the end of the
reign of Merkaure Sobekhotep VII (Dynasty XIII) and the beginning of that of
Sekhemresementawy Djehuty of Dynasty XVI, leaving the remainder of the Dynasty XIII
kings with regnal lengths between 3 months and 1.3 years.181 Since Bennett believes that
these reigns seem to be unusually short, he proposes that the two dynasties overlap
chronologically, allowing for the last of the Dynasty XIII kings with their territory
centered at Memphis and expands their range to 1-5 years each. In the process, Bennett
extends the years of Dynasty XVI/XVII from 90-100 to 110-130.182
Bennett believes that Dynasty XIII fell ten to fifteen years after the start of the
Theban regime.183 He notes that the first few reigns of Dynasty XVI were peaceful,
demonstrated by building activity at Abydos and Coptos, but struggles recorded in the
inscriptions of Neferhotep and Montuhotep may indicate more troubled times. However,
there is no indication that the Hyksos brought warfare to the Theban area. Thus, Bennett
suggests that the remainder of Dynasty XIII protected the new dynasty by being a
"buffer,"184 much like Ryholt had proposed for the Abydos Dynasty.
One interesting observation Bennett presents is the difference in the recording of
dates between Dynasties XII and XVIII.185 In Dynasty XII, the counting of regnal dates
started with the beginning of the civil year immediately following that, in which the king
had come to the throne. Later, in Dynasty XVIII, a more complicated system was used,
181
Bennett,
Bennett,
183
Bennett,
184
Bennett,
185
Bennett,
m
"Genealogical
"Genealogical
"Genealogical
"Genealogical
"Genealogical
Chronology," pp. 128-129.

Chronology," p. 149.
Chronology," pp. 126, 129-130.
Chronology," p. 129.
Chronology," p. 131. See also Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 202; 203, n. 705.
51
in which the king's reign was counted from the date, on which he took the royal office.
In the. Turin King-List, Dynasty XIII rulers are usually recorded in terms of years,
months, and. days while those of Dynasty XVI are almost always denoted with years only.
-Thus, Bennett believes that the Dynasty XVI kings had initiated the new dating system
and that the records and computations had been difficult for the authors of the Turin
King-List to decipher, so they rounded the numbers to the nearest quantity of years. Thus
Bennett states:
A change in regnal dating systems is perhaps easier to understand if the 17th
dynasty (here Dynasty XVI/XVII) was established as a new and rival regime to
the 13th Dynasty rather than as a continuation of that Dynasty. The 18th Dynasty
then simply inherited the procedure of its predecessor. ,86
In Bennett's theory, Dynasty XVII (here Dynasty XVI) was an integral reason
why Dynasty XIII became weak and eventually fell as a result of the "invasion" of the
Hyksos.
However, one might note that such a bold move by this regime must be
indicative of an already-weakened dynasty. Thus, the formation of Dynasties XIV, XV,

and XVI/XVII as well as others, including the Kushite Empire, were not the cause of the
problem but were a result of it. It is likely that this weakening of power in all but the
core of the Memphite area, if this was the true state of affairs, occurred because of
internal and external pressures due to issues to be discussed in a later chapter. 8
In his study of the Second Intermediate Period, Ryholt seems to have believed
that Dynasty XVI regnal dates were recorded with the standard year, month, day
designations due to the wsj'and possibly preserved day sign in 11.8.189 However, the
186

Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 123, 151.
188
See Chapter 7.
189
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 31, table 36.
187
52
beginning of the list of this dynasty certainly seems to lack any months or days though
Ryholt records them as "missing." Possibly, there was a mistake in the recording of line
11.8 from the Vorlage. (Ryholt's chart shows that there was a title but no summation for
the Dynasty XHI and summations for the rest): However, it does seem more plausible
that Bennett's interpretation'of these numbers is correct, especially in light of further
evidence.!-90
Recently, Allen has suggested that the other characteristics of the Turin King-List,
like the dating systems used by the various dynasties, may indicate that an overlap
between Dynasties XHI and XVI is possible.191 In addition to adopting Bennett's
hypotheses regarding the dating of the dynasties, Allen also notes the headings (or lack
thereof) for the groups of kings. He derives the following relationships between the
dynasties: XIII-XIV, XV, and XVI-XVII.192 He reconstructs the heading of Dynasty XIII
as (7.4): ny[swt ntiw hr] s2 ms[w nsw] bit [sht]p-ib-rc cnh wdS snb, "The kings, who
followed after the children of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, Sehotepibre, l.p.h."193
Allen inserts a fragment of a summation of years at the beginning of Dynasty XIV (8.28),
[.. .ir.n.fm]nswyt[rnpt-hsb]
("he acted as king [for x years/months/days]") while the
dating system of Dynasty XIII continues.194 The heading preceding the kings of Dynasty
XV (10.22) marks an abrupt break with the word hkSwfoswt, "Rulers of Foreign lands."
190
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 131, n. 140. Ryholt also noted the possibility that the New
Kingdom dating system may have begun in Dynasty XVI (Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 202).
191
J.P. Allen, "Second Intermediate Period."
192
See also Ryholt, "The Turin Kinglist," p. 140, 146.
193
See also, Ryholt, "The Turin Kinglist," p. 142; "Source for Chronology," pp. 26-32.
"So-Called Turin Canon," p. 29.
194
For the reconstructed component, see J.P Allen, "Turin," p. 49. Several scholars, beginning with Helck
have argued that this formula is used every 13 to 16 lines (Ben-Tor, "Seals and Kings," p. 67, n. 65; Helck,
Untersuchungen zu Manetho, pp. 83-84; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 29).
53
As stated before, the changes in year calculations for Dynasties XVI and XVII show that
these two groups are related.195 Previously, Winlock had pondered if a relationship
between these two groups might exist due to the fact that the list of tombs within the
Abbott Papyrus suggests-that the same cemetery developed linearly through both groups
of kings.-196
With these observations in mind, Allen believes that the overlap between
Dynasties XIII and XVI are likely and stresses the fact that the format of the Turin KingList would not have allowed for an overt display of this reality. Nonetheless, the changes
in the recording of the regnal lengths of the kings, as described by Bennett, certainly are
indicative of some political overlap.
In the past, scholars have looked to the changes in Dynasty XVI/XVII culture as
resulting from their disconnection from the royal court models of the Middle Kingdom
(including funerary complexes) due to the sudden removal of the traditional Dynasty XIII
rulers from the Memphite region.197 Such changes occurred in the standards of
hieroglyphic transcription, the decrease of the variety and scope of the Coffin Texts, and
the development of the Book of the Dead.198 It is unclear why these modifications would
have been necessary, especially since Thebes, the southern capital of the Middle
Note that Winlock had intuitively wondered about the relationship between Dynasties XVI and XVII.
Winlock, Rise and Fall, pp. 105-108. Ryholt suggests that the Abbott Papyrus may not reflect the
chronological order of tombs (Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 169). For further bibliographic information
concerning the Abbott Papyrus, see Bellion, Catalogue des Manuscrits, p. 1.
197
Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p. 747; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 128; Grajetzki, Middle
Kingdom, pp. 74-75;.
198
R. Parkinson and S. Quirke, "The Coffin of Prince Henmefer and the Early History of the Book of the
Dead," Studies in Pharaonic Religion and Society for Gwyn Griffiths, (London, 1992), p. 48; Quirke,
"Royal Power," pp. 127-128. Note that Lapp published a coffin thought to be from Assuit that may date
from Dynasty XIII or XVI and that contains some chapters from the Book of the Dead (G. Lapp, "Der Sarg
des JmnJ mit Einem Spruchgut am Ubergang von Sargtexten zum Totenbuch," SAK 13 (1986), pp. 140147).
196
54
Kingdom, still held the documents and examples needed to continue the earlier styles.
However, here again, there may be evidence of a conscious decision to differentiate the
kings and culture of this region from those of Dynasty XIII. Also, continued changes in
the religion of the royal afterlife cannot be attributed strictly to the Theban kings, as the
tombs of most Dynasty XIII and Dynasty XVI rulers are not known. However, material
from the Dynasty XVI/XVII royal burials differs substantially from that of Awibre Hor
and other earlier tombs. Also, the simple plans of the Dynasty XVII pyramids, are
devoid of the complexity of the Late Middle Kingdom with their hidden and blocked
passages.
Expanding on Bennett's arguments concerning the Late Middle Kingdom/Second
Intermediate Period, Allen has suggested that Dynasty XIV emerged directly from
Dynasty XIII, representing a faction of this group of kings with their own polity in the
Delta.199 Meanwhile, Dynasties XVI and XVII, which ruled from Thebes, were also
related to one another. Differences between the cultures and later dating of these groups
in the Turin King-List might suggest that the chronology of the Late Middle
Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period must be reevaluated.
III.B.4.C. The Distribution of Ceramics in the Late Middle Kingdom/Second

Intermediate Period
Bourriau's studies of ceramic material of the Late Middle Kingdom and Second
Intermediate Period appear to reflect the understanding of the political situation presented
J.P. Allen, "Turin," pp. 49, 65-66.

55
here.
Though pottery cannot be used to determine exact political units, it can indicate
the spheres of influence of administrations with access to resources (clay types) only
available in specific places. Also, the abrupt abandonment of ceramic forms or
assemblages may correspond to important events.
At some point between the end of the Late Middle Kingdom and the beginning of
the Second Intermediate Period, three distinct ceramic traditions are visible within Egypt
including those of Upper Egypt (and Middle Egypt from Assuit), the Memphite region
(centered at Itjatawy, down to Assuit), and the Delta.201 The last of these, of course, is
defined by Asiatic designs while the other two are the continuation of regional types. In
Lower Egypt, the Middle Kingdom, types, including Marl C jars, continue until late
Dynasty XVII/early Dynasty XVIII, when the Upper Egyptian forms replace them (rare
examples of Asiatic forms made from Nile clays are also found). In Upper Egypt, forms
continue to evolve from the First Intermediate Period through the New Kingdom with no
definitive breaks (besides the loss of Lower Egyptian types).
Interestingly, similar patterns also arise with contact with Kerma. It seems that at
the point in which the Upper Egyptians lose the ceramic types of their northern
neighbors, they also become the only region of the three to be in direct contact with the
200
Bourriau, "Beyond Avaris," pp. 159-182; "Second Intermediate Period," p. 197. Slightly earlier, the
sequence at Lisht North as well as at Kom Rabi'a (RAT in Memphis) was believed to show a hiatus just
after the beginning of the Second Intermediate Period, contemporary with the growth in population around
Tell el-Dab'a (F. Arnold, "Settlement," p. 19; D.G. Jeffries, et al., "Memphis 1985," JEA 73 (1987), p. 16).
201
Bourriau, "Patterns of Change," p. 16; Bourriau, "Relations between Egypt and Kerma during the
Middle and New Kingdoms,"'in W.V. Davies, ed., Egypt and Africa (London, 1991) p. 130. For the
connection between the material culture of at least early Dynasty XIII and Dynasty XII, see Quirke, "Royal
Power," pp. 123, 125; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 397. For a summary of the Tell el Dab'a sequence, see J.S.
Holladay, "The Eastern Nile Delta During the Hyksos and Pre-Hyksos Periods: Toward a
Systemic/Socioeconmic Understanding," inE.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New Historical and
Archaeological Perspectives (Philadelphia, 1997), pp. 184-187.
56
Kushites (Classic Kerma).
This progression may seem natural since the Theban kings
were closest to this region and the administration at this southern capital had no doubt
been in control of this area in the Late Middle Kingdom. Nonetheless, it appears that
Lower Egypt lost contact with Nubia sometime in or after the Neferhotep I to Sobekhotep
IV era while the connection with Upper Egypt remained uninterrupted from the Middle to
the New Kingdoms.
In sum, the disappearance of Lower Egyptian forms from the south as well as that
of Nubian types from the Memphite region seems to correspond with the emergence of
Dynasty XVI. The lack of Asiatic material in general for both the Memphite and Theban
areas may indicate that the Hyksos had little lasting cultural influence over these regions.
Late Middle Kingdom ceramic forms continued in the local areas under the rule of
weakened Dynasty XIII kings. Prior to the replacement of Middle Kingdom forms with
the Upper Egyptian assemblage in the Memphite region, there is a thin layer of clean
sand present at some sites, possibly corresponding to the fall of Dynasty XIII and the war
with the Hyksos.
It should be noted that other regionalized assemblages have been proposed for
Middle Egypt and the Elephantine area.203 Thus, the simplified examination presented
above is not sufficient evidence for the political situation in Egypt on its own. However,
the nature of these developments near the centers of the territories ruled by these
dynasties is important despite the fact that the peripheral regions do not necessarily
follow suit.
202
203
Bourriau, "Relations," pp. 130-131.

Bourriau, "Beyond Avaris," p. 99.
57
III.B.4.d. The Chronology of the Overlap

In traditional scholarly thought, it was believed that a Dedumose was the Dynasty
XIII king in Thebes when the Hyksos invaded Egypt. Scholars believed that this king (as
Tutimaios) was associated with Manetho (via Josephus)204 with the ruler of the southern
part of Egypt when the Hyksos overtook Memphis and began their dynasty. As this king
is known from several monuments in the south of Egypt,205 Ryholt considers him
(Dedumose Djedhetepre) to be a part of his Theban Dynasty XVI.20 He argues that the
Tutimaios reference is not really in the Manetho text and, thus, does not refer to this king
known from monuments at Deir el Bahari and Gebelein.207 Stela 46988 of the Cairo
Museum, which has this king's name, has the later form of the htp-di-nswt formula,
possibly indicating that it is a part of the Theban tradition.208
204
Grimal, History, p. 185; Helck, Geschichte, p. 131; Redford, Pharaonic King-lists, p. 240; Schneider,
Lexikonder Pharaonen, pp. 108-109.
205
Redford, "The Hyksos," pp. 2-3.
206
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 249, n. 859, 262. Occurrences of Dedumose are found on the following
monuments: Gebelein stela, CG 20533, and Edfu stela, JE 46998. See Helck, Historische-Biographische,
pp. 43-44, no. 59. von Beckerath places him as the 37th king of Dynasty XIII (von Beckerath, Handbuch,
p. 285.
'
'
'
'
207
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 327-328. El-Sayed also implies that this identification is not certain (R.
el-Sayed, "Quelques precisions sur 1'histoire de la province d'Edfou a la 2e Period Intermediate," BIFAO
79 (1979), p. 207.
208
For this evidence, see el-Sayed, "Quelques precisions," p. 188, line 181. For the text, see Mioso, A
Reading Book, pp. 12-14. For the change in the offering formula from T ^ A to TAOD , see P.C. Smither,
"The Writing of the htp-d'i-nsw in the Middle and New Kingdoms," JEA 25 (1939). In this article, Smither
notes the earlier version of the sign grouping from the reigns of Sekhemkare, Khendjer Nimaankhare,
Sobekhotep III, Sobekhotep IV, Wahibre, and Queen Nebkhas. Early writings of the second form date to
the following kings: Dedumose and Pentjen as well as Apepi, Sobekemsaf and Kamose. For the stela with
this form, see Mioso, A Reading Book, pp. 12-14, lines 15 and 13. See also W. Barta, Aufbau und
Bedeutung der Altdgyptischen Operformel (Gluckstadt, 1968), pp. 53, 73-73; C. Bennett, "Growth of the
htp-d'i-Nsw Formula in the Middle Kingdom," JEA 27 (1941), p. 77; Lapp, Typologie derSdrge und
Sargkammern von der 6. bis 13. Dynastie (Heidelberg, 1993), pp. 67, 194; G. Rosati, "Note e proposte per
la satazione delle stele del Medio Regno," Oriens Antiqws 19 (1980), p. 271; P. Vernus, "Le PretreRitualiste," p. 590; "Sur les Graphies de la Formule," pp. 151-152. It seems to be the case that this
development as well as others (dates in lunette, appearance of the khehker frieze at the top of stela,
appearance of the king, and whm cnti), may derive from expedition sites such as the Sinai and wadis, where
58
It has always been assumed that the Hyksos took Memphis at the beginning of
Dynasty XV. However, it now seems more plausible that Dynasty XV began as a
localized polity in the eastern Delta while the end of Dynasty XIII and Theban Dynasty
XVI existed in the south. When Dynasty XV began, the power base of Avaris had
already been established by a presumably weak Dynasty XIV. Thus, a localized kingdom
was easily established, but there may not have been the means to proceed southward at
that time. During his reign, Sakirhar referred to himself with both the title hk3-h3swt^&
well as parts of the Egyptian titulary, including the Nebty and Golden Horus names.209
According to Ryholt, the next king, Khayan, has seals with the title hk3-hlswt and seals
and monuments with royal titles in conjunction with his nomen and prenomen.210
Meanwhile, the following rulers, Apepi (contemporary with Sekenenre, Kamose and
Ahmose) and Khamudi never use any titles other than the royal Egyptian ones. Thus,
here, there is a progression, which Ryholt believed might represent phases in the Hyksos
phenomena, though, in the Turin King-List, all of these Asiatic rulers are categorized as
artisans seemed to have had more freedom for experimentation during the latter part of Dyansty XII (C.
Bennett, "The Writing of htp-di-nsw," JEA 27 (1941), p. 157; "Motifs and Phrases on Funerary Stelae of
the Later Middle Kingdom," JEA 44 (1958), p. 121; O. Berlev, "Review of Egyptian Stelae, Reliefs, and
Paintings from the Petrie Collection, Part II, in R.M. Stewart," Bibliotheca Orientalis 38 (1981), p. 321;
Freed, "Representation and Style," pp..20, 22, 78, 79, 100, 111; R.J. Leprohon, "A Late Middle Kingdom
Stela in a Private Collection," in P. Der Manuelian, ed., Studies Simpson, 2 (Boston, 1996), p. 528; S.
Quirke, "Horn, Feather and Scale, and Ships: On Titles in the Middle Kingdom," in P. Der Manuelian, ed.,
Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, 2 (Boston, 1996), p. 669; Rosati, "Note," p. 271; Vernus, "Sur
les Graphies de la Formule," pp. 141-152). Franke states that the older form continued after the adoption of
the newer one as far south as Dendera (Franke, "Altagyptische Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen," p. 147).
There was some archaism of this form during Dynasty XVII as well as in the reigns of Hatshepsut and
Thutmosis III of Dynasty XVIII and in the Saite Period (A. Spalinger, "The Concept of Monarchy During
the Saite Epoch-An Essay of Synthesis," Orientalia 47 (1978), pp. 12-13).
209
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 18, n. 35; 43, 119-120, 121. Von Beckerath lists Sakirhar as a part of
Dynasty XV/XVI since he follows the earlier interpretation of the Turin King-list (von Beckerath,
Handbuch,p. 116).
210
For example, see P.E. Newberry, Egyptian Scarabs (Mineola, New York, 2002), p. 115, PL 117.
59
"rulers of foreign lands."211

The evolution of the Hyksos' denotation from "ruler of foreign lands" {hkl-hlswt)
to "king of Upper and Lower Egypt" and "son of Re," along with the use of the nomens
and prenomens, rather than indicating the siege of all of Egypt as Ryholt proposes, may
-correspond to the events resulting in the taking of Memphis.212 Based upon the names
alone, one might suggest that the Hyksos began moving southward during the reign of
Sakirhor, taking Memphis under Khayan's rule. In theory, once this latter king had
control of the ancient capital, he decided to adopt the full ancient Egyptian titulary.213
Also, only Khayan and his successor, Apepi, are known from inscriptions in Egypt
outside of the Delta. Thus, the invasion of Memphis, which resulted in the demise of
Dynasty XIII, may have occurred during the reign of Khayan, when this king removed
earlier royal statues from the temples of this region, taking them to his capital at Avaris.
Thus, it may be the case that the traditional view, based upon Manetho, that the first king
of Dynasty XV, Salitis, was triumphantly crowned in Memphis may be nothing more
than a myth.214
It is possible that the Hyksos kings continued their campaign into Upper Egypt,
possibly taking Thebes from the Dynasty XVI kings for a brief period of time. Thus, it
may be the case that the difference between Dynasties XVI and XVII is the presence of
211
Ryholt, Political Situation, ^ . 123-124. See also von Beckerath, Handbuch, p. 112-115.
This development is also clear in the list of kings composed by von Beckerath {Handbuch, pp. 114-115).
For a discussion of the "son of Re" epithet, see D.P. Silverman, "Epithet zi R' in the Old through the
Middle Kingdom," forthcoming.
M
It may be the case that the first kings of Dynasty XVI also did not use all royal titles. An El Kab graffito
names the "son of Re" Dedumose without the nomen being within a cartouche (A.J. Peden, The Graffiti of
Pharaonic Egypt. Scope and Roles of Informal Writings (c. 3100-332 B.C.), Probleme der Agyptologie 17
(Boston, 2001), p. 48). However, since the example is a graffito, it may not reflect official doctrines.
214
For an opposing view, see Bietak, "Overview," p. 55.
212
60
Hyksos activity in the Theban region as Ryholt proposed.215 In this theory, the fall of
Dynasties XIV, XIII, and XVI are all attributed to the Hyksos kings, with the demise of
the latter two occurring well after the former.
IV. Internal Chronology of<Dynasty XIII

The internal chronology of Dynasty XIII is very complicated due to the condition
of the Turin King-List as well as the different interpretations of its content. Each major
study, which has included Dynasty XIII, has produced a different result (see Appendix I).
One of the most recent of these examinations was that of Ryholt.216 Thus, this section
will serve primarily as a review of Ryholt's list of Dynasty XIII kings with discussions of
problems and issues related to it.
IV-.A. Ancient Sources

IV.A. 1. Manetho and the Length of Dynasty XIII
Revealed through Eusebius (ca. 260-340 AD), Africanus (ca. 160-240 AD), and
Josephus {Contra Apionem via the later Epitome), the history of Manetho (Aegyptiaca),
that Ptolemy II Philadelphus originally commissioned in 280 BC, states that sixty kings
ruled in Egypt from Diospolis during Dynasty XIII, which endured for 453 years.217 It is
likely that the sources for Manetho mistook the 100 for 400 since such an error was
215
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 5-6.

Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 71, 72, 209-245, 284, 315-322.
217
Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 44; L. Kakosy, "Egypt in Ancient Greek and Roman Thought," in
J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, 1 (Peabody, MA, 1995), p. 6; Lloyd, "Manetho," p.
464; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 17; "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1444. For a discussion of
Manetho's work, his sources, and his motives, see Redford, Pharaonic King-lists, pp. 203-259, 297-332.
For a typical early use of Manetho, see Weill, La Fin du Moyen Empire, pp. 8-12, 252-262.
216
61
common in the transcription of documents during this time (453 instead of 153).218
Besides the number of kings (reportedly from Thebes) and the overall length of the
dynasty, Manetho provides no other specific information regarding the historical figures
of this time period.
Nonetheless, the time given by Manetho for this period as roughly
150 years is adhered to by most scholars, even though it was composed over 1000 years
after the end of Dynasty XIII.220 It is possible that if Manetho's estimate for the length of
this dynasty is incorrect, then the number is too low.
IV.A.2. The Turin King-List as the Source for Reconstructing Dynasty XIII
The Turin King-List is the most important text pertaining to Dynasty XIII, as it
objectively presents the names of many monarchs, for whom there is no other form of
evidence, and it lists these rulers (by prenomens or sometime nomens) in chronological
order with their reign lengths.221 Unfortunately, this document is severely damaged and
must be reconstructed in many places.222 To make things even more complicated, it
appears that lacunae were also found in the earlier renditions (derived from five or more
218
Weigall, Pharaohs, p. 138. Greenberg has attempted to argue that the actual length of Dynasty XIII is
69 years (Greenberg, "Rehabilitated," pp. 25-28; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 3, n.2).
219
Weigall, Pharaohs, pp. 141-142; Winlock, Rise and Fall, p. 94. For a summary of the information in
the various sources for Manetho's writings related to the Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate
Period, see Petrie, History, pp. 202-205.
220
Malek suggests that Manetho used a list similar to the Turin King-List as a source for his work (J.
Malek, "The Original Version of the Royal Canon of Turin," JEA 68 (1982), pp. 104-105).
221
222
Malek, "The Original Version," p. 93; Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 1; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 3, 9.
Note that in this study, Ryholt's reconstruction of the Turin King-List is utilized since his analysis of the
pattern of the fibers in the papyrus is a technique which must not be ignored in favor of earlier works. This
method was first used by T.G. Wilkinson (The Fragments of the Hieratic Papyrus at Turin, containing the
names of Egyptian Kings, with the Hieratic Inscription at the back (London, 1851)).
62
manuscripts in early Dynasty XVIII), which scribes copied to make this document.223
When a scribe encountered one of these areas where information was missing, he would
write the word, wsf224 Ryholt also noticed that wsf, which marks the place of a king, is
often paired with a six year regnal length in the Turin King-List.
Thus, this formula
was used when a lacuna was encountered as the place holder for an unknown king who
ruled and undetermined number.of years.
In his study of this document, Ryholt has outlined several different types of
mistakes, such as incorrect chronology, parts of names, and reign lengths, which have
affected not only the Turin King-List but also the interpretation of it by modern
scholars.226 Several of these mistakes have been made in the Dynasty XIII section, one
of which impacts the identity of the first king of the era.
Many of the Dynasty XIII kings are difficult to identify, as one can see by
comparing Appendices I-III, where the names of rulers and their sequences differ from
one scholar to the next.227 A large number of kings are listed in order with their regnal
length in the Turin King-List, but there are many fragments and lacunae in this text,
making any reconstruction preliminary at best. Likewise, several of these rulers are not
223
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 31-32. Ryholt suggests that there were four versions of the king-lists
prior to that now in Turin. Note that some of the developments from one source to another could have
occurred in more than one step per document, reducing the number of previous copies by one or possibly
two papyri. For comments concerning Ryholt's reconstruction of the Vorlage, see J.P Allen, "Turin," p. 52.
224
Helck, Untersuchungen zu Manetho, p. 29; Kadish, "Historiography," p. 109; Ryholt, Political
Situation, pp. 10-12, 31-33; "The Turin Kinglist," p. 141, 147-148; "So-Called Turin Canon," pp. 30, 31.
Previously, Redford had a different interpretation, believing that ws/indicated where the scribe wished to
show that a king had been intentionally left out of the original manuscript due to political or some other illwilled purpose. See Redford, Pharaonic King-lists, p. 15. See also C. Bennett, "King Qemau: A
Reconsideration," GM159 (1997), pp. 11-12. However, Ryholt's theory concerning the appearance of wsf
is more consistent with-the evidence at this time.
225
226
227
Grimal, History, p. 183.
63
preserved in the Turin King-List though their names have been found on statues and other
228
monuments.
IV.B. The Kings of Dynasty XIII

IV.B.l. Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I
The Turin King-List cites, Khutawyre (Wegaf) as the first ruler of Dynasty XIII
(7.5) with a regnal length of over 2 years and 3 months, while Sekhemrekhutawy
Amenemhet Sobekhotep I is in line 7.19. With the similarity in the prenomens of these
kings ( s versus ^ ? 0 ), scholars such as Ryholt have argued that their names were
switched by mistake in this document.229 Allen notes that Ryholt's hypothetical
reconstruction of the previous version of the Turin King-List places these two rulers in
close proximity (col. XII.5 and col. XIII.4), which may explain further how they became
reversed even with Sobekhotep following the prenomen Sekhemrekhutawy.230
. Other evidence also suggests that Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I
belongs closer to the kings of Dynasty XII than to those of Dynasty XIII, as the Turin
King-List indicates-. For example, this king used a double name, coupling Sobekhotep
with Amenemhet. Whether these names mark filiation, as Ryholt argues,231 or not, this
king wished to connect himself with a ruler of this name possibly from Dynasty XII. Due
These rulers include Ameny Qemau (who may be listed as Amenemhetre in 7.7), Ini, Neferhotep II,
Senebmiew and Sekhaenre (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 337, 358-359).
229
Breasted, History, p. 211; Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 45; G. Legrain, "Notes d'inspection.
XLIX. Le Roi Ougaf et la plaquette Rubensohn," ASAE 8 (1907), p. 249; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp.
315-318; Stock, 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens, pp. 48-49, 50-51; Weill, La Fin du Moyen Empire, pp. 279307; "Les Successeurs de la Xlle Dynasty a Medamoud," REA 2(1929), pp. 145, 155; "Complements," p.
10. 'Titulary- Horus: mnh-[...], Nebty:?, Golden Horus: cnh-ntrw, Prenomen: shm-rc-hw-t?wy, Nomen:
sbk-htp with double name imn-m-htt. Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 336. See Schneider, Lexikon der
Pharaonen, p. 259; von Beckerath, Handbuch, pp. 92-93.
230
J.P. Allen, "Turin," p. 50.
231
See Chapter 6.
64
to the fact that the heading for this group of rulers in the Turin King-List labels them as
those "who followed after" Dynasty XII, it is likely that the first entries in this set of
rulers were related, however distantly to Amenemhet III or Amenemhet IV especially
since three out of four of them have second names with some form of Amenemhet.232
Other evidence also points to a close chronological link between a
Sekhemrekhutawy (presumably Sobekhotep I) and the kings of late Dynasty XII. This
prenomen appears in the Kahun Papyri,233 texts which begin in Dynasty XII and do not
span the entirety of Dynasty XIII.234 Also, the same man by the name of Sobekwer
(identified through titles and family relationships), appears both in the Kahun Papyri
during the reign of a Sekhemrekhutawy as well as in the Semna Dispatches, which are
dated to Amenemhet III,235 indicating that the span between these kings was less than one
generation. Several Nile height records, an inscription type continuing from Dynasty
XII, were found at Semna and assigned to the reign of Sekhemrekhutawy Sobekhotep
T
236
It should be emphasized that the sources listed in the paragraph above all refer to
232
K.S.B. Ryholt, "A Reconsideration of Some Royal Names of the Thirteenth Dynasty," GM119 (1990),
pp. 210, 213. Drioton and Vandier suggest that Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I could have
been the spouse of Nefrusobek, achieving the right to the throne through marriage (E. Drioton and J.
Vandier, L'Egypte (Paris, 1975), p. 283).
233
Gardiner, Pharaohs, p. 151; F.L. Griffith, The Petrie Papyri: Hieratic Papyri from Kahun and Gurob
(London, 1898), pp. 25-29, Pis. X-XI.
234
For the Lahun Papyri, see U. Kaplony-Heckel, Agyptische Hanschriften I, (Weisbaden, 1971); S.
Quirke, "Visible and Invisible: the King in the Administrative Papyri of the Late Middle Kingdom," in R.
Gundlaeh and W, Seipel, eds., Dasfriihe agyptische Konigtum (Wiesbaden, 1999), pp. 65-66; The UCL
Lahun Papyri: Religious; Literary, Legal, Mathematical and Medical (Oxford, 2004); The Administration
of Egypt in the Late Middle Kingdom, (Whitstable, 1990), pp. 155-173; U. Luft, Das Archiv von Illahun.
Briefe 1 (Berlin, 1992).
. . .
235
Fmie,Personendaten,p. 336, Doss. 558; Griffith, The Petrie Papyri, PL X, line 3; P.C. Smither, "The
Semna Dispatches," JEA 31 (1945), pp. 7-8. See also Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 315. Ryholt notes that
this document refers to year 40, presumably of Amenemhet III.
236
Grimal, History, p. 184; Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 3, no. 6. A sealing of this king was
found at Mirgissa (Kemp, "Social History," p. 160).
65
a Sekhemrekhutawy without the nomen. Thus, it is not absolutely certain that these texts
belonged to Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I. Scholars have listed up to
three possible kings with this prenomen: Amenemhet Sobekhotep, one with an unknown
nomen and Horus name KhabaW,'and Pantjeny.237 It is likely that Pantjeny dates to
Dynasty XVI since a stela with his name displays the later form of the offering
formula.238 Thus, he can be eliminated from the possible rulers with this name at the
beginning of Dynasty XIII.
When scholars accept Wegaf as the first king of Dynasty XIII, they often place
(Horus) Khabaw in the wsfrn Turin King-List 7.6 to explain the early occurrences of the
prenomen Sekhemrekhutawy.239 However, an architrave from Tanis may link Khabaw
with Awibre Hor due to the fact that both of their (Horus) names appear in its
inscription,240 though other explanations are possible.241 More conclusively, a bark stand
from Medamud displays the name of Wegaf, which appears to have been added to that of
Sedjefakare Amenemhet, and may indicate that the former ruled after the latter, making it
impossible that Wegaf was the first king of the Dynasty.242 For this reason,
237
Franke, "Zur Chronologie," pp. 249, 251-254; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 316-317; von Beckerath,
Untersuchungen, pp; 33-36, 46-49; Weill, La Fin du Moyen Empire, pp. 285-286.
238
For references, see note 208. Smither notes the earlier version of the sign grouping from the reigns of
Sekhemkare, Nimaankhare Khendjer, Sobekhotep III, Sobekhotep IV, Ibiaw, and Queen Nebkhas (Smither,
"The Writing of the htp-d'i-nsw" pp. 34-35). Early writings of the second form date to the following kings:
Dedumose and Pantjeny as well as Apepi, Sobekemsaf and Kamose. Franke states that the older form
continued after the adoption of the newer one as far south as Dendera (Franke, "Altagyptische
Verwandtschaftsbezeichhungen," p. 147).
239
For example, see Franke, "Zur Chronologie," p. 251.
240
P. Montet, La Necropole Royale de Tanis, III (Paris, 1960), pp. 71-73, PI. 28; Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 318; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 45.
241
242
F. Bisson de la Roque and J.J. Clere, Fouilles de Medamoud 1927, FIFAO 5 (Cairo, 1928), p. 85, Fig.
61, PL III; K.A. Kitchen, "Byblos, Egypt, and Mari in the Early Second Millennium B.C.," Orientalia 36
(1967), p. 45; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 317-318, 341; J. von Beckerath, "Notes on the Viziers 'Ankhu
and 'Iymeru in the Thirteenth Egyptian Dynasty," JNES 17 (1958), p. 267. Note that Ryholt confirms this
conclusion from a drawing because the photo was not clear enough. However, enough is visible in the
66
Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I can likely be reconstructed as the first king

of Dynasty XIII. .
Quirke has recently argued that the Turin King-List is correct and that time
between Wegaf and Sekhemrekhutawy (Amenemhet Sobekhotep I) may only be 5-10
years because the-reigns were so short.243 It should be noted that six out of fifteen kings
with estimated regnal lengths based on relatively solid evidence ruled for at least 12
years.244 Thus, the actual number for all of these kings must be significantly greater
considering that many of the known and proposed pyramids of the Late Middle Kingdom
likely belong to rulers of this era (making these reigns from 2-4 years or longer based
upon the construction time for these pyramids). Thus, it is unlikely that Quirke's
proposal explains the commonalities between this king and those of late Dynasty XII.
IV.B.2. Sekhemkare Amenemhet Senebef

The king following the three year-reign of Sobekhotep I is Sekhemkare
(Amenemhet Senebef),245 who also has the double name, which appears in the Turin
King-List. Little is known concerning this ruler, but there is a Nile level record dating to
his fourth year at Semna as well as an inscription at Askut dated to Year 3, and his name
photograph (along with the drawing) to determine that the styles differ between the inscriptions of the two
kings. Against this interpretation, see Franke, "Zur Chronologie," p. 249; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen,
p. 34.
243
S. Quirke, "In the Name of the King: On Late Middle Kingdom Cylinders," in E. Czerny, et al., eds.,
Timelines: Studies in Honour of Manfred Bietak, 1 (Dudley, MA, 2006), pp. 264-265.
244
Kings included in the six are: 1. from the Turin King-ListFirst King (Sobekhotep I), 2 years 3 months;
Amenemhetre at least 3 years; Sehotepibre, at least 1 year; Reniseneb, 4 months; 2. from Nile records
Senebef, at least 3 years; Khendjer, at least 3 years.
245
Titulary- Horus: mh-ib-tiwy, Nebty: it-shm-f, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: shm-ki-rc, Nomen: snb.f with
double name imn-m-htt. Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 336; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 31-33;
Handbuch, pp. 88-89.
67
appears in the Lahun Papyri.246 Ryholt suggests that the filiative double name indicates
that Amenemhet III or IV was the father of this ruler, making Sobekhotep I his half or
full brother.247
In a statue from Elephantine, a king is named as Sekhemkare Amenemhet.
Ryholt believes that this ruler is the one mentioned in the Turin King-List 1.1 (imn-m-hct[rf]).248 However, it is more likely that the statue reflects the double naming of the king
Sekhemkare Amenemhet Senebef, especially since the interchanging of names occurs in
private examples.249 For example, one private person, Amenemhet was also referred to
as "Amenemhet Renefseneb" within a single inscription.250 Also, it seems unlikely that
two kings, who reigned within a year or two of one another would have had the same
prenomen as this situation would have been confusing. The vizier during the reign of
Senebef was Khenmes.251
IV.B.3. Nerikare
In the same line as the entry for Senebef (7.6), there is a wsf, which, according to
246
A. Badawy, "Preliminary Report on the Excavations by the University of California at Askut (First
Season, October 1962-January 1963)," Kush 12 (1964), pp. 52-53; Gardiner, Pharaohs, p. 151; J.
Vercoutter, "Semna South Fort and the Records of Nile Levels at Kumma," Kush 14 (1966), p. 139; M.
Bellion, Catalogue des Manuscrits, p. 166 (Pap. Kahun IV.l).
247
Ryholt, "Royal Names," p. 106; Political Situation, p. 209. Note that Ryholt rules out Amenemhet III in
a later publication due to his assumption that the king had no living sons upon his death, leading to the rule
of Amenemhet IV, who he believes was not from the royal bloodline (Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 209).
248
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 336, 337. See also von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 36.
249
For the known examples, see P. Vernus, Le Surnom au Moyen Empire Procedes d'Expression et
Structures de la Double Identite du Debut de la Xlle Dynastie a la Fin de la XVIIe Dynastie (Rome, 1986),
pp. 3-77.
250
See Vernus, Surnom, p. 9; J. Garstang, ElArabah (London, 1901), PI. 8.
251
Franke, Personendaten, p. 286, Doss. 461; H. Gauthier, Le Livre des Rois d'Egypte, II, MIFAO 18
(Cairo, 1912), p. 4; Habachi, "Vizier Ibi'," p. 122; Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 3, no. 5; P.
Newberry, "Extract From My Notes IV," Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology 23 (1901), pp.
222-223; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 132; Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, p. 57; Weill, La Fin du
Moyen Empire, p. 310.
68
Ryholt, indicates a lacuna in the scribe's source.
The number of years recorded for the
unknown king is six with no months or days, the type of entry used when the number of
years of a ruler whose name was not known. Since there are a number of rulers of
Dynasty XIII, who are not listed in the Turin King-List but are known through
monuments or seals, some scholars have attempted to place the known names into this
position. Ryholt believes that Nerikare would fit into the initial ws/due to the fact that
there are Nile level records at Semna and Askut dated to year 1 of this king.253 Since the
practice of recording the level of the Nile in the Nubian region occurred during late
Dynasty XH-early Dynasty XIII, this king likely reigned during this period. Thus,
placing him in this wsf entry seems logical.
Seals of a king Sobek are known and can be dated to early in Dynasty XIII
(before Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III). Ryholt suggests that this nomen may
belong to Nerikare or (Horus) Khabaw, since this part of their titularies has yet to be
identified.
However, one must wonder if this is a nickname for Sobekhotep similar to
that of Ameny for Amenemhet (see below).
IV.B.4. Ameny Qemau

In position 7.7 in the Turin King-List, there is the name Amenemhetre with a year
252

Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 70, 318-319,337. Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?,
Prenomen: wy-kl-rc, Nomen:?. See Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, p. 180. J.P. Allen believes that
this reconstruction is possible (J.P. Allen, "Turin," p. 51). Gabolde argues that this king did not exist and
that the incomplete cartouche from which he is known is actually that of Woserkare Khendjer. Gabolde,
"Nerkare a-t-il Existe?," BIFAO 90 (1990), pp. 213-222. However, Ryholt notes that a stela from Thebes
confirms the existence of Nerikare (Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 337, n. 1).
254
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 34, n. 89. For a drawing of the seal, see Stock, 13. bis 17. Dynastie
Agyptens, pp. 47, 39, Abb. 54. Stock suggested Sobekhotep or Sobekemsaf as the full name of the king.
However, since all kings with the name Sobekemsaf date to Dynasty XVII, it is unlikely that this seal
represents one of them.
253
69
date of at least 3. Because there is no king with this exact prenomen, there are different
opinions as to who this ruler might be. Ryholt suggests that this entry names Sekhemkare
Amenemhet, who has been combined with Sekhemkare Amenemhet Senebef in this
study.
Ryholt also Suggests that that Qemau was the son of this king, using the filiative
double name Ameny Qemau,256 with Ameny being a shortened form of Amenemhet.257
In this scenario, Qemau's name is placed in a wsf lost in a lacuna after Amenemhetre.
Allen suggests that Ameny Qemau is the Amenemhetre of Turin King-List 7.7
and that his likely father Sekhemkare Amenemhet may have been represented by the
same wsf entry as Nerikare.258 Bennett notes that it is possible that the father of Qemau,
Ameny, may not have actually been a king.259 Nonetheless, he favors Amenemhet III or
IV from Dynasty XII or some other previous ruler by this name as the father of Qemau
rather than placing him within a reconstructed wsfentry.260 It is also possible that the
double name of Qemau refers to his grandfather. Significantly, the entry in the Turin
King-List (7.7) denotes a reign of three or four years, depending upon whether or not a
stroke appears in the lacuna. The presence of the pyramid of Ameny Qemau at Dahshur
indicates that a regnal length of at least 3 years is possible for this ruler.
255
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 214-215.

Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen:?, Nomen: kmJwwith double name imny.
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 11-12, 192, 337; "The Turin Kinglist," pp. 149-150; "A Bead of King
Ranisonb and a Note on King Qemau," GM156 (1997), pp. 97-100; von Beckerath, Handbuch, 102-103.
257
A private tomb at Beni Hasan (tomb 2), belonging to an Amenemhet (Dynasty XII Kheperkare
Senwosret 1), shows different forms of the name, including Ameny, used interchangeably throughout the
tomb (P.E. Newberry, Beni Hasan, Archaeological Survey of Egypt 1 (London, 1893), p. 11).
258
J.P.Allen, "Turin," pp. 50-51.
259
Bennett, "Qemau," pp. 11-17.
260
See also the consideration of these kings in Grimal, History', p. 183; Ryholt, "Royal Names," pp. 107109.
256
70
IV.B.5. Hotepibre Qemau Saharnedjeritef

The king listed in 7.8 of the Turin King-List is Sehotepibre, who is thought to be
Hotepibre Qemau Saharnedjeritef.261 Ryholt, likely correctly in this case, believes that
the double name, Qemau, shown by this king refers to his father and predecessor Ameny
Qemau.262 However, it is possible that the name indicates a full statement of filiation
(Qemau son of (si) Harnedjeritef).263 The Turin King-List assigns at least one year to him
with a maximum of four years, though this number is unlikely in the space of the line and
the associated lacuna; it is probable that the number is on the lower end of this range.
IV.B.6. Iwefni
The king following Qemau and his son in the Turin King-List is Iwefni (7.9).
Unfortunately, the papyrus breaks before recording the number of years of this king's
reign, and he is not known from any other source. His familial relationship to those who
preceded, as well as those who followed/remains unknown.
IV.B.7. Sankhibre Ameny Intef Amenemhet

After Iwefni, Sankhibre (Ameny Intef Amenemhet), came to the throne (7.10).265
Ryholt suggests that this king used filiative names to refer to his grandfather, Ameny and
Titulary- Horus:?; Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: htp-ib-rc, Nomen: si-hrw-nd-hr-itf. Ryholt,
Political Situation, p. 338. See also von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 39-40; Handbuch, pp. 90-91.
262
Ryholt, "Royal Names," pp. 106-107, 109-110; Political Situation, p. 70. See also Quirke,
. "Investigation," p. 216.
263
von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 39.
264
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen:?, Nomen: Iw.f-n.i. Ryholt, Political Situation,
p. 338; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 40; Handbuch, pp. 90-91.
265
Titulary- Horus: scnh-ib-Owyi'shr-tiwy, Nebty: shm-hcw, Golden Horus: hk-m3ct, Prenomen: scnh-ib-rc,
Nomen: imn-m-Iitf with triple names inmyand in-it.f. Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 338. See also
Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, p. 57; von Beckerath, Handbuch, pp. 90-91.
71
father, Intef.266 If the understanding of this triple name is correct, Sankhibre

Amenemhet's father was not a king, something, which seems to contradict Ryholt's
theory that filiation always indicates royal parentage in the names of kings. However,
here, the lineage may be intended to indicate that Ameny was the grandfather via the nonruling son, Intef. Though Ryholt suggests that seals with the title "king's son" and the
name Intef may refer to the father of this king,267 one must take note that this designation
was commonly used for men outside the royal family at this time.268
IV.B.8. Semenkare Nebnun and Sehotepibre

The kings in lines 7.11 and 7.12 of the Turin King-List are Semenkare (Nebnun)
and Sehotepibre.269 Since the list only contains the name Sehotepibre for the latter, there
is some confusion since this same prenomen appears in 7.8. However, as mentioned
above, Ryholt amends this earlier occurrence to Hotepibre. One of the reasons why he
266
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 214-215, 338; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 40-41.
Martin, Egyptian Administrative and Private-Name Seals, p. 24, numbers 237-238; Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 214, Table 248).
Franke, "Altagyptische Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen," pp. 308-309; "Review of Ward, Essays on
Feminine Titles of the Middle Kingdom and Related Subjects," JEA 76 (1990), p. 229; Egyptian Titles,
Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 2; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 100-101; Ward, Index, p. 145; Essays,
pp. 39-40, 40-44, 120. For a similar situation in parts of the Old Kingdom, see K. Baer, Rank and Title in
the Old Kingdom. The Structure of the Egyptian Administration in the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties (Chicago,
1960), pp. 32-22, 45; C.F. Nims, "Some Notes on the Family of Mereraka," JAOS 58 (1938), 638-647. For
a study with slightly different conclusions, see B. Schmitz, Untersuchungen zum Titel sA-niswt
'Konigssohn', Habelts Dissertationsdrucke. Reihe Agyptologie 2 (Bonn, 1976). Note that Bietak has
proposed that Nehesy's father founded Dynasty XIV based upon his literal interpretation of this title
(Bietak, "Zum Konigsreich," pp. 59-60). For the possibility that this title continues to be honorific in
Theban Dynasty XVI, see el-Sayed, "Quelques precisions," p. 201. For general problems with interpreting
titles, see D. Franke, "Probleme der Arbeit mit altagyptischen Titeln des Mittleren Reiches," GM 83 (1984),
pp. 103-124.
269
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: smn-Jc?-rL', Nomen: nb-nwn; Horus: swsh-tiwy,
Nebty:?, Golden hours:?, Prenomen: shtp-ib-rc, Nomen:?. Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 338-339: von
Beckerath, Handbuch, pp. 90-91. For the assignment of the Horus name of this king from a stela from
Gebel Zeit, see P. Mey, et al., "Installations Rupestres du Moyen et du Nouvel Empire au Gebel Zeit (pres
de Ras Deb) sur la Mer Rouge," MDAIK 36 (1980), pp. 304-305, Fig. 301(301), PI. 380a. See also Ryholt,
"A Bead," pp. 97-98.
267
72
chose to place Sehotepibre in this position is the separate occurrences of this name and
that of Nebmm on stelae at Gebel Zeit.270 Bennett points to the fact that the inscribed
royal stelae of the Dynasty XIII kings were found in unassociated contexts and, thus, do
not necessarily point to a chronological connection.271 Also, it is still possible that the
son of Ameny.Qemau, Hotepibre, could, have occupied this position despite the notion
that he likely reigned directly after his father.
IV.B.9. Sewadjkare and Nedjemibre

Little is known concerning the next two kings in the Turin King-List (7.13-14),
979
Sewadjkare and Nedjemibre.
The latter seems to be mentioned in a Demotic document
in the Carlsberg Papyri in Copenhagen. However, Ryholt suggests that this deceased
king, Nedjemibenpare (ndm-Ib-n-pS-rc), actually may be a ruler of the Third Intermediate
Period, since the story containing his name is set in that era.273 The regnal length of
Nedjemibre can be reconstructed in the Turin King-List as seven months(?).
IV.B.10. Khaankhre Sobekhotep II
The nomen of Khaankhre Sobekhotep II (written.as Sobekhotepre) can be found
270
G. Castel and G. Soukiassian, "Depot de Steles dans le Sanctuaire du Novel Empire au Gebel Zeit,"
BIFAO 85 (1985), p. 290, PI. 262; Mey, et al., "Installations Rupestres," pp. 304-305; Ryholt, "A Bead,"
pp. 99-100; Political Situation, p. 78. In this area, galena mining took place, an activity that continued well
into the Second Intermediate Period, as indicated by the presence there of Dynasty XVI/XVII monuments
(Sewoserenre Bebiankh and Nebkheperre Inter).
271
Bennett, "Qemau," p. 15.
272
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: swld-kl-rc, Nomen:?; Horns:?, Nebty:?, Golden
Horus:?, Prenomen: ndm-ib-rc, Nomen:? Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 339. See also von Beckerath,
Untersuchungen, p. 41; Handbuch, pp. 90-91.
7
73
in Turin King-List column 7.15 followed by the phrase, "son o f (sf) and possibly nnl274
Thus, it is likely that this king was not of royal lineage, as his father's name is not in a
cartouche. The name of the father of Khasekhemre Neferhotep I appears in a similar
fashion in the Turin King-List. The regnal length of Sobekhotep II is not preserved.
IV.B.ll. Amenemhet Reniseneb

The next ruler in the Turin King-List, Reniseneb,275 has a regnal length of four
months. In an inscribed bead, this king has a double name, including Amenemhet.276
According to his filiation theory, Ryholt suggests that this king's father was either
Sankhibre Amenemhet, Sehotepibre, Sewadjkare, or Nedjemibre (nomens not known for
the last three).
However, one must always remember that private people also used
their grandfather's names in double naming. This name could also link him to an
ancestor, a family, or a revered predecessor.
IV.B.12. Awibre Hor

The next ruler listed for Dynasty XIII in the Turin King-List (7.17) is Awibre
(Hor) (spelled iwt-ib-rc in this document).278 Awibre Hor was buried in a reused shaft
tomb at the pyramid complex of Amenemhet III at Dahshur. The location of this tomb,
274
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 215, n. 740; "The Turin Kinglist," p. 144. Titulary- Horus: sml-tiwy,
Nebty: dd-hcw, Golden Horus: kiw-ntrw, Prenomen: h^-^nh-r^ Nomen: sbk-htp. Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 339; Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, pp. 254-255; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 4243; Handbuch, pp. 90-93.
275
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen:?, Nomen: rn.i-snb, with double name irnn-mhct. Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 339; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 44; Handbuch, pp. 92-93.
276
Ryholt, "A Bead," pp. 95-96.
211
Ryholt, Political Situation,]). 216.
. . . . . .
278
Titulary- Horus: htp-ib-Gwy, Nebty: nfr-hcw, Golden Horus: nfr-ntrw, Prenomen: 2w-ib-rc, Nomen: brw.
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 339. See also Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, pp. 134-135; von
Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 44-49; Handbuch, pp. 92-93.
74
along with the finds inside, suggests to some scholars that the power of kingship had
weakened.279 Nonetheless, as indicated in a later chapter, the tomb of Awibre Hor,
though modest, was not devoid of some luxury. However, one must recognize here that
the state-of the-Egyptian economy as a whole may be more to blame for the scarcity of
expensive items in Awibre Hor's tomb, rather than the diminishing power of the king. In
fact, Weigall had even reported that the tomb demonstrated that "more stable conditions
had returned."280
A princess, Nebhotepti, the child, associated with Awibre Hor through the style of
her objects, was buried in the tomb adjacent to that of the king.281 Ryholt, following
Hari, has argued that the mother of this princess was the queen and king's mother
Nebhotepti, known through seals and a statuette at Semna.2 2 Ryholt also surmises that
the children of Awibre Hor and Nebhotepti included Khabaw Sekhemrekhutawy, whose
name is found upon an architrave at Tanis along with that of his supposed father, possibly
indicating a coregency,
as well as Djedkheperew.
Neither Khabaw nor
Djedkheperew are found in the Turin King-List, and Ryholt believes that they are
279
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 171.

Weigall, Pharaohs, p. 147.
281
282
D. Dunham and J. Janssen, Semna Kumma, Second Cataract Forts I (Boston, 1960), p. 28, PI. 87 A21,
A22; R. Hari, "Un Reine Enigmatique: Nebon-Hotepti," BSEG 4 (1980), p. 47; E. Hornung and E.
Staehelin, Skarabaen und andere Siegelamulette aus Basler Sammlungen, Agyptische Denkmaler in der
Schweiz I (Mainz am Rhein, 1967), pp. 215-216, no. 128. Note that Ryholt's argumentation regarding the
reign to which this queen belongs is circular {Political Situation, p. 218).
283
Murnane, Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, SAOC 40 (Chicago, 1977), p. 25. These two kings could also
have been related without ruling sequentially, or one may have been a revered predecessor of the other.
See J.P. Allen, "Turin," p. 50.
284
Titulary- Horus: hc-b!w, Nebty: whm-dd, Golden Horus: cnh-mptw, Prenomen: shm-rc-hw-tiwy,
Nomen:?; Titulary- Horus: dd-hprw, Nebty: dd-msw, hrw-c}(?), Prenomen./...]k!-rc, Nomen:/...]i. Ryholt
suggests that the nomen of Khabaw could be Sobek (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 38-39, 70, 216-218,
219, n. 755, 318, 340).
280
75
represented by an unpreserved tra/entry.285 He also claims a chronological link between

Khabaw and Djedkheperew and king Sheshi (Ryholt's Dynasty XIV) at Uronarti,286
though reviews of this argument suggest that this conclusion may not be archaeologically
sound.287 Also, Ryholt argues that Djedkeperew is the king listed upon the Osiris bier in
the tomb of Djer at Abydos along with traces of Imv (Hor).
Unfortunately, however,
the actual identity of the king in this inscription and its precise date are not clear, and
thus, the relationship between this ruler and Awibre Hor is far from certain.289
IV.B.13. Sedjefakare Kay Amenemhet

The king following Awibre Hor in the Turin King-List is Sedjefakare
285

G.A. Reisner, "Clay Sealings of Dynasty XIII from Uronarti Fort," Kush 3 (1955), pp. 36; 53, Figs. 2-4;
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 321-322; S.T. Smith, "Administration," p. 207.
287
For a response to the archaeological objections to this theory, see Ryholt "Date of the Kings."
288
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 217, n. 747; 286, n. 1033. Other options have also been suggested. For
Khendjer, see Leahy, "A Protective Measure at Abydos in the Thirteenth Dynasty," JEA 75 (1989), pp. 5556; J. Wegner, "The Mortuary Complex of Senwosret III: A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity and
the Cult of Osiris at Abydos," dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1996, p. 385. Grajetzki believes the
Osiris bier dates to Dynasty XIII (Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 41). For Djedkheperew, see Leahy, "The
Osiris 'Bed' Reconsidered," Orientalia 46 (1977), pp. 433-434. J.P. Allen argues that this bier belongs to
Pantjeni, the Dynasty XVII (Ryholt's Abydos Dynasty) king, based upon the space in the inscription for the
throne name Khutawy (J.P. Allen, "Turin," pp. 50-51, 68, n. 10). Von Beckerath believes that the name on
this object is Neferkare (Nebiryra II?) possibly of Dynasty XVI (his Dynasty XVII) but that the bier itself
dates to Dynasty XIII (von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 185). For Dynasty XVIII or after, see
Amelineau, Tombeau, p. 118. For references to dating this object to the Late Period, see Leahy, "Osiris
.'Bed,'" pp. 426, n. 421. For several options, see M.G. Maspero, Guide to the Cairo Museum (Cairo, 1910),
pp. 176-177. Other names have also been considered by scholars.
289
E. Amelineau, Le tombeau d'Osiris (Paris, 1899), pp. 109-115, Pis. 102-104. For Awibre Hor of
Dynasty XIII, see Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 286, n. 1033. For Khendjer, see Dodson, The Canopic
Equipment, p. 35, n. 86; Monarchs, p. 68; Leahy, "The Osiris 'Bed,'" pp. 433-434; "Protective Measure,"
pp. 55-56; J. Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," p. 385; The Mortuary Temple, p. 22.
Grajetzki believes the Osiris bier dates to Dynasty XIII. Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 41. For the Dynasty
XVI/XVII king Pantjeny, see J.P. Allen, "Turin," pp. 50-51, 68, n. 10. ForNebiriau of Dynasty XVII
(Ryholt's Dynasty XVI), see von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 184, 289.
286
76
(Amenemhet).290 Very little is known about the reign of this ruler, who occupied the
throne for an unknown number Of years. However, this king does possess a nomen with a
double name Kay. Ryholt suggests that a magicwand (CG 9433) displaying the name of
Kay, as a double name with Seb, shows that this man also ruled and that these supposed
kings were the father and grandfather of-Amenemhet.291 Though some scholars have
suggested that the name on.the wand is a version of Sedjefakare,292 Ryholt argues that
these are separate kings and proposes that both of them were included in the same
unpreserved wsfas Khabaw and Djedkheperew.
Allen cautiously approaches Ryholt's conclusion that all royal double names
represent filiation and indicate that both a father and a son ruled.294 It is possible that Seb
and Kay may have been given royal titulary honorarily, which may have happened in
regard to Montuhotep I in early Dynasty XI. 95 However, in this case, the royal ancestor,
Montuhotep was not commemorated until Dynasty XII, which weakens the argument that
a double name could be used this way.296 It is also possible that all three names refer to
Amenemhet himself.
290
Titulary- Horns: hry-tp-Bwy, Nebty: ntr-blw, Golden Horus: ci-phty, Prenomen: sd8-ki-rc, Nomen: imnm-filtwith double name kty. Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 341; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 46;
Handbuch, pp. 92-93.
G. Daressy, Catalogue General des Antiquites Egytiennes du Musee du Caire: Textes et Dessins
Magiques (Cairo, 1903), pp. 43-44; D. Randall-Maclver and A.C. Mace, ElAmrah andAbydos, I (London,
1902), PI. 43; Ryholt, "Royal Names," p. 110; Political Situation, pp. 70, 218-219.
292
Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 130; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 46.
293
- ' . . ' ' ' - . .
294
J.P.Allen, "Turin," p. 51.
295
Von Beckerath, Handbuch, pp. 76-77, n. 2.
L. Postel, Protocole des Souverains Egyptiens et Dogme Monarchique au Debut du Moyen Empire
(Turnhout, 2004), pp. 7-54.
77
IV.B.14. Khutawyre Wegaf

As discussed above, the next ruler listed in the Turin King-List is
Sekhemrekhutawy (Amenemhet) Sobekhotep (7.19), with both his nomen and prenomen
in a single cartouche. As Ryholt and others have pointed out, this king was probably
confused with Khutawyre Wegaf (7.5),297 who actually belongs in this position and ruled
for a little over two years (see section IV.B.l. above). However, many scholars continue
to argue that the order reflected in the Turin King-List is accurate due in part to this
king's activity at Medamud where, Dynasty XII rulers had also built monuments.298
However, Sekhemrekhutawy Sobekhotep I also had monuments there.299
IV.B.l5. Woserkare Khendjer

The next entry in the Turin King-List includes both the prenomen and nomen of
297
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 13; Stock, 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens, pp. 48-49; von Beckerath,
"Notes on the Viziers," p. 267.. Titulary- Horus: shm-ntrw, Nebty: hc-b!w, Golden Horus: mry-[,..],
Prenomen: hw-tiwy-rc, Nomen: wgi.f Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 341; von Beckerath, Handbuch, pp.
92-93. See also Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, p. 311.
298
E.A.W. Budge, ed., The Egyptian Sudan, Its History and Monuments, 1 (London, 1907), pp. 485-486;
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 171; Grimal, History, p. 184; Hayes, Scepter, p. 341; Kemp, "Social History,"
p. 160; Save-Soderbergh, Agypten undNubien, pp. 118-119; Stock, 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens, p. 50;
von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 30-31; Weill, La Fin du Moyen Empire, pp. 279-307'. Vercoutter
considered the theory about the confusion in the names in the Turin King-List, but decides that Wegaf was
the first king largely due to his hypothesis that Semna was abandoned early in the dynasty when a supposed
dam there was no longer needed (J. Vercoutter, "Le Roi Ougaf et la XHIe Dynastie sur la lime Cataracte,"
Rd'E 27 (1975), pp.222-224, 227-229, 234, PI. 222). See also W. Helck, "Review of von Beckerath,
Untersuchungen zur politischen Geschichte der zweiten Zwischenzeit in Agypten," AFO 22 (1968/1969),
pp. 93-94.
299
F. Bisson de la Roque, Fouilles de Medamoud 1928, FIFAO 6 (Cairo, 1929), pp. 3, 4,-58-72, 115-123,
PI. 114; Bisson de la Roque and Clere, Meâwowa'7927, pp. 89-92, 99-100, 103, 105, 117-118, 131-137,
PL 104; Fouilles de Medamoud 1929, FIFAO 7 (Cairo, 1930), pp. 78, 89-93, PI. 75. Other kings including
Sobekhotep III were also active at Medamud (Bisson de la Roque, Medamoud 1928, pp. 83-94, 124-127;
Bisson de la Roque and Clere, Medamoud 1927, pp. 43-47, 83, 87, 105, 118-120, 137-140; Helck,
Historische-Biographische, pp. 13-14, no. 21). See also Grimal, History, p. 183; Weill, "Complements,"
pp. 22-23.
299
Lepsius, Denkmaler 111, PI. 13b; Weigall, Pharaohs, p. 212.
78
Woserkare Khendjer in a single cartouche, though the latter is misspelled (7.20).
This
king may also have a possible alternative prenomen, Nimaankhare (ni-mSc-n-hc-r*),

found in the Abydos stela Louvre C.i/. 301 Here, according to some scholars, either
Khendjer changed his name at some point, or there are two-kings who used this nomen.
However, following von Beckerath, Ryholt notes that the writing style differs between
the nomen and prenomen, and it is likely that the former was a later addition and may
indicate that no king by the name of Nimaankhare Khendjer existed.303 Though
Khendjer's regnal length is not preserved, he likely ruled for more than 3-4 years, since
he built a relatively large pyramid at South Sakkara.304
Quirke suggests that sequential viziers contemporary with Woserkare Khendjer
were Ankhu, who likely held this position during the preceding reign, and his son
Resuseneb (rsw-snb), whose mother was Merryt.305 Other scholars believe that Ankhu
served in the reign of Khendjer as well as in reigns before or after with the specific rulers
300
Titulary- Horus:/...]- c nh, Nebty: w!h-mswt, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: wsr-k3-rc, Nornen: h-n-d-rox hd-r. Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 342; "The Turin Kinglist," p. 150. See also Schneider, Lexikon der
Pharaonen, pp. 99-100; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 49-51; Handbuch, pp. 94-95.
301
A. Dodson, "The Tombs of the Kings of the Thirteenth Dynasty in the Memphite Necropolis," ZAS 114
(1987), p. 42; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 31; After the Pyramids. The Valley of the Kings and
Beyond (London, 2000), p. 14; "Tombs of the Kings," p. 42; G. Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah: Deux
Pyramides du Moyen Empire. Edition Photographique de VEdition Originale-Impreimerie de 1'IFAOC
193, 1933 (Cairo, 1986), pp. 26-27; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 49; Weill, "Complements," p. 13.
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 27; Stock, 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens, pp. 50-51.
303
Ryholt, Political Situation,-p. 220, n. 761; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 49-50.
304
See Chapter 3, Section III.
305
Franke, Personendaten, p. 254, Doss. 398; Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 132, 133.
79
being determined by their chronology of the period.
306
Khendjer's queen was
Senebhenas I.307
IV.B.16. Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw

Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw is the ruler listed in 7.21 of the Turin King-List.
Interestingly, the king's prenomen is written within the cartouche while the nomen is
denoted afterwards as if it were a title. Some Egyptologists have argued that this name,
Imyremeshaw, which means "the overseer of the army," may have been his designation
before he became king/
This title, imy-rmsc, is high-ranking and is often paired with
the title htmw-bity (royal seal-bearer), when used in reference to the administrative sector
of the palace.310 In contrast, Ryholt argues that other private individuals had the name
Imyremeshaw,311 and it therefore does not denote any sort of occupation in this context,
possibly referring instead to a family tradition or an ancestor.312 Nonetheless, there is at
least one instance of Imyremeshaw's name being deliberately erased, possibly indicating
he was not considered to have been legitimate.
Ryholt believes that the larger text in Papyrus Bulaq 18 {Cairo CG 58069), which
306
Franke believes that the vizier Ankhu lived during the reigns of Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet
Sobekhotep I and Khendjer (Franke, Personendaten, pp. 136-137, Doss. 173). Ryholt argues that this
vizier occupied this position in the reign of Khendjer and continued into the tenure of the following king in
order to support his dating of Papyrus Bulaq 118. Ankhu appears in Papyrus Bulaq 118/s (small), 118L
(Large), and 118/131 as well as in Papyrus Brooklyn 135.1446 B and C (Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 14).
307
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 39, 40, 221.
308
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: snrnh-k3-rc, Nomen; imy-r-msc. Ryholt,
Political Situation, p. 342; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 51-52; Handbuch, pp. 94-95.
309
310
Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, pp. 62-63; Titles and Bureau, pp. 98-99. For more information on
the title, see Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 116-129; Franke, "Probleme," pp. 112-113.
Martin, Egyptian Administrative and Private-Name Seals, p. 19, no 173.
312
Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 131; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 221-222.
313
Dodson, Monarchs, p. 68.
80
records the accounts during a royal visit to the Theban region, may refer to the family of
an unnamed king, Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw or Sehotepkare Intef.314 Most scholars
have dated this text, which was discovered in the tomb of the scribe Neferhotep at Dra
Abu el-Naga in 1860,
to Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I due to his close
proximity to Woserkare Khendjer in many chronological reconstructions of the period,316

but it is more likely that this king was first in the dynasty. Thus, it is important to note
Ryholt's argument- for the dating of this text. First of all, he believes that the vizier at this
time was Ankhu; who also served Khendjer; so this unidentified king must be close in
date to him.. A queen Aya is mentioned in the text and is likely a sister or niece of
Ankhu's son-in-law, setting the earliest reign as that following Khendjer, whose wife was
Senebhenas.317 The king, whose visit was recorded in this document, reigned between
three and five years, depending on whether or not both the small and large text within the
papyrus dates to this same individual. Nonetheless, if this document concerns activities
at Medamud, it may be more likely to refer to one of the kings, who was active in this
area (as seen through relief) such as Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I,
Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III, Sedjefakare Kay Amenemhet; or Khutawyre
3,4

This tomb dates to late Dynasty XHI/early Dyansty XVII. Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 7-8.
3,6
A. Mariette, Les Papyrus Egyptiens du Musee de Boulaq, II (Paris, 1872). See also L. Borchardt, "Ein
Rechnungsbuch des koniglichen Hofes aus denl Eride des mittleren Reiches," ZAS 28 (1890), pp. 65-103;
F.L. Griffith, "The Account Papyrus no. 18 of Boulaq," ZAS 29 (1891), pp. 102-116; Helck, HistorischeBiographische, pp. 10, no. 15; Franke, Middle Kingdom, p. 396; "Zur Chronologie," p. 255; Grajetzki,
Hochsten Beamten, p. 258; Hayes, "Notes on the Government," pp. 38-39; Quirke, S, "Administrative
Texts," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 1 (Oxford, 2001), p. 25;
"Investigation," pp. 9-10; The Administration of Egypt, pp. 10, 11-13, 22, 124; "Visible and Invisible," pp.
68-70; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396; J. von Beckerath, "Die Konige mit dem Thronnamen shm-rc hw-t5wi,"
ZAS 84 (1959), p. 85; Untersuchungen, pp. 47-49, 99. Fragments of a text from the estate of Ankhu were
found with this document.
317
315
81
Wegaf.318
IV.B.17. Sehotepkare Inlef and Meribre Seth

Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw is followed by Sehotepkare Intef (7.22),3 9 whose
name is written in a manner similar to that of the-previous ruler, and the regnal length of
this king is unknown. The next ruler, Meribre Seth (7.23),320 is also listed on a stela from
Abydos and architectural fragments from Medamud. Though this king ruled at least four
years (Abydos stela, Cairo JE 35256), little else is known concerning the events of his
reign.
IV.B.18; Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep HI

For the following ruler in the Turin King-List, Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep
III, both names were written within a single cartouche, though the prenomen of this king
was misunderstood.and misrepresented in this document.321 Though only a little over
four years are listed for this ruler's reign in the Turin King-List?22 Sobekhotep III is
thought to have been a revolutionary leader, who set out to create his own dynasty, only
318
See Bisson de la Roque, Medamoud 1928, p. 3.

Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: shtp-k}-rc, Nomen: in-it.f. Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 342; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 52; Handbuch, pp. 94-95.
320
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: mr-ib-rc, Nomen: sth. Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 342; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 53-5A;.Handbuch, pp. 94-95.
321
Titulary- Horus: hw^tiwy, Nebty: hcm-shin.f, Golden Horus: htp-ht-w3ct, Prenomen: shm-rc-swld-tiwy,
Nomen: sbk-htp. Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 17, 343; "The Turin Kinglist," p. 150. See also Schneider,
Lexikon der Pharaonen, pp. 255-256; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 54-55; Handbuch, pp. 94-95.
322
319
82
to have it come to an end with his death.323 He chose to display prolifically the fact that
his parents were not royal in monuments and seal impressions.324
Detailed information about the family of Sobekhotep III is available on a stela
from Abydos {Louvre C8), an altar at Sehel, and an inscription at Wadi el-Hol.325
Sobekhotep III was born to Montuhotep and Iwhetibu (w-ht-ibw), who took the titles
"god's father" and "king's mother," respectively, once he become ruler.326 His maternal
grandfather was the low-ranking military official ( cnh-n-nwt), Dedusobek.327
Sobekhotep III had two brothers, Seneb and Khakaw (presumably named after Senwosret
III), with the title "king's son" as well as a stepfather of unknown name.328 He had a half
sister, Reniseneb, and his wife was Senebhenas, whose father may have been a vizier
named Senebhenaf. This high ranking official was married to a hereditary princess
named Sobekhotep, and was the father of the Queen Montuhotep of Dynasty XVI.329
Sobekhotep III had a second wife named Neni, who bore two princesses, Iwhetibu/Fendy
323
O.D. Berlev, "The Eleventh Dynasty in the Dynastic History of Egypt," in D.W. Young, ed., Studies
Presented to Hans Jakob Polotsky (East Glouster, MA, 1981), p. 370.
324
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 172; Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 15, no. 23; Ryholt, Political
Situation, pp. 34, 37, 223; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 54.
325
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 179; L. Habachi, "Notes on the Altar of Sekhemre'-sewadjtowe Sebkhotpe
from Sehel," JEA 37 (1951), pp. 17-19; Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 14, no. 22; Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 222; H. Wild, "A Bas-Relief of Sekhemre-Sewadjtawe," JEA 37 (1951), pp. 12-16.
326
Franke, Personendaten, p. 190, Doss. 273; Postel, Protocole, p. 49; Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p.
48; Helck, Geschichte, p. 121; M.F.L. Macadam, "Gleanings from the Bankes MSS.," JEA 32 (1946), p. 60,
PI. 68; P. Montet, "Le Roi Ougaf a Medamoud," RdE 8 (1951), p. 170; L. Troy, Patterns ofQueenship in
Ancient Egyptian Myth and History, Uppsala Studies in Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern
Civilizations 14 (Boreas, 1986), p. 159; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 54. For further information
concerning the king's family, see Macadam, "Royal Family," pp. 20-28; Petrie, History, p. 211, Fig. 121;
Schmitz, Untersuchungen zum Titel, pp. 208-211; Weigall, Pharaohs, pp. 153-154.
327
Franke, Personendaten, p. 439, Doss. 761. For this title, see Section IV.B.19. and Berlev, "Les
Pretendus 'Citadins,'" pp. 23-48.
2
Dodson, Monarchs, p. 68; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 223-224; Franke, Personendaten, p. 363,
Doss. 612; 280, Doss. 448.
329
Franke, Personendaten, p. 388, Doss. 661; Macadam, "Royal Family," pp. 24-25. Troy believes
Reniseneb was the daughter of Sobekhotep III. Troy, Patterns ofQueenship, p. 159.
83
{iwht-ib. wdd.tfnd) and Dedetanuk, the former having the rare honor of a cartouche.330
After Resuseneb, who was the son of the vizier Ankhu, served as vizier to Sobekhotep
III, Aymeru took this position for the remainder of this king's reign as well as that of
Neferhotep I.331
The reign of Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III ushered in a time of increased'
11')
power of the king of Dynasty XIII.
Ryholt has suggested that there may have been
changes to the administrative system at this time as seals and sealings with Sobekhotep
Ill's name may indicate an increase in the number of officials.333 However, an overall
escalation in the frequency of the use of these seals may correlate to a rise in the activity
of the king due to his accessibility to additional resources. Such a phenomenon could
have occurred due to the ruler's leadership abilities, an increase in the power of kingship,
and economic prosperity due to favorable crop yields.
IV.B.19. Khasekhemre Neferhotep I

The most stable period for kingship in Dynasty XIII was an era of about twentysix years in which a sub-dynasty ruled Egypt. This group of kings is unusual, since it
was made up of a group of brothers.334 The founder of this remarkable mini-dynasty is
Khasekhemre Neferhotep I, whose nomen and prenomen appear in a single cartouche,
Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 17, no. 25; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 39, 40; Troy, Patterns
of Queenship, pp. 159-160.
331
Franke, Personendaten, p. 54, Doss. 24. Resuseneb appears on the verso of the Brooklyn Museum
Papyrus 35.1446, Franke, Personendaten, p. 254, Doss. 398; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 193-194, n.
685.
332
Bietak, "Overview," p. 54.
333
33
Simpson suggests that there may be an additional two kings (Simpson, "Dynasty XIII Stela," pp. 156157).
84
followed by "son of Haankhef' in the Turin King-List (7.25).335 This ruler, who reigned
for eleven years according to this document, was of non-royal descent and used the same
type of terminology for his parents as for his predecessor in the office of kingship,
Sobekhotep III. There is much known about the family of Neferhotep I since he and his
brother Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV both commissioned inscriptions concerning such
matters.
The family of Neferhotep I was from Aswan and was low to mid status within the
ranking of officials in society.336 His parents were Haankhef, who held the title "god's
father" as shown in a stela from Heliopolis, and Kemi, "king's mother."337 They both
appear in royal seals and other monuments with the ruler's names.338 The father of
Neferhotep I set up a stela, now in Rio de Janeiro, recording that his paternal
grandparents were Nehy and the lady of the house Senebtisi.339 Interestingly,
Neferhotep's grandfather was a military official, cnhnniwt, the same title that the
335
Titulary- Horus: grg-tlwy, Nebty: wp-ntfct, Golden Horus: mn-mrwt, Prenomen: he-shm-rc, Nomen: nfrhtp. Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 345; "The Turin Kinglist," p. 144. See also Schneider, Lexikon der
Pharaonen, pp. 171-172; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 55-56; Handbuch, pp. 96-97.
336
Schmitz, Untersuchungen zum Titel, pp. 211-213.
337
Franke, Personendaten, pp. 260-261, Doss. 410; Helck, Geschichte, p. 121; Ryholt, Political Situation,
p. 225; Troy, Patterns of Queenship, p. 160; Weigall, Pharaohs, pp. 213-214.
338
M. Dewachter, "Le Roi Sahathor et la famille de Neferhotep I," Rd'E 28 (1976), pp. 66-73; M.
Dewachter, "Le Roi Sahathor-Complements," Rd'E 35 (1984), pp. 195-199; Dodson, Monarchs, p. 68;
Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 19, no. 27; Postel, Protocole, pp. 49, 103; Quirke, "Royal Power," p.
130; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 34-37; Simpson, "Dynasty XIII Stela," p. 157; Weill, La Fin du Moyen
Empire, pp. 424-427.
330
K'.A. Kitchen, Catalogue of the Egyptian Collection in the National Museum, Rio de Janeiro
(Warminster, 1988), pp. 66-71, Pis. 47-48; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 76, n. 225; 225, 298. Note that
Kitchen thought that Haankhef was the father-in-law of Neferhotep I and that his father and mother (rather
than grandparents) were mentioned in the Rio de Janeiro stela. K.A. Kitchen, "Non-Egyptians Recorded on
Middle Kingdom Stelae in Rio de Janeiro," in S. Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies (New Maiden,
1991), p. 87.
85
grandfather of Sobekhotep III held.340 An inscription, located at Sehel, identifies his

wife as Senebsen.341
There is some confusion as to the identity of the children of Khasekhemre
Neferhotep I since the inscriptions at Sehel may show either his sons or his brothers.
Though these figures are labeled as "sons of the king," some scholars interpret the phrase
sl-nswt, which is used as an honorific title for private people at this time, as being able to
denote brothers of the king, rather than his children.
Ryholt interprets this same
inscription to mean that Kemi and Haankhef, who seem to have been named after their
grandparents, were children of Khasekhemre Neferhotep I. He also had a son named
Wahneferhotep who is known through an inscription on a wooden shabti found at
Lisht.343 The treasurer at this time was Senebi.344
IV.B.20. Sahathor
Following Neferhotep, the Turin King-List names Sahathor as the next ruler
(7.26).345 Sahathor was the son of Haankhef and Kemi and the brother of Neferhotep I
and Sobekhotep IV. Since Sahathor is only known as a king from two objects and the
340
Berlev, "Les Pretendus 'Citadins,'" pp. 23-48; Franke, "Zur Chronologie," p. 246; Grajetzki, Two
Treasurers, p. 30; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 130; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396; Titles and Bureau, p. 100;
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 225-226; Ward, Essays, p. 48.
341
Dewachter, "Roi Sahathor et la famille," p. 67; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 227; Spalinger, "Remarks,"
p. 102; Troy, Patterns ofQueenship, p. 160.
342
Dewachter, "Roi Sahathor et la famille," p. 69; "Complements."; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 226227.
-
Clayton, Chronicles, p. 92.
344
...
345
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horas:?, Prenomen: mn-w!d-rc, Nomen: sl-hwt-hrw. Ryholt,
Political Situation, p. 384. See also Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, p. 243; von Beckerath,
86
Turin King-List, it is believed that he only ruled for a few months.
Since this king may
have lacked a complete titulary (only the prenomen and nomen are known), scholars
often suggest that he was a coregent of Neferhotep I.347 Also, some scholars have
pointed to the fact that the absence of Sahathor in the Karnak King-List while his brothers
disappear, indicates perhaps that he never ruled alone.348 However, the nature of the
Karnak King-List is uncertain as it may contain only a selection of the Dynasty XIII
kings.
In another argument in favor of coregency, Ryholt points to an inscription from
Philae where the brothers of Neferhotep I, Sahathor and Sobekhotep IV, are shown along
with his parents.
Ryholt dates this inscription to the reign of Neferhotep I and suggests
that it was carved before this king was married. Ryholt reasons that the king must have
been young, requiring that his brothers serve as coregents with him. He also suggests
that a four-sided block at Karnak assigns the epithet, di cnh mi rc ("given life like Re"), to
both Neferhotep I and Sobekhotep IV and argues that this epithet was only used to denote
living rulers; so these kings must have reigned together. Since Sahathor is prior to
Sobekhotep IV in the Late Middle Kingdom, he also may have been a coregent, with
Neferhotep I around year 10 of his reign. Unfortunately, however, the evidence for
coregencies in Dynasty XIII is not currently conclusive.350
For this period, there has been a great deal of confusion regarding the likely
existence of two figures by the name of Sahathor, one being the brother of Neferhotep I
346
L. Habachi, "A Score of Important Officials Serving the Neferhotep Family as Revealed from Three
Objects in the Heqaib Sanctuary," Serapis 6 (1980), p. 47; Hayes, Scepter, p. 343.
347
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 192,216, n.745.
348
Dewachter, "Roi Sahathor et la famille," p. 66.
349
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 227-228, n. 804; 298.
350
Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, pp. 24-26.
87
and Sobekhotep IV and the other a son of Neferhotep I.351 The brother became a king for
a short period of the time, while the son did not. However, Davies discusses a Theban
statue carrying the name of a deceased man, Sahathor, without a cartouche.
Since this
statue also has the cartouche of Sobekhotep IV, Davies suggests that Sahathor died
without ever having been a king, arguing that the Turin King-List is incorrect. However,
if one does interpret these names as referring to two separate individuals, then the
discrepancies in the record are less problematic.
IV.B.21. Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV

The last king preserved in column 7 of the Turin King-List is Khaneferre
Sobekhotep IV, whose regnal length is missing in a lacuna (7.27) (Karnak Offering-List
38).353 However, the Debono Stela, as well as a poorly executed schist stela from Wadi
Hammamat, may indicate that the ruler held the throne at least to year nine.354
351
Habachi, "A Score of Important Officials," pp. 79-80; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 228; Simpson,
"Dynasty XIII Stela," pp. 157, 158; Stock, 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens, pp. 59-60.
352
W.V. Davies, "A Statue of the 'King's Son, Sahathor', from Thebes," in H. Guksch and D. Polz, eds.,
Stationen Betrdge zur Kulturgeschichte Agyptens (Mainz, 1998), pp. 177-179. A statuette from
Elephantine has a king's son Sahathor, born of Kemi. Thus, this inscription is from the brother of
Neferhotep. His name is not shown in a cartouche. S.J. Seidelmayer, "Stadt und Tempel von Elephantine
15/16 Grabungsbericht, IX Ausgewahlte Einzelfunde," MDAIK 44 (1988), p. 181, Abb. 115.
353
Titulary- Horus: cnh-ib-tiwy, Nebty: wld-hcw, Golden Horus: wsr-bSw, Prenomen: hc-nfr-rc, Nomen:
sbk-htp. Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 348, 350. See also Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, pp. 256257; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 57-58; Handbuch, pp. 96-97. The name of this king (Chenfres)
is found in the writings of Artapanus (1 st Century BCE) as transmitted through Eusebius. This significantly
later source, which is of little historical use, dates the fragmentation of the Egyptian state to before the
reign of this king and associates the exodus of Moses to him (Dodson, Monarchs, p. 70; Hayes, "Egypt:
From the Death," pp. 50-51; Helck, Untersuchungen zu Manetho, p. 36; Geschichte, p. 122; Die
Beziehungen Agyptens,^. 93; Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 25; Winlock, Rise and Fall, p. 93).
Commemorative seals carrying this king's name were produced in the time of this Jewish writer as noted
by Quirke ("Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 395).
354
F. Debono, "Expedition archeologique royale au Desert Oriental Keft-Kosseir," ASAE 51 (1951), pp. 8182, PI. 15; Simpson, "Dynasty XIII Stela," p. 155.
88
In the stela from Wadi Hammamat, the sons of Sobekhotep IV are named
including Sahathor, Sobekhotep/Miew and Sobekhotep/Djadja, one of which may have
become Sobekhotep V, as well as Haankhef Iykhernofret, who was named after the father
ICC
of the brother kings and designated with a double name.
The Debono Stela refers to
the parents and brothers of Sobekhotep IV.356 His parents as well as Neferhotep I and
Sahathor receive the epithet, m^-hrw, suggesting that-they may have been deceased. The
king's wife, Tjin, lady of Atfih, was the possible mother of prince Sobekhotep.357 They
were also the parents of Amenemhet (inscribed box, Cairo JE 34407) and a daughter
Nebtiunet (vase and seal).
The vizier during this reign was Aymeru Neferkare.
The
likely treasurer of this period was Senebi who was probably placed in this position during
the reign of Neferhotep I.360
IV.B.22. Khahotepre Sobekhotep V
There is some controversy as to the identity of the next king in Dynasty XIII.'
Ryholt places Merhotepre Sobekhotep after Sobekhotep IV, believing that there is space
for one additional line in column 7 of the Turin King-List?61 He suggests that the
355
Franke, Personendaten, p. 353, Doss. 592; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 229-230; Simpson, "Dynasty
XIII Stela," pp. 157-158.
356
357
Franke, Personendaten, p. 353, Doss. 592; Spalinger, "Remarks," p. 102; Troy, Patterns ofQueenship,
p. 160.
358
Franke, Personendaten; p. -89, Doss. 89; Ryholt; Political Situation, pp. 230-231.
359
Franke, Personendaten, p. 55, Doss. 26; Helck, Geschichte, p. 123. Habachi dates this vizier to
Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV and Merhotepre Sobekhotep V (Habachi, "Vizier Ibi'," pp. 123-124).
360
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 21.
361
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 230. Titulary- (see Merhotepre Ini below). See also L. Habachi, "New
Light on the Neferhotep I Family, as Revealed by Their Inscriptions in the Cataract Area," in W.K.
Simpson and W.M. Davis, eds., Studies in Ancient Egypt, Aegean, and the Sudan: Essays in Honor of
Dows Dunham on the Occasion of his 90th Birthday, June 1, 1980 (Boston, 1981), p. 80; Schneider,
Lexikon der Pharaonen, pp. 256-257; Simpson, "Dynasty XIII Stela," p. 157.
89
number of lines would correspond to the pattern of gradual increase in the entries as the
columns in the papyrus proceed.362 However, this concept,- which was originally
developed by Helck, has been questioned.
Ryholt points to the genealogical seals of a Sobekhotep with a mother named
Nebhotepti, as providing the identity of the missing king.363 Another seal of this type,
which Ryholt claims belongs to Merhotepre, carries the name of a "god's father," which
corresponds to neither of the two known from Sobekhotep III or the brother kings.364
Thus, while wishing to have the use of genealogical seals assigned to an unbroken string
of kings, Ryholt concludes that Merhotepre Sobekhotep was of non-royal origin and that
these seals belong to him. However, it is possible that the mother of this particular
Sobekhotep was an additional wife of Sobekhotep IV.365 Also, the seal displaying the
prenomen is broken, has some peculiar features, and does not in any way clearly read
"Merhotepre." 66 With so many assumptions, which cannot be substantiated at this time,
it is impossible to confirm Ryholt's placement of this king.
The king following Sobekhotep IV in the Turin King-List, who may have been the
son of the previous ruler, was (Khahotepre) Sobekhotep V, who is given 4 years, 8
months and 29 days (8.1).
This king is also listed in the Karnak Offering-List (41).
Unusually, in seals, this king's name appears with the prenomen in a cartouche but the
362
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 22-23, 24, 29, 31, table 25. For opposition to this idea, see Redford,
Pharaonic King-lists, p. 9.
363
364
. It seems that this seal may refer to the father as a king (generically and not by name). Thus this seal
type would have been held as a traditional form rather than indicating that the king it refers to was nonroyal.
365
Troy, Patterns ofQueenship, p. 160.
366
W.M.F. Petrie and Quibell, Nagada andBallas, I (London, 1896), PI. 80.85.
367
Titulary- Horus:?. Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: hc-htp-rc, Nomen: sbk-htp. Ryholt, Political
90
nomen does not have this royal attribute.368 A parallel for this oddity occurs in a
Dynasty XVII stela from Abydos, which also uses this form for king Rahotep, but other
objects of this ruler do show cartouches for both names.369 The only possible example is
the seal showing Nebhotepre as the mother of a Sobekhotep (see above).
IV.B.23. Wahibre Ibiaw

The next king in the Turin King-List is Wahibre Ibiaw, who is given 10 years, 8
months and 28 days (8.2).
Although a relatively long reign, it contained few
attestations of this king's activities when compared to those of Neferhotep I and

Sobekhotep IV., Thus, it might be the case, that though kingship may have been stable at
this time, signs of the less affluent period (such as a decrease in the ability to commission
royal monuments) to come were already emerging. It is likely that the vizier of this king
was Ibiaw, who also served into the reign of the following ruler.371
IV.B.24. Merneferre Ay
After a decade of rule by Wahibre Ibiaw, the longest reign of Dynasty XIII began
under Merneferre (Ay) (8.3).372 The length of his reign in the Turin King-List is
uncertain, since the first number is unclear, resulting in the possible years 13, 23, or 33. 373
However, Ryholt's version of the document shows that the middle number is likely
368
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 233. This phenomenon also occurs in the Turin King-List for the
following Dynasty XIII kings: Imyremeshaw, Intef, Ibi, and Hor (?) of 8.23.
369
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 233, n. 827.
370
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horas:?, Prenomen: w)h-ib-rc, Nomen: ib-icw. Ryholt, Political
371
Franke, Personendaten, p. 74, Doss. 62; Habachi, "Vizier Ibi'," p. 125. Hayes had suggested that the
vizier Ibiaw was the same man as the king (Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 51).
91
correct at 23 years, 8 months and 18 days.374 Ryholt argues that Ini was the queen of
Merneferre Ay based on her seal type.375 The son of the vizier of Ibiaw, Senebhenaf,
may have served in this office after the death of his father in the reign of Merneferre
Ay.376
IV.B.25. Merhotepre Ini Sobekhotep VI

The next king in the Turin King-List is Merhotepre (Ini), who ruled for a little
over two years (8.4),377 likely the same as the ruler (Merhotepre Sobekhotep) whom
5-70
Ryholt placed after Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV in column seven.
Stele Juridique,
which certainly dates to after Merneferre Ay, only has the prenomen of the king
Merhotepre, 79 and it is curious why a second king of this name would not be
differentiated from the first with the use of his nomen (also the case in the Turin KingList entry). Thus, it is suspected that Ini and Sobekhotep were double nomens for this
king, used interchangeably or chronologically.380 Ryholt believes that this king may have
been the son of Merneferre Ay because Stele Juridique shows that his daughter
372
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: mr-nfr-rc, Nomen: iy. Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 354. See also Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, p. 47; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p.
59; Handbuch, pp. 98-99.
373
Farina, IIPapiro, pp. 43, 46; Bennett, "King's Daughter," p. 22; Gardiner, Royal Canon, p. 16; Ryholt,
Political Situation, pp. 38, 74-75; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 59.
374
375
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 38, 234^235. See also the seal of the "great wife," Ini, in Hornung and
Staehelin, Skarabden und andere Siegelamulette, pp. 215, no. 127, PL 211; G.A. Reisner, Excavations at
Kerma, IV-V, Howard African Studies 6 (Cambridge, Mass., 1923), p. 75, Figs. 168[159], 176.
376
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 126-128; Franke, Personendaten, p. 388, Doss. 661; Habachi,
"Vizier Ibi'," p. 125; Macadam, "Royal Family," pp. 24-25; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 77, 259, 306.
377
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: mr-htp-rc, Nomen: ini. Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 356. See also Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, pp. 138, 257-258; von Beckerath,
378
379
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 233, n. 829.
380
92
(Reditenes) was married to Ini's appointed vizier, Ay,
381
demonstrating that he was on
friendly terms with the former king's family 382
IV.B.26. Sankhenre Sewadjtew, Mersekhemre Ined, Sewadjkare Hori and

Merkawre Sobekhotep VII '
The Turin King-List has the names of the next four kings preserved before
breaking for seven lines, according to Ryholt's reconstruction. The kings in this section
include Sankhenre Sewadjtew (3 years),
Mersekhemre Ined (3 years),
Tor
Hort(5 years), and Merkawre Sobekhotep VII (2 years).
Sewadjkare
Q/l
This last king is also in the
Karnak Offering List (45). Two sons of Merkawre Sobekhotep VII are named in a statue
pair from Karnak (Bebi and Sobekhotep).387 Bebi may have had two stelae set up by
majordomo Ptahaa.388 He is referred to as s3-nswmfc'(true prince) and sSnswsmsw
(eldest prince), so this probably denotes that he was an actual king's son.389
IV.B.27. The Remaining Kings
After the break in the papyrus, the following kings are listed (from 8.16-8.18):
381
Franke, Personendaten, p. 48, Do Handbuch, pp. 98-99 Handbuch, pp. 98-99ss. 12; Mioso, A Reading
Book, pp. 20-29; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 306-307.
382 Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 233-234.
383 .
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: scnh-n-rc, Nomen:swld.tw. Ryholt, Political
38
Titulary-Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: mr-shm-r, Nomen: ind. Ryholt, Political
385
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: swld-k3-rc, Nomen: hrw-i. Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 356; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 61; Handbuch, pp. 98-99..
386
Titulary- Horus:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: mr-k3w-rc, Nomen: sbk-htp. Ryholt, Political
387
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 235-236. Franke, Personendaten, pp. 164, Doss. 228; 353, Doss. 593.
388
Franke, Personendaten, p. 171, Doss. 239A. Bologna Stela B.1927 and CG 20578. E. Bresciani, Le
Stele Egiziane del Museo Civico Archealogico di Bologna (Bologna, 1985), pp. 40-41, 142.
389
93
Mer[.. .]re, Merkheperre, and Merkare.390 The next entry, 8.19 is lost in a lacuna, and the
following entry in the Turin King-List is Sewedjare Montuhotep (8.20)."
The son,
Herunefer, and queen^ Sitmut,pf king Montuhotep are known through the former's coffin
in the British Museum (EA 2999T).392
Lines 8.21-8.27 in the Turin King-List are fragmentary including these rulers:
[.. .Jmosre, [.. .Jmaatre Ibi, [.. .Jwebenre Hor[,..], S[.. .]kare,- Sehekenre Sankhptahi, and
[
]re, and Se[.. .]enre.
Ryholt has argued that the nomen of Sehekenre Sankhptahi,
one of the last of the dynasty, may demonstrate that the capital remained at Itjatawy until
the end when the Hyksos took Memphis.394 The fact that this king inserts the divine
name "Ptah" into his nomen, may indicate that he had special ties to the Memphite city.
Also, Sehekenre Sankhptahi's name was found on a treasurer's stela at Memphis.395
Ryholt argues that Sankhptahi may have been the son of Se[.. .]kare of 8.24 due to a stela
(Cairo CG 20600), which shows a Sankhptahi as a "king's son" along with several
"king's daughters." However, relationships are difficult to extract with certainty in this
stela.396
Four other kings from the Dynasty XIII, besides those already discussed above,
390
For each of these kings, only the prenomen is known: mr-[:. .]-rc, mr-hpr-rc, and mr-ki-rc. Ryholt,
Political Situation, p. 357; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 61; Handbuch, pp. 98-99.
391
Titulary- Horns:?, Nebty:?, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: swdc-rc, Nomen: mnt-htp. Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 357. See also N. Dautzenberg, "Plazierungsvorschlage zu zwei Konigen der 13. Dynastie,"
GM127 (1992), pp. 17-18; Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, pp. 158-159; von Beckerath,
393
In the order of rulers listed above, preserved names include: Prenomen-/. ..]-ms-[rc}, Prenomen-/...7c
m3 t-rc, Nomen-/&4 Prenomen-/..,]-wbn-rc, Nomen-hrw[.. ?]; Prenomen-^/.. .]-kS-rc; Prenoxnen-sM-n-r^
Nomen-^cnh-pth-i; Prenomen-/...]-[.. J-rc, Prenomen-s[.. .]-n-rc. Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 357-359;
394
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 69, 79.
95
For bibliography concerning this privately owned stela, see Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 358.
396
94
are not preserved in the Turin King-List: Mershepsesre Ini, Mersekhemre Neferhotep,
Sewahenre Senebmiew, and Sekhaenre.397 It is likely that these kings fit within the
lacunae mentioned above along with other unknown kings.
IV.C. Defining the Phases of Dynasty XIII

The rulers of the Dynasty XIII chronology discussed above can be placed into
three primary groups possibly reflecting the nature of kingship over time.
The first set
of rulers includes Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I through Seth. The initial

kings of this group were likely related in some way to the last rulers of Dynasty XII.
Many of them have double names including Amenemhet, which may refer to a king of
the earlier dynasty. In general, this period is seen as being weak primarily because little
is known about most of these rulers. However, it should be noted that the majority of the
recognized pyramids of Dynasty XIII likely belong to this group of kings. Also, Papyrus
Bulaq 18, dated to this time period,399 demonstrates the orderly operation of affairs
during a visit of the royal family to the Theban area, with the normal hierarchy of
government in place. Thus, though the reigns of these rulers are relatively short, there are
indications of stability with the king at the apex of society.
The next group of kings of Dynasty XIII includes Sekhemresewadjtawy
Sobekhotep III through Merneferre Ay. Sobekhotep III and the family of Neferhotep
39/
In the order of the listing above: xe,m>men-mr-sps-rc, Nomen-wr, Prenomen-mr-xljm-r^ ~Nomen-nfrMpi Prenomen-sw3h-n-rc, Nomen-snb-mi-iw, and Prenomen sh c-n-rc, Nomen-/".
]s. Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 359; von Beckerath, Unters-uchungen, p. 63.
398
For similar discussions, see Callender, "Renaissance," p. 171; Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt,"
pp. 746-747; Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 219-220; "Thirteenth Dynasty," pp. 395-396; Redford,
Akhenaten, p. 99; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 34-37, 296-297, Table 288.
399
For the dating of this document along with references, see Chapter 2, Section IV.B.16.
95
I/Sobekhotep IV, which followed him, emphasized their non-royal ancestry in their
monuments and sealings.400 They began a period of prosperity which endured through
the reign of Merneferre Ay, who held the throne for twenty-three years. Generally, the
kings in this grouping had a significant number of monuments in comparison to the other
Dynasty XIII kings. Merneferre Ay appears to have had a traditional royal funerary
monument as his pyramidion was discovered out of context in the Delta. It is possible
that some of the other funerary structures from the Late Middle Kingdom with unknown
owners may also belong to kings within this group.
The. final set of rulers within Dynasty XIII includes those from Merhotepre Ini
until the end. Next to nothing is known about these ephemeral kings, who have few
known monuments. These rulers were significantly weaker than their predecessors. It is
generally thought that they lost the eastern Delta to Dynasty XIV and the south to Theban
Dynasty XVI. They likely became a localized dynasty with little territory beyond the
Memphite region by the end of the era. The last of these kings was likely defeated and
overthrown by the Hyksos (Dynasty XV).
It should be noted that there are no attested Horus, Nebty, or Golden Horus names
known for each king following Sobekhotep IV.401 Though this could be due to a lack of
preservation, several kings in this time period ruled for long enough to construct a
number of monuments. This same pattern is also found for the Dynasty XIV kings.

Sankhptahi may potentially be the exception with a possible Golden Horus name, shc-n-pth (Ryholt,
Political Situation, p. 258).
401
96
V. Conclusions
Dynasty XIII cannot be classified as being a part of the Middle Kingdom or
Second Intermediate Period in its entirety. From Senwosret III of Dynasty XII through
Merneferre Ay (the Late Middle Kingdom), the organization of the government remains
little changed even though there was a substantial loss of economic and political power of
the rulers after the reign of Amenemhet III. Following Merneferre Ay, the Dynasty XIII
rulers lost territory to other groups of kings, ushering in the Second Intermediate Period.
A recent study by Bennett has changed the current understanding of the
chronological relationships between Dynasty XIII and those of the Second Intermediate
Period. Much data must be restudied in light of the probable overlap between Dynasties
XIII and (Theban) XVI. At this point, it appears that Dynasty XIV emerged in the
eastern Delta soon after the death of Merneferre Ay. Later, Thebes separated from the
capital at Jtjatawy forming Dynasty XVI. Near the end of Dynasty XIII, the Hyksos
(Dynasty XV) took over the eastern Delta and began to force their way southward,
eventually toppling Dynasty XIII. It is unknown if they made their way to Thebes, but
that area was also facing pressure from the Kushite kings from Nubia. Dynasty XVI
transitioned into Dynasty XVII, which began to undertake campaigns against both the .
Hyksos and the Kushites in order to drive the foreign kings out of their country.
Ryholt's study of the Turin King-List has, resolved some of the internal
chronological issues for Dynasty XIII. Here, in this study, we have adopted Ryholt's
placement of Sekhemrelthutawy A m e n e m h e t Sobekhotep I at the beginning of the period,
switching him with Khutawyre Wegaf. The known wsf entry has also been accepted as
referring to Nerikare. However, proposed missing kings such as Seb, Kay, and others
97
have been removed, as not every double name has been interpreted as representing royal
filiation.
There are still many mysteries in the lacunae of the Dynasty XIII section of the
Turin King-List. Interpretation of this document, often depends upon the goals and
agendas of the authors who examine it There is really no way to prove ordisprove any
reconstruction, except through additional work with the original document.
Unfortunately, the state of this text is such that the identity of many of the kings of
Dynasty XIII may never be known.
98
Chapter 2
Royal Legitimacy and Succession in Dynasty XIII
I. Introduction
Even if Dynasty XIII is extended a few decades beyond the 150 years assigned to
it, the situation of having over 50 kings in such a limited time must have created crises
related to legitimization and succession. Some of the shortest reigns, which lasted less
than a year, are probably symptomatic of these challenges. In this chapter, the nature of
royal legitimization in Dynasty XIII along with innovations which likely date to this
period will be addressed. Sections will also discuss the analysis of the probable and
proposed methods of succession for Dynasty XIII and evaluate their merits in light of the
evidence available at this time.
II. Legitimacy in Dynasty XIII

In ancient Egypt, the ruler was a human occupant of the divine office of
kingship.402 In theory, the office of kingship could be corrupted by unqualified or
deteriorating kings due to the failure of the leader to provide for the balance between the
living, the dead, and the gods, resulting in poverty, immorality, and the infiltration of
foreigners.403 During Dynasty XIII, many of the kings had short reigns, sometimes
lasting for little more than a few years. Thus, the question arises as to how the people,
402
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 275; Posener, De la Divinite du Pharaon, Cahiers de la Societe

Asiatique 15 (Paris, 1960), pp. 145-163; Silverman, "Unity and Power," p. 45; "Nature of Egyptian
Kingship," in D. O'Connor and D.P. Silverman, eds., Ancient Egyptian Kingship, pp. 51 -61. See also D.
Lorton, "Towards a Constitutional Approach to Ancient Egyptian Kingship," JAOS 99 (1979), p. 460.
403
Similar concepts are discussed in the Demotic Chronicle and other sources from the 4th-3rd Centuries
BC. See J.H. Johnson, "The Demotic Chronicle as a Statement of a Theory of Kingship," JSSEA 13 (1983),
pp. 61-72.
99
especially the elite, viewed the individual rulers and how the kings responded to them.
ILA. Divine Birth

Divine birth is a principle of divine kingship which designated the father of a king
as the sun god in place of his own biological one. Thus, a ruler did not have to be the sen
of the previous king to claim his right to the throne, giving this opportunity to anyone
with the ability to gain the needed support to legitimize his reign.
The development of the notion of divine birth began in Dynasty IV with the use
of the term si-re ("son of Re") in the titulary along with the nomen.404 This phrase itself
suggests that at least some aspect of the king was considered to be divine at the point that
he received it. However, the more overt concept of divine birth was not expressed until
much later. Lorton suggests that the "son of Re" is not to be taken literally, as it likely
denotes the king's status in comparison to the deity and the latter's duty to protect the
This part of the titulary emerged at the beginning of the reign of Djedefre (Hornung, Conceptions of
God in Ancient Egypt: the One and the Many (Ithaca, NY, 1982), p. 142; "The Pharaoh," in S. Donadoni,
ed., The Egyptians (Chicago, 1997), p. 286; P. Kaplony, "Konigstitulatur," LA, 3 1979, pp. 641-661;
Kemp, "Social History," pp. 71-72; D.P. Silverman, "Deities and Divinity in Ancient Egypt," in B.E.
Schafer, ed., Religion in Ancient Egypt: Gods, Myths, and Personal Practice (Ithaca, 1991) p. 65; "Nature,"
p. 71; Silverman, "Epithet;" W. Barta, Untersuchungen zur Gottlichkeit des regierenden Konigs. Ritus und
Sakralkonigtum in Altagypten nach Zeugnissen der Friihzeit und des Alten Reiches, Munchner
Agyptologische Studien herausgegeben von Hans Wolfgang Miiller 32 (Munchen-Berlin, 1975), pp. 32-40;
Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, pp. 63, 73-75, 81-82, 261; Fairman, "Kingship Rituals of Egypt," in
S.H. Hooke, ed., Myth, Ritual, and Kingship (Oxford, 1958), p. 77; Robins, "Legitimation," p. 287.
Assmann believes that the concepts behind this "representative theocracy" developed in the First
Intermediate Period due to the role played by the nomarchs at that time (Assmann, Mind of Egypt, p. 119).
Tobin points out that the king as the son of the sun god was already in existence from the beginning with
the connection between the ruler and the solar Horus (Tobin, Theological Principles of Egyptian Religion
(New York, 1989), pp. 93-94). See also, Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p.- 274. Teeter dates this component
of the titulary to Neferirkare of Dynasty V. (E. Teeter, "Kingship," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), pp. 411-412). However, this title is found earlier in the
reign of Khafre (Silverman, "Epithet"; von Beckerath, Handbuch, p. 54, n. 1).
100
former.405
In the Instruction to King Merikare, dated to the First Intermediate Period, the
creator is said to have "made for them (mankind) rulers in the egg."406 Similar claims are
also made in the Coffin Texts.407 Though the idea of the creator being the father is not
found here, it is clear that there is a divine intent in making a child, who was
predetermined to become king in the future. Thus, the attributes required to take the
divine office legitimately were in the ruler from the moment he became king. The
individual did not possess any divine aspects, until the coronation ceremonies,408 when
the office of kingship was passed from the deceased king to the next mortal ruler through
the royal ka or "life force."409 Theoretically, only after this ceremony, could a king
display certain divine features.
The first explicit, extended reference to divine birth known thus far is in the
Westcar Papyrus (Papyrus Berlin 3033), which is found in a copy dated to Dynasty
Lorton, "Towards a Constitutional Approach," p. 460. In a similar way, workers were sometimes
referred to as "sons" of their superiors (Vernus, Le Surnom, p. 116).
406
Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, pp. 75, 261; Kemp, "Social History," p. 74; Lichtheim, Ancient
Egyptian Literature, p. 106, line 135.
407
Silverman, "Deities and Divinity," pp. 70-71; "Nature," p. 72.
0
Goedicke, "Origin," pp. 126, 127; Hornung, Conceptions, p. 142; Silverman, "Deities and Divinity," pp.
63, 66, 68; Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, pp. 245-251.
. Note that Frankfort incorrectly believed that the king joined the realm of the gods upon succession (L.
Bell, "Luxor Temple and the Cult of the Royal Ka," JNES 44 (1985), p. 257; Frankfort, Kingship and the
Gods: A Study of Ancient Near Eastern Religion as the Integration of Society and Nature (Chicago, 1948),
pp. 123-139). Fairman stated that the gods accepted the king upon his coronation, legitimizing his reign
(Fairman, "Kingship Rituals," p. 104). Brunner argues that inheritance was the most important aspect of
the legitimization of a king at the beginning of the Middle Kingdom. However, later, full legitimization
was granted with the coronation through the gods (H. Brunner, "Die Lehre vom Konigserbe im fruhen
Mittleren Reich," in O. Firchow, ed., Agyptologische Studien (Berlin, 1955), pp. 4-11).
409
L. Bell, "The New Kingdom 'Divine' Temple: The Example of Luxor," in B.E. Schafer, ed., Temples of
Ancient Egypt (Ithaca, 1997), p. 140; Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 274; Robins, "Legitimation," pp. 287,
288; Silverman, "Nature," pp. 73-74.
410
These divine features could be present at any time during a ruler's reign after the coronation. For
example, Hatshepsut had a pleasant aroma and brilliant glow upon receiving her expedition from Punt in
Year 9 (Hornung, Conceptions, p. 64). The scenes related to her birth are in close proximity to those with
the divine aspects in the Middle Colonnade (E. Naville, Temple of Deir elBahari, Part II (London, 1896)
pp. 14-18, Pis. 47-54; Temple of Deir elBahari, Part III, (London, 1896), p. 16).
101
XV/XVII.411 The composition of this text may date to the Late Middle Kingdom, though
its precise chronological placement is uncertain.412 One of the tales in this papyrus is set
in the court of king Khufu of Dynasty IVr The mother of these infants is a non-royal
woman married to a priest of the sun god.413 A magician named Djedi prophesizes to this
king about the rare conception of triplets, who are the sons of the god Re and will become
the rulers of Dynasty V.414 The story also relates the birth of these children in the
presence of deities, who announce their royal destiny.
Regardless of whether or not this story served as a legitimization precedent for the
three brother kings of Dynasty XIII (Neferhotep I, Sahathor, and Sobekhotep IV) as some
have proposed,415 this tale does have some interesting elements, which explain the
divinely ordained kingship principle. For example, the magician, Djedi, reveals all the
details of the triplets' birth, including the names of the parents, their location, and the
411
R. Parkinson, Poetry and Culture in Middle Kingdom Egypt (New York, 2002), p. 295.
Assmann, Mind of Egypt, pp. 146, 185; Barta, Untersuchungen, pp. 22-29; C. Bennett, "The Structure of
the Seventeenth Dynasty," GM149 (1995), p. 31; Berlev, "Eleventh Dynasty," pp. 368-369; H. Brunner,
Die Geburt des Gottkonigs (Wiesbaden, 1964), pp. 203-206; Kemp, "Social History," p. 77; Ancient
Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization (London, 1989), p. 197; L.H. Lesko, "Textual Sources, Middle Kingdom,"
in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 796; Lorton,
"Towards a Constitutional Approach;" pp. 460-461,463; R. Parkinson, "Papyrus Westcar," in D.B.
Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), p. 24; Silverman, "Nature," p.
71. Quirke dates the preserved copy of the text to Dynasty XV/XVII based on the characteristics of the
hieratic. See Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 130; "Narrative Literature," in A. Loprieno, ed., Ancient Egyptian
Literature (New York, 1995), p. 271; "Second Intermediate Period," p. 262. Some scholars attribute it to
Dynasty XV; Bietak implies that the unprovenienced papyrus was from Avaris (Bietak, "Hyksos Rule," p.
115; "Hyksos," (2001), p. 140; G. Posener, Litterature et Politique dans VEgypte de la Xlle Dynastie,
Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes 307 (Paris, 1956), p. 12). Goedicke prefers the end of Dynasty
XVII (H. Goedicke, "Thoughts about the Papyrus Westcar," ZAS 11 (1993), pp. 23-36). For a photograph
and transcription of the papyrus, see A.M. Blackman, The Story of King Kheops and the Magicians:
Transcribedfrom Papyrus Westcar, Berlin Papyrus 3033 (Reading, England, 1988). For translations of the
text, see Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature 1, pp. 215-222; Simpson, Literature, pp. 15-30. For
further bibliographic information, see Bellion, Catalogue des Manuscrits, p. 353.
413
This is the first reference to the mother within the divine birth context. Previously, only the god, Re was
mentioned as being the father of the king (D.P. Silverman, personal communication).
414
For a study of the possible examples of multiple births in ancient Egypt, see J. Baines, "Egyptian
Twins," Or 54 (1985), pp. 461-482. Triplets were rare in ancient Egypt.
415
See Chapter 2, Section 2.II.E.1.
412
102
date. However, because these are the children of Re himself, it seems that Khufu accepts
the fate of his dynasty and does not attempt in any way to destroy the triplets. Other
signs, such as the proclamation by the gods during the birth that these babies would be
kings, demonstrate that there is no authority on earth, which can change the divine
decision of Re. The status of the parents of the. triplets is irrelevant, in determining their
future, since these children are the seed of Re.
According to Berlev, another way in which kings could allude to divine birth was
to show that their parents were not royal.416 Thus, in certain reigns in ancient Egyptian
history, the non-royal paternal parent of a king was referred to as the "god's father" (it
fitr).417 In Dynasty XIII, a selection of kings, including those possibly linked to the
Westcar Papyrus, used just such terminology to denote their own fathers. The brother
kings; Neferhotep I, Sahathor and Sobekhotep IV; state that they were born to the
commoners, Haankhef and Kemi while Sobekhotep III lists his parents as "god's father"
Mentuhotep and "king's mother" Iwhetibu.
Another king's mother Iwhetibu and a
god's father Dedusobek are the parents of an unknown ruler.419 Also, a Nebhotepti is
cited on a genealogical seal of a Sobekhotep, possibly matched with a paternal seal with
416
Berlev, "Eleventh Dynasty," p. 365.

Berlev, "Eleventh Dynasty," pp. 363, 366; Postel, Protocole, pp. 49-53; A. Gardiner, "The First King
Menthotpe of the Eleventh Dynasty," MDAIK 14 (1956), p. 46; E. Graefe, "Die Vermeintliehe
Unteragyptische Herkunft des Ibi, Obermajordomus der Nitokris," SAK 1 (1974), p. 203, n. 215; Quirke,
"Royal Power," p. 138; Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, p.255. This title may have also been used by
some priests. However, in Dynasty XIII, when "god's father" is used in conjunction with king's mother,
the emphasis is upon the fact that the parents are not from the royal family. See E. Blumenthal, "Die .
'Gottesvater' des Alten und Mittleren Reiches," ZAS 114 (1987), pp. 25-28, 31; Franke, "AMgyptische
Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen," pp. 309-310.
418
Habachi, "Neferhotep I Family," pp. 80-81; Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 130-131; Ryholt, Political
- Situation, p. 285.
~
419
Franke, Personendaten, p. 439, Doss. 762; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 246-248; A.E.P. Weigall,
"Tomb and Cemetery of Senusert III," in E.R. Ayrton, et &l,Abydos, Part III (London, 1904), p. 48, PL
XIII.
417
103
an uncertain reading.
Dynasty XIII kings were not the only ones to use the "god's father" designation.
During the First Intermediate Period, the initial ruler of Dynasty XI also used this title
along with the paternal name to show that he was of non-royal descent. 2
Also,
Amenemhet I, the first king of Dynasty XII, acknowledged his non-royal father,
Senwosret, with this same term.422 Generally, the "god's father" title in association with
a male, non-royal parent was used by kings who wished to distinguish themselves from
their predecessors,"likely due to political turmoil.42 Then, in order to counteract this
break from tradition, these kings may have used the concept of divine marriage to
legitimize their reigns and connect them to the long line of kings who preceded them.424
At the same time that a few of the kings used the term "god's father" with the
names of their fathers in seals, they also placed "son of Re" on the seals with their
mothers' names (Neferhotep I, Sobekhotep IV and another Sobekhotep but not
Sobekhotep III).425 This relationship in the seals would seem to point overtly toward the
divine marriage between the mortal (non-royal) mother and the god Re. It is also
interesting that the "son of Re" is usually associated with the prenomen. However, in
these seals, this term appears in conjunction with the nomen while the paternal seals
contain the prenomen of the king.
420
O. Tufhell, Studies on Scarab Seals II (Warminster, 1984), pp. 3533, PL 3564, no. 3533.
Postel, Protocole, p: 17; L. Habachi, "God's Fathers and the Role They Played in the History of the First
Intermediate Period," ASAE 55 (1958), pp. 176, 186-188. In the New Kingdom, this term can be used for
the royal tutor (H. Brunner, "Der "Gottesvater" als Erzieher des Kronprinzen," ZAS 86 (1961), pp. 90-100).
See also the "god's father of Onuris" in the Second Intermediate Period stela in A. Leahy, "A Stela of the
Second Intermediate Period," GM44 (1981), pp. 29, Fig. 21.
422
Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, p. 255.
423
Baines, "Definition," p. 18; Habachi, "God's Fathers," pp. 167-190.
421
424
For the New Kingdom and the connection of divine marriage scenes and legitimacy in the New
Kingdom, see Simpson, "Egyptian Sculpture," p. 268, n. 219.
425
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 35, Fig. 2; Postel, Protocole, p. 103, n. 471.
104
H.B. Festivals
II.B.l Accession and Coronation
Festivals, involving the appearance of the king, served as a form of legitimization.
The first and most important festivals for a monarch included the accession and
coronation. The accession ideally occurred at sunrise on the day after that on which the
previous king died, while the coronation was planned on the date of the New Year or on
the first day of one of the other seasons.426 Leprohon states:
These occasions were crucial because it was during them that the divine essence
of the sacral office was transferred to the king and the fusion of the pharaoh's
human and divine natures occurred.427
The right to the throne was affirmed through these ceremonies.428 Thus, in most
cases, the fact that someone successfully became king was sufficient to indicate that he
possessed the royal ka and that he was divinely chosen for this highest office in the
human realm. Though there are no direct depictions or inscriptions related to such
ceremonies in Dynasty XIII, one should expect that they occurred with the accession of
each new king upon the throne.
II.B.2. The Sed Festival
The sed festival is another event that is important for the legitimization of some
kings. This ceremony occurred after a ruler had been in office for some time, but just
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," pp: 276-277. For more details of the accession and coronation, see C.J.
Bleeker, Egyptian Festivals: Enactments of Religious Renewal, Studies in the History of Religions 13
(Leiden, 1967), pp. 95-96; Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, pp. 245-246, 247-248; Fairman, "Kingship
Rituals," pp. 78-80, 81-83, 96-97, 104.
427
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 276. See also Silverman, "Nature," p. 69.
428
L. Bell, "Luxor Temple," p. 257; Brunner, "Die Lehre," pp. 4-11; Goedicke, "Origin," pp. 126, 127;
Hornung, Conceptions, p. 142; Silverman, "Deities and Divinity," pp. 63, 66, 68.
105
how long this period was can differ (traditionally after 30 years).429 With its roots in the
reigns of the earliest Egyptian kings, this festival contains ceremonies and ritualized
athletic activities. Nonetheless, the primary purpose of the sed festival seems to have
been to rejuvenate the strength of the king through close contact and the exchange of gifts
with the gods, as well as a reenactment of the coronation.430
Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I may have celebrated a sed festival,
as indicated in relief on a doorframe found at Medamud.431 It is likely significant that
this king celebrated such a festival in his relatively short reign (3? years), possibly
indicating problems in the late Dynasty XH/early Dynasty XIII, requiring legitimization
beyond the coronation. However, it appears that the sed festival scenes of this king were
copied from those of Senwosret III, and it is possible that his participation in such
ceremonies was symbolic rather than being a historical event.432 Nonetheless, later in
Dynasty XIII, Merhotepre Sobekhotep VI is depicted in a statue wearing a sed festival
A'X'X
robe, possibly commemorating his celebration.
For more information on the Sed Festival, see Bleeker, Egyptian Festivals, pp. 96-123; Bonheme and
Forgeau, Les Secrets, pp. 287-306; Fairman, "Kingship Rituals," pp. 83-85; Lorton, "Towards a
Constitutional Approach," p. 461.
430
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 281; Teeter, "Kingship," p. 412.
431
Di. Arnold, "Cult Complexes," pp. 82, 83 Fig. 36; J. Revez, "Medamud," in K.A. Bard, ed.,
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 476; C. Sambin, "Medamud," in
D.B. Redford, ed., The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2 (Oxford, 2001). For the Medamud material, see
Bisson de la Roque, Medamoud 1928, pp. 3,4, 58-72, 115-123, PI. 114; Bisson de la Roque and Clere,
Medamoud 1927, pp. 89-92, 99-1Q0, 103, 105, 117-118, 131-137, PL 104; Medamoud 1929, pp. 78, 89-93,
PI.-75. Sekhemrekhutawy Sobekhotep I overtook the Senwosret III temple (later usurped by Sobekemsaf
of Dynasty XVII) at this site, including the Sed Festival porch while Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III
usurped the lintels.
Statuettes of an unknown Late Middle Kingdom ruler, dressed in a sed robe, were found at Semna
(Vercoutter, "Roi Ougaf," pp. 227-228).
433
W.V. Davies, Royal Statue Reattributed (London, 1981), no. 31.
106
II.C. Historical Precedent

II.C.l. The Westcar Papyrus
While Parkinson states that the tale in the Westcar Papyrus is based on
"historical" figures of the Old Kingdom, with the addition of some fictional characters,
and is intended to entertain the reader,434 this text may have served to legitimize the
consecutive reigns of the three brothers in Dynasty XIII.435 In other words, the three
Dynasty V brothers in the story serve as a historical precedent for those during Dynasty
XIII. Interestingly, there is a king-list in Wadi Hammamat which may be of the same
"historical" school as Papyrus Westcar. Both in this inscription and the literary text,
Khufu is listed with his sons (Djedefre?), Khafre, Bauefre, and Hordedef, the last of
which may not be real historical figures.436 If Redford's dating is correct, it is possible
that these texts may be roughly contemporary. Also, there may be a conceptual link
between Khufu's desire in the Papyrus Westcar to learn about the secret chambers of
Thoth and Neferhotep's quest to search the library in the temple at Heliopolis regarding a
text outlining the specifications for the statue of Osiris at Abydos (Neferhotep Stela).437
Interestingly, The Prophesies ofNeferti, a text whose story is set in the court of
Parkinson, "Westcar," p. 25; Poetry, pp. 182-192. For the tendency of kings of the late Middle
Kingdom to follow the precedents of the Old Kingdom, see Baines, Visual and Written Culture, p. 194-195.
435
Franke, Das Heiligtium, pp. 69-70; Parkinson, Poetry, p. 296; Quirke, "Second Intermediate Period," p.
262. For a general statement concerning the use of fictionalized history for the purpose of legitimizations,
see M. Van Buren and J.E. Richards, "Introduction: Ideology, Wealth, and the Comparative Study of
"Civilizations"," in J.E. Richards and M. Van Buren, eds., Order, Legitimacy, and Wealth in Ancient States
(Cambridge, 2000), p. 9. For a discussion of how the past was used almost exclusively in literary texts to
present the events of the present, see Baines, "Concepts," pp. 131, 136-138; Posener, Litterature et
Politique, p. 29.
436
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 17-18, n. 32; Simpson, "Dynasty XIII Stela," p. 155; D. Wildung, Die
Rolle dgypticher Konige I (Berlin, 1969), pp. 164-167. Redford says they were princes who never took
throne; he dates the inscription to Dynasty XII (Redford, Pharaonic King-lists, pp. 25, 237).
437
R.B. Parkinson, "The Dream and the Knot. Contextualizing Middle Kingdom Literature," in G. Moers,
ed., Definitely: Egyptian Literature, Lingua Aegyptia 2 (Gottingen, 1999), p. 68; Poetry, pp. 194, 303-304;
Silverman, Non-Royal Burials. See Chapter 2, section II.D.2.
107
the Dynasty IV king, Sneferu.
In this story, a lector priest states that there will be a
king called, Ameny, who will come from Upper Egypt and take the throne and return the
land to its proper state. Many scholars believe that the Ameny spoken of here is
Amenemhet I, who established Dynasty XII after serving as the vizier of king
Mentuhotep Nebtawyre.439
Unlike in the Westcar Papyrus, in The Prophesies ofNeferti, the king named in an
earlier time period may actually be a reference to a ruler who, seven centuries later would
take the throne. Its composition during the reign of Amenemhet I seems probable, but
the premise of using such a work for legitimization is extremely important. The reality of
the circumstances, under which Sehotepibre Amenemhet I acquired the throne, are
unknown, and the nature of the Prophesies ofNeferti may be truthful, embellished, or
propagandistic fiction.440 However, it does seem that Ameny/Amenemhet I had to have
such stories suggesting that his rise to power was predetermined in the Old Kingdom in
order to legitimize his reign.441
The similarities between the tale in the Westcar Papyrus and the Prophesies of
Neferti are interesting. Both are set in Dynasty IV during the height of pyramid
Do. Arnold, "Amenemhet I," p. 18; Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, pp. 103, 104; Callender, .
"Renaissance," p. 156; Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p, 736; Hallo and Simpson, Ancient Near
East, p. 244; Helck, Geschichte, p. 106; Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature 1, pp. 139-145. For further
bibliographic information, see Bellion, Catalogue des Manuscrits, pp. 340-341.
Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, p. 259; Hornung, History, p. 50; Leprohon, "Overview," p. 47;
Posener, Litterature et Politique, pp. 22-28; Postel, Protocole, p. 63; Simpson, "Twelfth Dynasty," pp. 453,
454;. Note that Franke stresses the hypothetical nature of this conclusion. Not only was the nickname
Ameny popular, it also could be seen as an ideological allusion to the mythical Menes, the first mortal king,
according to ancient Egyptian sources. See Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p. 736. See also
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 207, n. 708; Silverman, Non-Royal Burials.
440
Callender, "Renaissance*" pp. 156, 158; Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p. 736; Kemp,
"Social History," pp. 75-77; Posener, Litterature et Politique, p. 28. Assmann suggests that Amenemhet I
came to power through a civil war (Assmann, Mind of Egypt, p. 117).
441
Hornung, History, p. 50.
108
construction under powerful kings. At least for the Prophesies ofNeferti, it may be the
case that this text are part of a genre of Middle Kingdom literature, through which kings
justified their acts through prophesy attributed to religious figures of this revered period.
This purpose is less certain regarding the Westcar Papyrus. It may be the case that the
small part of the document relating the story of the triplets was an older story revived at
this time for the use of the brother kings, as Quirke suggests.442
II.C.2. The Neferhotep Stela

The Neferhotep Stela at Abydos also suggests the use of real or derived historical
sources as precedent for the legitimization of the king's actions.443 This inscription
claims that, Khasekhemre Neferhotep and his courtiers read through the manuscripts at
the Temple of Atum at Heliopolis and found a text concerning the means to create a
statue of the god for the Temple of Osiris.444 They undertook this task in preparation for
the king's participation in the Osiris festival at Abydos in year two of his reign.445 This
stela served as a public testament to the literate elite that the king was responsible in his
duties to the gods, something which was expected for a legitimate ruler.
442
Quirke, "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 397.

Baines, "Concepts," p. 141.
444
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 179; Leahy, "Protective Measure," p. 59. For a bibliography and
translation of this text, see J.H.. Breastead, Ancient Records of Egypt: The First through the Seventeenth
Dynasties I (Urbana, 2001), pp. 332-336. For a complete study of this stela {Berlin 1204) and the Osiris
Festival, see R. Anthes, "Die Berichte des Neferhotep und des Ichernofret liber das Osirisfest in Abydos,"
Festschrift zum 150 Jarigen des Berliner Aryptischen Museums, Mitteilungen aus der Agyptischen
Sammlung 8 (Berlin, 1974), pp. 15-49.
5
Kadish, "Historiography," p. 110. Dodson, Monarchs, p. 69; Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 2129, no. 32; B.J. Kemp, "Abydos," LA, I (Weisbaden, 1975), p. 32; A. Mariette, Catalogue General des
Monuments d'Abydos (Paris, 1880), pp. 233-234; Description desfouilles dAbydos II (Paris, 1880), Pis. 2830; A.E.P. Weigall, Guide to the Antiquities of Upper Egypt (New York, 1910), p. 6; Weill, La Fin du
Moyen Empire. Eyre suggests that the stela of Neferhotep I at Abydos is the first "konigsnovelle" (Eyre,
"The Semna Stelae: Quotation, Genre, and Functions or Literature," in S.I. Groll, ed., Studies in Egyptology
Presented to Miriam Lichtheim (Jerusalem, 1990), p. 147). This stela has been used as evidence that the
king was literate (Baines and Eyre, "Four Notes on Literacy," GM61 (1983), p. 78).
443
109
II.C.3. The Use of the Nomen Amenemhet

The nomen Amenemhet (or Ameny Qemau) was used by eight of the Dynasty
XIII kings. In six of these, it was used as components of double names. Regardless of
whether or not this name refers to family members, it directly or indirectly hearkens back
to reigns of Dynasty XII such as Amenemhet I and III. In fact, one of the kings in the
Turin King-List (7.12), Sehotepibre, has the same prenomen as Amenemhet I. Thus, it is
likely that the kings of Dynasty XIII deliberately associated themselves with the
successful rulers of the Middle Kingdom, perhaps to legitimize their reigns.
II.D. Art and Royal Regalia

Another means of royal legitimization during Dynasty XIII was the depiction of
kings in royal regalia in relief and sculpture, which related the status of the ruler
according to traditional ideology. There are more than two dozen royal statues dated to
Dynasty XIII, but, unfortunately, few have inscriptions, which identify the king
depicted.446 In general, the art style of Dynasty XIII initially continued that of Senwosret
III and Amenemhet III with a stylized body and a modeled, somber face with heavy
eyelids and down-turned lips.447
Statues such as EA 1167 and a head of Khendjer from his funerary complex show
the king wearing a names crown with a uraeus upon his brow, as one can see in the
sculptures of other periods including Dynasty XII.448 Other statues depict the king in sed
festival garb such as one depicting Merhotepre Sobekhotep VI from the Cairo Museum
446
Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p 69.

See Chapter 1, Section II.A3.
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, PI. 5b-c; Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, Fig. 54. For an example of a
statue depicting Amenemhet III in a names crown, see Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 44, no. 31.
447
110
(JE 37421/CG 42027).449 Relief scenes depicting the king, Sekhemrekhutawy

Amenemhet Sobekhotep I celebrating a sed festival are also found at the temple at
Medamud.450 Though there is some question as to whether or not this ruler actually
participated in a sed festival or simply copied the scenes and texts from a monument of
Senwosret III, these depictions as well as those mentioned above all work to connect
these individual rulers with traditional kingship of the Middle Kingdom.
Though most of the royal regalia of Dynasty XIII continued from the traditions of
ancient Egyptian kingship to that date, the blue crown may have been a new addition,
which may have signaled the need for additional legitimizing paraphernalia.
51
Though
the term for this headgear, khepresh (Aprs), appears at this early date, the determinative of
the crown itself seems to be more in the form of a royal cap than the fully developed
crown of the early Dynasty XVIII.452 Nonetheless, several of the depictions do indicate
that certain details of the crown were developing, including the blue color, the inscribed
curls, and the curled snake. Examples of this crown during the Late Middle Kingdom
and Second Intermediate Period occurred during the following reigns: Sekhemrekhutawy
Amenemhet Sobekhotep I (Medamud),453 Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV (Wadi
Hammamat),454 Menkhaure Senaaib (Abydos),455 Sekhemreneferkhau Wepwawetemsaf
449
Davies, Royal Statue Reattributed, no. 31.

Bisson de la Roque, Medamoud 1928, pp. 3,4, 58-72, 115-123, PL 114; Bisson de la Roque and Clere,
Medamoud 1927, pp. 89-92,99-100, 103, 105, 117-118, 131-137, PL 104; Medamoud 1929, pp. 78, 89-93,
PL 75.
451
W.V. Davies, "The Origin of the Blue Crown," JEA 68 (1982), pp. 69-76.
452
Cairo JE 59635. Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 73.
453
Bisson de la Roque and Clere, Medamoud 1927, p. PL 4.
454
Debono, "Expedition archeologique royale," p. 81, PL 15; Simpson, "Dynasty XIII Stela," pp. 154-158,
Fig. 151, PL 157a.
455
EX. Ertman, "T
"The Cap-Crown of Nefertiti: Its Function and Probable Origin," JARCE 13 (1976), p. 64,
PL 68; Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 47, no. 64; A. Mariette, Abydos II (New York, 1998), PL 27.
450
111
(Abydos?),
and several examples from Dynasty XVII (Abydos).
Davies suggests
that the khepresh of the New Kingdom, with its association with legitimate kingship and
coronation might be reflective of its use in the Late Middle Kingdom/Second
Intermediate Period when this institution suffered some weakening.458
H.E. Monumental Architecture

The construction of monumental architecture is a form of visual legitimization
that most kings of ancient Egypt used, since it served as a clearly visible display of royal
power and wealth. For Dynasty XIII, however, most of the rulers were unable to
construct impressive monuments. It is clear that some monarchs continued to add onto
Middle Kingdom temples and sacred sites such as those at Medamud, Karnak, Abydos,
and Memphis. The most significant of the relatively small structures they built are the
tombs of a few of these sovereigns.459 Nonetheless, the quantity and size of the royal
monuments were still greater than those of the private officials of the period, and it is
likely that messages of legitimacy were still encoded into the buildings of the Dynasty
XIII kings.
III. Succession
In ancient Egypt, succession occurred in a period of time, which was
Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 48, no. 65. J.J. Clere, "La Stele de Sankhptah, Chambellan su Roi Rahotep," JEA 68 (1982), PL 4-6; von Beekerath,
Untersuchungen,pp. 188-189, 298, xvii, 15(15).
458
Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 51; Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 45, no. 62.
459
See Chapter 3.
457
112
mythologically dangerous, like birth and death (and creation in general).
The passing
of the office of kingship from the deceased king to a successor could erupt into chaos.
Just as a newborn might face dangerous situations such as disease or stillbirth, the new
king could find himself threatened by evil forces, including would-be usurpers or
competitors for the throne. Despite the perceived and real dangers associated with
succession in ancient Egypt, the rapid turnover of kings during Dynasty XIII did not
greatly impact the stability of society nor cause harm to the ideological framework of the
royal institution itself.461
Determining the means, through which the selection of a king occurred is one of
the most important issues in the study of Dynasty XIII.462 Many theories have been
suggested for the mechanics of succession, but none prove to be satisfactory for more
than a few reigns, if at all. In reality, it seems that several innovations may have been
developed as different factors emerged.
III.A. Father-to-Son Succession

The Osiris-Horus-Seth myth found in the Memphite Theology,463 which has its
roots in the Pyramid Texts, may reflect the pattern of normal succession in ancient
Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods, p. 101.

Callender, "Renaissance," p. 171; David, Builders, p. 197; Grimal, History, p. 171; Hallo and Simpson,
Ancient Near East, p. 249; Helck, Geschichte, p. 117; Murnane, "Overview," p. 701; van den Boom, Duties
of the Vizier, p. 346; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 434; Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 5.
462
Quirke, "Thirteenth Dynasty;" p. 396.
463
Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods, pp. 25-30; Kemp, "Social History," p. 72. For the later Ramesseum
Dramatic Papyrus from the accession or sed festival of Senwosret I, see Fairman, "Kingship Rituals," pp.
81-83; Kemp, "Social History," p. 72; K. Sethe, Dramatische Texte zu altaegyptischen Mysterienspielen
(Leipzig, 1928).
461
113
Egyptian kingship.4 4 The story records that Horus, the eldest son of the ruler, as the
rightful heir to the divine throne of Osiris through the rules of inheritance; this divine
model sets the program on a royal level. The ancient Egyptians then viewed the
deceased ruler as Osiris, and the heir, preferably the eldest son, became Horus. Thus,
royal ideological mythology could actually hide the true mechanics of succession,
especially in unfavorable times since the deceased king became Osiris and the living son
Horus, regardless of bloodline.465
Inheritance usually transferred from father to son, but other possibilities
. existed.466 In the private sector at Deir el-Medina in the New Kingdom, however, rules
of inheritance prioritized children and grandchildren while brothers and sisters followed
in a secondary position.467 Also, a non-related heir could be appointed,468 sometimes
through adoption. If a private office was to be transferred to a new family, a formal case
had to be presented, proving the owner's right to the position and declaring his wish to
convey it to someone else.
At the end of Dynasty XII, the female king, Nefrusobek came to the throne.469
She was a daughter of Amenemhet III and may have been the sibling or half-sister of
464
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 274. Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, pp. 68-72; 256-257; 260-261,
263-265, 324-325. J.P. Allen argues that the myth established Horus as the end result of the evolution of
the Ennead in that his place as king on earth parallels the sun god's role as the sustainer of life in the
natural world (J.P. Allen, Genesis in Egypt (New Haven, 1988), p. 11.) J.P. Allen also notes that Horus
only achieves his position through the death of his father, Osiris (J.P. Allen, Genesis, pp. 33-34). Lesko
also approaches this myth from a mythological point of view, but he still allows for the possibility that the
Memphite Theology may have legitimized father-to-son succession (L. Lesko, "Ancient Egyptian
Cosmogonies and Cosmology," in B. Schafer, ed., Religion in Ancient Egypt (Ithaca, 1991), pp. 92-93).
465
466
Bonheme, "Kingship," pp. 240-242; W. Boochs, "Der ehebrechersche Sohn," GM114 (1990), pp. 4345; G. Robins, "A Critical Examination of the Theory that the Right to the Throne of Ancient Egypt Passed
through the Female Line in the 18th Dynasty," GM62 (1983), p. 73; Robins, "Queens," p. 105.
467
J.M.A. Janssen and P.W. Pestman, "Burial and Inheritance in the Community of the Necropolis
Workmen at Thebes," Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 11 (1968), p. 165.
468
Robins, "Legitimation," p. 288.
469
Grajetzki, Middle Kingdom, pp. 61-63.
114
Amenemhet IV.
After her death, Dynasty XIII began. The relationship between the
last kings of Dynasty XII and the first of Dynasty XIII is uncertain.
Titles of two royal women found on scarab seals suggest that there were at least
two normal father-to-son successions in Dynasty XIII. Both of these women possessed
the titles "queen" and "king's mother."471 The first is Nebhotepti, whom Ryholt assigns
to the reign of Awibre Hor through a circular argument, based on his seal chronology.472
Ryholt places the second queen, Aahotepti, prior to the reign of Sobekhotep III without
an exact association with a king.473 Nonetheless, from the titles of these two queens,
there is solid proof that the mothers of at least two rulers were the spouses of kings.
Another likely candidate for father-to-son succession was Ameny Qemau and his
possible successor Hotepibre Saharnedjeritef. The latter's name can be translated as
"Qemau's son Harnedjeritef' a phrase, which appears in a cartouche. Ryholt has also
proposed that double names represent father-to-son successions, though there are other
ways of interpreting these in private examples, as will be shown in Chapter 6.
Nonetheless, even if only some of these double names represent this type of succession,
they only occur in the first part of the dynasty, presumably when descendents of the
Dynasty XII kings remained. Later, however, another form, fratrilineal succession
emerges, changing some aspects or emphasizing some of the more unorthodox
470
Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 43.

Quirke, "Investigation," p. 230; "Royal Power," p. 129. Another seal dated to late Dynasty XII/XIH
appears to be a third example. -
472
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 38-39, 218, for the bibliography of the seal see 238-239, n. 101.
Fragments of a statuette of Queen and King's Mother Nebhotepti were found in room LVII of the Semna
Fort (Dunham and Janssen, Semna Kumma, p. 28, PL 87 A21, A22; Tufnell, Scarab Seals, PI. 64, nos.
3535-3536).
473
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 39, n. 104; 242-243. Another possible example is the "king's wife" and
"king's mother," Senet, who lived in the Late Dynasty XII to early Dynasty XIII.
471
115
characteristics of the office of kingship.
III.B. Fratrilineal Succession

The myth of Osiris suggests that conflict could ensue between a brother and a son
of a deceased king concerning the identity of the rightful heir. In the Contendings of
Horus andSeth, the two gods (the son and the brother of the deceased king), fight over
the right to the throne without either being the obvious choice amongst the gods, who
debate over the issue.474 Ultimately, Horus ascends to the throne, but the fact that the
rightful heir could be a brother is implied.475
Fratrilineal succession (fratriarchy) is a system that ancient Egyptian royalty may
have developed during the Second Intermediate Period in order to prevent young children
from inheriting the throne while maintaining the royal power of a single family.
Instead, a king might choose a brother, nephew, or another mature relative to take the
throne upon his death. With this sort of system, the lines of succession would have been
stable initially, though individual reigns of the successors may have been shorter, relative
to those of father-to-son succession because occupants were of the same generation.
However, as the throne passed to successive generations (nephews, etc.), there may have
been some confusion concerning the right to the throne. As the number of eligible male
relatives increased, factions within the family may have emerged.
474
Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature 2, pp. 214-223; J. van Dijk, "Myth and Mythmaking in Ancient
Egypt," in J. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East 3, (Peabody, MA, 1995), pp. 1704-1706.
See also Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, p. 68-70, 256, 265 .
475
Note that one early king, Peribsen identified himself with Seth (rather than having Horus associated with
his serekh), while Khasekhemwy used both Horus and Seth, presumably after he defeated Peribsen.
Normally, it is assumed that there was a civil war at this time and that the state was led by two leaders,
ideologically, Horns and Seth. See S. Quirke, Who Were the Pharaohs, (Mineola, New York), p. 35.
476
Bennett, "Structure," pp. 29-30. See also Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, p. 258.
116
Fratrilineal succession has occurred many times over the course of human history.
According to Bennett,477 examples include: the Elamites,478 Assyrians from the 15th-14th
centuries BC,479 later Kushite kings including those of Egyptian Dynasty XXV,480
Hsiung-nu (Huns) in Mongolia after 31 BC,481 Russian princes after 10.54,482 Aztecs,483
Maya in Post-Classical Period,484 Ottoman Turks after 1603,485 and modern Saudi
Arabian kings.486 During Dynasty XIII, at least one instance of fratriarchy occurred (the
Neferhotep/Sahathor/Sobekhotep family) from 26 to 65 years (17-43%) of the 150-year
period.
Bennett suggests that rulers of Dynasty XVII and, possibly, parts of XIII,
consciously chose to institute a practice of fratrilineal succession to create stability in the

office of kingship.487 He theorizes that this concept may have originated from contact
with the Kushite rulers in Nubia, though evolution within Egypt may be a more plausible
hypothesis, considering the internal situation at the time.488 Also, isolated examples of
477
Bennett, "Structure," pp. 29-30.

F. Hintze, The Lost World ofElam (London, 1972), p. 88ff.
479
B. Landsberger, "Assyrische Konigsliste und dunkles Zeitalter," JCS 8 (1954), p. 31.
480
A.J. Arkell, History of the Sudan to AD 1821 (London, 1961), pp. 121, 127; D. Dunham and M.F.L.
Macadam, "Names and Relationships of the Royal Family of Napata," JEA 35 (1949), p. 149; M.F.L.
Macadam, The Temples ofKawa I. The Inscriptions (London, 1949), p. 124; D.B. Redford, History and
Chronology of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt: Seven Studies (Toronto, 1967), p. 66. Lohwasser notes that
there is only one certain case of fratrilineal succession in Napata (Anlamani and Aspelta). A. Lohwasser,
"Queenship in Kush: Status, Role and Ideology of Royal Women," JARCE 38 (2001), p. 64. For the most
part, there was a loosely-based collateral system, in which the office of kingship alternated between two
families within which patrilineal succession occurred (L. Torok, "On the Foundations of Kingship Ideology
in the Empire of Kush," in S. Wenig, ed., Studien zum antiken Sudan. Akten der 7. Internationalen Tagung
fur meroitistishe Forschungen vom 14. bis 19 September 1992 in Gosen/bei Berlin, Meroitica 15 (Berlin,
1999), p. 276).
T.J. Barfield, The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China (Oxford, 1989), pp. 72 ff.
482
G. Vernadsky and M. Karpovich, A History of Russia, II (New Haven, 1994) pp. 83 ff.
483
N. Davies, The Aztecs: a History (London, 1973), pp. 79-80.
484
L. Scheie and D. Freidel, A Forest of Kings (New York, 1990), p. 359 ff.
485
A.D. Alderson, The Structure of the Ottoman Dynasty (Oxford, 1956), pp. 10-14.
486
D. Holden, The House ofSaud(New York, 1981), pp. 174, 240, 381.
487
Bennett, "Structure," pp. 25-32.
488
Bennett, "Structure," p. 31.
478
117
brothers taking the throne in succession can be found as early as the Old Kingdom.
Djedefre and Khafre were both reigning sons of the king Khufu of Dynasty IV. 489
Another example of brother kings is that of the Dynasty XI rulers, Sehertawy Intef and
Wahankh Intef, who were both sons of the god's father, Mentuhotep. Thus, the Dynasty
XIII example(s) may have more to do with necessity than with a deliberate modification
of kingship itself.
Name
Generation
Regnal Length
1. Khasekhemre Neferhotep
First
11.25
2. Menwadjre Sihathor
First
less than a year
3. Kfianeferre Sobekhotep
First
12
4. Khahotepre Sobekhotep
Second?
4.75
5. Wahibre Ibiaw
Unknown
10.75
6. Merneferre Ay
Unknown
23.75
Further Members (?):
Table 2.1. Kings possibly related to the fratrilineal line of Neferhotep I.

In Dynasty XIII, brother-to-brother succession occurred with Khasekhemre
Neferhotep I, Menwadjre Sahathor, and Kfianeferre Sobekhotep IV (Table 2.1).490 Some
scholars have suggested that Sahathor, who only ruled for days or months, served as a
Habachi, "God's Fathers," pp. 179, 181.

Quirke, "Investigation," p. 230; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 130; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396.
118
coregent to Neferhotep without ever having occupied the throne alone.491 However, there
is no clear evidence of a coregency, and it is likely that this king died due to his age,
inheriting kingship from his brother after over eleven years. After the reign of the next
sibling ruler, Sobekhotep IV, his possible nephew, Khahotepre Sobekhotep V became
king, a sequence one would expect at the end of the generational line in the pattern of
fratrilineal succession.
Bennett believes that this line continued to rule through the
reign of Merneferre Ay, due to the relatively long reign-lengths of these kings.493
Another possible example of fratrilineal succession is Sekhemrekhutawy
Sobekhotep I and Sekhemkare Senebef as both of these rulers have double nomens
compounded with Amenemhet.494 Also, Ryholt suggests that the (Horus) Khabaw and
(Horus) Djedkheperew were brothers, though there may be some question as to the merits
of his argument.495 Finally, an example of collateral succession, in which a nephew
followed his uncle on the throne may have occurred during Dynasty XIII. According to
Ryholt, Sankhibre Ameny Intef Amenemhet took the throne after his grandfather,
Sekhemkare Amenemhet V; his uncle, Ameny Qemau; his cousin, Qemau
Saharnedjeritef; and another possible relative, Iwefni.496 He argues that this chronology
can be amended, making Ameny Qemau the grandfather of Ameny Intef Amenemhet.
Thus, in this scheme, Saharnedjeritef would have been the uncle of this king rather than a
491
Dewachter, "Roi Sahathor et la famille," p. 66; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 192, 216, n.745.
Murnane does not consider this coregency in his list of double-dated monuments for Dynasty XIII
(Murnane, Coregencies, p. 25).
492
Quirke notes that there is no actual evidence for this relationship (Quirke, "Investigation," p. 230).
493
4M
' Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 209.
495
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 216-218. See also below, Chapter 1, Section IV.B.12.
496
Ryholt, "Royal Names," p. 107; Political Situation, pp. 214-215. Bennett expresses some doubt in
Ryholt's reconstruction (C. Bennett, "Thutmosis I and Ahmes-Sapair," GM141 (1994), p. 35, n.34).
However, his placement of Ameny Qemau with the prenomen Semenkare is incorrect as it is found in
conjunction with Nebnun in a stela from Gebel Zeit.
119
generational contemporary. Nonetheless, either scenario may suggest some sort of

transfer of the office of kingship through members of an extended family, preference
being shown for father-to-son succession with the alternative option of a brother or, if
deceased, his eldest male heir.
Despite the-fact that the ideological system of kingship may have allowed for
fratrilineal kingship at least in some limited circumstances, it would seem that the brother
rulers (Neferhotep I and family) had to go to great lengths to legitimize their reigns. As
with other kings of non-royal birth, Neferhotep gave his parents royal designations after
he was in office ("god's father" and "king's mother"). In inscriptions, it also appears that
Neferhotep I may have designated his heirs (his brothers) as his sons, which incorporated
them into the traditional hereditary successional pattern. One must wonder if he might
have adopted his brothers as sons to make this transition easier. However, if the Westcar
Papyrus does originate from this time period, it may be the case that there were still
doubts as to the legitimacy of this successional procedure.
III.C. Coregency
At the beginning of Dynasty XII, Amenemhet I may have founded (or
reestablished) the practice of coregency.497 Though some scholars do not believe that this
497
L. Berman, "Amenemhet I," dissertation, Yale University, 1985, pp. 173-203. Franke, " The Middle
Kingdom in Egypt," p. 738; Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods, p. 101; Hallo and Simpson, Ancient Near
East, p. 245; Leprohon, "Overview," p. 48; W.K. Simpson, "The Single-Dated Monuments of Sesostris I:
An Aspect of the Institution of Coregency in the Twelfth Dynasty," JNES 15 (1956), p. 216; "Studies," p.
57; "Twelfth Dynasty," p. 454. .As coregency relates to the Instruction of Amenemhet, see Silverman,
"Non-Royal Burials"; "Unity and Power," pp. 35-37, 40. For evidence of coregencies in Dynasty XII, see
Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, pp. 1-24; Valloggia, "Amenmhet IV," pp. 113-133; J. Wegner, "The
Nature and Chronology of the Senwosret III-Amenemhet III Regnal Succession. Some Considerations
Based on New Evidence from the Mortuary Temple of Senwosret III at Abydos," JNES 55 (1996), pp. 266279.
120
method of succession existed for some or all of the Dynasty XII kings,498 others credit
this innovation with the reason for why these twelve nomarchs were able to rule for over
-200 years.499
- . - , -
Generally, the institution of coregency is a successional tool used to inhibit

would-be coups from taking place.500 According to one model, an aging king might
choose an appropriate heir as coregent. This younger king might then be placed in an
inferior position but with enough power to take the throne easily when his predecessor
died. The junior monarch, under this model, was not given full royal titulary nor did he
have any true royal power. Nonetheless, he did gain certain titles which separated him
from the other princes and was often sent to perform military duties away from the
capital, both for his protection and to ensure the. sole authority of the regnant king.5
In an equally viable model for coregency, however, it has been suggested that the
junior ruler played the primary role of king while the older one functioned in more
elusive, possibly ritual roles.502 If indeed such a system existed, it may be the case that
498
Callender, "Renaissance," pp. 148-149; Delia, "Study," pp. 187-253; M. Eaton-Krauss, "Middle
Kingdom Coregencies and the Turin Canon," Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities
12 (1982), pp. 17-20; Franke, "Middle Kingdom," p. 398; W.J. Murnane, "Coregency," in D.B. Redford,
ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 1 (Oxford, 2001), pp. 307-311; C. Obsomer, Sesostris Ier:
Etude Chronologique etHistorique du Regne, Connaissance de l'Egypte Ancienne 5 (Bruxelles, 1995), pp.
35-161; E.P. Uphill, "The Question of Pharaonic Co-Regency," DE 49 (2001), p. 82. For additional
sources for and against the coregency of Amenemhet I and Senwosret I, see C. Obsomer, "La Date de
Nesou-Montou (Louvre CI)," Rd'E 44 (1993), pp. 103-140. For the impact of coregency upon art styles,
see C. Aldred, Middle Kingdom Art in Ancient Egypt (London, 1969), p. 24.
499
Quirke, "Royal Power."138; Hayes, Scepter, p. 172; Hornung, "Pharaoh," p. 297; Leprohon,
"Overview," p. 48; Simpson, "The Single-Dated Monuments of Sesostris I," p. 214.
50
A similar system was used by the Inca in order to prevent usurpation (H. J.M. Claessen, "The Balance of
Power in Primitive States," in S.L. Seaton and H. Claessen, eds., Political Anthropology: The State of the
Art (New York, 1979), p. 189).
501
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 281; D. Lorton, "Terms of Coregency in the Middle Kingdom," VA 2
(1986), pp. 113-120; Murnane, "Coregency," p. 308.
502
Simpson, "The Single-Dated Monuments of Sesostris I," pp. 214-219; Wegner, "Nature and
Chronology," pp. 274-275. Note that Simpson suggested that the junior regent was granted either segments
of the pharaonic duties, or there was combined rule between the two kings. He suggests that, like a sed
121
the practice of coregency evolved over time from the first model to the second or that the
titles of the two kings depended upon the circumstances surrounding the reign of the
elder ruler. If he was in bad health, it may be the case that his heir would receive the
throne early, taking the authority of the state while leaving his predecessor in a revered
role in the religious realm. In either model, the younger king would develop his authority
with his generational peers, something, which would survive the death of the senior king.
In this system, the junior monarch began counting his regnal years, resulting in two sets
CAT
of dates (those of the older and younger king) being in effect at the same time.
The value of such a model may be suggested in the literary masterpieces, The
Instructions of Amenemhet I to his Son504 and Sinuhe.505 From both of these sources, one
may learn that the king may have been assassinated or may have survived an attempt on
his life by members of the court.506 According to the assassination scenario, in The
festival, this practice may have been used to maintain the power of Horus (the divine institution of
kingship) in an aging ruler (Simpson, "The Single-Dated Monuments of Sesostris I," p. 214).
503
Kemp, "Social History," p. 79. For titles associated with coregency, see Lorton, "Terms," pp. 113-120;
Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, pp. 254, 255, 258, 269. Note that "king's son" was used as an honorary
title by this time and is often found in connection with military leaders and others, who were not related to
the ruler (Franke, "Altagyptische Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen," pp. 308-309; "Review of Ward,
Essays," p. 229; Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 2; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 100-101; Ward, Index,
p. 145; Ward, Essays, pp. 39-40, 40-44, 120).
504
K. Jansen-Winkeln, "Das Attentat auf Amenemhet I. und die erste Agyptische Koregentschaft, SAK
18 (1991), pp. 241-264; .,"Zu den Koregenzen der 12. Dynastie," SAK 24 (1997), pp. 115-135. For
references to the issues of coregency and the dating of this text, see Baines, "Definition," p. 21; Murnane,
"Coregency," p. 308. Manetho also suggests foul play at the end of Amenemhet's reign (Callender,
"Renaissance," p. 160). For further bibliographic information concerning this text, see Bellion, Catalogue
des Manuscrits, pp. 329-330; Silverman, "Non-Royal Burials." Obsomer does not believe that this text or
Sinuhe supports the existence of a coregency during the reigns of these kings (Obsomer, Sesostris ler, pp.
112-133).
R. Parkinson, "Sinuhe," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia ofAncient Egypt, 3 (Oxford,
2001), p. 292; Obsomer, "Sinouhe l'Egyptian etles Raisons de son Exil." Le Museon 112 (1999), pp. 207271. Baines was the first among many scholars to analyze this story as a literary piece rather than a work
of propaganda (J. Baines, "Interpreting Sinuhe," JEA 68 (1982), pp. 31-44). He sees the work as reflecting
basic Egyptian values and beliefs but does not agree that it demonstrates any propagandists features. For
further bibliographic information, see Bellion, Catalogue des Manuscrits, pp. 351-353.
506
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 160; Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods, p. 102; Grimal, History, pp. 161163; Hornung, History, p. 54; Lesko, "Textual Sources," p. 796; Simpson, "The Single-Dated Monuments
122
Instructions, the deceased Amenemhet I advises his son to have no friends and to trust no
one. From Sinuhe, it is clear that the prince, Senwosret I, was occupied with military
campaigns in the Libyan front. One can imagine the scenario in which Senwosret
received news of his father's death and rushed back to the Residence to claim the throne.
However, with the aid of a coregency, there is little question over who the rightful heir
is.507 Thus, a possible coup d'etat was avoided, and Dynasty XII continued for two
of Sesostris I," p. 216; "Twelfth Dynasty," p. 454; Tobin, Theological Principles, p. 87. The historical
merit of these and other literary works is questioned by some. See Assmann, Mind of Egypt, pp. 138-139;
Assmann and Blumenthal, eds., Literatur undPolitik; J. Baines, "Research on Egyptian Literature:
Background, Definitions, Prospects," in Z. Hawass, ed., Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-First
Century: Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists Cairo, 2000, 3 (New York,
2003), pp. 5-8; A. Foster, "The Conclusion to the Testament of Ammenemes, King of Egypt," JEA 67
(1981), pp. 36-47; "Instructions of Amenemhet," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt, 2 (Oxford, 2001), p. 171; W.J. Murnane, "Response to D.B. Redford (The Writing of the History of
Ancient Egypt)," in Z. Hawass, ed., Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: Proceedings of
the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists Cairo, 2000, 2 (New York, 2003), pp. 15-18; W.K.
Simpson, "Response to J. Baines (Research on Egyptian Literature)," in Z. Hawass, ed., Egyptology at the
Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists
Cairo, 2000, 3 (New York, 2003), pp. 45-47. On the other hand, Redford believes that regarding these
works as complete fiction is erroneous. See D.B. Redford, "The Writing of the History of Ancient Egypt,"
in Z. Hawass, ed., Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: Proceedings of the Eighth
International Congress of Egyptologists Cairo, 2000, 2 (New York, 2003), p. 4. Some scholars suggest
that The Instruction of Amenemhet I to his Son records an unsuccessful attempt to kill the king, which
initiated the ruler's desire to create a coregency with his son, the reasons being evident in the story of
Sinuhe as this story may show that the king was eventually murdered (Leprohon, "Overview," p. 48;
Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, pp. 249-250). G. Burkard argues that the assassination attempt was
unsuccessful, but there was no coregency (Burkard, '"Als Gott erschienen spricht er' Die Lehre des
Amenemhet als postumes Vermachtnis," in J. Assmann and E. Blumenthal, Literature und Politik, (Cairo,
1999), pp. 153-165). For both sides of the debate, see M. Lichtheim, "Didactic Literature," in A. Loprieno,
ed., Ancient Egyptian Literature (New York, 1996), p. 248.
507
For a summary of the arguments both for and against a coregency, see Posener, Litterature et Politique,
pp. 65-66, 80-81, 84, 102. Grimal argues that The Instructions of Amenemhet I dates to Dynasty XVIII
and rejects that these are events of that period (N. Grimal, "Coregence et Association au Trone:
l'Enseignement d'Amenemhat Ier," BIFAO 95 (1995), pp. 273-280). Note that Simpson believes that since
Sinuhe fled upon hearing the news of Amenemhet's death, the argument might be made that a clear-cut
succession, due to a coregency, may not have occurred. See Simpson, "Twelfth Dynasty," p. 454. Also,
Franke notes that Senwosret would not have had to return suddenly from Libya at the news of his father's
death, if the succession had been solidified by a coregency. See Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt,"
p. 738. Kemp thinks that there was instability even with the coregency of the two kings (Kemp, "Social
History," p. 79). Leprohon discusses the practice of having an accession ceremony at sunrise on the day
following that on which the previous king died. This tradition might also be a reason why even a coregent
might hasten to return to the capital after his father's death. See Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 277. Delia
argues that Sinuhe does not demonstrate a coregency (R. Delia, "Doubts about Double Dates and
Coregencies," BES 4 (1982), p. 67).
123
centuries. Of course, it would be a mistake not to see these literary pieces as propaganda
in their own right, thus making the validity of actual historical facts uncertain.508
Nonetheless, for our purposes of understanding how a coregency might work, this
illustration of the process is invaluable. In theory, this form of succession may have
continued until the last few reigns of the dynasty when, ultimately, a woman, Nefrusobek
claimed the office of kingship.
An alternative to coregency was for the king to appoint the heir as vizier or to
allow him to take part in administrative duties and military endeavors without actually
crowning him as a ruler.509 Uphill sees this option as the preferable alternative for the
interpretation of the early Dynasty XII evidence found in texts such as Sinuhe and the
Instructions ofAmenemhet Ifor his Son outlined above.
Here, the successor is clearly
in a position of some royal power even though there is no direct evidence that he has
been crowned.
Wegner has argued for a coregency between Senwosret III and Amenemhet III of
Dynasty XII due to a control note dated to a year 39 as well as other material found
Note that in Hie Instruction ofAmenemhet I, the spirit of the possibly deceased king asks his son,
Senwosret, to be his successor and may also refer to how he did not have the time to prepare his son for the
role of king or announce him as his choice (Berman, "Amenemhet I, pp. 195-202). Thus, a coregency
would not make sense under these circumstances. Some scholars believe that this story may actually have
served as propaganda supporting Senwosret's claim to the throne as well as his authority to punish his
adversaries (Callender, "Renaissance," p. 160; Posener, Litterature et-Politique, pp. 19-20). Posener sees
the work as being political in nature as a means to legitimize the rule of Senwosret I (Posener, litterature et
Politique, pp. 64, 65, 75-76, 85-86). Delia believes that the story simply refers to the normal means of
royal heredity and does not reflect the desire to create a system of coregency (Delia, "Study," pp. 196, 229230; "Doubts," p. 66). Simpson notes that the motives behind The Instructions ofAmenemhet I cannot be
fully understood because the context behind the composition of the story is unknown. He suggests that a
balanced approach be taken in interpreting Sinuhe and other works (Simpson, "Belles Lettres and
Propaganda," in A. Loprieno, ed., Ancient Egyptian Literature (New York, 1996), pp. 441, 443). See also
C. Theriault, '"The Instruction ofAmenemhet' as Propaganda," JARCE 30 (1993), pp. 151-160.
509
Uphill, "Question," p. 81.
510
Uphill, "Question," p. 82.
124
around the temple of the earlier king at South Abydos.511 In this case the form of
coregency used was that in which the junior ruler played a more active role than the
senior one, possibly taking epithets associated with the deceased, Thus, coregency at this
point and in Dynasty XIII, if it existed, may be much more difficult to identify than
originally thought.
--.-.-.-----
Some reigns of Dynasty XIII, like those of the preceding Dynasty, may have been
characterized by coregencies. Murnane outlines the occurrences of two royal names on a
single artifact as evidence for a coregency.
However, none of these examples appear
to provide any conclusive'data for the existence of coregencies, since they often do not
represent consecutive rulers and do not have double dating (year x of king A, year y of
king B), the most convincing evidence.513
The first possible coregency is that of (Horus) Khabaw and Awibre Hor, whose
names are found on a limestone block, originally from an architrave.514 Ryholt places
Khabaw after Awibre Hor, presuming that this inscription indicates a coregency or a
chronological link between them.515 Alternatively, Allen suggests that Hor wished to
associate himself with an earlier king like when he did the same with Nymaatre
511
Wegner, "Nature and Chronology," pp. 249-279; The Mortuary Temple ofSenwosretffl. Publication of
the Pennsylvania-Yale-Institute of Fine Arts Expedition to Egypt 8 (New Haven, 2007) pp. 19, 36-40.
Ryholt believes that there may have been a coregency between Amenemhet III and Amenemhet IV
(Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 209-210). For coregencies between Senwosret III and Amenemhet III and
the latter with Amenemhet IV, see also Leprohon, "Amenemhet III," pp. 297-321, 195-197.
5,2
Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, pp. 24-26. Note that Callender argues that it is impossible to
determine whether double dates refer to two kings ruling at the same time or consecutive kings, under
which an official served (Callender, "Renaissance," p. 149).
.
513
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 281; Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, pp. 1-2; "In Defense of the
Middle Kingdom Double Dates," BES 3 (1981), pp. 73-82.
514
Montet, La Necropole Royale, pp. 71-72, PI. XXVIII; Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, p. 25.
515
See Chapter 1, Section IV.B.12.
125
(Amenemhet III) on a faience plaque.5

A statue base from Medamud displays the names of Sedjefakare Kay Amenemhet
and Khutawyre Wegaf. Many scholars, who believe that the position of Wegaf in the
Turin King-List is correct, state that it is impossible that this ruler and Sedjefakare Kay
Amenemhet were coregents. They argue that Wegaf was venerated by Amenemhet
through the inscription or that the object was simply reused.
However, Ryholt places
Wegaf after Amenemhet because he believes that this king was switched with
Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I.518 His evidence for this placement
includes the Medamud object linking these two kings. Due to his interpretation of double
names and his theory that those without these are usurpers, he does not believe that these
kings were coregents. However, if chronological proximity and the names of two kings
on a single monument are indicators of coregency, then these rulers must remain
candidates at this time. Another object with two royal names, an ostracon from
Elephantine, dated to the Late Period, pairs Wegaf with a Senwosret from that location.
This significantly later piece is not applicable to the issue of coregencies as it was
probably a scribal exercise.520
The brother kings may also have used coregencies. Several scholars have
516
J.P. Allen, "Turin," p. 50; A. Erman, "Miscellen," ZAS 33 (1895), p. 143. See also Murnane,
"Coregency," p. 25; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen,p. 30.
517
Legrain, "Notes," p. 251, Fig. 251; Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, p. 25; Vercoutter, "Roi Ougaf," p.
227; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 30.
518
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 219-220. For others who place Wegaf within Dynasty XIII, see Chapter
1, Section IV.B.l.
519
Legrain, "Notes," pp. 250-252; Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, p. 24; Ryholt, Political Situation, p.
341.
520
Dewachter, "Roi Sahathor et la famille," p. 66; Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, p. 24; Ryholt, Political
Situation, pp. 192, 216, n.745.
126
suggested that there was a coregency between Neferhotep I and Sahathor.521 In fact, it is
often believed that the latter never actually ruled alone, as his reign was quite short and
his influence almost undetectable. Meanwhile, the names of Neferhotep I and
Sobekhotep IV, who follows Sahathor in the Turin King-List, are on two opposite sides of
sandstone block from Karnak.
Since the two kings are not necessarily incorporated
into a single design, it is likely that they were carved at different times, and the block is
not proof of a coregency.523 However, Habachi has argued that the Wadi Hammamat
inscription (the Debono Stela), which shows Neferhotep I's names after those of Sahathor
and Sobekhotep IV, may indicate a coregency.524 Both of these kings are designated with
epithets, which indicate that the rulers were either coregents or deceased individuals. It is
likely that, since this inscription also includes the deceased parents of Sobekhotep IV as
M r
well as his children, it simply refers to his living and deceased family members.
Though coregency may have existed in Dynasty XIII, there is no concrete evidence to
prove that it played a part in the succession of kings at this time.526
With the reigns of kings being so short, it may be the case that some rulers in the
Late Middle Kingdom may have served as regents for child rulers. In this way a type of
coregency may have existed. Some of them may have been outside of the royal family
proper and may have usurped the position from the previous royal family.
521
Dewachter, "Roi Sahathor et la famille," p. 66; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 192, 216, n.745.
A. Mariette, Karnak, Etude topographie et archeologique (Leipzig, 1875), PL 8, n, o; Petrie, History, p.
213; Weigall, Pharaohs, p. 159. See also Dewachter, "Roi Sahathor et la famille," p. 71.
523
Murnane, "Coregency," p. 25.
524
Habachi, "Neferhotep I Family," p. 80. See Chapter 1, Section IV.B.21.
525
Some scholars have argued that there were no coregencies in ancient Egypt (R. Delia, "A New Look at
Some Old Dates: A Re-Examination of the Twelfth Dynasty Double Dated Inscriptions," BES 1 (1979), pp.
15-28; "Study," pp. 187-253; "Doubts."; Obsomer, Sesostris Ier, pp. 35-161). In response, see Murnane,
"Double Dates," pp. 73-82.
526
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 19, 34, n. 87.
522
127
III.D. Usurpation
It is likely that usurpation occurred during Dynasty XIII, since the normal
successional lines may have been in question, and conditions within Egypt may not have
been favorable.527 There are some indications that high officials including military
leaders may have become kings during this time.528 Usurpations likely occurred during
the reigns of ineffective kings and shortly after the death of others.
Any hostile takeover of this nature must have been supported by at least a sector
of the elite or the military in order to have been successful. Another means of usurpation
was through the support of a powerful cult.
In Dynasty XIII, the gods Amun and
Sobek are most prevalent in the names of rulers. However, it is uncertain as to the power
of such institutions at this time. Interestingly, in the reign of Kheperure Intef of Dynasty
XVII, the cult of Min at Coptos appears to have been punished for their support of the
Hyksos kings, showing that cults of this era could involve themselves heavily in political
matters. Also, at the beginning of Dynasty XII, the cult of Amun took precedence over
that of Montu, possibly indicating that the priests of the former supported the assent of
Amenemhet I to the throne.
III.E. Elective Kingship

In 1933, Junker proposed "elective kingship" as an explanation for the seemingly
Breasted, History, p. 214.

von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 87-91; "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1443.
Lorton, "Towards a Constitutional Approach," pp. 463-464.
128
chaotic situation in Dynasty XIII kingship.530 In this system, each new king was selected
through what may have been some form of election. More recently, Lorton has suggested
that such a system may have existed in the Old Kingdom and beyond with a king coming
from a group eligible for the office.
This person was then chosen or approved by the
military, cult or some other powerful institution.

The system of elective kingship has also been proposed for the Kushite kings of
Dynasty XXV/ J i In scenes depicting the coronation, the new king is presented to the
god, Amun of Napata, by the officials, military and priests. Then, the god accepts the
king, legitimizing his reign. Since this process is masked in ritual, it is unclear if there
was actually some sort of election between eligible heirs or whether this type of scene
simply serves to legitimize the ruler through a religious proceeding.533
III.F. Selective Kingship

In 1954, Hayes developed his own hypothesis concerning the mechanics of
succession in Dynasty XIII by refining that of Junker.534 Hayes conducted a detailed
study of Brooklyn Museum Papyrus 35.1446, in which two royal decrees (judicial
530
H. Junker and L. Delaporte, Die Volker des Antiken Orients (Freiburg, 1933), pp. 103-104. See also von
Beckerath, "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1443. A similar theory has often been suggested for the Hyksos
kings (Bietak, "Hyksos Rule," p. 113).
531
Lorton, "Towards a Constitutional Approach," p. 462. See also R. Anthes, "The Original Meaning of
mr hrw," JNES 13 (1954), pp. 21-51, 191-192..
532
Torok, "Foundations of Kingship," pp. 274, 276-278.
533
L. Bell identifies the birth room of Amenemhet III at Luxor as the actual or symbolic site for such a
ritual (L. Bell, "Cult of the Royal Ka," pp. 263-270, 273-290).
W.C. Hayes, A Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom in the Brooklyn Museum (Brooklyn, 1955), pp.
144-149. See also Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 44. For a more recent study, see Quirke, The
Administration of'Egypt, pp. 127-149. See also Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 11-12, no. 16-17.
For further bibliographic information, see Bellion, Catalogue des Manuscrits, pp. 92-93.
129
petitions, Insertions B and C on the recto)
were made to a vizier named Ankhu.
Insertion C cites an unnamed king, who ruled for at least six years while Insertion B may
date to year five of the same ruler. Hayes claims that the handwriting of Insertion B
appears to date to slightly before a third record, verso Text A, which he dates to year 1 of
Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III.53^ Therefore, he considers that the contemporary
Insertions B and C must date to the reign immediately prior to Text A.
After dating his texts, Hayes continues to speculate concerning the king listed in
Insertion C and presumably B. He searches.for a king, who ruled for a period of six years
and who preceded Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III. Hayes identifies the unnamed
king as Sekhemrewadjkhau Sobekemsaf, basing his theory on monuments at Medamud,
which have his name juxtaposed next to that of Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III,
though he acknowledges that some scholars place Sobekemsaf in Dynasty XVII.537
Hayes' argument then turns to the vizier Ankhu and the kings he served. He notes
that two stelae from Abydos prove that this official worked under a Nimaankhare
Khendjer II while the larger text in Papyrus Bulaq 18 refers to a vizier Ankhu serving
under a Sobekhotep, who Hayes equates with Sobekhotep III.538 The smaller text in
Papyrus Bulaq 18 also mentions Ankhu but does not name the king. Nonetheless, Hayes
claims that this text is contemporary with Insertion B in the Brooklyn Museum Papyrus
and, thus, also dates to the reign of Sekhemrewadjkhau Sobekemsaf.539
535
Hayes, A Papyrus, pp. 71-85, Pis. V-VI.

Hayes, "Notes on the Government," pp. 38-39; Hayes, A Papyrus, pp. 67, PI. XIII; Hayes, "Egypt: From
the Death," p. 49.
537
Hayes, A Papyrus, pp. 145-146; Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 47. Such a conclusion comes from
the excavator's remarks. See Bisson de la Roque, Medamoud 1928, p. 5.
538
Hayes, A Papyrus, pp. 73, 146; Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," pp. 47-48.
539
Hayes, A Papyrus, p. 73.
536
130
In the course of his reconstruction Hayes devises the following mini king-list:
Woserkare Khendjer I, Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw, Nimaankhare Khendjer II,
Sehotepkare Intef V,54! Meribre Seth,542 Seldiemrewadjkhau Sobekemsaf and
Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III. According to this list, Ankhu may have served
five kings from Khendjer II to Sobekhotep III.543
Though Hayes states that moving Sekhemrewadjkhau Sobekemsaf to Dynasty
XVII might result in a collapse of the theory in which Ankhu served as vizier for five
reigns, he continues to focus on Ankhu and his family and the office of vizier.544
Ankhu's father may have been a vizier, though there is no evidence that Ankhu inherited
his office directly from him. Resuseneb and Aymeru, Ankhu's sons, also were viziers,
the latter serving under another Sobekhotep. An Aymeru, son of Aymeru served under
Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV, and Hayes suggests that he may have been a nephew of
Ankhu.
With such a long string of presumably related viziers, Hayes believed that he
could discern the dynamics of Dynasty XIII kingship.545 It seemed to him that the
viziership was more powerful than the royal throne, since all of the kings appeared to be
unrelated while the viziers passed their office through members of the family. Thus, the
succession of viziers seems to have been more stable than that of kings.
540
Hayes, A Papyrus, pp. 145-147.

Note that Hayes reconstructs the name as [Nefer?]ka[re] Intef. The name has been changed here to
reflect the form used by Ryholt. See Hayes, A Papyrus, p. 146.
542
The placement of Seth is not discussed, but he is listed in a footnote as one of the potential five kings.
See Hayes, A Papyrus, pp. 147, n. 514. For the placement of this king, see von Beckerath, Handbuch, p.
285 (20), and Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 73 (25).
543
544
545
541
131
Returning to Junker's earlier model,546 Hayes devised a theory, which accounted

for his findings.547 He rejected the idea that there was any concept of "popular elections"
as ancient Egyptian society was not "politically advanced" enough. Instead, he suggests
that the vizier or a group of high-ranking officials selected a man to serve as king for a
specified amount of time. This person would carry the titles of king and wear royal
regalia, but would posses no real power.
To illustrate his theory, Hayes refers to Insertions B and C on the recto of the
Brooklyn Papyrus.54 In these royal decrees, the king commanded the vizier, Ankhu, to
handle judicial disputes at Thebes. Thus, Hayes suggests that the king received these
complaints and forwarded them to the vizier, the acting seat of power, because he no
longer had the authority to act injudicial proceedings.5 9
III.F.1. Scholarly Acceptance

Hayes' theory had a profound impact on the study of Dynasty XIII and was
unconditionally accepted for many years.550 In fact, even recently, some general histories
still claim that the viziers of this period controlled the office of kingship during Dynasty
546
Junker and Delaporte, Die Volker, pp. 104-105. See Chapter 2, Section IV.D.
548
Hayes, A Papyrus, pp. 148,171-185, Pis. V, VI.
549
530
Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 123, 132. For example, see how this theory frames the interpretations in
W.K. Simpson, "Sobkemhet, A Vizier of Sesostris III," JEA 43 (1957). See also K. Butzer, "Long-term
Nile Flood Variation and Political Discontinuities in Pharaonic Egypt," in J.D. Clarke and S.A. Brandt,
eds., From Hunters to Farmers, (Berkeley, 1984), p. 109; Gardiner, Pharaohs, pp. 153-154; Helck,
Geschichte, p. 118; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 86-93; "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1443; Ward,
Essays, pp. 47-48; Williams, "Problems," pp. 1224, 1229.
547
132
XIII.551 In an article from 1987, Cruz-Uribe restates Hayes' idea that a, family of viziers
had significant control over the country, while kings held the throne for short periods of
time and were "shuttled on and off the throne, by some, as yet unrecognized, political
procedure."552 In the same article, he cites the reforms of Senwosret III as leading to the
cause of the fall of the Middle Kingdom-since these administrative changes resulted in
taking power from the many nomarchs and placing it in the hands of the viziers, who
eventually held more authority than the ruler himself, who became nothing more than a
"puppet king."553
In another publication, Kemp takes a less overt approach to this theory stating that
the viziers maintained the "continuity of government" as the "hereditary principle of
royal succession.. .broke down."554 Thus, while not suggesting directly that the viziers
appointed kings, this scholar alludes to a scenario, in which these officials somehow
preserved the administrative aspects of the state while kingship suffered a period of
chaos. Meanwhile, Verner suggests that families, which held important positions, often
vied with one another in order to gain the power of kingship.555 Likewise, Bietak
imagines a chaotic atmosphere where both "usurpers" and "kingmakers" were active.556
He states:
551
Grimal, History, p. 183; Hornung, History, p. 70; A.B. Knapp, The History and Culture of Ancient
Western Asia and Egypt (Belmont, CA, 1988), pp. 167-168. See also Gundlach, "Grundgegebenheiten,"
pp. 84-85, 90.
552
Cruz-Uribe, "The Fall of the Middle Kingdom," p. 107. See also Z. Hawass, Hidden Treasures of the
Egyptian Museum (Cairo, 2002), p. 34.
553
Cruz-Uribe, "The Fall of the Middle Kingdom," p. 111; "A Model for the Political Structure of Ancient
Egypt," in D.P. Silverman, ed., For His Ka: Essays Offered in Memory of Klaus Baer, SAOC 55 (Chicago,
1994), pp. 49, 50. For the opposing views, see section IV.E.2. For the possible reforms of Senwosret III,
see Chapter 2, Section 1 .II.A. 1.
554
555
Verner, Great Monuments, p. 434.
556
133
The Thirteenth dynasty was not stable; it consisted, more or less, of a continuum
of usurpers with very short reigns that averaged three years. The power brokers
of that period were administrators and generals, some of them of foreign origin,557
Due to the fact that so many scholars adopted Hayes' theory without question, the
usual, characterization of Dynasty XIII kingship has gained even more acceptance. Since
kings were normally at the apex of society, placing viziers above them (rather than
simply having these officials take the throne) enhanced the impression that kingship was
exceedingly weak during this period.
II1.F.2. Theoretical Abandonment

Over the years since Hayes proposed his theory, there have been a few scholars
who have objected to "selective kingship." For example, Bell argued that Hayes' theory
was controversial and that this sort of system would not have been consistent with
Egyptian ideology.558 However, Bell did allow for the elective aspect of this system
when no apparent heir could be found. She suggests that kings might have been elected
from the extended family of Amenemhet III by other members of the group in Dynasty
XIII. Other scholars have also criticized Hayes' conclusions. For example, Ryholt cites
the examples of fratrilineal succession as well as coregencies as evidence that viziers did
not hold the power, since such institutions are not compatible with this system.559
In his dissertation as well as an article published in 1991, Quirke presented
557
Bietak, "Hyksos," (2001), p. 138.

Bell, "Climate," pp. 265-266. See also the concerns of von Beckerath (von Beckerath, Untersuchungen,
pp. 87-91).
559
From the family of Ankhu, there were three or four viziers and from that of Ibiaw, there were two or
three (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 282-283). See also Habachi, "Neferhotep I Family," p. 80.
558
134
substantial criticism of Hayes' theory that the vizier held the power in Dynasty XIII.560
To be fair, one must realize that Hayes formulated his idea prior to the chronological
analyses of the Second Intermediate Period kings found in the Turin King-List conducted
by scholars such as von Beckerath,561 Franke,562 and Ryholt.563 Thus, his knowledge of
the chronology of the period was limited. The problem, nonetheless, lies in<the fact that
so many scholars continue to repeat his mistakes in their surveys of history or in their
arguments. Even Hayes was not certain of his own conclusion, allowing for the
possibility that the vizier Ankhu really only served under two kings.564
In reality, there are many essential problems with Hayes' theory. First of all,
there is only one king with the nomen Khendjer.565 Also, scholars currently place
Sekhemrewadjkhau Sobekemsaf either at the end of Dynasty XIII or the beginning of
Dynasty XVII, and, thus, he plays no part in a reign, in which Ankhu served as vizier and
was not the unnamed king in Insertions B and C in the Brooklyn Museum Papyrus.
The main error in Hayes' theory resulted from an incorrect dating of Papyrus
Bulaq 18 to Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III, when the correct reign is likely to be
prior to his and closer to that of Khendjer.566 Thus, it is likely that Ankhu held the office
of vizier for only two reigns instead of five,567 and Insertions B and C date to the reigns
560
Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 3-4, 227-233; "Royal Power," pp. 123-139. See also Franke, "Zur
Chronologie," p. 246; O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," p. 61; Quirke, "Visible and invisible," pp. 67-68; Titles
and Bureau, p. 85.
561
von Beckerath, Untersuchungen.
562
Franke, "Zur Chronologie," pp. 245-274.
563
Ryholt, Political Situation.
564
565 See Chapter 1, Section IV.B.15.
566 O.D. Berlev, "Zamecanija k papirusu Bulak 18," Drevnij Mir (1962), pp. 50-55; Quirke, "Royal Power,"
p. 134; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 47-48.
567
135
of one of these two kings.568 Ryholt has re-identified the king in Papyrus Bulaq 18 as
Imyremeshaw or Intef,569 which would amend the details of Quirke's argument without
changing his overall conclusions.
Quirke also notes that the significance of the stelae of Amenysoneb from Abydos
cnr\
(Louvre C11-C12), used by Hayes to date Ankhu to Khendjer is anything but certain.
The first stela names Ankhu, while the second has roughly-carved cartouches of
Nymaatre next to that of Khendjer. It isn't even certain that Ankhu served under
Khendjer, since these are two separate stelae, but they are close in time, likely
consecutive.
Hayes' evaluation of Ankhu's relatives in the role of vizier may be somewhat
stretched once he discusses the family members beyond this official's grandfather and
sons. However, it is clear that there was at least a small group of related viziers during
the middle of Dynasty XIII. Nonetheless, Ankhu's role in Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1446 in
the decrees is completely normal.571 Likewise, the later vizier Aymeru Neferkare (not the
same as Aymeru son of Ankhu), also demonstrates a subservient relationship to
Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV.572 Finally, Ankhu is mentioned in neither the pyramid of
Woserkare Khendjer at Sakkara nor in the temple of Sekhemrekhutawy Sobekhotep I at
Hayes' conclusion that the handwriting in Text A, which contains the name of Sekhemresewadjtawy
Sobekhotep III, and was later than that of Insertions B and C, still applies under this revised dating of
Papyrus Bulaq 18.
569
See Chapter 1, section IV.B.16.
570
Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 47; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 134. See W.K. Simpson, The
Terrace of the Great God at Abydos: The Offering Chapels of Dynasties 12 and 13, Publications of the
Pennsylvania-Yale Expedition to Egypt 5 (New Haven and Philadelphia, 1974), PI. 80.
571
Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 133, 134; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396; Helck, Historische-Biographische,
pp. 7-9, nos. 12, 13. For a translation of the texts of Amenysoneb, see M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian
Autobiographies Chiefly of the Middle Kingdom (Frieburg, 1988), pp. 80-83. In general, all private
monuments were theoretically granted by the king in ancient Egypt (Hornung, "Pharaoh," p. 283). The
Late Middle Kingdom practices do not appear to have deviated from this norm.
572
Franke, Personendaten, p. 55, Doss. 24; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 133; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396.
136
Medamud.
Nonetheless, the fact that Ankhu's mother is the only elite Middle
Kingdom woman to possess a statue at Kamak and the appearance of this vizier's name
on a private stelae (priest of Amenysoneb at Abydos) show that this official must have
been extraordinary.574
Quirke notes that the king is not mentioned in Papyrus Bulaq 18, leading scholars
of the past to believe that the vizier, whose name appears at the tops of several lists of
some day entries, was in control of the administration.575 However, Quirke has
demonstrated that the lists do not represent functional hierarchies but rather are arranged
according to status groupings within general categories. Thus, the vizier, being the
highest ranking official below the king, always appears at the tops of categories
pertaining to any aspect of his duties. Finally, the king does not appear in the papyrus
because, in effect, all items paid or supplied to individuals belong to him.
In general, the well-known viziers of Dynasty XIII are not significantly more
powerful than other officials, who held this position.576 Naturally, when the kingdom
was more stable, and royal reigns were longer, the viziers were able to benefit from the
prosperity of the nation, but only in the traditional proportion to that which the king
received. Likewise, the occurrence of a single family within an office over time is not
unusual in ancient Egyptian history. Accordingly, Quirke states that there is no inversion
573
The names of viziers are never found in royal, mortuary inscriptions. Usually, officials related to the
treasury/construction administration are the ones whose names appear in such contexts (Quirke, "Royal
Power," pp. 134, 135).
'
574
Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Autobiographies, pp. 80-82; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 134.
5
Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 23-188; The Administration of Egypt, pp. 58-59, 120-121.
576
Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, pp. 215, 216; "Royal Power," p. 135. For directives of a vizier
from the reign of Senwosret I, see W.K. Simpson, Accounts of the Dockyard Workshop at This in the Reign
ofSesostris I [:] Papyrus Reisner II. Transcription and Commentary, Papyrus Reisner II (Boston, 1965),
pp. 20-22, Pis. 27-28, 10.
137
in the relationship between the royal authority and his bureaucracy.
However, his
conclusion does not mean that more minor shifts in the distribution of power did not
occur. It is evident that the king did lose some power, since royal names appear much
more rarely on private monuments than previously, and rulers conducted fewer quarrying
expeditions and produced less statuary and other state-commissioned works.
As discussed in other parts of this thesis, the relationship between the king and the
administrative class appears to have remained relatively stable throughout Dynasty XIII,
even though there are isolated examples, which seem to push this line. Other items
clearly show respect for the ruler. For example, a staff from the tomb of Sonebnay and
his wife Khons carries the cartouche of the king, Sewahenre.579 This, along with the titles
of the man, such as htmw-bity, denote a high rank and association with the national
administration. These sorts of inscriptions clearly show that the highest respect of the
people and their largest claim to rank was through the king and not the vizier.
One reason why viziers have mistakenly been understood to wield so much power
is the fact that many of them had the same or similar names, leading scholars to assume
they held their position for longer than the kings they served.580 Von Beckerath identifies
at least three or four viziers named Aymeru.'
One of these was the son of the vizier
Ankhu while another was the son of the hrp-wsht (director of the broad court),
3//
Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 136.

579
O.D. Berlev, "A Contemporary of King Sewah-en-Re,'" JEA 60 (1974), pp. 106-113.
580
Stock, like Hayes, did not recognize the fact that there may be more than one Ankhu and Aymeru
(Stock, 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens, p. 54).
581
von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 98-99. See also E. Delange, Musee du Louvre: Statues
Egyptiennes du Moyen Empire (Paris, 1987), pp. 66-68.
578
138
Aymeru.582 A third Aymeru was the son of the vizier Ay who had previously been the
governor of El Kab.583 The possible fourth Aymeru had no displayed filiation, but had a
double name including Neferkare.584 Habachi and Dodson have suggested that the
Aymeru with statuary in the Heqaib sanctuary at Elephantine is the same as Aymeru
Neferkare dating to Sobekhotep IV.585 Thus, there are at least three viziers of the name
Aymeru: Aymeru son of the vizier Ankhu, Aymeru (-Neferkare) son of the controller of
the hall Aymeru and Aymeru son of the vizier Ay.
It also may be the case that there were several viziers with the name Ankhu
though none have filiation displayed in connection with their names.5
The stela of a
Wepwawethotep, indicates that his wife's father, Ankhu, and two brothers, Resuseneb
and Aymeru had held the office of vizier.587 Von Beckerath believes that Ankhu or one
of the Ankhus was likely the son of another vizier since Cairo Statue 42034 refers to his
mother "vizier's wife" as well as "vizier's mother."588 Louvre Cll and CI2 of
Amenysoneb589 dates a vizier Ankhu to slightly later than Nimaankhare Khendjer.590
Likewise, von Beckerath places the Ankhu in Papyrus Brooklyn, Insertions B and C just
prior to Sobekhotep III.591 Meanwhile, he believes that Papyrus Bulaq 18 should date to
582
Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 37-38, no. 48. Stela Cairo CG 20690 and Turin Statuette 1220;
Heidelberg Statue 274.
583
Mioso, A Reading Book, p. 21, line 25. Cairo Stela JE 52453.
584
von Beckerath, "Notes on the Viziers," pp. 263-265. This Aymeru is the same as that with father
Aymeru as shown in a stela from Karnak.
585
Dodson, Monarchs, p. 69; Habachi, "A Score of Important Officials," p. 49; "Studies," pp. 261-278.
586
von Beckerath, "Notes on the Viziers," pp. 263-264.
587
Franke, Personendaten, p. 154, Doss. 207. See also Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 257. Cairo Stela
CG 20690.
588
von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 99. For the evidence of the relationship between Ankhu and
Resuseneb in Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1446, see Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, pp. 147-149.
590
von Beckerath, "Notes on the Viziers," pp. 265-267. See also Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 257.
591
139
Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I. It should be noted that Ryholt's

reassignment of the date of Papyrus Bulaq 18 to Imyremeshaw or Intef in his chronology
or the order of the rulers in the Turin King-List would alleviate the need to have more
than one vizier Ankhu.
The approach to the Dynasty XIII material after Hayes' study is in sharp contrast
to that of Petrie from much earlier.592 Petrie took a more unbiased approach. Though,
some of his conclusions are incorrect, the data from his relatively lengthy presentation
can be analyzed easily, correcting for mistakes made due to the lack of information and
the early state of the study of the Turin King-List at this time. Thus, it is necessary to
return to such methods to reevaluate this time period while considering other theories.
Only in this way will the truth of the events of the period ever be discovered, to whatever
degree that is possible.
III.G. Circulating Succession

As noted above, it was Quirke, who effectively questioned Hayes' theory
concerning the existence of a ruling body of viziers and officials that appointed the king
for determined periods of time. In the process of criticizing this idea, Quirke developed
his own hypothesis based on an anthropological model of kingship,593 a process that
becomes apparent in a later article.59
Quirke believes that father-to-son succession probably was the ancient Egyptian
Petrie, History, pp. 200-227.

Quirke, "Royal Power."
Quirke, "Thirteenth Dynasty."
140
ideal, even though this interpretation comes from European "primogeniture" models.595
Nonetheless, he prefers to acknowledge that other criteria may have been acceptable,
especially in periods when the power of kingship suffered. In these cases, he proposes
that "oligarchic structures" may have emerged, resulting in various, viable means of
596
succession.
Toward the end of his study,597 Quirke suggests that the middle, more stable,
portion of Dynasty XIII may have resulted from the practice of circulating succession, a
theory adopted from anthropological literature.598 Quirke explains that the lack of related
kings may have been the effect of a system, in which powerful families shared in the
inheritance of the throne.599 The right to the throne would have passed from one group to
the next as the position became open. According to Quirke, this means of succession
would have stabilized the state, by eliminating the existence of rivals vying for the royal
office since the familial line of kings had broken down. Also, reigns would have been
short, for the most part, because the eldest of each family group would have been
preferred.600
Unfortunately, in his article, Quirke did not compare the evidence from the
middle of Dynasty XIII to the anthropological principles of circulating succession, a form
of a political system, in which power is spread across a specified section of society.
595
Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 137; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396.

Quirke, "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396. See also Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, p. 216.
597
598
See below and J. Goody, "Circulating Succession Among the Gonja," in J. Goody, ed., Succession to
High Office, Cambridge Papers in Social Anthropology 4 (Cambridge, 1966), pp. 14-15, 155-169. Note
that von Beckerath mentions the possibility of terms of office (von Beckerath, "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p.
1443).
599
600
596
141
Thus, here, the focus will be to explain this model and to determine whether or not it
applies to Dynasty XIII Egypt.
Modem and past cultures of West Africa (Ghana, Dahomey, Nigeria, Mali), the
Western Sahara (Kawar and Teda), the Eastern Sudan (Shilluk and Eastern Anuak), the
East African Coast, South-Eastern Africa (Nyakyusa), Asia (Malaya, Socotra, Summer
and Akkad, and Southern India), the Pacific (Fakaofo and Rotuma), and Europe (Ireland
and Scotland) have all made use of circulating succession.
In general, the system
works by rotating access to offices among groups, and is thus found in some
organizations such as the United Nations.602 This form of government can occur in
chiefdoms as well as in states.
A society, which operates according to a system of circulating succession, must
be divided in some tangible way, both vertically and horizontally. For example, the
Ganja define their social groups as ruling estate, Ganja Muslims, commoners, strangers,
and slaves.603 The ruling estate is the only group with access to the most prestigious of
offices and defines itself as the descendents of Sumailia Ndewura Jakpa, who conquered
the area, in which they live.604 Within this ruling class, there are many subgroups,
members of which qualify to occupy local offices called chiefships. Certain chiefships
are eligible to ascend to the provincial office of division chiefship. From this position,
one might be able to reach the highest leadership position in the nation, the paramountcy,
if one is a member of one of the five eligible divisions.605
601
Goody,
Goody,
603
Goody,
604
Goody,
605
Goody,
602
"Circulating
"Circulating
"Circulating
"Circulating
"Circulating
Succession," pp. 172-175.

Succession," pp. 162, 163.
Succession," p. 143.
142
When a chiefship becomes open, the office moves to another qualifying group.
Within that group, the selection of the next office holder is made based on his seniority
along with other considerations such as his qualities such as intelligence, character, and
physical strength. Another important practice adds an economic aspect to the process, as
the candidate must present appropriate gifts to various parties including a committee
composed of members of the other groups. Ultimately, however, it is the divisional ruler,
who makes the final selection. There is nothing to prevent a younger candidate from
presenting himself, but it is generally recognized that one is a better leader if he or she
possesses age, experience, and wealth.
From the chiefships, the divisional ruler is chosen based on circulating succession
along with demonstrated skill. The result is an opportunity for promotion. The benefit of
such a system is that the groups all have an equal stake in the preservation of the
government. The group holding the power must perform its duties appropriately,
appointing members of the other groups to ranking positions. Meanwhile, the
infrastructure is such, that if a group attempts to harness power for itself, society breaks
into organized factions. The threat of such conflict often keeps the system in check.
According to Goody, in states, circulating succession is always based on filiation

through the male line.608 In other words, the organized groups are based on descent from
a single heir or a group of such heirs. Thus, circulating succession moves from one group
to another, and a son cannot follow his father directly; the office must be turned over to a
more distant relative. However, as the right of succession returns, the eldest son or a
606
Goody, "Circulating Succession," pp. 155-158.

Goody, "Circulating Succession," pp. 160, 164.
608
Goody, "Circulating Succession," p. 161.
607
143
grandson of a former king might then become eligible.

When comparing the theory of circulating succession to the mid-Dynasty XIII
evidence, one must anticipate findings that might indicate that such a system is
applicable. First of all, it must be accepted that circulating succession is -a very complex
system. In the Ganja example, it is evident that this form of government not only affects
kingship but also provides the structure for more minor offices. Likewise, as noted
above, states, which use this form of succession, are organized into family groups, based
on one or more predecessors, who established their right to the throne. In Dynasty XIII,
one might also search for groups within the elite class, who might hold offices such as
vizier or military positions, which might lead their group to the office of kingship.
It is possible, though unlikely, that a system of circulating succession existed
without leaving any tangible evidence. Nonetheless, it is prudent to search for some
indication that defined groups existed within Dynasty XIII society. First of all, one must
examine royal filiation. During the time Quirke proposes circulating succession may
have existed, one finds that kings often emphasize their non-royal lineage. However, this
filiation refers only to the father and the mother, not to some distant relative. Therefore,
multiple non-consecutive kings do not proclaim their relationship to the same direct
ancestor, and no extended familial groups are evident in the royal sector.
The next aspect of society to examine is that of kinship terms in the elite sphere,
forming a tribal group, from which kings might be selected. Franke defines some kinship
terms, which could indicate that there was some concept of a tribal group. For example,
the term, mhwt, which first appears in Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1446 from the reign of
609
Goody, "Circulating Succession," p. 159.

144
Amenemhet III (late Dynasty XII), refers to the extended family group beyond the
nucleus (father, mother, and children), but it is a term meaning connecting families to a
common ancestor.610 Other words, such as Jbwt, whiit, and hnw encompass various parts.
of communities and households, including unrelated parties
and, thus, fall outside of
the type of group one would expect for circulating succession.

It is likely that by the Middle Kingdom, clearly defined kinship groups no longer
existed. Franke states:
Ancient Egyptian society was not preferentially stratified by kinship from the Old
Kingdom onward. Social hierarchy and order were determined by rank and
status, not by kinship.612
For example, in the Old Kingdom, the terms/?^("nobility"), rhyt("commoners"),
and hnmmt ("sun-people," precise meaning unknown), labeled some of the social
classes.613 Commoners were known as nds from the First Intermediate Period and nmhy
in the New Kingdom.614 Franke states that when the structure of the political system was
610
A.M. Fathy, "Identical Familial Terms in Egyptian and Arabic: A Sociolinguistic Approach," in Z.
Hawass, ed., Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: Proceedings of the Eighth International
Congress of Egyptologists Cairo, 2000, 3 (New York, 2003), p. 185; Franke, "Altagyptische
Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen," pp. 179-203; "Kinship," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Encyclopedia of
Ancient Egypt, 2 (Oxford, 2001), p. 246; J. Lustig, "Ideologies of Social Relations in Middle Kingdom
Egypt: Gender, Kinship, Ancestors," dissertation, Temple University, 1993, pp. 45-65; Troy, Patterns of
Queenship, p. 104.
611
Franke, "Kinship," p. 246; "Altagyptische Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen," pp. 204-210, 245-256, 279289; Fathy, "Familial Terms," p. 189.
612
Franke, "Kinship," p. 247. See also Assmann, Mind of Egypt, p. 132. Richards states that, in the
Intermediate Periods, "actual authority devolved to powerful provincial kin groups." Here, presumably, the
meaning of kin group is the father-to-son succession of power within local dynasties, rather than extended
tribal groups (Richards, "Modified Order," p. 38). Note that there may be some traces of kinship lines
(tribes) in the Old Kingdom (Ann Macy Roth, Personal Communication).
613
D. Lorton, "Legal and Social Institutions of Pharaonic Egypt," in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the
Ancient Near East, I (Peabody, MA, 1995), p. 351. See also Goedicke, "Origin," pp. 127-128; Doxey,
Egyptian Non-Royal Epithets, pp. 193-196.
6,4
Lorton, "Legal and Social," p. 351. See also, D.P. Silverman, "A Reference to Warfare at Dendereh,
Prior to the Unification of Egypt in the Eleventh Dynasty." in Egypt and Beyond. Essays Presented to
145
threatened, kin groups did emerge in texts (biographies),615 but the nuclear family seems
to have been more important than distant relatives.616 Thus, an underlying system of
kinship with its corresponding terms are evident in some texts, but a system organized on
such units is missing, making circulating succession improbable in Ancient Egyptian
society after the Early Dynastic Period or possibly the Old Kingdom.
Cruz-Uribe stresses that family groups did exist and are visible in the retention of
certain offices within familial groups.
However, it must be emphasized again that the
transfer of these offices followed the patterns of inheritance. Thus, it was important to be
the predecessor's son or alternatively, brother, rather, than to trace one's heritage back to
a common ancestor. Inheritance differs from "tribal" family groupings.
Another problem with circulating succession in Dynasty XIII is the related line of
kings Khasekhemre Neferhotep I, Menwadjre Sahathor, Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV, and
possibly Khahotepre Sobekhotep V. The first three of these rulers were brothers while
the fourth may have been a son of Sobekhotep IV. Here, there is clearly a roadblock in
the circulating succession theory. By definition, such close relatives could not assume
the throne in turn. Since this block of kings makes up the middle third of mid-Dynasty
XIII, it is difficult to explain how circulating succession could apply.
The model for Dynasty XIII kingship must not only comply with tradition,
however one might define it, but it must also conform to the structure of Egyptian
society. Though circulating succession can appear in states, these entities seem less
LeonardH. Lesko. S. Thompson and P. der Manuelian, eds., Providence, 2008, p. 328; D. Franke, "Kleiner
Man (nds)was bist Du?" GM167 (1998), pp. 33-48; Doxey, Egyptian Non-Royal Epithets, pp. 191, 196.
615
Franke, "Kinship," p. 247.
616
Franke, "Kinship," p. 247. For the importance of lineage in non-royal inscriptions, see Baines, Visual
and Written Culture, p. 195.
617
Cruz-Uribe, "Model for the Political Structure," pp. 48-49.
146
complex and more loosely organized than that of ancient Egypt by the Middle Kingdom.
In fact, societies that use circulating succession appear to be chiefdoms or transitional
chiefdoms/states in their structure, and it is well-known that as states develop, they lose
strong familial associations, becoming organized along lines of class instead.618
Nonetheless, one -might argue that the only area, in which the patrilineal line is preserved
is in the institution of kingship, and, thus, it is possible that kinship groups related to
distant ancestor rulers may have emerged at the end of Dynasty XII. Evidence does not
exist, however, to move that the Dynasty XIII kings proclaimed their relationship to any
of these predecessors in unprecedented ways.
Just like with Hayes' theory, that of Quirke has begun to be repeated in
Egyptological literature.619 For example, Murnane suggests it to be a system through
which families of the elite officials, who often trace their lineage to Dynasty XIII royalty,
gained power with "the ebb and flow of their accumulated influence."620 Meanwhile,
Franke states that "a sort of circulating succession" may have existed through a number
of influential families along with the "charisma" and "deeds" of the candidate.621
O'Connor suggests that this system worked well for the late Dynasty XIII to early
618
Claessen, "Balance of Power," p. 23; M.H. Fried, The Evolution of Political Society (New York, 1967),
p. 235; "The State, the Chicken, and the Egg; or What Came First?," in R. Cohen and E.R. Service, eds.,
Origins of the State: The Anthropology of Political Evolution (Philadelphia, 1978), p. 36; C.W. Gailey,
"Culture Wars: Resistance to State Formation," in T.C. Patterson and C.W. Gailey, eds., Power Relations
and State Formation (Washington, D.C., 1987), pp. 39-40; E.R. Service, "Classical and Modern Theories
of the Origins of Government," in R. Cohen and E.R. Service, eds., Origins of the State: The Anthropology
of Political Evolution (Philadelphia, 1-978), p. 27. In relation to ancient Egypt, see Richards, "Mortuary
Variability," pp. 3-6, 22.
619
620
Murnane suggests that this system resulted from the reforms in the administration in late Dynasty XII
(Murnane, "Overview," p. 701).
621
Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p. 746.
147
Dynasty XVII (Dynasty XVI in this study).
However, there is no evidence that there
was any organized circulation between defined groups, and the data for the latest phases
of Dynasty XIII and that of the Theban kings of Dynasty XVI is so fragmentary that there
is no way to prove or disprove any theory concerning kingship. For the first part of the
period, charisma and accomplishments, within the context of a broader group made up of
the progeny of one or more Dynasty XII kings, were probably the more important factors
in the selection of a ruler. After the brother kings, it is unclear how rulers were chosen,
and it is probably better not to speculate upon the nature of the institution at this time
unless more specific evidence comes to light.
Though one cannot accept the sort of kinship groups necessary for circulating
succession, it is true that some stelae during the Second Intermediate Period provide for
the names of a far greater number of relatives including kings or other royal family
members than in other time periods.623 However, in no way, are these genealogies used
to justify the right to the throne, the main concern here. In other words, these texts
simply outline parts of families associated with royalty in one way or another but do not
serve to establish groups, from which a ruler might originate.
From the discussion above, circulating succession cannot explain the transfer of
the royal office in Dynasty XIII, but it is possible that something similar to the Kushite
(Napata) collateral succession could have occurred.
In this system, two eligible groups
alternated in their turn in the office of kingship. Within a group, the right to the office
passed from father to son (but not necessarily the eldest son). This system originated
622
O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," p. 61.

Bourriau, "Patterns of Change," pp. 8, 15; Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 11; Simpson, Terrace of the Great
God; Ward, Essays, p. 50.
624
Torok, "Foundations of Kingship," p. 276.
148
from a fratrilineal line, in which heirs became scarce and adjustments were made. This
bilateral system, however, would not have had the same structure as circulating
succession, which would allow for the investment of multiple groups within a society to
function as heads of the state. Though this system does appear to have been stable, there
is no evidence that such a method existed'in Egypt during Dynasty XIII.
IV. Gonelusions
The rapid succession of kings in Dynasty XIII gives rise to questions as to the
means of legitimization of rulers, as well as methods of succession. Kingship was a
divine, eternal office, which mortals occupied for a limited amount of time.625 It is
possible that the kings of Dynasty XIII used idea of divine birth to legitimize the reigns
of the brother kings through the possibly older story of triplets in the Westcar Papyrus.626
Also, real and fictionalized historical precedents also may have been used to justify
alternative means of succession as well as to connect kings to the more affluent kings of
Dynasty XII. Kings also legitimized their reigns through representing themselves in
sculpture and relief as traditional rulers, wearing royal regalia and taking part in normal
festivals, and by building monuments.627
Ideally, the office of kingship passed from father to son through the rules of
inheritance as it did in the mythological world from Osiris to Horus, according to the
Memphite Theology. However, for Dynasty XIII, the route to this office remains
unclear. More than one model of succession must have existed from the beginning to the
625
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 275; Posener, De la Divinite; Silverman, "Unity and Power," p. 45;
"Nature," pp. 51-61. See also D. Lorton, "Towards a Constitutional Approach," p. 460.
626
627
Baines, "Definition," p. 7; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 137; Simpson, "Egyptian Sculpture," p. 266.
149
end of Dynasty XIII,
since kings ascended the throne though it is clear that both father-
to-son and fratrilineal succession existed. It is also likely that usurpation by regents of
child kings, as well as powerful officials may have taken place from time to time.
Coregency is another possibility, but insufficient evidence exists to confirm its usage
during Dynasty XIII.
Elective and selective kingship, as well as circulating succession, are methods of
transferring the royal office which are the most alien to ancient Egypt.629 The first of
these suggests some sort of democratic procedure, at least within the elite of society,
while the second implies that officials, such as viziers, were more powerful than kings.
However, the evidence dated to Dynasty XIII fails to support such conclusions.
Circulating succession is an anthropological model which has clear indicators
including easily identified kin groups horizontally stratified within society.
As
mentioned above and elaborated upon further in Chapter 6, no traces of this sort of
system exist within ancient Egyptian society.
. .
..
Though there may be as of yet undetermined methods of succession in Dynasty

XIII, it would seem that the ancient Egyptians had a limited number of options through
which kings could be selected. It is not necessary to explain the rapid turnover of rulers
through models of succession. Rather, it is more important to acknowledge the social and
economic conditions of the period. These conditions, which eventually caused the
demise of this group of kings, provide great insight into the situation, which may have

H. Junker and L. Delaporte, Die Volker des Antiken Orients (Freiburg, 1933), pp. 103-104.
Quirke, "Thirteenth Dynasty."
150
been dire at times.631 It is likely that some rulers were replaced because they or their
predecessors were unable to reverse unacceptable trends. Since the lengths of most of the
reigns of Dynasty XIII kings can only be estimated, it should not be assumed that they
were all significantly short or that the 150 year length given to the group is necessarily
correct.
See Chapter 7
151
Chapter 3
The Late Middle Kingdom Royal Funerary Monument Corpus
I. Introduction
In the study of ancient Egyptian history, the size and attributes of royal and
private funerary structures can provide both a synchronic and diachronic measure of the
power held by various social groups.632 The components of the royal funerary
establishments of the Late Middle Kingdom (after the reign of Amenemhet III), in
contrast, remain poorly examined and misunderstood, resulting in an unrealized potential
source of data on Dynasty XIII kingship.
In regard to royal pyramids of the period, scholars have noted but have avoided
extensive investigation of the royal pyramid complexes of the Late Middle Kingdom
perhaps because of the impression that so few of the rulers built such structures. Though
there were more than fifty kings in Dynasty XIII, only five pyramids and one shaft tomb
dating to this period (Fig. 3.1) have been discovered and recorded by scholars. Of these
six tombs, only three are associated positively with the names of Dynasty XIII kings; one
or more of the unknown owners of the remaining pyramids may be Amenemhet IV or
Nefrusobek, who were the last rulers of the previous dynasty. Additional sites, from the
Memphite region to the Delta, have been proposed as being potential locations for Late
Middle Kingdom royal tombs, though some are better candidates than others.633
All of the certain late Dynasty XII-Dynasty XIII sites were excavated between
632
633
Kemp, "Social History," pp. 86-89, Fig. 82.81.

See Chapter 3, Section XL
152
pi I tPTanean Sen
Sakkara
Cairo
4-Dahshur
Mazghuna#(
-Hawara
Red Sfta
Valiey of the Kings (
Figure 3.1. Map showing the locations of excavated Late Middle

Kingdom pyramids (Sakkara, Dahshur, Mazghuna, and Hawara).
Abydos is the site of two additional royal funerary structures in the
corpus to be discussed in Chapter 4. The Valley of the Kings is the
location of the tombs of the New Kingdom rulers.
153
fifty and a hundred years ago, using less than ideal archaeological methods, and
investigators failed to record integral data concerning items such as ceramics and
fragmentary objects. Also, much of the time, these early excavators did not fully
understand the remains of the architectural features they revealed, often leading later
scholars to miss the connections between monuments at different sites. Finally, more
recent archaeologists have not returned to work at these royal funerary structures.
Instead, grander and more intact monuments, such as the Dynasty XII pyramids, have
taken precedence, due to modern environmental threats and the encroachment of villages
upon their elements.
This chapter will focus on the location, structure, and furnishings of the Late
Middle Kingdom royal tombs, providing a comprehensive description of the architectural
components of these monuments, correcting and enhancing information found in the
original publications. Additionally, a tomb model found within a Dynasty XII royal
funerary complex will be added to this corpus. Finally, a synthesis of this information
will be presented with the proposal of a tomb typology, which will then be used to
evaluate other potential sites for the burials of rulers of this period.
II. The Development of the Late Middle Kingdom Royal Tomb Type: The Pyramid
of Amenemhet III at Hawara
In the second half of Dynasty XII, there appears to have been a significant shift in
the architectural expression of the ideology of the royal afterlife. In the tomb of
Senwosret II at Lahun, a series of corridors leads in a circular pattern from just outside
the sarcophagus chamber to the south, west, north and east, entering the site of the burial
154
from the north (Fig. 3.2 left).634 These passages are not the primary means though which
one would have entered the sarcophagus chamber and may have been a conceptual model
of the netherworld as it would be understood in the funerary texts of the New
/ i f
Kingdom.
The following ruler, Senwosret III was likely buried in his tomb at Abydos,
the center of the Osiris cult, rather than in his pyramid at Dahshur.636 During this reign,
unprecedented bent or arced tunnels and corridors, which may be related to Sokar in the
fifth hour of his voyage through the netherworld,637 were added onto both the
substructures of this king's funerary monuments, as well as onto those of some queens
(Fig.3.2 right).
Though the funerary monuments of these kings lacked characteristics
specific to the Late Middle Kingdom (Amenemhet Ill-Dynasty XIII) type to be discussed
below, they may provide the precursors in the development of the standardized features
of these later structures.
The first monument to display typical qualities of a Late Middle Kingdom royal
tomb type (the wsht tomb), including winding corridors, portcullises, and a complex
lowering system for the lid of the sarcophagus, is that of Amenemhet III at Hawara.639
Petrie explored the substructure of this complex in 1888, before any of the other royal
634
W.M.F. Petrie, Illahun, Kahun andGurob (London, 1891), pp. 2-3, Plate 2.
E. Homung, The Valley of the Kings: Horizon of Eternity (New York, 1990), p. 26; RoBler-Kohler,
"Konigliche Vorstellungen I", pp. 73-88.
J. Wegner, "South Abydos: Burial Place of the Third Senwosret? Old and New Evidence at the Abydene
Complex of Senwosret III," KMT 6 (1995), pp. 69-71; Mortuary Temple, p. 393.
637
Di. Arnold, Tlie Pyramid Complex of Senwosret 111 at Dahshur Architectural Studies, The Metropolitan
Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition XXVI (New York, 2002), pp. 40-41; Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp.
199, 392. See also D. Eigner, Die Monumentalen Grabbauten der Spdtzeit in der Thebanischen Nekropole
(Vienna, 1984), pp. 163-183; K.J. Seyfried, "Bemerkungen zur Erweiterung der unterirdischen Anlagen
einiger Graber des Neuen Reiches in Theben-Versuch einer Deutung," ASAE 71 (1987), pp. 244-245.
638
Tombs displaying this feature included those of Senwosret III at Dahshur and Abydos, the queens'
gallery in the Senwosret III pyramid at Dahshur, and Queen Waret II at Dahshur (Di Arnold, The Pyramid
Complex of Senwsoret 111, p. 41). For similar structures, which lead to the surface, in private tombs of the
Amarna Period, see J. Assmann, "Das Grab mit gewundenem Absteig zum Typenwandel des PrivatFelsgrabes im Neuen Reich," MDA1K 40 (1984), pp. 277-290.
639
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 28.
635
155
funerary establishments had been excavated.640 Amenemhet III also had a pyramid
complex at Dahshur, with variations on earlier prototypes, but this monument appears to
have been abandoned due to structural problems.641 Though the reasons for the change in
the architectural layout of the substructure between first pyramid at Dahshur and the
second at Hawara during the reign of Amenemhet III are unclear, this new plan marked
the beginning of a trend, which continued well into Dynasty XIII.642
South Abyctos
Ni
Lahun
Dahshur
Figure 3.2. The substructure of the tomb of Senwosret II at Lahun (left)
and the arced tunnels of Senwosret III from South Abydos and Dahshur
(right). After Petrie, 1891, PI. 2; Ayrton et al. 1904, PL 36 and Arnold,
2002, Plan 1.
640
W.M.F. Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara (London, 1890) pp. 5-8; 13-16; B. Porter and R.L.B. Moss,
Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs, and Paintings, IV (Oxford,
1934), pp. 100-101. See further below.
641
Di. Arnold, Amenemhet III, pp. 83-84.
64z
Both Wegner and Di. Arnold have proposed that the pyramids of Senwosret III and Amenemhet III at
Dahshur predate the tombs of these kings at South Abydos and Hawara (Di. Arnold, The Pyramid Complex
of Senwsoret 111, pp. 36-37; Wegner, Mortuary Temple, p. 390). Such a situation is possible if these two
rulers were coregents.
156
In the sections below, the elements of the pyramid of Amenemhet III will be
discussed in great detail. Despite the fact that there is a division between Dynasties XII
and XIII, both in modern and ancient lists of kings, Amenemhet Ill's monument at
Hawara is linked directly to those of the later period. Thus, the Late Middle Kingdom
royal tomb corpus, as defined here, begins with the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara
and proceeds through much of Dynasty XIII. Later chapters will address the significance
of the developments of these monuments upon the understanding of kingship in Dynasty
XIII and its relationship to this institution in the previous period.
II.A. The Elements of the Superstructure

The pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara was built upon a platform and was
composed of a mudbrick core with limestone casing. 43 The monument was 102 to 105
m on each side with a height of 63 m and a slope of 49 degrees.644 A rectangular
enclosure wall, measuring 384.96 by 157.89 m surrounded the complex with the pyramid
at the northern end.645 Dividing walls extended from the eastern to the western sides of
the enclosure in order to create separate zones for the pyramid, the temple, and the
entrance. On the northern side of the structure, Petrie found the remains of a small
chapel.646
643
The bricks used in the construction of the monument were roughly 45 by 22.5 by 13 cms (A.J. Spencer,
Brick Architecture in Ancient Egypt (Warminster, 1979), p. 38). Those making up the houses connected to
the site of the pyramid measured 37.5 by 18 by 12.5 cms (E.P. Uphill, Pharaoh's Gateway to Eternity (New
York, 2000), p. 14).
644
Uphill, Gateway, pp. 63-64, 71. W.M.F. Petrie had originally measured the sides as being 101.75 m
(4006 inches) each with an estimated height of 58.01 m (2284 inches) (Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara,
p. 13).
645
M. Lehner, The Complete Pyramids (London, 1997), pp. 181-183.
646
Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara, p. 6.
157
To the south of the pyramid, there was an elaborate temple, known by classical
authors as the "Labyrinth."647 Unfortunately, this structure lay in ruins, and the
investigators often found little more than limestone chips marking its position.
Architectural components such as columns and shrines as well as statues of Amenemhet
III, the god Sobek, and other deities littered the surface. From the descriptions of the
classical writers, as well as evidence noted by Petrie, it seems that this temple resembled
a "Mansions of Millions of Years" (hwt nt hh n rnpwt), common in the New Kingdom
though preceded in form by the Dynasty XI tomb of Nebhepetre Mentuhotep.648 In fact,
the first use of this term was on a statue of an official during the reign of Khaneferre
Sobekhotep IV of Dynasty XIII.649
ILB. The Components of the Substructure

Unlike the other elements of the Hawara complex, the substructure of the tomb of
Amenemhet III was well-preserved, but many of the passages and chambers, including
the sarcophagus, were partially flooded at the time of Petrie's work there.650 Though this
complex has some unique features, the structure of the tomb is similar to those of the
others to be discussed in the next sections, and it served as the architectural and
ideological prototype for these later monuments.
I.E.S. Edwards, The Pyramids of Egypt (Harmondsworth, 1961), p. 231; W.M.F. Petrie, Hawara,
Biahmu, andArsinoe (London, 1889), pp. 4-8; W.M.F. Petrie, et al., The Labyrinth Gerzeh and Mazghuneh
(London, 1912), pp. 28-35; Verner, Great Monuments, pp. 430-432. See the plan in Di. Arnold, "Pyramids
of the Middle Kingdom." in Z. Hawass, ed., Pyramids: Treasures Mysteries and New Discoveries in Egypt.
Vercelli, Italy, 2003, p. 360.
648
For the development of the "Mansion of Millions of Years," see Di. Arnold, "Vom Pyramidenbezirk
zum 'Haus fur Millionen Jahre," MDAIK 34 (1978), pp. 1-8; "Cult Complexes," p. 75; Wegner, Mortuary
Temple, pp. 5, 6, 9, 224, 228.
649
Habachi, "New Light," p. 263, Fig. 262.
5
Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara, pp. 14-16, Pis. 11-12. The flooding was a result of the high water
table.
158
As will be seen below, the other Late Middle Kingdom royal tombs were
constructed by excavating a pit, into which the sarcophagus chamber and all of the
corridors were then placed. In the tomb at Hawara, a pit was excavated for the burial
chamber, while individual trenches were dug for all of the surrounding passageways.651
Here, limestone (bedrock) made this process less difficult than the loose sand often
encountered in the construction of some of the other monuments. Around the central pit,
a short, mudbrick wall was built with the use of mortar, either to hold back the sand from
above, to help support the superstructure, or both. The quartzite sarcophagus chamber
was placed in the pit, and the trenches were lined in limestone, creating the layout of the
tomb.
The entrance to the substructure of the pyramid of Amenemhet III was towards
the western end of the southern side beneath the encasement stones (Fig. 3.3.A).652 From
this point, a staircase (24.42 m long and 0.96 m wide; Fig. 3.3.B), made up of small,
shallow steps with narrow ramps on either side, descended into an uneven room (1.7 by
3.77/3.72 m).653 Next, a small passageway led to a portcullis chamber (Fig. 3.3.C), where
a quartzite block (2.64 by 1.78 by 1.82 m) had been maneuvered from its niche to the
right of the passage, possibly with the use of ropes, until its western end rested in a space
on the other side.654 In this way, the stone plugged the entrance to the rest of the
Edwards, Pyramids, p. 233; Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara, p. 14; Uphill, Gateway, p. 71; Vemer,
Great Monuments, pp. 428-429.
652
Lehner, Pyramids, p. 182; Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara, p. 14; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 428.
653
This is the lowest point in the tomb.
654
Note that the structure of the portcullis had not yet evolved completely. Petrie had difficulty
determining how the stone was moved into place. His drawings show that the descending ramp, found in
the later tombs, was not used at Hawara. For the fully developed form of the Late Middle Kingdom
portcullis system, see Fig. 1.7. Note that Lehner mistakenly identified the closed blocking stone as the
third rather than the first (Lehner, Pyramids, p. 182).
159
substructure, which began at a higher level behind the blocking stone, the base of which
had become the ceiling of the chamber.655 However, since the area around the portcullis
was composed of limestone, the tomb had not remained secure as robbers had easily cut a
tunnel around the hard block.
Behind the portcullis, another small corridor led to the southwest turning
chamber, measuring 2.67 by 2.18 by 1.88 m (Fig. 3.3.D).656 This type of room was
designed so that a coffin and other funerary furnishings could be maneuvered around
corners between relatively narrow passages. From here, a corridor, which was filled with
large blocks of stone, continued to the north (Fig. 3.3.E). However, the main part of the
tomb extended to the east. Just after the turning chamber in the southern wall of the
passage, a niche with a socket revealed that a wooden door had once stood in this area.
The niche allowed the door to fall within the lines of the walls when opened so that it
would not stand in the path of the coffin and other items as they were moved through the
tomb after the death of the king. The corridor continued to the east for a total of 30.63 m
(from the southwest turning chamber to that of the southeast; Fig. 3.3.F). The width of
the corridor was 0.97 to 0.99 m except at the eastern end where it narrowed to 0.79 m.657
At the end of the southern corridor, there was another turning chamber, partially
filled with masonry, measuring 3.59 by 2.25 by 2.28 m.658 At the northern end of this
room, there was a second quartzite portcullis, which had remained in its niche to the left
655
Wegner points to the tomb of Senwosret III at South Abydos as a precedent to this portcullis
configuration as well as the changes in level (Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," pp.
373-375; Mortuary Temple, p. 390).
6
Petrie, Kahun, Guroh, andHawara, p. 15.
657
Note that this narrow width matches that of the sarcophagus chest. Thus, the coffin would have fit
through this hallway.
658
Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara, p. 15.
160
i:soo
N
SOUTH
PASSftSE
G.
D.i
C.
CORE
QF I BMCKWOF.K
nRIGINftL
' STQNE CftSING.
Figure 3.3. Plan of the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara. After Petrie 1890,
Plate 2.
(Fig. 3.3.G). A passageway, which was located at a higher level beyond the blocking
stone, ran to the north for 15.33 m (width at 0.97 m; height at 1.59 to 1.81 m) as it sloped
downward; it ended in a third turning chamber, measuring 4.22 by 2.29 by 2.18 m, with
161
masonry filling parts of it. At the western end of the turning chamber, there was an
unclosed, quartzite portcullis (3.51 by 1.55 by 1.12 m; housed to the right of the chamber;
Fig. 3.3.H). Fr<5m here, another corridor led 8.54 m to the west (at a higher level), ending
in the antechamber (7.85 by 2.28 by 2.32 m; Fig. 3:3.1).
Like the second and third turning compartments, the antechamber was partially
filled with stones. 5 Near the center of this room, there was a small corridor in the floor,
which had been blocked. This passage, measuring 1.82 by 0.92 m, led to the sarcophagus
chamber, which displayed an advance in technology (Fig. 3.3.J). The base was made of a
monolithic piece of quartzite with interior measurements of 6.79 by 2.39 by 2.35 m.660
Within this block, a separate sarcophagus and canopic chest had been placed during the
early phases of construction. The sarcophagus, which was decorated with a niched
facade, was placed to the north of the canopic box in the burial chamber.
The lid of the
chamber was composed of three sections. Two quartzite blocks covered the southern and
middle portions of the tomb. These 1.22 meter-high stones were stationary, as they had
been built into the tomb. A third lid section was located in the north and had been
suspended above the chamber, using stone pillars set in niches upon sand (Fig. 3.4 right).
After the deceased Amenemhet III had been placed inside, workers must have crawled
into the two small corridors hidden in the floor of the antechamber. One of them
removed the stone that held the sand in the niche permitting it to pour into the small
chambers, causing the supports, and thus the lid, to lower slowly. Once the lid had been
659
Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara, pp. 15-16.

Later scholars have stated that this block was 100 tons and measured 7 by 2.5 by 1.83 m (Lehner,
Pyramids, pp. 182-183; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 429).
661
Dodson notes that the canopic box was slightly to the west of the central axis of the sarcophagus in
order to make room for the coffin of Neferuptah (Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 28). For the tomb of
Nefeniptah, see p. 13.
660
162
closed, there was no mechanical way to reopen the sarcophagus.
Figure. 3.4. The structure of the saddle roof in the tomb of

Amenemhet III at Hawara (left; after Petrie, 1890, Plate 4) and the
mechanics of the sand lowering system (right).
The roof of the chamber was in the saddle form, composed of two large limestone
slabs (50 tons each), which formed a triangular apex above the sarcophagus (Fig. 3.4
left).
Horizontal limestone beams were used across the chamber below this feature.
Above the saddle roof, mudbricks, some of which weighed 18 to 23 kilograms, were laid,
with the aid of mud mortar. On top of this layer, a brick arch, was formed using five
courses. Above, the arch, which served to help distribute the weight of the pyramid, the
interior of the structure was constructed setting bricks into the sand (7 m thick).
The tomb itself had been robbed through a small hole chiseled into the area where
Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara, pp. 6, 15; Spencer, Brick Architecture, p. 38; Verner, Great
Monuments, p. 429.
163
the lid and the base of the sarcophagus met.663 From here, the coffin had been ravaged
and burned. Interestingly, the coffin and funerary goods (including an alabaster offering
table) of a princess, Neferuptah, were found within the sarcophagus chamber next to the
items of the king.664 Some of this woman's objects had mutilated hieroglyphs inscribed
into them (feet of birds and tails of snakes not shown).
On other items, the feet and
tails of normal hieroglyphs were chiseled in order to alter them into this form.
Neferuptah's inscriptions represent the first use of mutilated hieroglyphs in the Late
Middle Kingdom, something, which became standard in the funerary equipment of both
royal and private individuals of Dynasty XIII.666
663
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 29, n. 57; Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, andHawara, pp. 15-16, Pis. 1314; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 429.
664
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 29; Lehner, Pyramids, pp. 182-183; Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and
Hawara, p. 17; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 430.
665
Mutilated hieroglyphs were likewise found on the objects from the sarcophagus within the pyramid of
Neferuptah (N. Farag and Z. Iskander, The Discovery of Neferwptah (Cairo, 1971), p. 55). These
modifications of the hieroglyphs prevented them from harming the deceased in the subterranean part of the
tomb (H.G. Fischer, " Archaeological Aspects of Epigraphy and Palaeography," in R. Caminos and H.G.
Fischer, Ancient Egyptian Epigraphy and Palaeography (New York, 1976), p. 32; "Hieroglyphen" LA II
(Weisbaden, 1977), p. 1195).
6
Mutilated hieroglyphs were also used in royal and private inscriptions found in tombs in the Old
Kingdom. It has been mistakenly stated that the coffin of Nebkheperre Intef of Dynasty XVII has the last
example of mutilated hieroglyphs (Bourriau, "Patterns of Change," p. 13). However, the coffin and canopic
case of Kamose also contains mutilated hieroglyphs, though the latter also has regular bird and other animal
signs. Kamose's funerary equipment is the last royal use of such modified signs until Dynasty XXV.
There are also examples of royal coffin and canopic inscriptions without mutilated hieroglyphs during
Dynasty XVII (A. Dodson, "On the Internal Chronology of the Seventeenth Dynasty," GM120 (1991), pp.
33-38). Objects from the private tomb of Sonebnay and his wife, Khons have mutilated hieroglyphs.
Cartouches reveal that they lived in the reign of Sewahenre Senebmiew (Dynasty XIII) (Berlev, "A
Contemporary of King Sewah-en-Re,'" pp. 110-111, Pis. 26-28). For other examples, see Fischer,
"Hieroglyphen," p. 1195; Hayes, Scepter, p. 348; P. Lacau, "Suppressions et modifications de signes dans
les textes funeraires," ZAS5\ (1913), pp. 26-35; V. Maragioglio and C. Rinaldi, "Note sullaPiramide di
Ameny 'Aamu," Orientalia 37 (1968), p. 325; T.E. Peet, The Cemeteries ofAbydos, Part II1911-1912,
Memoirs of the Egypt Exploration Fund 34 (London, 1914), p. 57, PL 13.53; G.A. Reisner, Canopies,
Catalogue General des Antiquites Egyptiennes du Musee du Caire 103 (Cairo, 1967), pp. 14, 17, 18, 142,
143, 361, 362, Pis. IV, VI, XXXII, LII; D.P. Silverman, "Coffin Texts from el Bersheh, Kom el Hisn, and
Mendes," in H. Willem, ed., The World of the Coffin Texts (Leiden, 1996), p. 138; H.M. Stewart, Egyptian
Shabtis, Shire Egyptology 23 (Buckinghamshire, 1995), p. 15; N. Swelim and A. Dodson, "On the Pyramid
of Ameny-Qemau and its Canopic Equipment," MDAIK 54 (1998), p. 327, Fig. 324. J.P. Allen, "Coffin
Texts from Lisht," in H. Willems, ed., The World of the Coffin Texts (Leiden, 1996), pp. 1, 13; Grajetzki,
Burial Customs, p. 58.
164
The appearance of a woman's burial within the funerary complex of the king is
not so unusual in the Middle Kingdom though her proximity to the ruler is unique.667
However, a small pyramid, located by Habachi several kms southeast of the complex at
Hawara in 1936 and excavated by Farag in the 1950's, was found to contain inscriptions
with the name of this same Neferuptah.668 The actual location of the princess' burial
seems to have been within her own pyramid as fragments of mummy wrappings with skin
attached were discovered there; she likely outlived Amenemhet III.669 Also, within the
Pyramid of Hawara, there is a corridor leading to the north on the western side of the
monument. Di. Arnold has suggested that this hallway may lead to the burial chamber of
queens like that of the same king at Dahshur.670
II.C. The Owner of the Pyramid at Hawara: Amenemhet III

Amenemhet III, who ruled for 46 years, was one of the most successful kings of
the Middle Kingdom. During his reign, Egypt enjoyed great wealth, the office of
kingship had significant power, and Amenemhet III was able to construct monuments of
the highest quality throughout the country. Two of the most impressive of these
structures included his pyramid complexes at Dahshur and Hawara.
W. Grajetzki, "Multiple Burials in Ancient Egypt to the End of the Middle Kingdom." in W. Grajetzki,
ed., Life and Afterlife during the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period (London, 2007), pp, 1634.
Farag and Iskander, Neferwptah. See also Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 29; P. Janosi, Die
Pyramidenanlagen der Koniginnen. Untersuchungen zu einem Grabtyp des Alten und Mittleren Reiches
(Vienna, 1995), pp. 67-70; Grajetzki, "Multiple Burials," p. 24. Farag notes that the average size of the
bricks of the pyramid of Neferuptah was 46 by 25 by 14 cms while' Spencer records the brick size as 46 by
24 by 14 cms (Spencer, Brick Architecture, p. 38). Note that this pyramid does not have the substructure
design of the Late Middle Kingdom royal type.
Grajetzki, Middle Kingdom, p. 58.
670
Di. Arnold, "Dahschur Dritter Grabungsbericht," MDAIK36 (1980), pp. 20-21. See also A. Dodson,
"The Tombs of the Queens of the Middle Kingdom," ZAS 115 (1988), p. 135; The Canopic Equipment, p.
28, n. 56.
165
Amenemhet III began his first funerary monument at Dahshur. During

construction, this pyramid suffered structural failure due to the underlying soil quality as
well as the weight of the superstructure. Presumably, at this point, the royal architects
abandoned Dahshur and began work at Hawara where they made radical changes in the
design of the tomb of the king, possibly relating to new ideas regarding the afterlife of
this important figure. Though some of these new features were derived from earlier
pyramids, the overall impact of the new design upon the funerary monuments of later
kings is significant and likely pertains to a culmination in religious experimentation that
would begin again in Dyansty XVIII.671
Compared to the information about Dynasty XIII kings to be discussed in this
thesis, knowledge concerning the reign of Amenemhet III is relatively extensive, and it is
certain that the office of kingship was secure during this point of the Middle Kingdom.
After the death of Amenemhet III, however, the stability of kingship declined
significantly. Amenemhet IV, who may not have been directly related to his
predecessors, took the throne for four years, followed by a daughter of Amenemhet III,
Nefrusobek. After these last two kings of Dynasty XII, information concerning the
following rulers becomes fragmentary as they were ephemeral, and some appear to have
had little resources for the construction of monuments.672
III. The Pyramid of Woserkare Khendjer (Lepsius XLIV) at South Sakkara

The most complete of all of the post Amenemhet III pyramid complexes is that of
See Chapter 4 below. Also, see Wegner, "Amduat Tomb"; RolMer-Kohler, "Konigliche Vorstellungen
I," pp. 73-88.
672
Grajetzki, Middle Kingdom, pp. 74-75.
166
the Dynasty XIII king Woserkare Khendjer at South Sakkara. Thus, it is most logical to
proceed from Amenemhet Ill's funerary establishment at Hawara to a discussion of this
monument, since through it, the conceptual plans of the others, all of which presumably
remained incomplete, can be envisioned. Also, the attribution of this pyramid to
Woserkare Khendjer, is certain, as his name was discovered not only on a pyramidion
within the complex but also in the limestone relief fragments of his chapel. Thus, this
monument serves as a chronological peg within the Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary
corpus.
Lepsius was the first to note the existence of this pyramid, and de Morgan appears
to have entered the tomb.673 However it was not studied in detail until Jequier excavated
the monument in 1929-1931,674 and published it, along with a nearby royal tomb, in a
relatively detailed report.675 Thus, not only is this structure well-preserved, but the
recording of its features is also more substantial than those of the other members of the
Late Middle Kingdom royal monument corpus. Nonetheless, the condition of the site is
poor in many areas as are the remains of the other Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary
monuments, having a square mound of mudbrick debris surrounding a large, sand-filled
J. de Morgan, Carte de la Necropole Memphite (Cairo, 1897), p. 6; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 67;
C.R. Lepsius, Denkmdler ausAegypten undAethiopien I (Leipzig, 1897), p. 202, PI. 234.
674
The pyramid is in an area, which has a concentration of Old Kingdom private tombs (G. Jequier,
"Rapport Preliminaire sur les Fouilles Executees en 1928-1929 dans la Partie Meridionale de la Necropole
Memphite," ASAE 29 (1929), pp. 153-156; "Rapport Preliminaire sur les Fouilles Executees en 1929-1930
dans la Partie Meridionale de la Necropole Memphite," ASAE 30 (1930), pp. 105-107; "Rapport
Preliminaire sur les Fouilles Executees en 1929-1931 dans la Partie Meridionale de la Necropole
Memphite," ASAE 31 (1931), pp. 32-35; Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 1, 39-43; Weill, "Complements," p. 11).
675
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah. For summaries of the work here, see C. Holzl, "Saqqara, Pyramids of the
13th Dynasty," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology ofAncient Egypt (New York, 1999),
pp. 711-712; Lehner, Pyramids, pp. 186-187; B. Porter and R.L.B. Moss, Topographical Bibliography of
Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs, and Paintings III (2) (Oxford, 1981), pp. 434-435; R.
Stadelmann, Die Agyptischen Pyramiden, Kulturgeschichte der Antiken Welt 30 (Mainz
Rhein, 1985), pp. 249-252.
167
crater.676
The pyramid complex of Khendjer had many components including two enclosure
walls, a north chapel, a mortuary (pyramid) temple, a subsidiary pyramid, and shafts
leading to galleries for the burials of members of the court (Fig. 3.5.A-G).677 Graffiti
within the tomb suggests that the substructure was begun in the first year of Khendjer's
reign with the pyramid being raised in the next two years followed by the surrounding
walls and buildings.678
III.A. The Elements of the Superstructure

The pyramid complex of Khendjer was-constructed on a relatively high plateau at
the edge of the desert. However, the southeastern side had to be built up for the later
addition of the brick outer enclosure wall. In this same area, there was a practically
unused ramped staircase, made of mudbrick, descending toward the east.679 The staircase
was 2.5 m wide with steps measuring 12 cms in height and 38 cms in depth and was
eventually covered and blocked by the enclosure wall.680
The pyramid of Khendjer was roughly 52.5 m (100 cubits) on each side.681 The
structure was made of mudbrick, encased in fine Tura limestone. In the tomb crater, laid
676
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 3, 28.

Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, PI. 2.
678
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 30.
679
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 28, Pis. 22, 24b-c. Lehner suggests that this feature may mark.the
location of the substructure in an earlier plan of the tomb or may have even been a south tomb like that
found in the pyramid of Djoser (Lehner, Pyramids, p. 186). Note that there is a mudbrick, ceremonial
staircase leading to the tomb of Senwosret III at Abydos (Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 373-374, 393).
680
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 9, n. 1.
681
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 30. Dodson states that the sides are 51.8 m (Dodson, "Tombs of the
Kings," p. 41; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29). I have measured the length in the plan as 55 m.
This same estimate is also found in Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229. However, he seems to round most figures to
the nearest five.
168
bricks and debris were preserved to a height of about half a meter.682 The bricks had
varying amounts of straw inclusions and were 42 by 21 by 11 cms ( 2.00 cms).683 One
of the bricks in the pyramid structure had a white inscription painted upon it with the date
"year 1, month 3," suggesting that the construction of this part of the funerary complex
began very early in the reign of Khendjer.684
Figure 3.5. The Pyramid Complex of Woserkare Khendjer at South Sakkara.

After Jequier, 1986, PI. 2.
Around the mudbrick structure, there was a trench 6 to 7 m wide and 2 m deep
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 29; Spencer, Brick Architecture, p. 39.
169
that the architects cut in order to provide a foundation for the encasement stones.
Unfortunately, Jequier was able to identify only fragments of these stones, as they had
been removed in earlier times. Nonetheless, he did estimate the angle of the pyramid,
likely with the use of the slope of a pyramidion to be discussed later, as 55,686 a number
coming roughly in the center of those of the more recent studies of this object: 5422' 687
to 56,
making the monument around 37.49 m high.
In the northeastern corner of
the encasement trench, Jequier discovered a foundation deposit within a small circular pit
lined with bricks.690 The deposit included four small vessels with a cone-shaped base.
The inner enclosure wall, which was approximately 77 by 78 m in length, was
located around 8 m from the face of the encasement stones of the pyramid (Fig. 3.5.A).691
The wall was made of limestone blocks in a palace facade pattern, which extended out 3
m in some areas, and was similar to those of some of the Dynasty XII kings.692 Upon
excavation, only a trench and the first layer of stones were preserved in most places.
Interestingly, abutting the outside of the wall in the east, there was a section of a
685

687
J. Rousseau, Mastabas etpyramides d'Egypte (Paris, 1994), pp. 197-198.
688
C. Rossi, "Note on the Pyramidion Found at Dahshur," JEA 85 (1999), p. 219.
689
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 30. Based on my measurement of the sides of the monument in the plan
at a 55.50 degree angle, the height of the pyramid could be around 40 m. However, here, the excavator's
written estimates will be used above all others. Nonetheless, Jequier's calculation of a height of 37.35 m
has been corrected using his own data in the formula: h=tan A x l/2b where h is the height, A is the slope
of the pyramid and b is the base length. An angle of 54.90 would result in a height of 37.35, so it is
possible that this number has been rounded to 55 in the text but not in the calculation. Jequier's incorrect
estimation of the height has been repeated by more recent authors (Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 1929; Lehner,
Pyramids, p. 186; Stadelmann, Agyptischen Pyramiden, p. 249).
69
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 30, Fig. 24; J.M. Weinstein, "Foundation
Deposits in Ancient Egypt," dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1973, p. 85.
691
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 7. Note that Fakhry estimates the length of the inner wall as being
about 75 m on each side (Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229).
692
Jequier, "Rapport 1930-1931," p. 33; Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 7-8, Figs. 6-7. The Dynasty XII
examples include Senwosret II, Senwosret III, and Amenemhet III (Di. Arnold, The Encyclopedia of
Ancient Egyptian Architecture (Princeton, 2003), p. 162).
686
170
mudbrick, sinusoidal wall.693 Jequier believed that this wavy wall served as a temporary
enclosure and was replaced later when time and finances were sufficient.694 As will be
noted later, this wall is more robust than the other two sinusoidal constructions in the
complex. The function of these walls will be considered together with those from other
sites in a later chapter.- The outer enclosure wall was made of mudbrick being about 2.6
m wide and measured 122.65 by 125.9 m around its perimeter (Fig. 3.5.B).695 Jequier
only found sections of this wall preserved though it was clear, due to the presence of a
trench, that it originally surrounded the entire complex.
From the middle of the eastern face of the pyramid to the outer wall, Jequier
found the fragmentary remains of a limestone mortuary temple, measuring roughly 26.25
by 27.5 m, including a courtyard with the dimensions 15 by 25 m (Fig. 3.5.C).696 Since
the temple was so completely destroyed, it was difficult for the excavators to reconstruct
its plan. Nonetheless, they discovered many architectural fragments, such as sections of
torus molding, decorated columns, and inscribed limestone and granite blocks, leading to
some conclusions about this monument.
Jequier notes that the fragments from
papyriform columns indicated that the hall they occupied was about 4 m in height.698
Unfortunately, the majority of the temple's relief fragments were in such a poor
state that the excavators did not attempt to record them.699 Nonetheless, he had a few
examples copied, and the fragments show standard themes such as offering bearers, the
693
Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930," p. 108; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, Pis. 2, 4a.

Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 7; Spencer, Brick Architecture, p. 39.
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 6.
696
Jequier, "Rapport 1930-1931," p. 32; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 3-4, PI. 3.
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 4-6; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 440.
698
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 4. Columns from Medamud from Dynasties XIII-XVII are similar in
form (Bisson de la Roque, Medamoud 1927, pp. 82, Fig. 59.7; 84).
699
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 4-6, Figs. 1-5.
171
offering formula, and cartouches with the names Khendjer. Jequier noted that the quality
of the carvings was sub-standard. Such a reduction in the quality of artisanship has
become synonymous with periods such as Dynasty XIII, in which kingship suffered a
loss of power and economic strength.
At the front of the temple, there was a large doorway leading outside the pyramid
enclosure.700 Jequier suggested that a causeway, beginning at this point, was visible and
ran in the direction toward the cultivation to the east, as he was able to see the line of two
mudbrick walls in the sand. However, well before this structure reached the valley, its
path could no longer be traced. Perhaps it is rather a ramp or temporary road leading to
the site as such structures are common whereas formal causeways appear not to be
used.701
In the middle of the northern face of the pyramid, there was a small chapel
measuring approximately 6.38 by 8 m (Fig. 3.5.D).702 Like the larger, funerary temple,
this small structure was completely destroyed, and only indications of the building
remained. At the northern end of the chapel, there were two small ramped staircases, one
leading from the eastern side and the other from the western one, next to the enclosure
wall.703 These features, made up of three steps each, led from the ground level inside the
enclosure wall up to a platform at a level 0.56 m high.704 This area was open and
originally led to a darker room covered with a roof supported by columns.
Carved fragments from the structure indicated that it originally included offering
700
Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930," p. 107; Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 6.

Wegner, Mortuary Temple, p. 24.
702
Jequier, "Rapport 1930-1931," pp. 32-33; Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 15-17, PL 12.
7
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 15, 17, Pis. 12, 15a.
704
701
172
scenes, kheker friezes, a blue ceiling with stars, and a false door made of quartzite.
This latter object was inscribed in sunk relief, decorated with blue/green pigment and had
been placed at the southern end of the chapel near the pyramid. Another fragment
included the king's Nebty name, Wahmesut {wlh-mswi) while additional pieces of the
door displayed other parts of the titulary. Another set of blocks with a portion of the
king's titulary, had chisel marks where his name had once been, possibly indicating the
malicious destruction of the ruler's identity. Finally, one fragment showed a part of a
yellow serpent with red, dashed scales.
Other sculpted features were also found in the small chapel. There was part of a
quartzite statuette of Khendjer, broken at the level of the elbows. Though the
craftsmanship is not as superb as in the reigns of Senwosret III and Amenemhet IV, the
rendering of the facial features resembles that of Late Dynasty XII, although these
attributes are less enhanced (heavy eyes, down turned lips, large ears, etc.).
Another important find in the chapel was that of fragments of a black granite
pyramidion, measuring 1.3 m in height with a circular tenon on the base for attaching it to
the pyramid.707 Now in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, this object was inscribed with the
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 15-17, Figs. 14, 15; Verner, Great
Monuments, p. 440. Note that false doors were already antiquated by this time, having been replaced by
stelae except in the northern chapels of kings (Senwosret I, Senwosret II, Senwosret III, and Amenemhet III
at Hawara) (Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, pp. 89, 163).
7
Robins, Egyptian Statues, p. 45; E. Russmann, "Historical Overview," p. 19; "Aspects," 35-36; C.
Aldred, Egyptian Art in the Days of the Pharaohs 3100-320 BC (New York, 1980), p. 138; Bourriau,
Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 37; Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229; Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930," pp. 106-107;
"Rapport 1930-1931," p. 33; Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 18-19, PI. 15b-c; Richards, "Modified Order," p. 44.
707
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229; Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930," p. 106, PI. 102; "Rapport 1930-1931," p. 33;
Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 19-26, Figs. 16-20, PI. 16. Note that Verner mistakenly places these fragments in
the temple on the eastern side of the pyramid (Verner, Great Monuments, p. 440). Tenons could also be
square at this time (Di. Arnold, Building in Egypt: Pharaonic Stone Masonry (New York, 1991), p. 127).
173
king's names708 as well as Coffin Text, spell 788.709 Spell 788a is found on the coffins of
Awibre Hor and Nebhotepti at Dahshur as well as that of a lector priest from Lisht.710
In the buildings within the complex, there were twenty control marks in both red
and black ink.7
These inscriptions often record the names and titles of individuals along
with dates. Thus, through these marks, it is possible to identify certain people related to
the construction of the tomb. The years recorded in this structure ranged from year 1 to
year 5, indicating that this latter date was probably the extent of Khendjer's reign. The
names of officials included the overseers of the southern province, Shebnu and Ameny,
both sons of Nemtynakht, as well as the overseer of the palace, Senebtyfy and untitled
officials Iwsobek, Hawnakht, and Neferhotep.712
III.B. The Components of the Substructure

The construction of the substructure had begun by excavating a pit in the sand
measuring 13 m on the sides and 11 m in depth with a 4 m-wide trench that sloped
upward toward the west,713 Then, the sarcophagus chamber and the other components of
the substructure were placed within it, probably with the aid of brick structures, as will be
seen in other monuments to be discussed below.
708
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29.

E. Fiore-Marochetti, "On the Design, Symbolism and Painting of Some Xllth Dynasty Tomb
Superstructures," GM144 (1995), pp. 49, 50; M.G. Maspero, "Sur le Pyramidion d'Amenemhait III a
Dahchour," ASAE 3 (1902), pp. 206-208; A. de Buck, The Egyptian Coffin Texts VII (Chicago, 1961), Spell
788.
710
L. Lesko, Index of the Spells on Egyptian Middle Kingdom Coffins and Related Documents (Berkeley,
1979), pp. 54-55, Da2c, Da4c, and L2Li. Da2x and Dale, which both belong to women, display Spell 788.
711
F. Arnold, The Control Notes and Team Marks, The South Cemeteries of Lisht 2 (New York, 1990), pp.
176-181; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 10-15, Fig. 18-11.
712
F. Arnold, Control Notes, pp. 176, 178-179, KH171, 178-179, 112-113, 115.
713
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 33-34.
709
174
Figure 3.6. The Pyramid of Woserkare Khendjer. After Jequier, 1986, PI. 2.
The concealed entrance to the substructure of the pyramid of Khendjer was

located at the southern end of the center of the western side of the pyramid (Fig.
3.6.A).714 The passage descended toward the east from an opening found at the level of
the pavement stones, providing the foundation for the pyramid's encasement. The area
defining this entrance, just outside the encasement trench, was lined with six courses of
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 31, Pis. 32, 37b.
175
mudbricks with a small brick staircase descending through the center.715 There were also
two narrow brick staircases descending against the encasement stones (at a right angle to
the previous staircase to the west) toward the entrance in order to allow for an approach
from three sides when lowering heavy funerary equipment.716 Jequier's plan also shows
a long brick structure leading from the northwest of the interior enclosure wall to the area
of this entrance,717 but he does not discuss this feature.
The entrance and its components were constructed of well-worked Tura
limestone.718 From the western edge of the opening in the surface, a ramped staircase
descended toward the east. The stairs were shallow and slanted back, ostensibly to allow
a person carrying heavy objects to walk down them easily, while larger items could be
placed along the ramps in order to slide them safely through the corridor. In the
limestone feature leading to the opening, as well as in every flat area without a staircase,
including places where the level changes, grooves were cut on each side in order to allow
wood to be placed to help guide bulky objects, such as the coffin, over the space.
The stairway is approximately 0.9 m wide and extends downward for around 5 m,
providing fourteen steps, before the floor becomes level for a distance of approximately
2.75 m with 1.75 m of this region being a portcullis chamber (Fig. 3.6.B).7I9 A quartzite
portcullis stone, measuring around 2.9 by 1.9 by 1.9 m, rested in a ramped recess (with a
slope of 9) to the south. According to the excavator, the portcullis was supposed to have
lowered with the use of a system, in which the sand from beneath a stone support could
715
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 31, PI. 38f.

Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 31, PI. 32.
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, Pi. 31.
7 8
719
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 31-32, PL 38.
176
be released, allowing one end to slide down the quartzite ramp across to a niche in the
northern side of the wall.720 The base of the stone would form a ceiling to the room
below and would have concealed the entrance to the next corridor, which was positioned
behind it at a level 1.5 m above the previous floor (See Fig. 3.7).
Figure 3.7. Plan of one portcullis in the tomb of Khendjer. After

Jequier 1986, PI. 8.
Jequier notes that the smaller stone meant to prop up the portcullis was missing,
but the block still remained in its original, pre-burial position.721 Thus, he surmised that
the mechanisms used to move this particular stone had failed. Since Jequier did not
explain how the sand would have been released from the hole, the supposed sand
lowering system may simply have been a niche for a lever used to start the stone down

177
777
the ramp had it ever been used.

In the passage after the portcullis, another staircase of the same design as the
79'}
previous one stretches again to the east traveling around 13.5 m in thirty-nine steps.
Again, the floor leveled off, for a distance of about 3.3 m including another portcullis
chamber (Fig. 3.6.C). Strangely, halfway between the end of the staircase and the
western edge of the block, there was a recess on each side of the wall. Here Jequier
found evidence for a wooden double door.724 When the doors were opened, they fit into
niches in the walls so that they would be flush and, thus, would not be in the way of the
funerary equipment brought in during the interment. This double door system was
similar to the single variety found at Hawara, except that the two planks joined- in the
middle of the corridor. The reason why this doorway was in between the two quartzite
portcullis stones is unknown. It may have served to keep people from entering the tomb
prior to burial, though one would have thought that the architects would have placed the
door at the entrance to the structure. Alternatively, it is possible that the wooden doors,
as well as the portcullis, may have served a ritual purpose rather than as a means of
protecting the tomb.
The second portcullis was identical to the first in its mechanics and measured
approximately 1.75 by 3 by 1.75 m.
However, this system operated from a niche to the
north of the passage. Like the previous portcullis stone, this quartzite block remained in
its original position, never having been moved to rest in its intended place.
722
For the use of levers in ancient Egyptian architecture, see Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 133.
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 32, PL 38.
724
Edwards, Pyramids, pp. 738-739; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 32, PL 38.
725
See Chapter 5, Section IV for further discussion.
178
The next passageway continued in an easterly direction at a level about 1 m

higher than before for about 6.75 m, while the width was the same as all of the other
corridors (around 0.9 m).727 The floor of this hallway sloped downward slightly, leveling
off just prior to ending in a square room measuring around 2.25 m on each side (Fig.
3.6.D). This* chamber served to turn the coffin 90 degrees in order to continue through a
passage to the north. However, the entrance to this next corridor was hidden in the floor
The passage, which was around 11m long, 1 m wide, and 1 m tall, continued at a
lower level toward the north.
The hallway ended with the antechamber, which was
concealed above it (Fig. 3.6.E). Thus, the entrance to this part of the tomb was through
the floor of this chamber, above the level of the ceiling of the previous corridor. This
room measured approximately 9.9 by 2.25 m, the longer section running east/west, with a
height of about 2 m.
Beneath the floor in the center of the antechamber, there was an entrance to
another passage, which had been hidden by pavement stones.729 This new corridor
extended toward the south, measuring 3.75 m in length, 1 m in width, and.l.25 m in
height. The end of this hallway was blocked by the northern end of the sarcophagus lid
once the body had been placed inside the sarcophagus chamber.
The sarcophagus was made of a single quartzite block with niches for the coffin
and the canopic box (Fig. 3.6.F).730 The upper part of the inside of the sarcophagus
measured around 3.5 m long by 1.25 m wide by 1 m high. Presumably, this area was

730
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 32, PL 38. Fakhry estimated that the stone weighs around 60 tons
(Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229).
179
kept free for funerary items such as weapons and other goods and was used to maneuver
the coffin.731 Meanwhile, the niches for the coffin and the canopic box rested below,
measuring approximately 2.4 by 0.8 by 1 m and 0.75 by 0.7 by 0.7 m, respectively.
The lid of the sarcophagus was made of two large pieces of quartzite, the interior
of the southernmost one having a slightly rounded shape (2.25 m long, 3 m wide and 1.5
m tall).732 The northern lid component was about the same size as the first but was flat
on its underside. The profile of this section of the lid was in the form of a truncated
triangle with a rectangular base. The reason for this shape was that the lid originally was
held above the base with the use of quartzite blocks on its east and west sides. Thus, this
shape fit best into the saddle roof before the lid was lowered.7
Like the structure of the saddle roof in the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara,
two large limestone slabs were set, leaning into one another on top of the walls around
the sarcophagus in Woserkare Khendjer's tomb. Above the junction of these two stones,
there were eight layers of bricks below an arch.734 This feature was composed of twelve
courses of bricks, sometimes interspersed with layers of sand, which served to relieve the
pressure from the tremendous weight of the pyramid above.
Before the interment, the northern part of the lid would have been propped upon
two, one-meter high granite supports on the eastern and western sides of the
sarcophagus.
Like in the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara, these supports sat
upon sand and caused the lid to remain open with enough space to place the funerary
731

733
Di. Arnold, Building, pp. 194, Fig. 193.127.
734
Di. Arnold, Building, pp. 79, Fig. 73.27; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 34; Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229.
735
Edwards, Pyramids, pp. 240-241; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 32-33, PI. 38; Verner, Great
Monuments, pp. 439-440.
732
180
goods, including the coffin, within. This sand lowering system was made complete by
the presence of two small corridors running from the sarcophagus chamber to the east and
west.736 The first of these passages was located to the east and had a concealed entrance
in the floor of the hidden hallway, leading to the antechamber, discussed earlier. It was
about 6.25 m from the southern entrance of this hallway and was 2.75 m long, 0.8 m wide
and 0.9 m high. Meanwhile, the western passage had the same dimensions and emerged
from the floor of a small room, measuring 1.5 by 2 m, to the west. From here, another
passageway, measuring 2.5 m in length and 0.8 m in width extended toward the north,
running to an entrance beneath the floor of the western end of the antechamber.
As was the case with the sarcophagus of Amenemhet III, small stones would have
blocked the space between the burial chamber and the small, eastern and western
passages before the burial.737 After the royal mummy had been placed in the coffin, men
would have been sent into the tight corridors to remove the stones. Once this occurred,
the sand would flow from beneath the granite supports, holding the lid above the
sarcophagus. Slowly, the heavy lid would close, securing the coffin within by sealing the
tomb along with the entrance to the northern corridor. Additionally, the supports would
block access from the eastern and western passages.738
In his monograph, Jequier contemplates whether or not the tomb of Khendjer was
ever used.739 As noted above, both portcullis stones remained open. However, the lid of
the sarcophagus had been maneuvered into position as if the deceased ruler had been
736

Di. Arnold, Building, pp. 79, Fig. 73.27; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 33, PI. 38.
Note that Jequier recognized that this system paralleled that of Mazghuna (Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah,
p. 33).
739
737
181
placed inside. In addition, it is important to consider that if the encasement of the

pyramid had been completed, it would have covered the entrance to the king's tomb,
making the lowering of the portcullis stones unnecessary. In fact, the king would have
had to have been buried before the superstructure could have been finished!
Unfortunately, no signs of burial goods remained within the sarcophagus.740
Nonetheless, there was a small, child-sized hole cut into the base of the lid in one area.
Here, it seems that robbers had successfully entered the burial. Jequier believed that they
had been able to take everything out of the sarcophagus.
IILC. The Subsidiary Pyramid

When examining elements of the funerary complex other than the royal tomb
itself, it is important to recognize that there was a smaller pyramid with two burial
chambers, located to the north of the mortuary temple, just outside of the northeastern
corner of the inner enclosure wall (Fig. 3.5.E).741 This structure would have measured
approximately 25.5 m on each side, making its sides about half that of the main
pyramid.
However, the majority of the superstructure was missing, and only a few
courses of bricks were visible. Like the larger monument of Khendjer, this structure was
to be mudbrick with a stone encasement. Also, Jequier discovered four or five pieces of
dark granite, which may have comprised the small pyramidion.743 Janosi suggested that
there could have been an eastern temple and northern chapel associated with the small
740

Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29; Janosi, Die Pyramidenanlagen, pp. 70-71, 120122, 177; Jequier, "Rapport 1930-1931," pp. 33-35; Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 35-39, PI. 32.
742
Fakhry {Pyramids, p. 230) estimates the sides as being around 25 m each. See also Janosi, Die
Pyramidenanlagen, p. 184.
741
182
pyramid, though Jequier did not supply evidence for either building.
As in the larger pyramid, the entrance to the tomb, located on the center of the
eastern side, was concealed in the foundation of the encasement stones (Fig. 3.8. A).745
From the surface, there was a ramped staircase with 21 steps leading to the west (at an
angle of 33).746 At the base of the stairs, the floor became increasingly level, ending'in a
portcullis chamber (Fig. 3.8.B). Here, the quartzite portcullis stone had been closed from
its niche to the south, sliding down its quartzite ramp, partially into the space cut out to
hold its end in the north. Like the blocking stones in Khendjer's tomb, this block
provided a ceiling for the chamber, closing off the access to the next corridor at a higher
level.
The second passage also continued in a westerly direction.747 However, this short
corridor was level, ending in a second quartzite portcullis chamber (Fig. 3.8.C). This
blocking stone had also been positioned in its final resting place from the niche to the
north. However, the stone has since cracked in two, and only half of it remains in situ. It
is here that the violators of the tomb broke into the structure by smashing through the
limestone ceiling.
From the second portcullis chamber, a third passageway extends to the west at a
higher level than before.748 This corridor ends in an antechamber (the ceiling is not
preserved here), which leads to a sarcophagus to the south at a lower level (Fig. 3.8.D).
Unlike the sarcophagus in the main pyramid, this one does not include a canopic niche.
744
Janosi, Die Pyramidenanlagen, p. 177.

Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 35, PL 32, Figs. 26-28.
Janosi, Die Pyramidenanlagen, p. 184.
7
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 35, Figs. 26-27.
748
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 230; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 37, Figs. 26, 37.
183
Rather, it only has room for a coffin with a separate box to the south for the canopic
equipment.749 Also, the lid system is substantially different. The lid remains today in its
original position in a niche in the ceiling. It is held here with the use of six pillars (two
on each end and two in the middle) made up of stacks of uniform blocks of stone. The lid
was likely to have been closed with the use of levers as the stones were removed.750
Figure 3.8. Subsidiary Pyramid of the Khendjer Pyramid

Complex. After Jequier, 1986, PI. 2.
A second quartzite sarcophagus was located to the north of the antechamber (Fig.
3.8.E). Here, the floor is level with the top of the lower section of the sarcophagus, and
the separate quartzite canopic box, which is the same size as the first, is located on the
eastern side of the southern end of the sarcophagus so that it would not encumber the
Dodson measured this canopic box as 0.65x0.65x0.65 m, though recent checking shows 0.6 m for each
side of the cube (Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 35).
750
Edwards, Pyramids, p. 243.
184
placement of the coffin.
Like the lid in the other chamber, that of the unused
sarcophagus was propped upon five pillars of stacked stones (two on each end and one in
the middle on the eastern side).
The situation in the subsidiary pyramid is directly opposite to that of the main
one. In the Khendjer monument, the portcullis remained open while the sarcophagus lid
was lowered. In the smaller pyramid, the portcullis stones were closed while the
sarcophagi remained open. Jequier decided that a tomb was used when its sarcophagus
was closed.752 Thus, he assumed that the main pyramid was occupied while the
subsidiary one was not. This conclusion will prove to be a constant challenge in the
discussion of other tombs later in this chapter.
Another issue surrounding the complex is the purpose of the subsidiary pyramid.
There are two main options: a resting place for queens or a pyramid for the king's ka.
Dodson believes that the location of this pyramid indicates that it is more likely to belong
to the queens of the owner rather than for the ruler's own ka.753 Jequier also.believed that
these tombs were for queens or other family members (without ruling out the ka
theory).754 However, he thought that something, such as a change in political family,
may have prevented the interment of Khendjer's wives or descendents in this particular
part of the complex. Finally, Lehner allows for the possibility that this subsidiary
751
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 35; Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 230; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 37,
Figs. 26, 37.
752
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 33, 37.
753
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 41; "The Tombs of the Queens," p. 136; The Canopic Equipment, p.
35; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29; After the Pyramids, p. 11. See also Grajetzki, "Multiple
Burials," pp. 24-25.
754
185
pyramid could be the last example of a ka pyramid.
III.D. Subsidiary Burials

To the west of the subsidiary pyramid, there were several roughly hewn galleries
of tombs located within the mortuary complex of Khendjer (Fig. 3.5.F-G).756 These
galleries were entered through large shafts located between the inner and outer enclosure
walls. At least some of these shafts contained more than one sarcophagus, but all appear
to have been unused, and none contained inscriptions.
The first shaft, measuring roughly 2 by 4 m, was located near the center of the
inner enclosure wall and extended under this structure from the north.757 The outer
sections of the shaft were supported through the use of brick masonry extending
downward for 10 m. From the opening, the galleries ran to the north and south, housing
space for three burials complete with a sarcophagus and a separate canopic box for each.
The southern end ran beneath the enclosure wall of the main pyramid and had two
quartzite sarcophagi, each with a canopic box to its south with no space between any of
these items. To the north of the shaft, the gallery continued with an additional limestone
sarcophagus and a canopic box in the normal position.
The second shaft was to the west of the first, being only about 6 m away, while
the third gallery was located closer to the (western) outer enclosure wall.758 These two
shafts were very similar to the first in their construction. However, their ceilings had
755
Lehner, Pyramids, p. 187.

Dodson, "The Tombs of the Queens," p. 135; Jequier, "Rapport 1930-1931," p. 33; Fouilles a Saqqarah,
p. 38, PI. 32.
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 35; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 38, PL 38.
758
756
186
collapsed due to the weakness of the stone in these areas. Thus, Jequier was unable to
enter them and could not add their galleries to the plan, though he did note that they both
extended to the south.
None of the three shafts had any sign of a superstructure.75 However, there were
sinusoidal walls around at least two and, probably originally, all three of them. The
second shaft had a wavy wall, the sides of which were located to the west and north of
the structure.760 This wall also likely continued around the first shaft but may not have
been preserved well enough to detect. The third shaft was surrounded on three sides
(north, east, and south) by sinusoidal walls and by the outer enclosure wall to the west.
The majority of the lines of these walls were preserved.
Interestingly, in the debris to the south of the pyramid, Jequier found a fragment
of an alabaster canopic jar with the name of a queen "Seneb..." inscribed upon it.
Unfortunately, very little of the inscription is preserved, and, since there are no animate
hieroglyphs, it is impossible to determine if it contained any mutilated ones, as might be
expected. These hieroglyph variations occur on objects, which were close to the mummy
within burials at this time.762 It is also unclear as to exactly where the queen, associated
with the fragment, was buried. Since the subsidiary pyramid seems to have had two
unused sarcophagi, it is likely that the queen was buried in one of the galleries, which
Jequier was unable to enter. Nonetheless, there is still a chance that the fragments came
from the subsidiary pyramid.763
759

Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah.
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 35, n. 65; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 28, Fig. 21.
762
Fischer, Archaeological Aspects, p. 32; "Hieroglyphen," p. 1195.
763
Janosi, Die Pyramidenanlagen, p. 70; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 80.
760
187
III.E. Court Cemeteries

In a recent survey of the Sakkara region conducted by Alexanian, Schiestl, and
Seidlmayer, pits to the north and south of the pyramid of Khendjer were noted.764 It is
likely that these tombs are connected to Khendjer in some way, possibly being the burial
locations of the members of his court. The southern group extends south to the
"Unfinished" Pyramid and may also be associated with this monument. To the north of
the funerary complex of Khendjer, there were many small sand-filled pits and several
large ones (SAK S4/2, 4, and 5; 35 m in diameter) with fragments of granite, quartzite
and limestone in the debris surrounding them. Meanwhile to the south, SAK 5/1 and 5/2
were 6.8 by 7.6 m and 16 by 12 m respectively. The former had limestone chips,
quartzite, and granite while the latter was surrounded by pottery dating to Dynasty XIII.
The surveyors believe that these tombs were likely mastabas, at least some of which had
been encased in limestone.
Since the funerary complex of Khendjer can be dated to a specific king, it could
be quite important in establishing the chronology of some of the other Late Middle
Kingdom monuments especially through the use of ceramics. Schiestl notes that the
surface pottery may be mixed from the time of the establishment of the complex until the
abandonment of the cult, making it impossible to establish a specific ceramic corpus for
his reign. Also, it should be recognized that Jequier's work at the site likely destroyed
the context of any stratified material, if it existed beyond ancient times.765 Thus, the
examination of some of the court tombs could be enlightening even though they too are
764
R. Schiestl, "Neues zur Residenznekropole der 13. Dynastie: Survey in Dahschur-Nord/Sakkara-Stid

und Dahschur-Sud," SOKAR 13 (2006), p. 48.
765
N. Alexanian, et al, "The Necropolis of Dahshur Excavations Report Spring 2006," ASAE
(forthcoming); Schiestl, "Neues zur Residenznekropole," p. 48.
188
likely heavily disturbed.
III.F. The Owner of the Royal Tomb: Woserkare Khendjer

The Turin King-List names Woserkare Khendjer in (Ryholt's) section 7.20 with
both his prenomen and nomen in a single cartouche (the latter name is misspelled).766
The regnal length is not preserved in this document but is likely to be around five years
as this date is recorded in the pyramid complex of this king, who was either the 17th or
22nd ruler of Dynasty XIII, depending upon the chronology used (see Appendix I).
Since the discovery of the pyramid complex of Khendjer at Sakkara, there has
been some debate over the origin of this king's nomen. With the complexity of the
period, many scholars have concluded that "Khendjer" is of foreign origin,7 7 indicating
that this king was not of Egyptian ancestry. For example, Ward points to Ugaritic and
Canaanite parallels to the name and reveals that this name means "swine" in Semitic
tongues {hnzr).
However, others have argued that the king was native to Egypt.
Khendjer is one of the few kings, to whose reign a specific vizier can be placed.
Ankhu served in this position during the tenure of this ruler and possibly that of the king
before or after.770 Unfortunately, there appear to have been several viziers by this same
name; debate exists concerning who did what. The name of the queen of Khendjer is
66
Titulary- Horus:/"...]-cnh, Nebty: wih-mswt, Golden Horus:?, Prenomen: wsr~kJ-rc, ~Novaeit\:h-n-d-rox hd-r. See Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, pp. 99-100; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 342; von Beckerath,
Untersuchungen, pp. 238-239.
767
Note that this name was incorrectly copied in the Turin King-list as n(y)-dr-re probably due to the
author confusing it with the prenomen, ny-m3ct-rc, of Amenemhet III (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 17,
74).
768
W.A. Ward, "Comparative Studies in Egyptian and Ugaritic," JNES 20 (1961), pp. 34-35. See the
further evidence in Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 220-221.
769
Stock, 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens, p. 50.
770
Ankhu appears in Papyrus Bulaq 18/s (small), 18L (large), and 18/1 as well as in Papyrus Brooklyn
35.1446 B and C. Franke, Personendaten, p. 254, Doss. 398; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 193-194.
189
likely to have been Senebhenas I, possibly indicated through the inscription in the
canopic jar fragment from the funerary complex.771
The complexity of the pyramid establishment of Khendjer would suggest that this
king was relatively powerful for his time. His reign is important for discovering
information concerning the relationship between the office of vizier and the crown itself.
III.G. Later Activity at the Pyramid

Interestingly, Jequier's excavations also revealed the presence of lower class
burials, dating to Dynasty XVIII, in the north and east of the enclosure of the pyramid of
Khendjer at South Sakkara.772 These simple, non-mummified interments occurred
beneath the stone of the foundation of the encasement of the pyramid, under the inner
enclosure wall, or within a mound of debris. Objects found in this cemetery included
pottery, amulets, stone vessels, a seal with the name of Thutmosis III (Dynasty XVIII and
in commemorative/decorative seals thereafter), a faience kohl jar with the names of
Amenhotep and Tiye (Dynasty XVIII) as well as blue painted ware ceramics. With the
end of Dynasty XVIII/beginning Dynasty XIX, there were no more tombs until after the
end of the Pharaonic Period.77
Graffiti from a block in the funerary temple indicates that at least a part of this
structure was standing in the New Kingdom. The text from one of these examples refers
to the quarrying of the stone from the structure in year 34 of the reign of an unnamed
771
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 39, 40, 221.

773
Jequier, "Rapport 1928-1929," pp. 160-161; "Rapport 1929-1930," p. I l l ; "Rapport 1930-1931," p. 36;
Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 49-53.
772
190
king.774 Since the text is constructed using full Late Egyptian grammar and the reign of
this king is so long, it has been proposed that the inscription dates to Ramses II.775
In the publication of the excavation of the pyramid of Khendjer at South Sakkara,
Jequier noted the presence of additional graffiti including geometrical shapes and boats of
unknown period. He also records an early Arabic inscription from within the tomb,
which M.G. Wiet translated as, "Ask this tomb who destroyed it after its glory!"77
Since there is evidence of the activity of the people of Dynasty XVIII at the
pyramid complex of Khendjer, one can be certain that the original pillaging of the tomb
took place no later than the early part of this period. Jequier believed that the first
Til
robbing of the tomb occurred during the Hyksos Period,
T1SK
"without doubt",
but he
fails to explain any evidence supporting this claim. Data supporting the time of robbing
or destruction of the Dynasty XIII tombs would be very useful and will be discussed later
in this thesis.
IV. The "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara (Lepsius XLVI)
Approximately 80 m to the southwest of the pyramid of Woserkare Khendjer at
South Sakkara, there is another mortuary complex, dating to the Late Middle
Kingdom.779 Lepsius was the first modern explorer to identify this monument as a
774
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 13-15, 43, n. 15, Fig. 12. Note that the tens place in the hieratic of the
year is difficult to read with absolute certainty.
775
775 i
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 15.
776 i
' My translation of "Demande a cette fosse qui l'a detruite apres sa gloire" (Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah,
p. 35).
777
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 34-35, 43.
778
779
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 55, PI. 51. For
summaries of the findings, see Holzl, "Saqqara," p. 712; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 187; Porter and Moss,
Topographical Bibliography III (2), p. 435.
191
pyramid.780 He seems to have entered the tomb, but his description and measurements
are inaccurate.781 In roughly 1893, de Morgan also entered the tomb as he sketched the
general outline of its interior.
Finally, Jequier excavated this incomplete pyramid in
two months during 1929-1931. Similar to other monuments of the time period, the ruins
included an area of compact brick material and debris mounds surrounding a sandy
crater.
IV. A. The Superstructure

The superstructure of the "Unfinished" Pyramid had only been started; this
monument probably never reached a state of completion.783 The pyramid itself was to
have been 91 m on each side.784 The center of the monument was constructed using
bricks made of mud with straw and other organic inclusions.785 Most of the twelve
remaining courses of bricks were placed with the use of mortar but did not alternate
between headers and stretchers. The bricks ranged from 40 to 44 cms in length, 21 to 23
cms in width, and 12 to 13 cms in height.786 In modern times, the mound representing the
7X7
pyramid stands to a height of about 3 m.

Around the area of bricks, there was a trench, 5.5 m wide and 1.8 m deep, cut in
Lepsius, Denkmdler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien I. Text, (1897), p. 202, PI. 234.
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 67.
782
de Morgan, Carte, p. 6; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 67.
783
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 232; Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930," pp. 107-111; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp.
55-56, Pls.13, 15. Note that Fakhry suggests that further excavations might lead to the discovery of
pyramid and valley temples (Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 230).
784
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 41; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29; After the Pyramids, p.
11; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, PI. 2. Fakhry lists the length of the sides as being around 95 m (Fakhry,
Pyramids, p. 230).
785
786
Spencer, Brick Architecture, p. 39.
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 230.
781
192
order to receive the foundation of the encasement stones.
Some of the pavement
stones of this trench remained in place, being about a cubit in height and connected with
the use of stone butterfly ties. Interestingly, the four outer corners of the pavement were
reinforced with brick masonry,789 a technique that will be met again in other monuments
including the substructure of S9 at South Abydos in a later chapter. The encasement
stones themselves seem never to have been laid as Jequier notes that he did not find any
slabs of the correct shape for this purpose.790
In two of the four corners, where the preservation was minimal, Jequier
discovered foundation deposits.791 At each corner there were two, brick lined holes
containing a variety of objects. From the northwest corner, items included two coneshaped vessels, a lid, the body of a large jarstand, two smaller stands, and a group of
miniature metal tools as well as a section of a bovine skull. The foundation deposit
discovered in the southwestern corner contained two conical vessels and two jarstands.
The enclosure wall, measuring 123.5 m on each side, was of the sinusoidal form
and was preserved to a height of 2 m at some points (Fig. 3.9.A.). The wall had a i m
deep foundation trench, unusual since most sinusoidal walls were simply built on the
surface, and was 0.65 m in width. Jequier notes that the bricks were made of fine silt
with straw inclusions and were smaller than those used in the pyramid, measuring 34 by
17 by 8 cms and 36 by 18 by 8 cms. Mud mortar was used in the areas between bricks in
order to make the surface of the wall smooth. Despite the fact that Jequier notes that
788
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 60-61, PI. 13, .

Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 61, Fig. 43.
791
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 230; Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930," p. 107; Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 62, Figs. 4445; Weinstein, "Foundation Deposits," p. 86.
789
193
there were no traces of color on the walls, a photograph in his monograph, appears to
show that they were whitewashed.792 Like in the complex of Woserkare Khendjer, the
area between the enclosure wall and the encasement stones of the pyramid is at a higher
level, forming a kind of terrace.7
Figure 3.9. The pyramid of unknown ownership at South Sakkara.

After Jequier, 1986, PL 13.
No indication of a causeway leading from the pyramid to the Nile Valley
7
793
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah.

194
survives.
However, there were structures preserved for the movement of supplies and
construction materials. There was also a ramp leading to the northeast from the entrance
to the tomb, which would have served as a road for construction materials, was located
along the northern enclosure wall at the western end.795 Here, a brick surface, measuring
5 m in width; ran across the sinusoidal wall. The purpose of this feature is unknown,
though it may have been used to transport the giant lower section of the sarcophagus
base.796
A more certain doorway in the sinusoidal wall was located in the center of the
western section (Fig. 3.9.B).797 Here, the curves on either side of an opening ended in
more solid rectangular doorjambs. This doorway seems to have been cut through the
wall rather than being planned from the beginning. Also, the bricks used for the
doorjambs were the same size as those of the pyramid (see below) rather than being the
smaller dimensions (see above) of those of the sinusoidal walls.
The entrance to the tomb, which was located in the center of the eastern side of
the monument, had been destroyed, but the outline of bricks was preserved (Fig.
3.8.D).798 Here, there was flat area, measuring about 5 m on each side. Since this space
was approximately 5 m down from the terrace surrounding it, the ramp mentioned before,
extended downward in order to bring supplies to the correct level. Also, there was a
ramped staircase made of brick to the north of the entrance, presumably for people not
Jequier, Fouilles
Jequier, Fouilles
796
Jequier, Fouilles
Jequier, Fouilles
798
Jequier, Fouilles
795
a Saqqarah, p. 56, PI. 13.

a Saqqarah, pp. 57-58, PI. 13.
a Saqqarah, p. 58.
a Saqqarah, p. 56.
a Saqqarah, pp. 55, 57, PI. 13.
195
carrying heavy or bulky supplies.

Above the entrance to the tomb, there were two pyramidions of black granite.800
The pyramidions had been placed across the pavement stones deliberately as they sat
safely upon a debris layer of 10 cms. One of these objects was fully formed, while the
other, which would have been the same size if completed, was truncated at the top. Both
of these pyramidions were similar to that of Woserkare Khendjer in size, production and
material, except that these were not inscribed and had beveled tenons like that of
Amenemhet III at Dahshur.801 The incomplete capstone had red lines on one side,
indicating to the sculptor how it was to be cut. It is likely that work stopped on this
pyramid at some point, and the stones were placed at the entrance then.
It is unclear why two pyramidions were needed for the "Unfinished" Pyramid at
South Sakkara. Some scholars have proposed that one of these capstones was to be used
for a queen's pyramid, which had never been started.802 Meanwhile, Verner questioned
whether one of these pyramidions was meant to serve as a votive object.803 Interestingly,
a miniature pyramidion was found at the Amenemhet III complex at Hawara.804 IF this
one actually was for votive purposes. Then perhaps Verner's idea may have credence.
Scholars have also suggested that the truncated pyramidion may have been intended to be
topped with a precious metal and, thus, would have been the primary capstone for the

Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 58-59, Pis. 13, 16-17, 19; "Rapport 1929-1930," pp. 109, PI. 103.
Cairo J54855 and J54856.
801
Arnold, Building, p. 127, Fig. 4.39.
802
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 230; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 187; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 81.
803
804
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 35, PL 27, bottom left; Uphill, Gateway, pp. 31-32, 44. Note that Uphill
believed that this small object may have served as the pyramidion of a small queen's pyramid.
800
196
monument.
It is also possible that one or both of these stones may have been intended
to top other "Unfinished" Pyramids in the area.806

Several other features, not detailed here, appear in-Jequier's plan.
In the south,
near the southeastern corner, there is a small portion of a ramped staircase.808 Also,
there is a strange, thin brick structure leading fromthe enclosure wall toward the
southeast, paralleling that found near the entrance of Khendjer's pyramid.
Another
feature, which appears in the foreground of Jequier's Plate 14, seems to be an eroded
column base, which sits upon the foundation blocks of the pyramid's encasement.
Clearly, this object is not in its original context and may not even be from this complex.
Jequier stated that he was unable to find any temples associated with this monument.810
However, in his plan, a depression in the center of the northern encasement trench may
indicate the planned location of a north chapel.
IV.B. The Components of the Substructure

The substructure of the "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara is one of the bestpreserved monuments of the Late Middle Kingdom corpus, as well as being the most
complex.811 The entrance to the tomb is located in the center of the eastern face of the
pyramid in a stone platform (Fig. 3.9.D). Originally, the entrance itself was meant to be
805
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 229; M. Vemer, "Pyramid," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of
Ancient Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), p. 441.
806
L. Habachi, "Khanta'na-Qantir: Importance," ASAE 52 (1954), p. 477.
807
808
Spencer records the bricks of this structure as measuring 34 by 17 by 8 cms and 36 by 18,by 8 cms
(Spencer, Brick Architecture, p. 39).
809
810
811
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 41; Dodson, After the Pyramids, p. 11; Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930,"
PI. 1; Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 63, Pis. 13, 17.
197
concealed as limestone pavement stones covered it, blending it into the surface of the
platform.
Within the entrance, there is a gentle slope, leading to a ramped staircase.812 In
this area, there are also grooves, into which workers could slide wooden boards to help
them transport large objects, such as a coffin, to the ramp below. Once past the opening,
this area was just tall enough for a man and wide enough for a coffin. In general, from
this point forward, the substructure of the tomb was made with Tura limestone, which
was sometimes painted to resemble granite.813
The ramped staircase, which led to the west, was about 16.5 m long and 0.8 m
wide and included forty-four steps (Fig. 3.9.E).814 At the base of the stairs there was a
flat area, measuring approximately 3.5 m in length with a portcullis chamber at the end
(Fig. 3.9.F). The structure of the quartzite, blocking stone and the mechanics used to
position it were identical to those of the pyramid of Woserkare Khendjer. The stone,
measuring 3.4 by 2 m, was housed in a niche to the north of the line of the stairway and
corridor. This portcullis sat upon a stone at the edge of a quartzite ramp, which led to a
recess in the opposite wall. Once the stone was removed, the portcullis would slide into
position, blocking the entrance to the next passage located above the level of the
chamber. However, this particular portcullis stone remained open.
A short passage, measuring 2 m in length and 0.8 m in width, was located behind
the portcullis and ended in a room, with the dimensions, 3.6 by 2 m.815 This room was
provided so that the coffin and other long objects might be turned 90 degrees. Starting at
812
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 63, Pis. 17, 19.

814
815
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 63-64, PI. 17.
813
198
this point, Jequier noticed some black dashes located in rows about 0.1 m from one
another (inconsistently drawn).816 Though he and others thought that these marks may
have been some kind of decoration,817 Di. Arnold later explained that these lines are the
remains of the system used to dress the stone, whereby consistently deep holes were cut
into the blocks, using a grid system (set with the aid of a cubit rod and a plumb bob). 818 '
After the holes were in place, a chisel was used to cut the stone back a standard distance
until the entire wall was even.
From the turning chamber, a corridor, measuring 12 m long by 0.8 m wide, sloped
gently downward toward the south, ending in a second turning chamber (3.7 by 2 m).
From here, a ramped staircase with four steps descended to the west ending in another
passageway (the latter being 9.5 by 0.8 m; Fig. 3.9.G). The corridor led to a larger room,
measuring D. 6 by 2.2 m.820 This room had two doorways; one of these openings ended in
a large storage gallery, measuring 15.1 by 1.8 m (Fig. 3.9.H). Presumably, this room was
meant to contain furniture and goods for the king's afterlife.
The second doorway from the previous room led to a corridor with a shape similar
to that of the gallery described above (Fig. 3.9.1).821 However, this chamber was divided
into two wider areas with a corridor in between. In the first section, there was a ramped
staircase leading down to another level. From the base of the stairs, there was a short,
narrow corridor that terminated in a larger area, the end of which could have been used
816
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 64, PI. 20. Jequier notes that these small lines were found only on the
porculli in the tomb of Userkare Khendjer while they are found on the walls and portcullises of this
chamber.
817
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 232; Verner, "Pyramid," p. 440.
818
Di. Arnold, Building, pp. 139-140; Encyclopedia, p. 59.
819
820
821
199
for additional storage. Prior to this extra space, there was a small, four-step, ramped
staircase leading to the west.
From the stairs, a corridor continued to the west for 2 m, ending in a second
portcullis chamber (Fig. 3.9.J). 22 Here, the quartzite blocking stone, measuring around
3.3 by 2 m, was closed. Jequier was fortunate in finding a robbers' tunnel carved into the
limestone, around the hard quartzite portcullis. Otherwise, there would have been no way
past this obstacle.
A second corridor continued westerly at a higher level behind the blocking stone
for a short distance of 2 m before encountering another portcullis chamber (Fig. 3.9.K).
This third quartzite block was approximately 3.3 by 2 m and remained in its open
position. From this point, a long corridor extended northward, at a higher level, toward
the main sarcophagus chamber.
Approximately, the first 2.8 m of this next passageway sloped gently
downward.
It flattened at the point where an antechamber was found. However, the
northern and southern sides of this room were at a level below that of the corridor. Thus,
to the south, there was a short, ramped staircase leading downward. The corridor in the
middle of the antechamber continued to the west where the sarcophagus chamber was
located.
Like the structure of the tomb itself, the sarcophagus chamber of the "Unfinished"
Pyramid at South Sakkara is far more complex than those of the other Late Middle
Kingdom royal mortuary monuments (Fig. 3.9.L). Jequier estimated that the monolithic
822
82

200
base of the quartzite sarcophagus alone weighs over 150 tons, measuring approximately
6.2 by 2.8 m in length and width and 4.2 m in height.825 Unusually, the coffin was placed
crossways in the sarcophagus so that it would be in the normal north/south orientation
within the east/west container. Instead of lying at the foot of the coffin within the
sarcophagus, the canopic niche sat at the southern end of its eastern side.
The sarcophagus was so large that it took three sizable quartzite blocks to cover
it.826 The two northernmost blocks of the lid were set into place as the substructure was
built and were encased further by limestone supports. The third block was mounted
above the sarcophagus to allow it to be filled and was to close using the sand lowering
system. As one would expect, there was a saddle roof here, composed of large limestone
slabs. Above the junction of these blocks, there was the expected layer of mudbricks
followed by a mudbrick arch with sand and debris above. The walls to the sides of the
mobile sarcophagus lid were made of granite.
The sand lowering system was similar to that of Woserkare Khendjer's tomb, but
there were some differences.
Like in Khendjer's tomb, there were two small corridors
on either side of the sarcophagus. In the second pyramid at South Sakkara, they extended
from beneath the floor of each end of the antechamber. Meanwhile, the lid was
suspended above the sarcophagus with the aid of four limestone supports at each corner
as well as two, longer quartzite blocks, which sat on a pile of sand. When the tomb was
to be sealed, workers would have knocked out the limestone blocks, leaving the
825

Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 231; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 64-65, Pis. 17, 18; Verner, Great
Monuments, p. 441.
827
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 64-65, Pis. 17,
18.
201
sarcophagus on the movable quartzite blocks alone. At this point, workers could be sent
into the corridors to remove the smaller stones blocking the sand, allowing them to pour
into the chambers, resulting in the gradual descent of the heavy lid.
The reason why limestone supports were used along with the standard moveable
quartzite ones is uncertain. It is possible that the ancient architects were concerned with
the weight of the stone. Also, this mechanism may have been added to prevent an
accidental lowering of at least part of the sarcophagus lid prior to the burial.
When Jequier recorded this tomb, he discussed the fact that the sand lowering
system had been released without the removal of the limestone supports. Thus, the lid
remained open, and the lowering mechanisms were unusable from that point forward. It
is unclear when this unfortunate event occurred and whether it was the result of careless
construction workers, robbers, or some other group. Jequier believed that no king was
ever laid to rest within this tomb, based upon his assumption that a tomb was used if the
sarcophagus was sealed, regardless of the status of the portcullis stones.828
The "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara is unique because it has an additional
sarcophagus, within the substructure of the tomb (Fig. 3.9.M).829 Suggestions for the
purpose of this structure include the possibility that it is a dummy tomb, meant to distract
potential robbers, a ka chamber, or the area for the burial of a queen or some other royal
person.
It must be remembered that the Dynasty XII pyramids of Amenemhet III at
Dahshur and Hawara included secondary burials within the substructure of the
828
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 64-65. Dodson believes that the tomb was abandoned due to a coup or
some other significant event (Dodson, After the Pyramids, p. 12).
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 65, Pis. 17, 18; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 187.
830
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 41; The Canopic Equipment, p. 35; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el
Naga," pp. 29, 39, n. 17; After the Pyramids, p. 12; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 187.
202
pyramids.
However, the structures of both sarcophagus chambers in this monument
take forms exclusively associated, as far as is currently known, with the burials of kings.
Nonetheless, it is interesting that the spatial relationships between the two sarcophagi of
the "Unfinished" Pyramid and that of the tomb of Khendjer within the pyramid the
subsidiary pyramid are similar (the secondary burial(s) is/are to the northeast of the
primary one).
The secondary tomb in the southern pyramid is located to the northeast of the
antechamber and is entered by using a ramped staircase at the end of the room and
passing through a corridor, measuring about 4.4 m in length. At the end of this
passageway, there is a granite sarcophagus chamber with a limestone, saddle roof.
The upper extent of the base of the quartzite sarcophagus was at the floor level of the
preceding corridor. A separate canopic niche was located in the wall to the east of the
southern end of the sarcophagus.
To the north of the sarcophagus chamber, there was another room, which held the
quartzite lid until after a coffin had been placed in its final position.
At this point, the
lid would have been positioned over the southern end the sarcophagus against the edge of
the floor of the previous passage. The position of the lid would also block access to the
canopic equipment in the wall (ca. 0.6 m on each side), though the top of this box would
have been visible in its niche. Next, the back room would have been empty and could
have received funerary goods. Then, a granite portcullis would have been moved from its
position in the west, sliding along the northern end of the sarcophagus lid, preventing the
832
8
Lehner, Pyramids, pp. 179-183. See also, Chapter 3, Section II.B.

Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 232; Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930," p. 109; Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 65, Pis. 17, 18.
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 36; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 65, Pis. 17, 18.
203
removal of the large stone.

In actuality, the lid remained in the room to the north, and it appears that the
sarcophagus had never been used.834 However, as with almost every monument of this
period, there is some evidence, to support its use. One of the sides of the quartzite lid of
this second burial chamber had been chipped as if a chisel had been utilized to gain
access to the tomb. Jequier thought that it was unlikely that robbers would have taken the
time to place the sarcophagus lid back into its original place.835 Also, in this case, one
would have to assume that the granite portcullis had not been used, leaving the burial
vulnerable. Perhaps, a burial in this chamber would explain the closing of the second
portcullis stone within the pyramid.
IV.C. Subsidiary Burials

In the area near the eastern section of the southern side of the enclosure wall, the
excavators found a single tomb shaft, measuring 3.3 by 2.1 m (Fig. 3.9.C). The tomb was
lined with limestone blocks, and the sarcophagus chamber had a saddle roof of the same
material. The sarcophagus was located in the floor, but there was no evidence that
anyone had ever been buried there.
IV.D. Court Cemetery

To the west of the "Unfinished" Pyramid (300 m), there is a wadi running
northeast to southwest (SAK S 8) that appears to contain mastaba tombs, which may
835
Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930," p. 109; Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 65.

Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 65, n. 62.
204
belong to the court officials of the owner of this pyramid or that of Khendjer slightly
further north.836 Many of these tombs are now sandy pits measuring roughly 7-12 m in
diameter with debris fields of up to 25 m. Near one pit, there was a large, quartzite
sarcophagus. Meanwhile, a railroad trench revealed the walls of a brick mastaba which
measures 10.4 by 16.8 m with a vertical shaft of more than 10 m in depth.
IV.E. The Owner of the Pyramid

Jequier believed that the second pyramid of South Sakkara belonged to either
Khutawyre Wegaf or Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw, the predecessor or successor of
Woserkare Khendjer.837 According to Ryholt's chronology, Khutawyre Wegaf is the
predecessor of Woserkare Khendjer. Unfortunately, however, the control notes found in
this tomb date from years 3 to 5,838 but this king's reign is only 2.25 years.839 Thus, if
these notes are contemporary with the construction of the tomb, it is necessary to look to
one of the kings with a reign of this length in order to find a possible owner.
Ryholt proposes that this tomb belongs to one of Khendjer's successors.840 He
suggested that it could be Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw or Sehotepkare Intef, with a 3-5
year reign, based upon his theory that. Papyrus Bulaq 18, a text recording the accounts for
a royal sojourn to the Theban region, belongs to one of them. He also points to a mark,
found on stone used in the complex that has hieroglyphs spelling "Woserkhau".841
836
Alexanian, et al., "The Necropolis of Dahshur Excavations Report Spring 2006"; Schiestl, "Neues zur
Residenznekropole," p. 49.
837
838
F. Arnold, Control Notes, pp. 181-183, KH121-128; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 63, Figs. 46-47.
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 197, Table 136.
840
841
Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 63, Fig. 47; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 80-81, n. 245.
205
Ryholt believes that this crudely, painted inscription is the Nebty name of a king.
Unfortunately, no ruler can be matched with this potential Nebty name due to the fact that
this part of the royal titulary remains unknown for the bulk of the Dynasty XIII rulers.
Nonetheless, the Nebty name pattern X-pcwis characteristic of the period.
Ryholt acknowledges that the use of this name to identify the stone as being for
the "Unfinished" Pyramid project is strange, though he justifies its use due to the
presence of this part of the titulary on the pyramidion of Khendjer.842 However, in this
later object, the Nebty name is not used exclusively and, in fact, appears only once (as
does the Horus name, which is not preserved) while the nomen and prenomen are more
prolific.843 Thus, though the mark at Sakkara could be the Nebty name of the unknown
king, there may be other explanations, such as an elaborate team mark or other
designation, especially since it is not preceded by the two goddesses, Nekhbet and
Wadjet, who normally introduce this titular component. If, however, the mark is truly the
Nebty name of the owner of the tomb, then Khutawyre Wegaf must be eliminated from
the list of possible rulers, who built the monument, since his "Two Ladies" name is
Khabaw CM/w). 844
.. -
A few officials are listed in the control notes including, the retainers Nebai (nbii),
lm (im), and Seneb-nakht (snb-nht) and hall keeper of the enclosure Seneb (snb) as well
as those without titles such as Ameny {jinny) and Heri.. .-nakht (ph... -nht).
Unfortunately, all of these men held relatively minor positions, and, as of now, there are
842
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 80-81, n. 245; 194; Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, p. 22, Fig. 18.
The presence of the Horus name is indicated by a small section of the lower right corner of a serekh and
the top of the head and crown of the falcon, which sits above it. See Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, Fig. 17.
844
Note that there are other kings, who have known Nebty names. See Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 81, n.
245.
843
206
no inscriptions that tie them to a specific king.

The architectural features of the tomb itself may also provide clues as to its owner. The two sarcophagus chambers, as well as the pair of capstones, could belong to
the brother kings Neferhotep I and Sobekhotep IV, especially since the latter emphasized
his relationship to the former. Both of these kings had relatively long reigns and with
their prosperity, visible through monuments, it could suggest that they would have been
able to construct significant funerary monuments. However, the dual burial chambers are
of two different types (see below), and a single king may have wished to have both styles
in his tomb since it is possible that they are linked to different aspects of royal funerary
religion at this time.
IV.F. Later Activity at the Pyramid

By the New Kingdom, the second pyramid at South Sakkara probably no longer
held religious importance, and there are tombs of this date in the northern areas of the
pyramid.845 However, unlike in the complex of Woserkare Khendjer, these burials are
rare. Nevertheless, there was a more extensive New Kingdom cemetery with small
tombs to the west of the site (S AK S 6).846
No clear signs exist as to who may have first entered the tomb, or who dug the
tunnel around the second portcullis. If Jequier's hypothesis is correct that it was tomb
robbers, who triggered the sand lowering system,
then they were unfamiliar with the
other Late Middle Kingdom tombs and were probably not a part of any sort of large-scale
1
846

Alexanian, et al., "The Necropolis of Dahshur Excavations Report Spring 2006."
207
destruction of these monuments.
However, this set of uninformed robbers could have
entered the tomb long after the original ones. Nonetheless, since no one seems to have
been buried within this monument, the identity of any visitors with unseemly motives is
not of the utmost importance.
In the main burial chamber of the tomb, there were several early Arabic
inscriptions, showing that the people of that time were able to get through the blocked
portcullis, though other intruders may have succeeded previously.849 One of these texts
refers to religious themes, while the other speaks of specific sects within the Islamic
movement.
V. The Pyramid of Ameny Qemau (DAS 18)

The funerary monument of Ameny Qemau, located 1.5 km south of the pyramid
complex of Amenemhet III at Dahshur, was first excavated in 1957 by Muses of the
Falcon Wing Press in Denver, who was shortly thereafter convicted of crimes such as
antiquities theft and currency smuggling, some of which were later overturned.850 No
proper publication of this expedition appeared, but the identity of the owner, a previously
unknown king named Ameny Qemau (incorrectly read as Aamu851), was revealed
through the inscriptions on calcite canopic jars. Some of these antiquities were allegedly
848
See Chapter 5, Section VI below.

850
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 27; "The Strange Affair of Dr Muses, Or the Discovery
of the Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," KMT 8 (1997), pp. 60-63; After the Pyramids, p. 8; J. Leclant, "Fouilles
et travaeux en Egypte, 1955-1957," Orientalia 27 (1958), pp. 81-82; Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," p.
326; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 319-320. For an additional summary of the
monument, see Lehner, Pyramids, p. 185.
851
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 39, n. 38; "Strange Affair."; S. Gabra, Chez les
Derniers Adorateurs du Trismegiste. La Necropole d'Hermopolis - Touna el Gebel (Cairo, 1971), pp. 203207; Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," p. 325; Porter and Moss, Topographical Bibliography HI (2), p. 890;
Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 129; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 319, n. 312.
849
208
found in Muses' possession, as he attempted to depart Egypt with them. The pyramid of
Ameny Qemau was revisited by the Italian architects, Maragioglio and Rinaldi, twice in
an attempt to record Muses' findings, they produced a short article published
approximately eleven years after the original excavation of the structure.
IV.A. The Elements of the Superstructure

The construction of the superstructure of the pyramid began with the clearing of
the sand from the natural limestone below.853 Once the tomb builders reached bedrock,
they began to cut three level trenches on the north, south, and west, while they leveled an
area in the east, creating a square, uneven mass of limestone in the center (Fig. 3.10. A).
The trench measured 57.55-57.65 m on the exterior of the western side and ranged from
44.2 m to 45.3 m in length on the interior sides, making them from 5.85 m to 6.5 m in
width. The natural slope of the land made the construction of an eastern trench
unnecessary. Here, leveling, along with the measurement of the trenches led Maragioglio
and Rinaldi to suggest that the pyramid was intended to measure 100 cubits with 52.4 m
being its actual length. The exterior line of each trench was reinforced with a hasty
construction of bricks and limestone.854 The Italian architects have also suggested that a
hypothetical sinusoidal wall may have been intended in the outer part of the trench within
meters of the encasement stones. However, this plan is unlikely, and the trenches are
within the normal widths for Late Middle Kingdom pyramids, suggesting that the
852
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," pp. 325-338. See also Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga,"
p. 27.
853
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," pp. 327-328, Pis. 353-356, Figs. 325-312; Swelim and Dodson,
"Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 320-321.
854
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," p. 328; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 321.
209
monument was to be slightly larger or that a foundation pavement would have extended
beyond its line. Interestingly, the monument was constructed upon a natural limestone
plateau, possibly in order to make it seem taller than it actually was.855
oof t
I
c.
4 U
B.
" * * rE=i':
oep
"i>V"
Figure 3.10. The pyramid of Ameny Qemau. After Maragioglio, 1968, PI. 51.
Bricks from the superstructure, built upon the rock in the center, were still
preserved at the time of recording. Nonetheless, there was a great deal of evidence that
suggested that the bulk of the superstructure remained incomplete after the burial of the
king, and it is possible that the casing had never been laid.856 In fact, Maragioglio and
Rinaldi suggest that the structure may have been finished as a short mastaba rather than a
pyramid. However, even the funerary monument of Khendjer which has a pyramidion,
855
856
Schiestl, "Neues zur Residenznekropole," p. 52.

Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," pp. 328, 329; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p.
323.
210
was in a similar state in modern times, indicating that these sites suffered much
destruction and that they appeared in poor condition even in antiquity.
Maragioglio and Rinaldi have proposed that the pyramid of Ameny Qemau may
have been designed to have an enclosure wall, a causeway and a subsidiary pyramid,
because such features are found at some of the monuments at South Sakkara and
Mazghuna.857 More significantly, they pointed to archaeological evidence for other
features. Mudbrick walls and debris to the east of the structure have been interpreted as
being the remains of a mortuary temple (Fig. 3.10.B).858 It is also possible that there is a
foundation for a small, north chapel within the relevant trench (Fig. 3.10.C).859 The
outer side of the northern trench for the encasement of the pyramid turns toward the
north, extending out an additional 3 m, making the trench 9.6 m wide in the area in the
center of the northern side for an extent of at least 8 m. Unfortunately, the northern wall
is not preserved from this point until a section 11.5 m to the east after the trench had
returned to its smaller size.
V.B. The Components of the Substructure

Like the other Late Middle Kingdom royal tombs, that of Ameny Qemau was
established using limestone blocks in an area cut out near the center of the superstructure
(Fig. 3.10.D).860 In this case, however, since the pit was hewn from limestone rather than
857
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," p. 328. Note that the "causeways" at the other monuments are likely
to have been short ramps or roads for the transport of building materials and goods from lower to higher
areas within the complex.
858
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," p. 338.
859
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," p. 328; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 319334.
860
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," Pis. 57-58, Figs. 13-14.
211
sand, the construction of the substructure must have proceeded at a relatively rapid rate.
The area between the natural bedrock and the placed limestone blocks was filled with
debris.861
Ideally, the tomb would have been entered through a ramp, which led down
toward its entrance on the eastern side (Fig. 3.11 .A). However, for some unknown
reason, this ramp was never finished; it had been filled in.862 Instead, one would enter the
tomb through a small passageway, sealed after the interment of the king's body with
stone blocks and bricks.
Figure 3.11. The interior of the pyramid of Ameny Qemau. After Maragioglio,
1968, PI. 51.
Once inside the tomb via the declining entrance passage, one would continue to
861
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," pp. 329-330; Swelim andDodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p.
323.
862
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," pp. 329-330; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p.
323.
212
the west through a short corridor (Fig. 3.11 .B).
At this point, there was a quartzite
portcullis stone, which blocked the entrance to the next corridor, located at a higher level
(Fig. 3.1 l.C).864 Unlike the blocking stones found in Late Middle Kingdom tombs,
including the others in that of Ameny Qemau, this one appears to have been lowered
from above through a shaft. Though Maragioglio and Rinaldi suggested that, in the
original plan, this portcullis likely was to have operated from the north to the south, it
appears rather, for some reason, an alternative system was used.
From the first blocking stone, a short passage (1.6 by under 1 by 1.1? m) led to
another room (1.3 by 1.4 m; Fig. 3.1 l.D), which again was filled with a quartzite
portcullis stone (1.6 by 2.15 by 1.4 m), blocking a passageway located above the level of
the floor (Fig. 3.11.E).865
The following corridor and turning chamber were not well-preserved, but their
general plan can be derived from knowledge of similar royal tombs from the period (Fig.
3.11.F-G).866 The passageway was short and continued westward before ending in a
turning chamber of unknown dimensions. This room likely housed a hidden staircase
which may have negotiated a drop of roughly 1.2 m.
Another small corridor then led to the north before encountering the next turning
chamber; it too was in poor condition (Fig. 3.11. H-I).867 This room, which was about 2.1
m in length, had vertical lines like those in the Dynasty XIII pyramids at South Sakkara.
863
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," p. 337; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 322324; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 438.
864
When Maragioglio and Rinaldi investigated this monument, this first portcullis stone was displaced.
See Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," PL 60, Figs. 18-21.
865
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," pp. 335-336, PL 359, Figs. 315-317.
866
867
213
From here, six steps led downward to a passage which continued to the west (1.74 by 0.9
by 1.75 m).868 This corridor was roofed by a quartzite block with a thickness of 0.75 m.
The corridor ended in the antechamber, which had a north-south axis (3.25 by 2.2
by at least 2.2 m).869 This area was the location of the lid of the sarcophagus prior to the
burial of the king (Fig. 3.1 l.K). Once the deceased ruler had been interred, the lid was
dragged into place over the sarcophagus in the burial chamber to the south (0.6 m thick),
and a quartzite portcullis was moved into place from the west (2.6 by 0.8 by 2.6 m),
sealing the burial chamber off from the antechamber. The lid of the sarcophagus was at
the same level as the floor of the antechamber (Fig. 3.1 l.L).870 The lid slipped up under
the side walls while the portcullis slid over it, sealing it from all directions as the end fit
into a notch.871 This sarcophagus type was similar to that in the second burial chamber of
the "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara (4.50 by 2.18; Fig. 3.1 l.M). Like most of the
other sarcophagus bases of the period, this one included both a niche for the coffin and
another at the southern end for the canopic equipment. 72
Unfortunately, the entire tomb, including the burial chamber, had been robbed in
antiquity, leaving only the canopic material behind.873 As far as is known to date,
fragments of a few objects were discovered, and only a small portion of those can be
found in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo today.874 It is possible that some of these
artifacts were lost in the process of the legal proceedings against Muses.
868
It is likely that these staircases were hidden beneath floor blocks.

870
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 27; "Strange Affair," p. 62.
871
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 40; After the Pyramids, pp. 8-9.
872
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 30; Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," p. 331; Swelim and Dodson,
"Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 323, 325.
873
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 27; Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," p. 332.
874
Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 325-328.
869
214
In his excavations, Muses found a fragment of what may have been an offering
table.875 He also discovered portions of the four canopic jars,.though there were .
conflicting reports as to whether or not the lids were recovered.876 Nonetheless, the
calcite vessels, or parts thereof, were inscribed with standard texts (in four columns),
filled with blue-green paint, and they included the nomen of the king, Ameny Qemau.
According to Dodson, the morphology of the canopic jars in the tomb of Ameny
Qemau shows that the style was unchanged from late Dynasty XII. Likewise, the texts
reflect the same continuity, with the structure of the word stp-sl, I n *> , with the word
spelled out at the beginning, as well as the use of imt/t instead of the later hr.t/t, found
during the time of Awibre Hor. 7 Like in the funerary texts found on objects of
Neferuptah in the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara, as well as the texts in her own
monument, the hieroglyphs in the sarcophagus chamber of Ameny Qemau were of the
mutilated style of the period.
V.C. The Owner of the Pyramid: Ameny Qemau

Fortunately, due to the discovery of canopic jars carrying the name of Ameny
Qemau, the owner of the Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary monument at Dahshur is
known. However, there are no other monuments or objects containing his name, and he
875
Dodson, "Strange Affair," pp. 62-63; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 324-325.
Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 326.
77
Naga," p. 27; "Strange Affair," p. 62; After the Pyramids, p. 9; L. Habachi, "Review of Untersuchengen zur
politischen geschichte der Zweiten Zwischenzeit in Agypten," Cd'E 85 (1968), pp. 80-81; Swelim and
Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 325-326. For other examples, in which the nomen is found on
canopic equipment without the prenomen, see Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 329.
878
Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 326-327. Note that the royal inscriptions are
only represented by a handful of examples, and any conclusions based on them must be treated with great
caution.
876
215
is not listed as such in the Turin King-List. Thus, the relative placement of this king
within Dynasty XIII cannot be established with certainty. Nonetheless, Ryholt has
suggested that the royal name (Sankhibre) Ameny Intef Amenemhet may refer to Ameny
Qemau as the grandfather of this ruler (Amenemhet, son of Intef, son of Ameny). Thus,
he places Ameny in a position prior to both Intef and Sankhibre Amenemhet. However,
the interpretation of this type of double (or triple in this case) name is not certain, as will
be shown later. Ameny could also have been a nickname for Amenemhet, of which there
are several options within the Turin King-List.
Maragioglio and Rinaldi suggested that the pyramid of Ameny Qemau was
constructed after those at Mazghuna, and due to the state of completion, they surmised
that Ameny had had a relatively short reign.879 Nonetheless, the architectural sequence of
the Late Middle Kingdom tombs is unclear. Given the size of the monument, it is likely
that this king had at least a normal regnal length for the first part of Dynasty XIII. Very
little information concerning Ameny Qemau remains in the poor record, which exists
from the excavations of his funerary structure. Though the architectural remains likely
suffered greatly due to the elements, since the Italian architects visited the site, this
location certainly is a prime candidate for future research. Screening of the spoil from
the excavations would likely unearth ceramic material and other remains, which might be
useful in the study of the kings of this period. Also, further examination of the site might
reveal more about the final plan of the structure, such as evidence for the existence of
periphery buildings attached to the pyramid.
Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," pp. 325-326.
216
V.D. Later Activity at the Pyramid

Unfortunately, there is not a lot of information concerning the cultural material
(such as pottery, statuary, small object, and etc.) found during the excavations of the
pyramid of Ameny Qemau. It is known that the monument was in the midst of Old
Kingdom mastabas.880 No mention of any New Kingdom or later activity exists at the
site, yet Maragioglio and Rinaldi suggest that the monument was used as a source of
limestone sometime from the New Kingdom to the Arab Period.881 Thus, without any
ceramic or other evidence, it is currently impossible to determine the date(s), in which
this tomb was looted and destroyed. One must also remember that the ruins of the
substructure of the pyramid remained uncovered and unprotected from the time Muses
excavated them until (and after) the Italian architects returned to the site. Thus, modern
damage is also a consideration.
VI. The Pyramid at North Mazghuna

In 1910-1911, Mackay excavated two large monuments, the first of which is 1.4
kms south of Dahshur, in a place he called Mazghuna after the name of the train station
adjacent to the site.882 According to a resident of a nearby village, de Morgan had
explored this monument previously, but, unfortunately, there is no record of his work
Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 320.

Maragioglio and Rinaldi, "Note," pp. 331, 338.
882
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 27; Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 37; Porter and Moss,
Topographical Bibliography IV, p. 76. Note that Jequier wrote that the name of this area was actually Gisr
Dahshur (Jequier, Fourths a Saqqarah, p. 67). For recent summaries of this material, see C. Holzl,
"Mazghuna," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p.
475; Lehner, Pyramids, pp. 184-185.
881
217
there.883
VI.A. The Elements of the Superstructure

In his monograph concerning the site, Mackay reported that there was no
indication of a formal superstructure at North Mazghuna,
though he was-convinced
that there was a limestone pyramid due to the presence of fragments of this material on
the flat surface.885 Also, Mackay was not able to excavate a large portion of the area
above the tomb, due to the presence of a Coptic Christian cemetery. Thus, either the
entire pyramidal feature had been removed through quarrying or intentional destruction,
or the plans for above-ground building were never implemented due to some unknown
circumstance such as the sudden death of the king.
Though there was no pyramid, Mackay did find evidence of two architectural
features in the area. He records a mudbrick wall, running north/south, to the northeast of
the tomb and states that it may have been used to flatten the area by serving to retain sand
and debris.
The wall was constructed of alternating headers and stretchers up to twelve
courses in height and was 0.95 m wide and 15.39 m long.

The second component of the complex, the causeway or supply ramp, was a large
structure, measuring 43.74 by 116.43 m and began about 3.63 m east and 3.45 m north of
the entrance to the tomb.887 The northern and southern extents of this feature were
composed of two walls, each with debris filling the space between; the former was wider
883
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 50.

885
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, pp. 50-51, 55.
886
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 55, PI. 49.
887
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 55, PI. 49. Spencer seems to have confused the causeway/ramp with the
outer wall, describing the construction of the former as the latter (Spencer, Brick Architecture, p. 49).
884
218
and had smaller walls running east-west for support. The 11.68 m between these two
structures was filled with debris, making a solid surface.
VLB. The Components of the Substructure

The entrance to the tomb was on the eastern side of the structure, with a poorlypreserved, ramped stairwell leading from the north.888 There were ten steps descending a
passage, measuring 0.96 m wide by 4.56 m long (Fig. 3.12. A). The steps were cut into
the stone and were 0.53 m wide by 0.43 m deep by 0.09 m high with a ramp on either
side of 0.22 m. The height of the passage ranged between 1.90 and 1.93 m.
At the base of the steps, the staircase turned to the west with flat stones on either
side measuring roughly 2.61 by 0.81 m each.889 The descent through the space between
the two stone blocks began as a ramp extending 3.78 m leading to thirty-one steps,
measuring 0.53 by 0.38 by 0.09 m with a ramp of 0.22 m on either side. All of the
roofing blocks in this one were found in situ (Fig. 3.12.B). The level dropped 0.14 m and
then a ramp proceeded for another 1.06 m. At the end of this passage, there was clear
evidence that a wooden door was to have been placed in this area due to the presence of
sockets and a bolt notch (Fig. 3.12.C). This door worked much in the same way as that at
Hawara with a niche on the southern side for the closing of the door. Meanwhile, when
the door was opened, it fit into a niche in the northern wall, preventing it from narrowing
the corridor.
The presence of the door, as well as the ramps without steps, seems strange when
889
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 232; Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 51.

219
compared to the monuments discussed before and after this section. A door in this
position must have either served in the construction process to keep out intruders, or it
may represent some sort of religious symbolism related to the king's afterlife. The ramps
may have provided safety for the mummy after the tomb was to be sealed. Meanwhile,
the workers must have used some sort of rope ladder across the slippery stone in order to
carry out their work below.
Figure 3.12. The substructure of North Mazghuna. After Petrie 1912, PI. 47
At the base of the staircases, there was a room with the dimensions of 1.97 by
1.61 by 3.8 m, where a quartzite portcullis stone, measuring approximately 4.5 by 2.01 by
1.79 m, would have been positioned to block the remainder of the tomb (Fig. 3.12.D).890
The portcullis rested in a chamber, which was 1.63 m above the floor on the northern
side. From this point, the stone would have been positioned down a ramp, creating the
ceiling of the chamber and blocking the entrance to the next section of the tomb.
The portcullis was to block a passage, which was 1.64 m above the surface of the
1
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 51, Pis. 47, 48(C).
220
floor of the previous chamber (1.12.E).
This corridor led from east to west, measuring
1.58 m long, 0.96 m wide and 1.4 to 1.59 m in height as the floor sloped downward 0.19
m. The ceiling was made of a single quartzite slab. This short passage ended in another
chamber, measuring 2.38 to 2.41 m from east to west, 2.95 m north to south, and 2.37 to
2.38 m in height (1.12.F). In the southwest of this room, there was an entrance to a
corridor, extending 1.47 m to the south, being 0.97 m wide and 2.11 m high ending in a
portcullis room (Fig. 3.12.G-H).
The area for the portcullis stone, which was never used, was 1.76 m (north to
south) by 1.52 m by 3.75 m high.892 The quartzite blocking stone itself is 2.96 by 1.69 by
1.79 m and sits in a recess to the east of its intended position. The mechanism used for
sealing this chamber was the same as that of the first portcullis discussed above as the
stone would have slid down the ramp to block the next section.
Once again, the corridor running south from the portcullis was 1.43 m above the
previous floor level (Fig. 3.12.1).893 This passage was 1.59 m long and 0.98 m wide. The
corridor was set at an incline with the north being 1.47 m high while the height of the
southern end was 1.36 m.
At the end of the passageway, there was another room with an east-west axis,894
measuring 4.93 by 2.51 by 2.13 m (Fig. 3.12.J). Mackay notedthat the floor appeared to
have been damaged when robbers dug into it, searching for the entrance to a non-existent
secret passage. At the southwestern corner of this room, there was a set of two steps built
into the floor, leading west followed by a ramped staircase descending to the north.
891
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth,

Petrie, et al, Labyrinth,
893
894
892
p. 52, PI. 47.

p. 52, PI. 47(F).
p. 52, PI. 47(G).
p. 52, PI. 47(H).
221
There was a ledge on the western wall, measuring 29 cms deep and was at a height of
approximately 3.8 cms above the level of the floor of the room.
The ramped staircase descended at an angle of 24 and was 0.85 m wide with
steps of 0.41 m in width, 0.41 m in depth and 0.16 m in height.895 From the base of the
steps, a hallway extends in the same direction for an additional 8.33 m, the width being
0.99 m with a height of 1.69 m (Fig. 3.12.K). This passage had a roof composed of eight
blocks of limestone, and the floor was 6.3 cms below that of the area prior to the last
portcullis. At the end of the corridor, there was a room measuring 3.3 by 2.69 by 2.38 m
(Fig. 3.12.L).896 In the northwest of this chamber, there was a passageway leading west
for 2.06 m being 0.97 m wide and 1.59 m high and was covered with a quartzite block
(1.12.M.).
The corridor ended in a large chamber measuring 9.16 m from north to south and
2.67 m east to west (1.12.N-P).897 In reality, this room was conceived as two separate
areas, the antechamber and the burial camber divided from one another by a quartzite
portcullis. In the antechamber, the floor was set to decline toward the sarcophagus.
Here, the lid was found in its pre-burial position. It was a finely smoothed quartzite
block measuring 4.23 m by 2.6 m and was 0.77 m thick, having flat ends and the arched
center common at this time. There was fine sand in the antechamber, and Mackay
believed that it had been placed there deliberately or had fallen into the area during the
building process and had not been removed.898
Once die b o dy wa s placed into die tomb, the lid would have been positioned over
895

897
898
896
p. 52, PI. 47(J).

p. 53, PL 47(K).
p. 53, PL 47 (M).
p. 54, PL 47.
222
the sarcophagus. A quartzite portcullis stone, measuring 3.21 (as estimated by the
excavator) by 2.62 by 0.61 m would have been maneuvered down a quartzite ramp from
the west with the aid of a lever in a slot cut for this purpose.899 This large block fit into
niches in both the roof and the eastern wall, fully sealing the remainder of the tomb.
The burial chamber itself has a saddle roof made of limestone (Fig. 3.12.P).900
The sarcophagus was carved from a single slab of quartzite and measured 4.75 by 2.63 by
1.83 m, the southern end lying beneath the wall; the niche for the body was to the north
of that for the canopic box. The former measured 2.38 to 2.39 m long, 0.94 to 0.96 m
wide and 1.17 to 1.18m deep while the latter was roughly square with the sides
measuring 0.66 to 0.68 m and had a depth of 0.76 to 0.77 m. The sarcophagus also had
small holes meant for the reception of tabs on the lid.
To the north of the burial chamber, there was a corridor 1.17 m long, 0.7 m wide,
and 0.66 m high, leading to a room with a floor surface at a level 1.50m below (Fig.
3.12.Q).901 This chamber was on an east-west axis and measured 4.70 by 1.49 m and
was 2.16 m in height. The entrance between the passage and the room was to have been
closed with a thin stone block.
Mackay does not propose a use for this room behind the burial chamber. Perhaps,
it contained funerary equipment, such as weapons and disassembled furniture (See the
tomb of Awibre Hor below). One should note that the width and height of the corridor
would have limited the size of the material, which could have been placed in this area.
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, pp. 53, 54, Pis. 27, 28.

Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 53, PI. 27, 28.
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 54, PL 47 (N, O), 48.
223
Like the antechamber, there was clean sand fill within this room.
Interestingly, there were some marks in the tomb at North Mazghuna.903 The
quartzite blocks had all been painted red, and some had carefully drawa black horizontal
lines (about 19 cms apart) with less well-rendered vertical ones (approximately 10 cms
apart) between them. These lines even appear in places where they would not have been
visible once the tomb was sealed. It is possible that these marks were used to help dress
these stones similarly to those on limestone surfaces in the "Unfinished" Pyramid at
South Sakkara. In the area of the entrance of the tomb, there were two quarry marks
written with black charcoal.904 There was also a team mark on the back of a limestone
block in the western wall of the first portcullis chamber as well as two others in from
unspecified locations.905
Mackay found no signs of offering goods or human remains, and the portcullis
stones had not been moved into their final positions, but he thought that the second
portcullis had once blocked the passage since the wall was not completely preserved
between this area and the hallway to the west.906 He surmised that robbers had made a
hole because the passage was blocked. However, it is difficult to understand why the
portcullis would have later been moved back into its initial open position once the
"robbers" had invaded the tomb. The tomb itself seemed to have no structural flaws, and
the workmanship is comparable to those of the other sites. Thus, either the owner
decided to be buried elsewhere, or the political situation was such that a group of people
902
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 54, PL 47.

904
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 52, PL 49.
905
F. Arnold, Control Notes, p. 175; Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 55, PI. 49, middle.
906
903
224
or the successor to the throne did not allow him or her to be interred in the finished
tomb.907 As a result, there was no indicative crater above, since the integrity of the
ceiling had been maintained. Like that in the "Unfinished" Pyramid, this condition may
have been due to the fact that the tomb had probably never been occupied. Thus, the
destruction found at the other monuments was not necessary here as will be seen below.
VI.C. The Owner of the Pyramid at North Mazghuna

Mackay believed that the tomb belonged to Amenemhet IV or Nefrusobek,
picking the former over the latter due to the fact that the pyramid at North Mazghuna
resembled that of Amenemhet III at Hawara.908 However, this conclusion is only one of
the possibilities as to who built the tomb.909
Dodson suggests that this pyramid belonged to either Hotepibre Saharnedjeritef or
Khaankhre Sobekhotep II based upon his chronological analysis of the sarcophagi and
geographical placement of the tombs.910 He chooses these two kings due to their position
between Ameny Qemau and Khendjer with the South Mazghuna pyramid (see below)
falling between this monument, and the reign of Khendjer.
907

Edwards, Pyramids, p. 236; R.N. Gillam, "Sobekneferu," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), p. 301; Griraal, History, p. 171; Petrie, et al., Labyrinth,
p. 37. Verner also seems to believe that this tomb belonged to Nefrusobek though he acknowledges that
most scholars currently date the monument to Dynasty Xlll (Verner, Great Monuments, p. 433). He claims
that this monument is later than that of North Mazghuna due to the complexity of the corridors. Others
have also repeated the possible late Dynasty XII dating of this monument (Bell, "Climate," p. 260;
Callender, "Reign of Sebekneferu," p. 229).
09
Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 141; Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 29, n. 61; W. Grajetzki, "Zwei
Pyramiden der 13. Dynastie bei Mazghuna und die ungeklarte Frage des Besttattungsortes von Amenemhet
IV. und Sobeknofru," Sokar 5 (2002), pp. 23-27.
910
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 31, 38.
908
225
VII. The Pyramid at South Mazghuna

Mackay chose to investigate the South Mazghuna pyramid, located 40 m from the
previously discussed monument at this site, because there was an area with limestone
chippings around a large crater filled with windblown sand.
It appears that only the
depression was fully investigated while the remains of the periphery structures were
excavated on a more selective basis. Thus, though there is a considerable amount of
information published on the work and details of this site, there is still potential for future
exploration here.
VILA. The Elements of the Superstructure

Excavations revealed the method of constructing the tomb, a process familiar after
the discussion of the pyramids above.
Four trenches, aligned with the cardinal
directions, surrounded a nearly square area, the exterior of the northern and western sides,
measuring around 55.67 m and 55.40 m respectively, making this monument roughly 100
cubits like that of Ameny Qemau (Fig. 3.13.A).913 However, in this case these trenches
were built into the hard, sandy, desert floor, rather than into limestone. Large, roughly
cut limestone blocks in the bottom of the trench existed in at least two corners. Over
these and around the edges of the trenches, were mudbrick walls, one brick in thickness,
coated with whitewashed mud plaster in order to preserve the integrity of the sand after
soil had been removed. These walls gradually leaned into the sides as they rose, an effect
911
Fakhry, Pyramids, pp. 232-233; Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, pp. 41-50. For other summaries of the
pyramid's elements, see HQlzl, "Mazghuna," pp. 474-475; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 184.
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 41; Porter and Moss, Topographical Bibliography IV, p. 76.
913
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 28; After the Pyramids, p. 10; Petrie, et al., Labyrinth,
p. 41.
226
achieved by carefully placing the edge of each brick slightly back from that of the one
below. Outside of the trenches, there was a surface, extending 3.00 cubits out around the
entire extent.
In the area in the center, where the tomb pit lies, there were some bricks, which
measured 46.48 by 23.37 by 12.95 cms,915 still in place in the superstructure. Mackay
found bricks one or two courses high, usually on their sides in the sand. He believes that
the monument at South Mazghuna was a mudbrick pyramid with limestone casing.916
Such a structure is probable due to the parallels of the Late Middle Kingdom royal
monuments.
The monument of South Mazghuna had a complete enclosure of the sinusoidal
type, measuring 76.61 to 77.72 m on each side (N. 77.72, S. 76.4, E. 76.61, and W.
76.63? m; Fig, 1.13.B). This wavy wall was 1.05 m wide and still stood up to 1.52 m
high.917 Mackay excavated this feature by following the structure along its outer face.
The southern and eastern walls were intact, while the other two only extended part of the
way toward the northwestern corner. There were two different sizes of bricks; one
measured 3 by 16 by 9 cms, and the other, 32 by 17 by 11 cms. Both were made from
alluvium soil mixed with sand,918 and were usually laid as stretchers in the wall. The
curves averaged 3.71 m across and 1.04 m deep, and the wall had a thin coat of

Spencer calculated the dimensions of bricks at 46.5 by 23.5 by 12.5 cms (Spencer, Brick Architecture, p.
38).
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 41. Other scholars have also repeated this conclusion based on Mackay's
publication. See N. Swelim, The Brick Pyramid at Abu Rawash Number "I" by Lepsius: A Preliminary
Study (Alexandria, 1986), p. 72.
917
918
Spencer states that the bricks were 30.5 by 15.5 by 9.5 cms and 32.5 by 17 by 10.5 cms (Spencer, Brick
Architecture, p. 38).
227
whitewashed plaster. The southern section of the enclosure had been set into a trench in
order to place it at an even level with the rest of the structure as the surface was at a
higher level in this location.
In the southern wall, near the eastern corner (18.8 m), Mackay discovered a
blocked entrance into the enclosure wall, measuring 3.71m (Fig. 3.13.C).919 The
entrance led into a room measuring, 7.52 by 6.86 m, the north/south section being the
longest. Another entrance, measuring 3.96 m, was located on the same line as the first in
the northern wall. A second chamber to the east shared a wall with the entrance room.
The means of access to this room is unknown since its southern end was disturbed on
both the eastern and western walls. Nonetheless, this room was 7.52 by 2.64 m. All of
these white, plastered walls were made with bricks measuring, 29 by 15 by 9 cms and 31
by 16 by 11 cms, a size essentially identical to those in the sinusoidal wall. On the
ground in this area, there was a large concentration of limestone chips, some of which
contained control notes from the construction of the tomb.920 These dockets, originally
translated by Gardiner and later modified by F. Arnold, record the delivery of unnamed
items by the "expeditionary forces of the southern province" (three examples), dating
from years 2 to 3 of an unnamed king, and a "Seneb" (one piece). Mackay believed that
this entrance had been blocked either after the burial or during the destruction of the
tomb.
In the eastern side of the sinusoidal enclosure wall, there was a second building,
919
Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 233; Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 47; Verner, Great Monuments, pp. 432-433.
F. Arnold, Control Notes, pp. 174-175; Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 9-10, no. 14; Petrie, et al,
Labyrinth, pp. 47-48.
920
228
which is almost centered, being 0.46 m closer to the northeastern corner (Fig. 3.13.D).
Mackay assumed that this structure was a funerary chapel. It had an entrance, on the
eastern side, which led to the largest room. This chamber measured 8.45 by 6.22 m and
had a surface, composed of plaster over a layer of bricks, which was 0.96 m below the
base of the wavy wall.
Figure. 3.13. The Pyramid at South Mazghuna. After Petrie 1912, PI. 39.
At the back there was another entrance, measuring 0.88 m, offset to the south
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, pp. 48, Pis. 39, 41, 45.
229
from the main doorway and extending back in the direction of the tomb.
This small
area was 1.66 by 4 m with a vaulted roof made of larger bricks with straw inclusions and
may have held a statue of the deceased ruler.
In his report of his findings at South Sakkara, Jequier notes a statuette fragment,
broken at the waist and missing its head and arms, now in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo
(no. 54493). It reportedly originated from the pyramids at Mazghuna.923 It is likely, but
not certain, that this object came from the back chamber of the chapel of this tomb since
the northern monument appears to have remained empty. Nonetheless, the statue
paralleled that of Khendjer, since it was made of black granite and was of similar size and
style.924
The southern wall of the main room also had an entrance, which led to two
smaller rooms, the latter having a vaulted roof.925 Originally, these two rooms had been a
single chamber measuring, 2.18 by 6.22 m. The doorway had been filled with bricks,
sealing the rooms.
Finally, in the northern part of the building, there was a doorway (1.05 m wide) in
the northern wall of the structure leading to two small rooms.
These chambers were
similar to the ones in the south, measuring 2.83 by 2.11 m and 2.67 by 2.11 m. While the
floor of the first chamber was at the same level as the main room to the south and all of
the adjoining ones, the surface in the northwestern area was 0.15 m lower than the others.
The brick sizes were 31 by 16 by 11 cms, 30 by 15 by 10 cms, 34 by 15 by 11 cms, and
922
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 48, PL 39, 41.

Jequier, Fouilles a Saqqarah, pp. 18-19, 67, PI. 15b-c.
925
Petrie, et al, Labyrinth, p. 48, Pis. 39,41.
926
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, pp. 48-49, Pis. 39, 41.
923
230
38 by 20 by 9 cms and were made of alluvium soil mixed with sand.
Mackay found no
evidence of bonding between the walls of this structure and those of the enclosure, and,
therefore, believed that the former was built before the latter.
It is likely that the mudbrick structure is actually an economical version of a
funerary temple or chapel, especially since the rooms are roughly in line with the burial
chamber to the west.928 Though there is no evidence to prove the hypothesis, it is
possible that the small isolated room in the north of the structure may have served the
same purpose as the northern chapel did at the pyramid of Khendjer. However, in the
latter monument, it appears that the northern chapel was inaccessible from the exterior of
the complex.
VII.B. The Components of the Substructure

Mackay, like other excavators of the Late Middle Kingdom tombs, had a difficult
time with sand pouring into the pit as he proceeded 2.74 m to the roof and beyond. In
these difficult surroundings, the ancient Egyptians developed procedures in order to
facilitate their work in these difficult surroundings.929 The original pit itself was dug by
removing the loose sand and penetrating about 1.4 m of compacted soil through a layer
with a high concentration of tiny stones and into another of clay. The removed looser
sand was placed just outside the pit area while the lower levels were cast just beyond
where the sinusoidal wall was constructed. In the plates from the excavations at
Mazghuna, there is another feature, which must have been used to help control the sand
927

Fakhry, Pyramids, p. 233.
29
928
231
walls of the pit.
Here, like in other monuments, brick lines the trench and the
stonework.
The entrance to the tomb was centered in the southern part of the pyramid, near
the trenches (Fig. 3.13.E). From here, a ramped staircase led northward and downward
(22 30') approximately 4.88 m, at which point the passage continued for 0.84 m at the
same level (1.13.F).931 The stairs measured 37 cms across with smooth surfaces of 28
cms and 25 cms on the eastern and western sides, respectively. The steps were narrow in
depth, measuring 11 cms each, and the final step dropped down 13 cms. The entire
staircase was sculpted into stone after it was placed in the entrance corridor.
At the base of the entrance corridor, there was a chamber with the dimensions 1.4
m (N/S) by 1.14 m (E/W), where a granite portcullis stood (Fig. 3.13.G).932 Though the
stone blocked the passage, it was still about 0.36 m short of where it was designed to rest.
The large portcullis, measuring 2.63 by 1.49 by 1.45, sat on limestone with an uneven
line cut down the middle to reduce friction, and a strip of granite (on the northern side).
These elements were cut at an angle of 4 15', declining from east to west, allowing for
the movement of the portcullis into place with the use of levers. Like in the other tombs
discussed previously, this stone provided the ceiling to this room.
On the opposite side of the portcullis, the entrance to a corridor was entered at a
greater height.933 From here, a second ramped staircase continued downward (18) to the
north, extending 2.79 m (Fig. 3.13.H). There were eight steps, each measuring 0.11 m in
depth and 0.39 m in width while, on either side, the ramp w a s 0.27 m wide. At the end of
930

932
933
931
Pis. 42, 43.

p. 42.
pp. 42-43, PI. 39.
pp. 42-43, PI. 39.
232
the staircase, there was a 0.13 m ledge, followed by a 0.84 m- long corridor.
The hallway ended at a room, measuring 1.4 m east-west and 1.14 m north-south,
that held a granite portcullis much like the previous one, with the dimensions of 2.65 m
by 1.59 m by 1.45 m (Fig. 3.13.I-J).934 Though the passage remained open, it was clear to
the excavators that the principles used for the lowering of the stone were identical to the
previous one. However, this particular example would have descended from the west,
rather than the east, at an angle of 6 15'.
Once again, a corridor, located at a higher level ran northward, but it was in such
poor condition that Mackay was unable to acquire its measurements.935 This passage led
to a rectangular room that was equally destroyed (Fig. 3.13.K). However, at the eastern
end, the floor level dropped 1.04 m downward via one cut-in step measuring, 0.42 by
0.35 by 0.1 m, presumably with a 0.49 m drop leading to it, and a large stone, measuring
1.08 by 0.2 by 0.5 m, placed inside of the next corridor (Fig. 3.13.L). Around the steps
on the eastern and southern walls, there was a ledge (0.15 to 0.16 m on the south and 0.22
to 0.23 m on the east) along the line of the hallway, the walls being cut back slightly, at
the height of the floor of the rectangular room.
The corridor was 10.29 m in length, 1.07 tol.08 m in width at the base, and 1.07
to 1.09 m at the top, running from the south to the north (Fig. 3.13.M).936 In this area, six
preserved roofing stones, all of which were set at a lower level than that of the area with
the ledge, covered most of the hallway. Interestingly, the height of the middle section
(four blocks) of the ceiling of the corridor was 0.10 to 0.22 m higher (1.63 m) than the
934

Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 43, PL 39, 40.
936
Petrie, et al, Labyrinth, p. 43, PL 39,40.
935
233
other areas (1.41 to 1.53 m) for a length of 4.13 m. The eastern and western walls were
constructed on top of the floors using three courses of stone blocks,937 ranging in size
from 1.59 to 1.98 m in length and from 0.48 to 0.64 m in width.
At the end of the corridor, there was another area with a ledge on the eastern side,
measuring 1.75 m in height and 0.25 m in width (Fig. 3.13.N).938 A small staircase, made
up of three steps, ascended approximately 0.89 m from the northern end of the hallway
toward the west. The depths of the steps were 0.19, 0.23, and 0.25 m from bottom to top
with the second being cut into two sections of stone, and stabilized with a wooden
dovetail cramp.
At the top of the stairs, there was an antechamber with the dimensions, 9.00 to
9.04 m east/west, 2.11 to 2.15 m north/south, and 1.62 to 1.66 m in height (Fig.
3.13.0).939 Six of the original nine roofing blocks were still in place, measuring 4.47 m
in length and 0.49 to 1.21 m in width. Mackay noted that this room seemed to have been
filled with small limestone blocks as many of the same size were found within the walls.
On the eastern side of the southern wall of the antechamber, there was a charcoal
sketch of what Mackay believed to be a king on a funerary bier.
He dates the drawing
to some time later than the burial, possibly at the time when the tomb was destroyed due
to his assessment that some plaster had fallen from the wall before the charcoal had been
applied as it was on both this substance and the bare stone. However, the photo in the
publication seems to indicate that this "plaster" may have been gypsum mortar used to
937
Mackay records the courses as 0.53, 0.64, and 0.48 m thick on the eastern wall from bottom to top and
0.53, 0.56, 0.57 m thick on the west side (Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 44).
938
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, pp. 43-44, PI. 39,40,44.
939
Petrie, et al, Labyrinth, pp. 44-45, PI. 40 (N).
940
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 44, PI. XLIV.
234
slide the large stones into place. At Abydos, such blotches of this substance exist even on
the smoothed interior surface of the limestone in a similar tomb.941 Until further research
is undertaken at South Mazghuna, it is probably best to keep the dating of this drawing
open.
Mackay did not understand the architectural purposes of the elements of this part
of the tomb,942 but it is clear that the sarcophagus of the South Mazghuna monument had
the same sand lowering system as tombs of Amenemhet III at Hawara and the pyramids
at South Sakkara (Fig. 3.13.Q).943 As one would expect, there are two small corridors
leading to the eastern and western sides of the sarcophagus to allow a person to trigger
the flow of sand from beneath the supports of the mobile lid component. The first of
these portals is located in the middle of the long hallway, which leads north from a
destroyed room to the antechamber (Fig. 3.13 M).944 Next to the western wall of the
large corridor 4 m from the northern extent of the tomb, is a square hole 0.5 m east/west
and 0.73 m north/south. It had been designed to be covered by a thin limestone cap,
sitting on narrow supports, while blending it into the rest of the floor. The small corridor,
which runs from east to west, is 3.44 m long, 0.7 to 0.74 m wide, and 0.91-0.92 m high.
The entrance to the second portal, which is located in the southwestern corner of
the antechamber, was 0.86 m north/south, 0.85 m east/west, and 0.91 m deep (Fig.
3.13.P).945 The first section proceeds from north to south, measuring 3.65 m long, 0.8 to
0.86 m wide, and 1.08 to 1.1 m deep. This passage ends with the entrance to a second
941
These observations are from my excavations of S9 at South Abydos in 2003.

Edwards, Pyramids, p. 236; Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, pp. 44-47, 49-50, Pis. 40, 41, 44.
943
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 28-29.
944
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 44, PL 40 (O), 44.
945
Petrie, et al, Labyrinth, p. 45, PI. 40 (Q and R).
942
235
corridor in its floor. The dimensions of the passage, which travels eastward toward the
burial chamber, are 3.15946 by 0.77 m with a depth of 0.95 m.
Within the second passage, Mackay discovered several objects, including a single
alabaster, vessel resembling a duck.9 7 This vessel, which was 0.46 m tall with a rim of
0.11 m and a maximum diameter of 0.24 m, had been sliced in half and reassembled in
ancient times. In this same location, Mackay found two limestone lamps.
In order to reach the sarcophagus, one has to enter a hidden passage located near
the center of the antechamber, along the northern wall (Fig. 3.13.0).9
Two steps, one
each on the east and west of the entrance descend to a third, which sits upon the floor of
the corridor. From here a passage leads to the south and measures 2.09 m in length, 1.06
m in width, and 0.85 m in height.
The burial chamber is well-preserved in the north, but poorly in the south.
Nonetheless, it is clear that the room had a saddle ceiling.9 9 The height of the roof above
the sarcophagus would have been 1.08 m. The sarcophagus chamber was 4.10 m in
length (north/south) and 2.88 m in width (east/west) and was made of one single piece of
roughly hewn quartzite with two additional slabs for the lid. To the east and west of this
northern lid there are quartzite supports measuring 0.89 by 0.34 by 0.95 m (eastern) and
0.89 by 0.34 by 1.05 m (western). The interior of the sarcophagus had two niches, the
northern one for the coffin and the southern for the canopic box. The former measured
Note that Mackay lists the length of this passage in two places, the first of which is repeated here. The
other measurements at 2.35 m must exclude the area of the entrance so as not to double count the area
within both passages though they are at different levels (Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 45, PI. 40).
7
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, pp. 45-46, Pis. 43, 46. For parallels, see Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p.
141.
948
949
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, pp. 46-47, Pis. 40, 41; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 432.
236
2.4 to 2.43 by 0.9 to 0.92 by 1.04 to 1.06 m while the latter was 0.72 to 0.73 m on each of
its four sides with a depth of 0.7 to 0.72 m. The southern lid block (2.23 by 2.11 by 1.4
m) was fixed in place and had a space hollowed out on the inside that measured 0.43 m,
allowing for the deposit of the canopic box. The second (mobile) lid component
appeared to be lodged into the northern wall (southern limit'of the antechamber, 2.59 by
2.01 by 0.99 to 1.57 m) in the entrance corridor. Inside the sarcophagus within the
debris, Mackay discovered a piece of a calcite kohl pot and a small, steatite inlay.950
Figure 3.14. Plan of the sarcophagus of the pyramid at South Mazghuna.

Note that the mobile component of the lid to the left is out of position. After
Petrie 1912, PI. 41.
Mackay's description of the position of the mobile quartzite lid component has
caused some degree of confusion (Fig. 3.14). He states that, "the southern side wall of
the great northern chamber (the antechamber) thus improperly included this block in its
951
masonry."
Meanwhile, later in the publication, he explains that this stone would have
been pushed into place from the second passage and argues against it ending in this
950
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 40; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29; After the Pyramids, p.
11; Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 46.
951
Petrie, et al, Labyrinth, p. 46, PL 41.
237
position, due to robbers sliding it such an inconvenient distance.
However, the plate
shows this stone as being lodged within the limestone with its thicker end being further in
the structure of the wall, making it impossible that this stone was meant to move from its

953
current position.
Coffin
Entrance size
Width
0.90
Entrance
Passage
Open x 1.06
Corridor 1
Corridor 2A
Corridor 2B
0.50x0.73
0.86x0.85
0.80x0.76
1.06
0.70
0.80
0.76
Table 3.1. Size comparisons between the width of the coffin (measurements for the
space allowed within the sarcophagus) and that of the passages leading to the
sarcophagus chamber at South Mazghuna. The entrance passage clearly displays the
proper dimensions for the transport of the funerary equipment.
The unclear description provided by Mackay has led to at least one incorrect
reconstruction of the tomb, other than his own. Lehner suggests that both of the quartzite
stones are in their intended and permanent positions and that a third missing stone would
have been positioned between them, using the sand lowering system, paralleling Hawara
in the way in which that lid functioned.
However, in the Hawara example, the part of
the lid closest to the northern passage is the one controlled by the sand lowering system
with the second and third being in their fixed position. In this way, the canopic chest and
the coffin could be placed into the sarcophagus through the opening below the lid. Once
the burial was complete, the sand lowering system would be activated, causing the

Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, PL XLI.
238
sarcophagus to seal and the burial chamber to be closed off from the corridor leading to
the antechamber. The problem with placing the mobile lid component in the middle is
that there would have been no way to insert the deceased king into the tomb since the
burial chamber would have been sealed with the stone in the passage. Since the main
passage has the dimensions necessary to carry the coffin into the chamber, this was
certainly its purpose (Table 1.1). Meanwhile, the other corridors had been used to initiate
the sand lowering system and had provided for the flow of sand allowing for the closing
of the mobile section of the lid.955
VII.C. Court Cemetery
To the north of the pyramid at South Mazghuna, there are a number of pits (DAS
54), indicating the existence of a cemetery.956 Currently, these burials are represented by
pits, but they may have originally been mastabas or shaft tombs. Unfortunately, now,
however, the area is heavily disturbed. These tombs could also be associated with the
pyramid of North Mazghuna, but they are closer to the southern monument.
VII.D. The Owner of the Pyramid at South Mazghuna

Mackay believed that the pyramid at South Mazghuna belonged to either
Amenhotep IV or Nefrusobek, favoring the former over the latter, due to the similarities
with the tomb of Hawara and the fact that this monument was smaller than that at North
See also Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 33.

Alexanian, et al., "The Necropolis of Dahshur Excavations Report Spring 2006;" Fakhry, Pyramids, p.
233. Recently, Schiestl discovered a beer jar rim, dated to Dynasty XIII, in this area (Schiestl, "Neues zur
Residenznekropole," p. 52).
956
239
Mazghuna.
However, Jequier later proposed that this monument and the one to the
south are so similar in architectural features to those of South Sakkara, including that of
Khendjer, that the Mazghuna monuments probably date closer to the reign of this king
than to the end of Dynasty XII.958 However, in light of the architectural characteristics of
the entire corpus, this relationship is not as significant as it might seem at first. The
similarities between this monument and S9 at South Abydos, to be discussed below, seem
to suggest that these tombs are of similar date, likely having been constructed relatively
early in Dynasty XIII.
Fakhry has suggested that it is possible that material from the potential court
cemetery may contain inscribed objects with the name of the king, who built the
complex. Potentially, the name of the owner of both this tomb and that at North
Mazghuna could be revealed by items such as control notes from elements of the
complexes themselves. Modern re-excavation of these pyramids and their peripheral
funerary installations would certainly be welcomed and could become essential
components of the study of Dynasty XIII kingship.
VILE. Later Activity at the Pyramid

It appears that the pyramid at South Mazghuna had been disturbed during Dynasty
XVIII. Several burials were located around the sinusoidal walls while others including
957
Petrie, et al., Labyrinth, p. 37. Note that the dating of South Mazghuna to Amenemhet IV still appears
in some recent publications, though authors usually allow for the possibility that the monument belongs to
Dynasty XIII (Bell, "Climate," p. 260; Callender, "Reign of Sebekneferu," p. 229; Verner, Great
Monuments, p. 432).
958
Jequier, Fourths a Saqqarah, p. 67. Currently, most scholars believe that this monument should be
dated to Dynasty XIII (Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 141; Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 29, n. 61;
Grajetzki, "Zwei Pyramiden," pp. 23-27; Hayes, Scepter, p. 341).
240
two tombs dated to the reign of Thutmosis III were within the pit for the substructure of
the monument.959 The placement of these burials caused Mackay to believe that the
superstructure of the tomb had been completely destroyed prior to this king's time in the
Second Intermediate Period or early New Kingdom.
VIII. The Shaft Tomb of Awibre Hor at Dahshur

The last example of a "certain" Dynasty XIII royal tomb is that of Awibre Hor,
who was originally thought to have been an insignificant coregent of Amenemhet III of
Dynasty XII, since he was buried in a renovated shaft tomb within the earlier king's
abandoned funerary complex at Dahshur.960 The shaft was located in the outer row of
tombs found between the two temenos walls on the eastern side of this pyramid.961 This
tomb was excavated by de Morgan in the spring of 1882 with the help of Legrain and
Jequier, the last of whom would later work at South Sakkara at the pyramid of Khendjer
and the second monument of unknown ownership discussed previously.962
959

S. Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor. Essai d'interpretation du materiel decouvert par Jaques de Morgan a
Dahchour (1894)," BIFAO 101 (2001), pp. 12-39; Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29;
Weigall, Pharaohs, pp. 147-149. For further bibliography on the elements of the tomb and objects within,
see Porter and Moss, Topographical Bibliography HI (2), pp. 888-889. Note that a few years after the tomb
was excavated, Petrie mistakenly reported that it was a pyramid at Dahshur, though he did recognize that
the king belonged to Dynasty XIII, despite the misinterpretation of the name as Rafuab (Petrie, History, p.
208).
961
J. de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894 (Vienna, 1895), pp. 86, Fig. 205. A loose English
translation of some of this report can be found along with selected photos and plans in R.L. Cron and G.B.
Johnson, "De Morgan at Dahshur: Excavations in the 12th Dynasty Pyramids, 1894-'95 Part Two," KMT 6
(1995), pp. 58-60.
962
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 84, 87, 90, 91, Fig. 209. As the excavations
commenced, a statuette within the debris yielded the name of the unknown king, Awibre Hor.
960
241
VIII.A. The Elements of the Superstructure

It is unknown as to whether or not there was a superstructure above the tomb of
Awibre Hor, but it is likely that his architects envisioned the pyramid complex of
Amenemhet III as an important part of the later king's tomb. In other words, this later
and less-powerful ruler likely hoped to acquire the benefits of the entire Amenemhet III funerary complex by being buried within its walls.
Such a concept would eventually
lead to the burial of rulers beneath the natural pyramid within the Valley of the Kings in
the New Kingdom. In the Late Middle Kingdom, it also became the practice of some
4
priests at Sakkara to extend the lengths of the corridors to allow their burial shafts to lie
beneath the walls of the Old Kingdom pyramid enclosure or even within the courtyard of
pyramid complex of Teti in order to attempt to receive increased status in the afterlife.964
VIII.B. The Architectural Components of the Shaft Tomb of Awibre Hor

Before the burial of King Awibre Hor, ancient engineers had modified a Dynasty
XII court tomb in order to contain the elements desired for the royal interment.965 The
original part of the tomb included a shaft measuring 2.7 by 1.49 m with a door, which had
a limestone lintel and lead to a chamber with the dimensions 2.7 by 1.4 m (Fig. 3.15.AB). This room had a vaulted ceiling, which had collapsed by the time of modern
Concerning the tomb of Awibre Hor, Clayton states, "This site was presumably chosen to indicate
solidarity and continuity with the previous dynasty" (Clayton, Chronicles, p. 91).
964
D.P. Silverman, "Middle Kingdom Tombs in the Teti Pyramid Complex," in M. Barta and J. Krejci
(Praha, 2000) pp. 267; 268, n. 32; 269; 271-272; Silverman, "Non-Royal Burials." One of the gallery
tombs extends beneath the walls of the inner enclosure of the pyramid of Khendjer at South Sakkara, and
all three are within the complex. For the
965
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 88, 101-102, Figs. 208, 242, 243; Dodson,
"Tombs of the Kings," p. 42; Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 30; Dodson, After the
Pyramids, p. 13.
242
excavations. From this point, a new section had been added to the south of the original
tomb via a shaft to the south of the entrance (measuring 6.1 by 2.4 m; Fig. 3.15.C). An
antechamber, measuring 2.77 by 1.33 m, was the first of the two new rooms (1.15.D). It
is here that the sarcophagus lid was stored until the time of the interment.966 Next, at a
lower level, the architects created a burial chamber with a limestone, saddle-roof
(1.15.E).967 The sarcophagus chamber measured 2.95 by 1.26 m, excluding the canopic
box niche in its southern end. The walls of both rooms were covered in plaster.
A
B
y
Figure 3.15. Plan of the shaft tomb of Awibre Hor. After de Morgan 1895, Fig.
243.
The sarcophagus room, which was made of quartzite (described as sandstone by

de Morgan), did not have an unfamiliar arrangement after the discussion of the Late
Middle Kingdom monuments above.968 Though the canopic box was not included in the
sarcophagus, this container was found in the center of the southern end of it in the
966

Di. Arnold, Building, pp. 194, 195, Fig. 194.191.133; de Morgan, Fouilles aDahchour Mars-Juin 1894,
p. 102, Figs. 243-244; "Tombs of the Kings," p. 42; After the Pyramids, p. 13.
968
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 102, Fig. 211; Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p.
31, Fig. 38.
967
243
expected position. Once put into its place, the sarcophagus lid was even with the floor
much like that of Ameny Qemau.969
VIII.C. The Contents of the Tomb of Awibre Hor

The real significance of the tomb of Awibre Hor is not the architectural features
but, rather, the fact that the tomb had lain relatively undisturbed, and that excavators
found some of the items buried with the king still in place.
In fact, the mummy of
Awibre Hor, though little more than a decomposed skeleton, is the only royal example
found to date from the entire Middle Kingdom. Considering that the excavations of the
other Late Middle Kingdom tombs have only recovered fragments of a few objects, the
nature of the cultural material in the tomb is of the utmost importance. Unfortunately, the
tomb had been robbed; the violators successfully punctured a hole in the ceiling of the
sarcophagus chamber, and parts and pieces of some of the tomb equipment were found
dispersed chaotically around the chambers.971
The antechamber contained the wooden ka statue of this king within a naos, both
now in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo (JE 30948).972 Interestingly, the position of this
statue (1.35 m in height) within the antechamber paralleled that of the body in the
sarcophagus; it was on its back with its feet to the south. The majority of the wellcarved statue was made of one block of wood, while other parts were attached, and the
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 42; After the Pyramids, p. 13.

Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 42; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 30; Monarchs, p. 68;
After the Pyramids, p. 13.
971
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 90.
972
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 17-26; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 91-92,
Figs. 211-216, Pis. 233-235 ; Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 30.
970
244
joins were hidden using a thin coat of gray plaster over the entire work.
Certain
features of the statue, such as the nails, eyelids, and belt, had been covered in gold leaf.
The ka arms, eyes, and beard were all detached and lay in the naos.
The naos, which held the ka statue, had inscriptions on its forward-facing wooden
planks, which flanked the image of the king.974 These inscriptions were attached to the
wooden naos, using a technique found throughout this tomb as well as in the debris from
the Late Middle Kingdom tomb S9, to be discussed below. A layer of plaster, placed
over the wood, was covered in gold leaf, and the hieroglyphs were etched into this
material. In this case, the inscriptions, which include the king's complete titulary, had
been painted green.
Figure 3.16. The contents of the tomb of Awibre Hor. After de Morgan,
1895, Fig. 211.
The ka statue did not stand directly upon the base of the naos as there was a niche
between it and the platform for the figure.975 This area was packed with wood shavings,
973
This thin plaster coat fell off the statue during excavations.
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 91, Figs. 213-214. For a discussion of the text
and paleography in an argument for the dating of this king to Dynasty XII, see Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre
Hor," pp. 17-21.
975
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 29-30; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 92.
974
245
containing miniature wooden vessels. In all, there were fourteen different types of
vessels, ranging in frequency from one to fifteen; all were painted white. 7
Interestingly, there was a second ka figure within the tomb.977 In the debris in the
shaft, de Morgan discovered a poorly preserved ka statuette. This wooden figure, which
was covered in gold leaf and had quartz eyes, provided the first sign of the name and
status of the occupant of the tomb with its inscriptions. As with the larger one, this figure
was in a naos proportioned to its size, the fragments of which were found in the tomb. It
too was inscribed with green hieroglyphs into gold leaf.
An interesting group of alabaster objects was comprised of two stelae, an offering
table, and a vessel. From the western side of the antechamber, there was one small
calcite stela containing an offering formula,978 and one larger stela with a text of fourteen
lines of Pyramid Texts (PT 204-205) came from the naos in this same room.979 Also,
there was an inscribed canopic jar.980 Finally, de Morgan found the pieces of an offering
table, displaying an offering formula, in and around the naos in the antechamber.981
All of the inscriptions mentioned above displayed blue, mutilated hieroglyphs.982
976
de Morgan, Fourths a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 97, Fig. 226. Note that the number of these vessels
in tombs of the royal family may have been standardized between 59-62 and that they may correspond to
the number of goods in the offering formula found on offering tables such as that of Neferuptah (Aufrere,
"Le roi Aouibre Hor," p. 29).
977
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 14, 17-26; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 90,
95, Fig. 209, 220.
978
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 27-29; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 94, Fig.
218; Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 30.
979
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 16, 26-27; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 94,
Fig. 217; Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 20; Burial Customs, p. 57.
980
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 91, 95 Fig. 210. Note that there were fragments
of two of these jars found throughout the tomb (B. Liischer, Untersuchungen zu dgyptischen
Kanopenkasten, Hildeshceimer Agyptologische Beitrage 31 (Hildesheim, 1990), pp. 24, 27). See also
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," p. 14.
981
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 95, Fig. 219.
982
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 37-38; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 91, 9495, Figs. 210, 217-219. See also Chapter 3, Section II.B for references for mutilated hieroglyphs.
246
Due to the presence of the disfigured signs, it is likely that these objects were meant to be
close to the body. In Dynasty XIII animated signs, such as snakes, birds and humans
were mutilated to prevent them from coming alive and harming the deceased. It is
interesting to note that both the large and small naos statues had normal hieroglyphs
indicating their location away from sacred space surrounding the body itself.
De Morgan found countless pieces of staves and other objects throughout the
tomb. " There were so many, in fact, that he was only able to reconstruct a handful of
examples. Also, he did not report on the frequency of the types, and, thus, there is only a
very incomplete record of these objects. Types included a staff topped with a wooden
head of Horus; mekes, was (1.55 m in height), dam, and awat staves; a flail; a granite
mace; two broken arrows, part of a dagger, and a sheath.984 The scepters, staves, and
weapons came from the naos, the coffin, and a case, which was found out of context on
the western side of the antechamber.985 All of these objects were made of wood and were
decorated with gold leaf.
In the naos and around the tomb, there were many ceramic pottery vessels.
From the text, it is certain that many of these pieces were Nile C, including jars, plates,
and cups.9 7 Unfortunately, however, this important ceramic evidence, tied to a specific
983
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 96-97, Figs. 221-225. Note that de Morgan
believed that the staves had been broken during the funeral and not by robbers. These objects are similar to
those of Dynasty XII princesses, Senebtisi and Neferuptah (A.C. Mace and H.E. Winlock, The Tomb of
Senebtisi atLisht (New York, 1916), Pis. 29-32; Farag and Iskander, Neferwptah, pp. 34-36, 66-69, 82-89,
Pis. 27a, 31b, 38,40,49, 52).
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1 894, pp. 96-100, Figs. 221, 223-225. For information on
staves, see H.G. Fischer, "Notes on Sticks and Staves," MMJ13 (1978), pp. 5-32; A. Hassan, Stocke und
Stdbe im Pharaonischen Agypten bis zum Ende des Neuen Reiches (Berlin, 1976).
985
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 96; Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga,"
p. 30.
986
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 98, Figs. 227-228.
987
The fabric type, Nile C, is characterized by silt clay with large straw inclusions.
247
king of Dynasty XIII, who is known in the Turin King-List, was poorly recorded and
provides no significant information such as fabrics and types. Other objects found in the
naos included: basketry, a wooden box, and tubular faience beads.988
The burial chamber contained a coffin decorated with an eye panel and a golden
band of inscriptions on a flat lid;989 the signs of birds and snakes were truncated. Inside
of the coffin, the body was heavily decayed, leaving only a skeleton, and most of the
jewels had been taken.990 Nonetheless, some objects were found within the context of the
coffin.
One of the most exciting items found within the coffin was the mummy mask (in
fragments).
This object was made of wood and had gilded plaster over it, making a
more economical mask in the style of the golden one of the later king of great modern
fame, Tutankhamun. The mask shows the king with a nemes headdress, the uraeus
having broken off (fragments of this uraeus may have been found in the coffin992). The
eyes were made of stone and were placed into metal sockets and were surrounded by
large, black-lined eyelids.
As mentioned above, the mummy also had other objects in its vicinity such as two

Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 33-34; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 101,
Fig. 241, PL 136; Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 31; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 30.
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 98. Dodson notes that this skeleton, which belongs
to the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, fell victim to the experiments of a French anatomist, D.M. Fouquet, who
cut through the skull, damaging the facial area (Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 30; After
989
the Pyramids, p. 14).
991
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 1-41; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 98, Fig.
229; Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 42; The Canopic Equipment, p. 31; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el
Naga," p. 30; After the Pyramids, p. 14; S. Ikram and A. Dodson, The Mummy in Ancient Egypt (London,
1998), p. 169. This mummy mask does not have the feathers and small face found in Late Middle
Kingdom through early Dynasty XIII private examples. See Ikram and Dodson, Mummy, p. 169.
992
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 100, Fig. 234, 235.
248
staves and a flail.993 Additional objects included a wooden mallet, two small calcite
vessels, two falcon collars (with carnelian and faience), a fragment of a dagger, and a
beaded sheath, ten sizeable golden needles, a wooden vulture head, two gilded wooden
beads displaying Awibre Hor's cartouche, inlaid wood, and countless fragments of gold
leaf.994 The mummy had gilded, wooden bracelets, with carnelian and faience beads,
around its wrists and ankles and had had golden covers over its nails.995
The four, human-headed canopic jars were found within a box, which matched the
coffin in its exterior design.996 Interestingly, the box was sealed with the name
Nymaatre, which was the prenomen of Amenemhet III, leading de Morgan to believe that
Awibre Hor was a co-regent of this king.997 It is unclear if this name was used
honorifically, commemorating the Dynasty XII king or if the name belongs Sedjefakare
Amenemhet of Dynasty XIII since it is possible that he may have used it early in his
998
reign.
The shape and size of the canopic jars continues that of late Dynasty XII. Like in
the funerary material of Ameny Qemau, the hieroglyphs are mutilated. Also, the word
The nomen of Awibre Hor appears on the Hapy and Qebehsenuef vessels while the
993

de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 98-100, Figs. 230-233, 236, 239, 248, PL 138C
995
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 99, 100, PI. 138D; Dodson, "From Dahshur to
Dra Abu el Naga," p. 30.
996
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 102, 105, Figs. 246, 247; Dodson, The Canopic
Equipment, p. 32; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 30; "Canopic Jars and Chests," in D.B. Redford,
ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, I (New York, 2001), p. 232; Reisner, Canopies, pp. 11-14,
17-18, Pis. 14, 16.
997
Cron and Johnson, "De Morgan at Dahshur," p. 60; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894,
pp. 105, 125-128. Murnane does not discuss this seal because it does not have a double name. However,
he dismisses the occurrence of a coregency between these two kings, whose names both appear on a
faience plaque (Murnane, Egyptian Coregencies, p. 25).
998
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 42; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 30-31; After the
Pyramids, p. 14. For uses of this seal in Nubia after the reign of Amenemhet III, see S.T. Smith, Askut in
Nubia: The Economics and Ideology of Egyptian Imperialism in the Second Millennium B.C. (New York,
1995), pp. 70-71. See also Weill, La Fin du Moyen Empire, pp. 482-484.
994
249
prenomen is on those associated with Imseti and Duamutef.
The texts are found in
three columns on each jar and are similar in form to those of Sobekemsaf II of Dynasty
XVII.1000 Dodson notes that the quality of the detailing on the lids is much lower than
those found in the complexes of Senwosret I and Senwosret III of Dynasty XII, as one
might expect.1001
VIII.D. The Owner of the Tomb: Awibre Hor

Scholars know very little concerning the reign of Awibre Hor, who occupies
position 7.17 in the Turin King-List according to Ryholt's transcription. Only a handful
of other objects have been found outside of the location of the tomb, and most of these
are without provenience. In essence, it appears that Awibre Hor reigned for only a short
time, estimated by Ryholt at up to 1.5 years, and he may not have had the resources
necessary to build his own pyramid or may have died prior to its construction.
The nature of Awibre Hor's tomb in relation to other royal tombs of the Late
Middle Kingdom is unclear at this time. It could be the case that Awibre Hor's short
reign resulted in his tomb provisions being less elaborate than the other kings of the
period.1002 In fact, Kemp notes the similarity between the funerary equipment of this
king and the provisions of Dynasty XII court burials, implying the low political/economic
status of Awibre Hor.1003 It is possible that this ruler had a familial or ideological
connection to Amenemhet III, due to the placement of his tomb within this king's
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 31; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 319334.
1000
1001
1002
1003
Kemp, "Social History," p. 149. See also Williams, "Problems," pp. 108, 1224-1225.
250
funerary complex, making his burial in this location both symbolic and significant.1004 A
female member of the court, possibly a daughter of Awibre Hor (Nebhotepti), was buried
in the tomb next to his, continuing the Middle Kingdom practice of associating women
with the king in death.
Aufrere has argued that there were two kings by the name of Hor, who had the
prenomens }w-ib-rc (tomb) and Jwt-i'b-rc (Turin King-List 8.17).1005 He believes that the
first of these was a king of Dynasty XII between Senwosret III and Amenemhet III, while
the latter was a ruler dating to Dynasty XIII. His argument is based upon the location of
this tomb, the Nymaatre (the prenomen of Amenemhet III) seal on the canopic box of
Awibre Hor, art and writing styles, as well as sealings and a plaquette which he argues
puts these names in juxtaposition, indicating a chronological relationship amongst the
three kings. However, this evidence is not convincing, as the seals contain phrases
connected to the god, Re, (such as mn-kJ-nfrand hc-kc-rc) which may not necessarily
correspond to royal names.
The plaquette, however, is interesting, as it appears to
have the nomen Hor and one side and the prenomen Nymaatre on the other.1007 If these
kings were linked, it is unclear why the forms of their names would not match.
Aufrere argues that Awibre Hor (in discussion for Dyansty XII dating) would not
have chosen to be buried in the pyramid of Amenemhet III if the latter was buried at
Hawara, because he would not have been in the correct location for the cult of the earlier
1004
For a discussion on the question of whether or not additional kings had shaft tombs similar to that of
Awibre Hor, see Chapter 3, Section XI.C.
1005
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 1-41.
For a description of these seals and the argument that they are not royal, see Ryholt, Second
Intermediate Period, pp. 62-63. See also Hornung and Staehelin, Skarabden und andere Siegelamulette, p.
205, no. 69.
1007
Erman, "Miscellen," p. 143.
251
king, and the site had been abandoned after the first kings of Dynasty XIII.1008 However,
it should be noted that cultic activity continued to take place at the Dahshur Pyramid into
Dynasty XIII.1009
IX. The Tomb Model

A limestone, architectural model of a tomb was found by a German expedition,
that Di. Arnold directed, at the funerary complex of the Dynasty XII king, Amenemhet
III at Dahshur.1010 Though this object has often been overlooked in studies of the
pyramids, Di. Arnold had suggested that it is possible that the object dates to Dynasty
XIII.1011 The object appeared in a special exhibit held at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo
in 2003,1012 and that the model's plan clearly fits into the Late Middle Kingdom genre of
architecture, whether that includes the end of Dynasty XII or not.
Some scholars, including Di. Arnold, have at times attempted to argue that the
miniature tomb provides a schematic plan, presumably later modified, for the
substructure of Amenemhet Ill's pyramid at Hawara.1013 Meanwhile, others have stated
that the sand lowering system found in the model indicates that it belongs exclusively to
1008
Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," p. 11.

Do. Arnold, "Zur Keramik aus dem Taltempel der Pyramide Amenemhets III. in Dahschur," MDAIK
33 (1977), pp. 21-26.
1010
Di. Arnold and R. Stadelmann, "Dahschur: Zweiter Grabungsbericht," MDAIK 33 (1977), p. 16, PI.
13b.
1011
Di. Arnold, Amenemhet III, pp. 87-88, PI. 67. Other scholars, such as Ryholt {Political Situation, pp.
82-83); Stadelmann Agyptischen Pyramiden, p. 245), and Verner (Verner, Great Monuments, p. 69), allow
for the dating of this object to Dynasty XIII.
1012
Note that in the catalogue, the model is dated to Dynasty XII (Hawass, Hidden Treasures, p. 34).
1013
Di. Arnold, Amenemhet III, pp. 87-88; Building, pp. 9-10; Lehner, Pyramids, pp. 181, 227. More
recently, Di. Arnold has suggested that this object may be a "demonstration sample" (Di. Arnold,
Encyclopedia, p. 152).
1009
252
the Dynasty XIII corpus,
but the same exact system was used in the Hawara complex
indicating that this technology existed in the reign of Amenemhet III.1015 Nonetheless,
since the context of the model provides evidence that it is later than the valley temple of
this king, it is likely that this object dates to a reign after his death.
Figure 3.17. The tomb model from the funerary complex of Amenemhet
III at Dahshur. After Arnold, 1991, Building, Fig. 1.6.
Ryholt notes that Dynasty XIII monuments in the area (Ameny Qemau and the
For example, see Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 82-83, n. 254.

Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 134.
253
unexcavated tombs thought to date the this period) may have been planned and executed
from the pyramid complex of Amenemhet III at Dahshur, since this is the location where
the model was found, as well as being the site of the tomb of Awibre Hor.1016 The use of
Dynasty XII funerary installations and their associated towns was probably typical in the
construction of the Dynasty XIII mortuary complexes.1017 Thus, the fact that such a
model would be found in the confines of Dynasty XII funerary architecture is not
surprising.
Describing the plan of the tomb model is somewhat difficult due to the fact that
the rendering is schematic, not exact. Thus, one must take certain liberties, based on
knowledge gained from studying the other complexes, in order to interpret the
architecture represented in the model.
18
Since the Late Middle Kingdom tombs, which have features similar to this model,
always have the canopic niche to the south at the far end of the sarcophagus chamber,
while the coffin is near the antechamber, the entrance of the tomb represented by the
model would likely have been on the eastern side of the monument (Fig. 3.17).
The entrance, as shown here, has a staircase leading from the surface, descending
northward toward the substructure of the tomb (Fig. 3.17.A). From here, a doorway to
the east (Fig. 3.17.B) appears very small in comparison to the other components of the
tomb. This phenomenon must simply be interpreted as the language of the model. Most
likely the architects wished for the object to portray the layout of the tomb and its
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 82-83. See also Chapter 5, Section V.B.
8
The model is 0.36 m long by 0.11 m wide by 2.72 m in height (Hawass, Hidden Treasures, p. 34).
254
features rather than being an exact to-scale replica.

From the entrance, a corridor continues to the east until a turning chamber is
reached (Fig. 3.17.C).1020 The walls widen at this point and slots for the blocks of the
ceiling are visible. From this chamber, a staircase leads to the north (Fig. 3.17.D). Here,
one might have expected a ramped staircase. However, the size of the model, might have
precluded adding this detail.
At the end of the stairs, there is another turning chamber as the eastern wall
widens and another set of slots for the slabs of the ceiling blocks appears. The corridor
continues for a short distance to the west. At that point, there is a wooden portcullis
(symbolizing quartzite; Fig. 3.17.E), shown in its preburial niche. Though the receiving
niche across from this feature is not shown, one must assume that the shape of the model
has been abbreviated, as it has in the case of the turning chambers. Thus this portcullis
works in exactly the same way as the real ones in the Late Middle Kingdom tombs.
The passage continues at a higher level behind the portcullis stone, immediately
reaching a turning chamber (Fig. 3.17.F). From here the tomb continues to the south,
where there is a large, rectangular antechamber (Fig. 3.17.G). In the center of this floor,
there is an entrance to a corridor running south to the sarcophagus chamber (Fig. 3.17.H).
The sarcophagus itself is not shown, but entrances to two small rooms are found in the
floor and wall of the antechamber, leading to two small rooms beside the sarcophagus
chamber. Two doors then lead to the sides of the sarcophagus, forming the structure
1019
For the accuracy of the models as well as the nature of other types of structures such as houses and
estates, workshops, granaries, and ships, see Hayes, Scepter I, pp. 262-274; S. D'Auria, P. Lacovara, and C.
Roehrig, Mummies and Magic (Boston, 1988), pp. 112-116. Note that, in Figure 59, of the latter
publication, the people are taller than the building. The door, which is painted on one side, is much smaller
than they are.
1020
For the definition of "turning chamber," see Chapter 3, Section II.B.
255
needed to create a sand lowering system for lowering the lid of a sarcophagus (Fig. I-J).
As noted above, the size and appearance of aspects of the tomb model are not
identical to their life-sized originals. However, here, it is important to remember that this
model may have served as a general guide for the laying out of the limestone blocks at
the base of the excavated pit rather than being an exact blueprint for the details of the
tomb. Nonetheless, it is quite fortunate that this tomb model was found, as it adds a sixth
example to the corpus of royal Dynasty XIII tombs.
The location of the monument depicted in the model is unknown. It is possible
that someday one of the proposed sites (see section XL) or an unknown monument from
Hawara or Dahshur will be excavated and will match the design of this model. However,
it could also be the case that the tomb was never constructed at all and that it only
remained in the planning stages. Also, it is possible that the model was intended for
ritual purposes.1021
X. Characteristics of the Late Middle Kingdom Royal Funerary Monuments

The first person who attempted to define the characteristics of four of the Late
1 099
Middle Kingdom pyramids was Jequier in 1933.
In his generalized comparison of the
pyramids from South Sakkara and those of Mazghuna, Jequier commented on aspects
such as the use of bricks, general plan, portcullis type, quartzite sarcophagus style and
mechanics, and dashed "decoration." However, until the present study, there has been
neither a detailed description of all of these monuments in a single publication, nor a
1021
For the resemblance between this model and tomb S10 at South Abydos, see Chapter 4, Section IV.
Though these are not the same tombs, many of their architectural features, and a little over half of their
plans, are identical.
1022
256
comprehensive analysis of the similarities, which they share. Specifically defining the
nature of the corpus is imperative in order to determine whether or not further
monuments belong to the group and what certain trends may be significant in the
development of kingship in Dynasty XIII.
X.A. The Elements of the Superstructure

The visible components of the Late Middle Kingdom royal tombs are not
distinctly different from their Old and Middle Kingdom counterparts except for the use of
sinusoidal walls. The presentation here provides an overview of the plans of the aboveground portions of the royal funerary complexes from the Late Middle Kingdom.
There are several characteristics of the Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary
monument corpus that indicate that these structures were envisioned as pyramids whether
or not they were completed. First of all, the elaborate design of the brickwork above the
sarcophagus chambers would have been capable of supporting the considerable weight of
a significant superstructure. Outside of the brick core, there was to have been a fine
limestone encasement for each pyramid. In several cases, such trapezoidal encasement
blocks were found above flat foundation stones in trenches, where ritual deposits were
sometimes hidden. Also, pyramidions from such monuments have been found both in the
complexes (Khendjer and the "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara), as well as
elsewhere (Merneferre Ay in the Delta).
Around the pyramid structure, there w as to be one or two enclosure walls. In
some cases, these structures were first built in the form of sinusoidal walls. However, if
there was enough time before the death of the king, these temporary structures could be
257
replaced with more durable (niched facade) stone or whitewashed, mudbrick walls.
Sometimes, the foundations of these trenches included large, uncut natural boulders.
Even more tenuously built sinusoidal walls could appear around areas of
construction. These walls were poorly made, using bricks and brick parts to form the
general structure of the wall while adding mud plaster to fulfill the curved shape. 'It is
possible that these walls were used as an economical alternative to straight walls since
much stability could be obtained quickly using this shape with less bricks. The bricks of
these structures as well as those of the enclosure walls differed in size from those used in
the pyramids.
On the eastern side of the outer enclosure, there was often a temple or cult
structure. These constructions could be either limestone or mudbrick with the former
option having painted inscriptions. In the most complete examples with limestone
temples, a decorated (including a false door), northern chapel is also present. In both of
these structures, it is likely that there were statues of the deceased king.
Another common feature of the Late Middle Kingdom royal pyramids is the
presence of subsidiary burials. The monument of Khendjer has both a subsidiary
pyramid and shaft tombs with galleries in his complex, while the "Unfinished" Pyramid
also had a less elaborate shaft tomb. The other locations of these mortuary complexes
may also have had contemporary burials, but the excavation techniques of the times as
well as the interests of the expeditions often did not lead to investigations of the
surrounding areas where such tombs may be located (See section XI. Below).
The final feature of the Late Middle Kingdom royal tombs is a causeway or
road leading in the direction of the Nile Valley. Most of the time, such a feature is only
258
visible for a short distance from the tomb, and its destination cannot be determined. For
this reason, it is uncertain as to whether or not these tombs had valley temples or whether
some or all of these kings established their cults in their predecessors'monuments
nearby. It may be the case that such short causeways/roads are actually ramps used
during the construction process.
X.B. The Components of the Substructure

It is in the substructures of the Late Middle Kingdom royal monuments that this
corpus can truly be differentiated from those of other time periods. Thus, this
information is important to compile so that a standard may be set for determining whether
further monuments should be included in this group. Obviously, there is differentiation,
but the common characteristics and restriction in choices in specific elements provide one
with a clear idea of what a Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary monument should
encompass.
X.B.1. Layout
For the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara, the building of the substructure
began with the excavation of one rectangular trench for the sarcophagus chamber and
separate channels for each of the corridors leading to it. In the remainder of the
monuments, a single trench served to delineate the space for the entire structure. Here, it
was limestone blocks which were used to separate the individual components of the
tomb. In these monuments, bricks were used to support the limestone elements as well as
to outline the trench and control the surrounding sand (where applicable as some
259
pyramids were set into stone plateaus).

The entrance to the substructure of the Dynasty XIII monuments was somewhat
inconsistent. The most common side for the entrance was the east (subsidiary pyramid of
Khendjer, Ameny Qemau at Dahshur, North Mazghuna, South Sakkara, and the tomb
model from Dahshur) while a single example is present from the west (Khendjer) and two
from the south (Hawara and South Mazghuna). None of the monuments have entrances
on their northern side, possibly indicating that this area was deemed as being
inappropriate for it.
In some cases, the entrances to the tombs in the Late Middle Kingdom royal
funerary monuments were beneath the superstructure, meaning that the monuments
would have had to have been completed after the death of the king. However, in other
cases, the entrance was hidden under a portion of the encasement of the pyramid. It is
unclear at this point whether these choices were deliberate or whether they reflect the
status of the completion of the tomb at the time when the king died.
The structure of the staircases in the Late Middle Kingdom tombs is always the
same, with the exception of the tomb model (a factor of its size and purpose) and perhaps
the pyramid of Ameny Qemau. The stairs are normally narrow and shallow and are cut
into the limestone after it is in position. On either side of the steps, there is a narrow
ramp, which was likely used to slide the coffin and other heavy equipment down the
stairs with the use of men and ropes. At the tops of steps, some excavators noted ridges
or notches that could be used to help position the heavy coffin onto the stairway.
Interestingly, in a few complexes, this type of stairway was found outside the tomb,
which was made of mudbrick.
260
In some of the Late Middle Kingdom pyramids, there are passages hidden beneath
false floors in corridors with dead ends. The stones of the false floor could be removed,
revealing either a drop to the surface below or a staircase. Meanwhile, other hidden
passages were blocked by portcullises.
X.B.2. Portcullis Types

There are two types of portcullis stones that are always made of a hard stone,
most commonly quartzite but sometimes also granite. The first variety, Type A, is found
in every tomb and is positioned so that it blocks a hidden passage above the level of the
floor of the previous room (Fig. 3.7).1023 The large stone sits in a niche to the side of the
chamber housing it. The length of one side of the stone is positioned upon a gently
sloping ramp usually made of polished quartzite. The end is propped upon a piece of
limestone, which is often found in a small niche of its own. When the tomb was to be
closed, the limestone was smashed, allowing the stone to move down the ramp with the
aid of small levers. At the end of the ramp, there was a smaller niche in the opposite
wall, which housed the end of the stone. Thus, the base of the stone performed as the
ceiling of the portcullis chamber while blocking the rest of the tomb.
Type A portcullis stones were not randomly placed within the tomb. It is clear
from their positions that a certain plan was usually followed. In most of the tombs there
are two Type A portcullis stones (Khendjer main and subsidiary, Mazghuna North and
South, while the pyramid of Ameny Qemau had one Type A, one Type B, and one
portcullis that dropped from the ceiling, the tomb model had one Type A variety, and the
1023
Di. Arnold, Building, p. 223; Encyclopedia, p. 224.
261
unfinished monument at South Sakkara had three Type A and one Type B portcullis).
There seem to be several rules for the position of these portcullises. First of all, when
there is only one Type A portcullis, it is housed to the left of the corridor preceding it
(model and Ameny Qemau, though the plan of the latter may have originally had another
Type A blocking stone before the one mentioned here). If there are two or more
portcullis stones of Type A, they always alternate the sides from which they slide into
position. With two stones, the first normally sits in a niche to the right of the passageway
while the second is placed to the left (North and South Mazghuna, and Khendjer main).
The subsidiary pyramid at the complex of Khendjer is the exception to this rule with the
order being left and then right. It is possible that since this tomb was not meant for the
king himself that there was more flexibility with the arrangement. In the "Unfinished"
Pyramid at South Sakkara, there was one portcullis stone at the base of the ramped
staircase leading from the entrance and two along the same line closer to the sarcophagus
chamber. Their order alternated directions starting with the right.
In all of the tombs, except for the model and the pyramid of Ameny Qemau, there
is always a Type A portcullis located at the end of the entrance, often at the base of a
ramped staircase. In three of the tombs, two Type A portcullis stones are located along
the entranceway (Khendjer main and subsidiary and South Mazghuna) while the
"Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara has all of its Type A portcullis stones along the
same axis even though the first and the last two are separated by corridors leading in
other directions.
It is unclear why five of the tombs have two portcullises in close proximity to one
another and/or are along the same corridor. Also, often, one or both of these blocking
262
stones remained in its original position. Thus, it is likely that the placement of these
stones had some sort of religious significance related to the king's passage to the afterlife.
Though these "doors" never reached a state of consistency in their placement, there are
enough correlations to propose some religious significance in the architecture of the tomb
at this time.
The second portcullis style, Type B, is only found in tombs with sarcophagi of
Type 2 (see below). In each case, only one of these blocking stones is found. Tombs
containing this type of stone include the pyramid of Ameny Qemau at Dahshur, North
Mazghuna, and the secondary tomb in the ""Unfinished" Pyramid" at South Sakkara.
Type B is always located just to the north of the sarcophagus and has a pre-use niche to
the west with a receiving niche to the east. The portcullis slides horizontally with its base
at the level of the floor of the antechamber.
In the two cases where this type of portcullis seals the main burial, the large stone
blocks the sarcophagus chamber from the preceding corridor. However, in the
"Unfinished" tomb at South Sakkara, the portcullis, still forming the northern wall of the
chamber, is located at the opposite end from the passage leading to the burial. It seems
irrational to place the portcullis behind the burial. However, here, it may have been more
important that the structure of the burial chamber and the placement be directionally
sound (according to religious tenets) than that the security system would work in a logical
fashion.
Another interesting element in three of the tombs was the insertion of wooden
doors. In the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara, a single wooden door blocked the
extension of the first corridor from the rest of the tomb. A niche would have housed the
263
door when it was open in order not to block the path while a bolt secured it when closed.
Within the tombs of Khendjer and North Mazghuna, there is a small niche on either side
of the wall, indicating the presence of double doors. When these doors were open, they
fit into the niches and were flush with the walls. In the pyramid of Khendjer, the wooden
doors are located just prior to the second portcullis while in that of North Mazghuna, they
are found prior to the first. Both of these doorways are located at the base of a long
ramped staircase.
X.B.3. Sarcophagus Types

The core of each mortuary structure is similar in the complexes except for those
meant to receive two burials. In the pyramids of Khendjer, South Mazghuna, North
Mazghuna, Ameny Qemau, and the model, the approach to the tomb follows the pattern
of corridors leading to the north on the eastern side. From here, the hallway turns to the
west and then approaches the sarcophagus chamber from the north. In all of these tombs,
except for that at North Mazghuna, where there are additional passages, this core
structure is attached to the entranceway via a corridor running in that direction.
The type of sarcophagus found in the tombs of the Late Middle Kingdom has
often been recog nized.1024 In the main burial chamber, presumably meant for a king, the
sarcophagus always includes a niche for the coffin with a second for the canopic
equipment at the foot. Secondary and subsidiary burials have matching cases for these
components but are not usually found in the same block of stone. The preferred material
for the construction of the sarcophagus and its chamber was quartzite, though granite is
1024
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 27; "Strange Affair," p. 62.
264
also found occasionally. Due to the fact that the sarcophagi were architectural
components rather than free-standing objects, they do not have any decoration or
inscriptions.
The sarcophagus itself is always aligned so that the coffin within sits to the north
of the canopic niche. From Awibre Hor's tomb, it is clear that the king's head was meant
to be at the north end of the coffin, and, thus, the canopic equipment was located at the
feet. If a configuration prevented the canopic niche from being to the south of the feet of
the deceased person, then the canopic container would be positioned to the east of the
southern end of the coffin.
There were three basic types of sarcophagi found within the Late Middle
Kingdom royal tomb complexes. Type 1 is the most complex, requiring careful
engineering to accommodate the closing mechanisms. In this type, found at Khendjer's
pyramid, the "Unfinished" Pyramid, South Mazghuna, and the tomb model, the bottom
portion of the sarcophagus was made of a single giant slab of quartzite. The lid was
composed of two or three (Hawara and "Unfinished" Pyramid) large pieces of the same
material. In the two-piece lid variety, the section of the lid over the southern part of the
tomb would be fixed into place during construction. The underside of the stone was
usually convex in order to facilitate the placement of the canopic box and other
equipment into this end. Meanwhile, the second part of the lid was positioned above the
sarcophagus by propping it upon two quartzite support stones, one being one each side
(east and west).
The structure of the tomb provided for an antechamber to the north of the
sarcophagus. From the floor of this room, a small corridor led to the edge of the bottom
265
section of the sarcophagus. Thus, when the coffin was brought into the antechamber,
workers maneuvered it through the corridor and into the sarcophagus.1025 Once all of the
equipment was in place, a sand lowering system allowed the mobile section of the lid to
be positioned.
The sand lowering system in its form here first appeared in the pyramid of
Amenemhet III at Hawara, with three quartzite lid blocks.1026 In this type, the supports
holding the mobile part of the lid in its position above the base sit in a niche filled with
sand. To the east and west of the sarcophagus, there are small passages, which lead to the
antechamber or a side passage, either directly or through two corridors at right angles to
one another. These entrances to these passageways are usually in the floor of the rooms
or hallways, from which they originate. At the other end near the sarcophagus, there was
a limestone blocking stone preventing the sand from pouring into the corridor. When the
sarcophagus lid was to be closed, a man would have been sent into the corridors to
remove the block and the sand would have poured into the chamber. As the level of the
sand lowered, the supports and the lid would gradually have maneuvered until the lid
came to rest gently upon the base of the sarcophagus. Once in this position, there would
be no way to move the heavy lid.
The sarcophagus chamber itself was often made of hard materials like quartzite
and granite. However, there are cases where only limestone was used. The ceilings were
also limestone, being of the saddle variety. Above the roof, bricks were laid to fill in the
gap between the limestone and a series of brick arches used to keep the pressure of the
1025
Excavators have only found the coffin of Awibre Hor. Those from the pyramids are missing or were
not preserved. See Chapter 3, Section VIII.C.
Di. Arnold, Amenemhet III, pp. 86, n. 210; Building, pp. 75, 78; Encyclopedia, pp. 14, 134; Dodson,
"From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 26; Holzl, "Mazghuna," p. 474.
266
superstructure off of the ceiling.

The more complicated, "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara contained a
variation on the Type 1 sarcophagus in the main burial chamber. Here, the quartzite
sarcophagus was massive, requiring three stones for the lid. The placement of the
sarcophagus was along an east-west axis rather than the normal north/south.
Nonetheless, it was so large that the coffin fit within it sideways, keeping its north/south
orientation. The canopic niche was the east of the southern end of the coffin. This
sarcophagus also had four limestone supports in addition to the two granite ones used in
the sand hydraulic system. These softer supports were meant to have been destroyed
prior to triggering the closing device.
The Type 2 sarcophagus was found in the pyramid of Ameny Qemau, that at
North Mazghuna, and the secondary burial chamber of the "Unfinished" Pyramid at
South Sakkara. This variety is much simpler than that of Type 1 discussed above. In two
of these tombs (Ameny Qemau and North Mazghuna), the base of the sarcophagus is
made of a single slab of quartzite and has niches for the coffin and the canopic equipment
in the preferred positions. The lid was also made of a single piece of quartzite but was
less massive than those of Type 1. The undersides could be concave, and the ends had a
traditional rectangular form. Before the burial, the lid was housed in the antechamber to
the north. Once the coffin and other items were placed into the tomb, the lid would be
maneuvered over the sarcophagus, which was at floor level. Finally, the Type B
portcullis would be slid from the west, sealing the chamber as the lid was in contact with
the walls and inserted into niches and, thus, could not be removed.
Once again, the "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara has a variation of the
267
Type 2 sarcophagus in the secondary burial chamber. However, there are a few
interesting features. First of all, the canopic niche is not in the sarcophagus, but is in the
wall on the eastern side at the southern end. Secondly, the room for the lid and the
associated Type B portcullis stone are not found in the corridors leading to the chamber
but rather behind them. As discussed above, this strange configuration allowed for the
portcullis and the lid to lie to the north of the chamber as it does in the other examples.
Once the lid was in place, it blocked most of the space in the wall, where the canopic box
was kept.
The last sarcophagus group found in the Dynasty XIII royal tombs is Type 3.
This form, found in the subsidiary pyramid and possibly in the galleries of Khendjer's
complex, always has separate containers, made of quartzite or limestone, for the coffin
and the canopic material. The canopic box is found either to the south of the coffin or on
the eastern side at the southern end, following the pattern in the other types. In the
subsidiary pyramid of Khendjer, the lids of the two sarcophagi were flat and were
suspended in the air in a niche in the ceiling. They were supported by five or six pillars,
made of uniform limestone stacks of blocks, around the perimeter. Levers would have
been used to lower the lids.
XI. Other Proposed Sites1027

One of the greatest mysteries of the Late Middle Kingdom is the location of the
missing tombs of the numerous Dynasty XIII rulers. Scholars have identified a number
1027
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 80, n. 242; Swelim, The Brick Pyramid, pp. 18, 73-74; "Pyramid
Research from the Archaic to the Second Intermediate Period: Lists, Catalogues and Objectives," in
Hommages a Jean Leclant I: Etudes Pharaoniques, Bibliotheque d'Etude 106/1 1994), p. 343; Swelim and
Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 334.
268
of unexcavated mounds and out-of-context pyramidions as potential monuments of this

period. Though some of these structures provide little evidence of Late Middle Kingdom
activity, others are likely to be the sites of the burials of Late Dynasty XII/Dynasty XIII
rulers. Below, these possible locations for funerary establishments in both the Memphite
region and the Delta will be described and evaluated as to their relevance to the Late
Middle Kingdom royal corpus investigated in earlier sections (Fig. 3.18).
Figure 3.18. Map showing the locations of the potential Late Middle
Kingdom royal funerary monuments.
XI.A. The Memphite Region

The Memphite region is the most likely area in which to find Late Middle
Kingdom royal funerary complexes. It is here that the kings of Dynasty XII built the
majority of their monuments near the capital of Itjatawy.1028 Scholars have suggested
Grajetzki, Middle Kingdom, p. 74
269
that five sites within this region may have one or more Dynasty XIII monuments (from
north to south): Abu Roash, Abusir, Sakkara, and Dahshur.
XI.A.1. Abu Roash (Lepsius I)

Abu Roash is a site, located 9 kms north of Giza, with monuments dated primarily
to Dynasties I-V.1029 Here, a mudbrick pyramid (Lepsius I) is located near the edge of
the cultivation. Though Dodson originally theorized that this monument might belong to
the Late Middle Kingdom corpus,
Swelim has recently suggested that the tomb may
be a non-funerary pyramid from the end of Dynasty III.1031 Others believe that the
monument is a mastaba from the period when the site was most popular.1032 Thus,
Dodson has recanted his original theory and no longer attributes the structure to Dynasty
XIII.1033 It is unlikely that any Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary monuments were
constructed in this northern location within the Memphite region.
XI.A.2. Abu Ghurob

Abu Ghurob is adjacent to the site of Abusir to the south of Giza. Abusir is the
1029
M. Valloggia, "Le Complexe Funeraire de Radjedef a Abou Roasch: Etat de la Question et Perspectives
de Recherches," BSFE 130 (1994), 5-17; E. Chassinat, "A Propos d'une Tete en Gres Rouge du roi
Didoufri (IVe Dynastie) Conserve au Mussee du Louvre," Monumnets et Memoires Publies par VAcademie
des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 25 (1921-1922), pp. 53-75.
1030
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 43; Lepsius, Denkmdler Text (1897), pp. 21-22.
1031
Swelim, The Brick Pyramid, pp. 2-3, 80-87. These pyramids served as the locations of the cults of the
living kings of this period (H. Papazian, "Domain of Pharaoh: The Structure and Components of the
Economy of Old Kingdom Egypt," dissertation, University of Chicago (2005), pp. 101-108; S.
Seidelmayer, "Town and State in Early Old Kingdom: A View from Elephantine," in A.J. Spencer, Aspects
of Early Egypt (London, 1996) p. 122).
1032
For example, see I.E.S. Edwards, "Abu Roash," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of
Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), pp. 82-83.
1033
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 30, n. 63; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 31. See also
270
location of pyramids of the Dynasty V kings while Abu Ghurob contains at least two sun
temples, a special royal construction of the period.
As one might expect, the activity
at these two sites originates primarily from Dynasty V with occasional material from the
end of the Old Kingdom as well as the Middle Kingdom and the Late Period.
XLA.2.a. Lepsius XXVIII

Lepsius first identified pyramid XXVIII, located to the south of the valley
component of Neuserre's (Dynasty V) sun temple at Abu Ghurob and oriented to the
local directions.1035 In 1907, Borchardt opened test trenches in the vicinity of the mound,
which measures around 95 m on each side and was made of clay, brick, and limestone
fragments with some quartzite, granite and basalt.1036 Some of the sondages produced
late Old Kingdom tombs and Late Period faience fragments. This investigation also
revealed a possible Middle Kingdom dark, red-slipped sherd at the bottom of one of the
trenches, indicating that the mound could be associated with that time period. Due to this
evidence, as well as the appearance of the clay, Borchardt suggested that it was a
manmade mound. Later, however, a Czech geophysical study concluded that the mound
1034
F.W. Von Bissing, Das Re-Heiligtum des Konigs Ne-user-Re I (Berlin, 1905); Ricke, H. Das
Sonnenheiligtum des Konigs. Beitrage zur agyptischen Bauforschung und Altertumskunde herausgegeben
von Herbert Ricke 7 (Gottingen, 1965).
1035
Lepsius, Denkmaler Text (1897), pp. 137-138; Denkmaler aus Aegypten undAethiopien, Blatt I (Berlin,
1897), PI. 32. L. Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Konigs Neuserre (Leipzig, 1907), pp. 6, Fig. 3, PI. 2; L.
Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Konigs S'AAHu-rea, Wissenschaftliche Veroffentlichung der Deutschen
Orient-Gesellschaft 14 (Leipzig, 1910), pp. 147-148, PI. 142; V. Maragioglio and C. Rinaldi, L'Architettura
Delle Piramidi Menflte 7 (Rapallo, 1970), PL 5. Note that Dodson refers to these pyramids as being at
Abusir (A. Dodson, "Two Thirteenth Dynasty Pyramids at Abusir?," VA 3 (1987), p. 232). For an aerial
photograph, see H. Ricke, Das Sonnenheiligtum, frontispiece.
1036
L. Bares, "Note to the Thirteenth Dynasty at Abusir," VA 4 (1988), pp. 117-118; Borchardt,
Grabdenkmal, p. 147, PL 142; Dodson, "Two Thirteenth Dynasty Pyramids," pp. 231-232.
271
was natural.1037
More recently, Dodson proposed that Lepsius XXVIII may date to Dynasty XIII,
though he was cautious in making the Late Middle Kingdom identification, noting that
this monument could be related to Neuserre's sun temple.1038 Bares also exercises doubt
concerning this date for the mound and proposes that this area may have served as the
deposit site of clay removed to construct Late Period shaft tombs around 1 km away.
However, according to this same scholar, Verner noticed connecting walls at the southern
and western sides of the mound in 1987, indicating that this feature is unlikely to be
natural.1040 Nonetheless, in a later article, Dodson notes that Verner has since dismissed
the hypothesis that this monument belongs to Dynasty XIII altogether.1041 Though the
mound labeled Lepsius XXVIII may display some of the aspects of Late Middle
Kingdom tombs in its composition, it is likely related to the Dynasty V activity in the
vicinity.
XI.A.2.b. Lepsius XVI

In the area between the sun temples of Neuserre and Userkaf at Abu Ghurob,
there is a second square mound, which Dodson considers to be a possible Dynasty XIII
pyramid.1042 This structure measures approximately 75 m on each of its four sides and is
1037
M. Verner, "Excavations at Abusir: Season 1978/1979-Preliminary Report," ZAS 107 (1980), p. 169;
M. Verner and V. Hasek, "Die Anwendung goephysicalischer Methoden bei der archaologischen
Forschung in Abusir," ZAS 108 (1981), pp. 75-76. For this theory and additional scholars' ideas with
references, see Bares, "Abusir," pp. 118, 120, n. 118. See also Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 80, n. 242.
1038
Dodson, "Two Thirteenth Dynasty Pyramids," pp. 231-232.

Bares, "Abusir," p. 118.
1040
Bares, "Abusir," p. 118.
1041
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 39, n. 28.
1042
Lepsius, Denkmaler, Blatt (1897), pp. 130-131, 138; PI. 32; Dodson, "Two Thirteenth Dynasty
Pyramids," p. 231; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 31.
1039
272
aligned according to the local directions. It is made up of bricks and small limestone
chips, and it sits in the desert near the line of cultivation, a characteristic, which Dodson
identifies as common in the Dynasty XIII corpus.
In response to Dodson's argument, Bares states that the location of Lepsius XVI
is much like those of the sun temples of Userkaf and Neuserre and that one might expect
another sun temple in this area.1043 Nonetheless, he does give more credence to the
possibility that this mound might be a pyramid of the Middle Kingdom than he does with
regard to Lepsius XXVIII even though there are no walls or ceramic vessels to
corroborate this conclusion. In the end, it is very unlikely that this monument represents
a Dynasty XIII royal funerary establishment, not only due to the lack of evidence
pointing to such an identification, but also the monument's size, which does not fit the
two ranges found in the Late Middle Kingdom structures (52-56 m and 91-105 m).
XI.A.3. South Sakkara

Sakkara, located to the west of the Early Dynastic Period and Old Kingdom
capital of Memphis, is a site with royal activity in Dynasties II-VI and VIII-IX and
private patronage throughout ancient Egyptian history. The Dynasty XIII, king Khendjer
as well as another unknown ruler from the Late Middle Kingdom chose to construct their
funerary monuments at the southern extent of this site (southwest of Memphis proper).
XLA.3.a. SAK S 3
One hundred meters to the north of the pyramid of Khendjer, the Free University
1043
Bares, "Abusir," pp. 118-119. See also Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 82.
273
of Berlin expedition, including Alexanian, Schiestl, and Seidelmayer, identified the

remains of a pyramid, which had not been completed.1044 Only the substructure remains
with its entrance on the eastern side. The sand-filled pit is 25 by 20 m with 2 m-wide
piles of debris, composed of sand; brick fragments; and quartzite and limestone chips,
surrounding it. Though this site had little diagnostic pottery, it is likely to be a Late
Middle Kingdom royal funerary monument.
XI.A.3.b. Lepsius XLV (SAK S 5)

Jequier reported that Lepsius XLV (about 70 m on each side), which is located to
the west of that of Khendjer and north of the "Unfinished" Pyramid, may also date to the
Late Middle Kingdom.1045 The debris around the site contained bricks, and there was
also a sinusoidal wall visible at the time he was there, but he was unable to find a tomb.
In 2006, the Free University of Berlin survey team was unable to find any signs of a
pyramid in this area, and they were unsure as to the function of the monument Jequier
had described.
Nonetheless, it is possible that this monument that no longer visible
from the surface. If it can be relocated, perhaps excavation may reveal that its features
have become covered.
XLA.3.C. SAK S 7
To the south of the southeastern corner of the "Unfinished Pyramid" at South
1044
Alexanian, et al., "The Necropolis of Dahshur Excavations Report Spring 2006;" Schiestl, "Neues zur
1045
Jequier, "Rapport 1929-1930," p. 111. Note that Swelim mistakenly lists this pyramid using Lepsius'
number for that of Khendjer (XLIV instead of XLV) (Swelim, "Pyramid Research," p. 343). He refers to it
as the "Demolished Pyramid."
1046
Schiestl, "Neues zur Residenznekropole," p. 48.
274
Khendjer
"Unfmishedlgl
Pyramid
Senwosret III
Sakkara
El
H Lepsius L
13
Sneferu(Red)
Amenemhet II ^*
la
Lepsius LIV
Dahshur
Sneferu (Bent)^*
g|]
Amenemhet III
(Awibre Hor)
DAS 2 H
DAS 17 B
a
Ameny Qemau
North
a
1
I km
Mazghuna
-.South j
Figure 3.19. Map showing the location of known and selected potential Late
Middle Kingdom royal pyramids at Sakkara, Dahshur, and Mazghuna. After
Dodson, From Dahshur
to Dra Abu el Naga, p . 26.
275
Sakkara, there is a sunken, sandy area measuring approximately 25 by 28 m surrounded

by spoil heaps with lengths of 55 m.1047 Schiestl suggests that this ruined monument may
have been a pyramid with 52.5 m sides, making it 100 cubits. Interestingly, there was an
accumulation of quartzite fragments in the northeast corner of the monument, and
Dynasty XIII ceramics were found.
XI.A.4. Dahshur
Dahshur was first used as a royal cemetery during the reign of the Dynasty IV
king, Sneferu, who built two pyramids at the site (Fig. 3.19). Later, three Dynasty XII
rulers, Amenemhet II, Senwosret III, and Amenemhet III each constructed their own
mortuary complexes around and between the Old Kingdom monuments. The southern
part of the site is the location of the pyramid of the Dynasty XIII king, Ameny Qemau,
discussed in a previous section, while Awibre Hor of the same era was buried within the
walls of the pyramid enclosure walls of Amenemhet III. It was in this complex, that an
architectural model of Late Middle Kingdom style royal tomb substructure was also
discovered. Since Dahshur represents the center of the field of known Dynasty XIII
pyramids, this site is very likely to house additional Late Middle Kingdom royal
monuments and tombs.
Below, the proposed positions of such structures, which have
been noted by multiple scholars in the past, will be reviewed.
Alexanian, et al., "The Necropolis of Dahshur Excavations Report Spring 2006;" Jequier, Fouilles a
Saqqarah, PI. 1; Schiestl, "Neues zur Residenznekropole," pp. 46-47.
1048
Dodson suggests without explanation that Sobekhotep IV may have had a pyramid in the
Dahshur/Sakkara area (Dodson, Monarchs, p. 70).
276
XI.A.4.a. Lepsius LIV

The first potential Dynasty XIII royal funerary site at Dahshur is located
approximately 125 m to the southeast of the pyramid of Amenemhet II (Fig. 3.19).1049
This location is made up of a mound of limestone debris, measuring about 40 m square, a
causeway, and the eastern side of a sinusoidal enclosure wall.1050 Even without
excavation, the appearance of this last component suggests that this tomb likely dates to
the Late Middle Kingdom.
Interestingly, it was at Lepsius LIV that an Egyptian Inspector by the name of
Moussa discovered a small fragment of limestone containing the cartouche of an
Amenemhet.1051 There are three likely possibilities as to the identity of this king out of
those with the same name. The relief may refer to Amenemhet IV or an Amenemhet of
Dynasty XIII, making this tomb datable to late Dynasty XII to early Dynasty XIII. The
fragment, however, could have actually come from the tomb of Amenemhet II, meaning
that the owner of Lepsius LIV is still unknown.1052 Unfortunately, several scholars have
noted that this area was severely impacted when an oil pipeline was installed in 1975, and
1049
Di. Arnold and R. Stadelmann, "Dahschur. Erster Grabungsbericht," MDA1K 31 (1975), p. 174; Fakhry,
Pyramids, p. 217; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 184; Lepsius, Denkmdler Text (1897), p. 207; Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 82; Stadelmann, Agyptischen Pyramiden, p. 249; R. Stadelmann and N. Alexanian, "Die
Friedhofe des Alten und Mittleren Reiches in Dahschur. Bericht uber die im Friihjahr 1997 durch das
Deutsche Archaologische Institut Kairo durchgefflhrte Felderkundung in Dahschur," MDAIK 54 (1998), p.
313.
1050
Di. Arnold and Stadelmann, "Erster Grabungsbericht," p. 174; Stadelmann, Agyptischen Pyramiden, p.
249. Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 41; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 27; After the Pyramids,
p. 8. See also Swelim, "Pyramid Research," p. 343, n. 316.
1051
Di. Arnold and Stadelmann, "Erster Grabungsbericht," p. 174; Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el
Naga," p. 39, n. 36; Swelim, "Pyramid Research," p. 343, n. 316.
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 27, 39, n.27; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 82, n.
252.
277
it may no longer be possible to excavate this important site.1
XI.A.4.b. Lepsius LV
Dodson originally noted that Lepsius recorded monument LV as being a 30 m
square of debris, making up a stone pyramid.1054 Dodson thought that this monument
was not known currently and that it, like Khendjer and others, had been mistaken as a
stone structure (rather than being stone encased brick). However, Dodson later stated
that this monument (a mastaba) actually belongs to Saiset of Dynasty XII.1055 Thus,
Lepsius LV is definitely not a Late Middle Kingdom pyramid.
XI.A.4.C. DAS 2
To the northeast of the tomb of Ameny Qemau (250 m), there is an unexcavated
pyramid, discovered by Di. Arnold and Stadelmann, who thought it might date to
Dynasty XIII (Fig. 3.19).1056 The remains of this monument measured approximately 20
by 20 m. The pyramid clearly had had a limestone casing surrounding the mudbrick
core, with the subsurface being made up of limestone, quartzite, and granite. Such
components would suggest that this debris may indeed represent a royal monument
dating to the Late Middle Kingdom, even though ceramics, which would support this
Dodson, After the Pyramids, p. 8; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 184; Stadelmann, Agyptischen Pyramiden, p.
249.
1054
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 41; Lepsius, Denkmdler Text (1897), pp. 207-208.
Dodson, "Two Thirteenth Dynasty Pyramids," p. 231, n. 232; The Canopic Equipment, p. 30, n. 63;
Porter and Moss, Topographical Bibliography III (2), p. 898; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 80, n. 242.
1056
Di. Arnold and Stadelmann, "Erster Grabungsbericht," p. 172, Abb. 3; 174; Stadelmann and Alexanian,
"Die Friedhofe," pp. 312, 313, Fig. 311. See also Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," pp. 36, 41; "From
Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29; After the Pyramids, p. 13; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 187; Porter and
Moss, Topographical Bibliography III (2), p. 890; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 81-82; Swelim, "Pyramid
Research," p. 343.
278
dating, have not been found. Ryholt has proposed that this tomb may belong to one of
Ameny Qemau's relatives including his father, son, or nephew (according the Ryholt's
chronology: Sekhemkare Amenemhet V, Hotepibre Saharnedjeritef, or Sankhibre
Amenemhet VI) due to its proximity to his pyramid.1057
It is important to note that the dimensions of DAS 2, as they now stand, are
smaller than those of the subsidiary pyramid in the funerary complex of Khendjer at
South Sakkara. It is likely that this debris mound represents only the location of the
substructure pit rather than the entire monument, which may never have been begun.
Otherwise, it would have been difficult to construct the winding corridors of the Late
Middle Kingdom royal tomb type, as defined in this study, within the confines of such a
small superstructure. If it is the case that this monument is encompassed completely by
its visible remains, then the plan of the substructure likely differs substantially from what
one might expect and may be difficult to identify as a royal tomb of this period without
inscriptional evidence.
XI.A.4.C. DAS 16
An unexcavated pyramid, which was first identified by Di. Arnold and
Stadelmann and may date to Dynasty XIII, lies just to the west of DAS 2 (Fig. 3.19).1058
The remains include some brick as well as the outer outline of a substructure with many
similarities to that of Ameny Qemau, including an entrance on the eastern side. Materials
visible on the surface included limestone, quartzite and diorite. It is very likely that this
1058

Stadelmann and Alexanian, "Die Friedhofe," pp. 312-313, Figs. 311, 319, PL 352.C.
279
tomb belongs to the Late Middle Kingdom corpus.

Despite the fact that this tomb is more likely to be a Late Middle Kingdom royal
pyramid than DAS 17 (below), the former has been overlooked due to the fact that Di.
Arnold and Stadelmann did not publish it with the other two in 1975. It is not until
Stadelmann and Alexanian describe the details ofJDAS 16 and their doubts about DAS 17
that the situation becomes clear. However, it should be noted that almost all of the
summaries of the Late Middle Kingdom monuments were published prior to this later
article, and so most refer only to DAS 2 and 17.
XI.A.4.e. DAS 17
According to Stadelmann, DAS 17 is a poorly preserved formation located on a
plateau at Dahshur and is 30 by 37 m.1059 The area is heavily pitted without any defined
areas or certain fragments of limestone from architecture. Unfortunately, this monument
has been used for military exercises, and it is likely that if there was any significant
architecture here, it is now heavily damaged. Nonetheless, the surveyors were least
certain regarding the nature of this site of the three suspected of dating to the Late Middle
Kingdom at Dahshur. Ryholt surmises that this tomb could belong to either Sekhemkare
Amenemhet, Hotepibre Saharnedjeritef, or Sankhibre Amenemhet based on his theory
that the first is the father of Ameny Qemau, whose monument is nearby while the second
and third are his son and nephew, respectively.1060
1059
Stadelmann and Alexanian, "Die Friedhofe," pp. 313, Fig. 311; Di. Arnold and Stadelmann, "Erster
Grabungsbericht," p. 172, Abb. 3; 174; Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," pp. 36, 41; "From Dahshur to Dra
Abu el Naga," p. 29; After the Pyramids, p. 13; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 187; Porter and Moss, Topographical
Bibliography III (2), p. 890; Swelim, "Pyramid Research," p. 343.
1060
280
XI.A.4X Lepsius LIX

From the description of Lepsius LIX, scholars such as Dodson and Swelim have
proposed that it may belong to the Dynasty XIII corpus of royal tombs.
The exact
location of pyramid LIX is unknown due to the fact that Lepsius originally placed the site
to the- east of a village called Dahshur, later correcting it to west, and that there are
several towns known by this name.
Lepsius described pyramid LIX as a site with a dark mudbrick shadow, measuring
roughly 58 m on each side, in the shape of a square in line with the cardinal directions.
He remarked that the pyramid was located around 300 m from the cultivation, a
measurement common with the funerary monument of Ameny Qemau and the structures
at Mazghuna, and that it was in the vicinity of a dike. In the area around this debris, there
was a large circular mound of limestone chips. The complex included a 50.00 m-wide
causeway, a queen's pyramid like that of Khendjer and buildings to the north and
southwest, the latter having a trail leading to the pyramid, as well as some other ruined
structure, which could not be identified.
Swelim and Dodson attempt to show that North Mazghuna is the likely choice for
Lepsius LIX using the details in the survey as well as comparisons with the known
monuments of the Late Middle Kingdom.1063 The main argument for the correlation is
the distance of 300 m between the pyramids and the cultivation and the fact that there is a
Coptic cemetery nearby Mazghuna. Lepsius had mentioned that there was a modern one
close to site LIX. All the other features are missing from North Mazghuna, and these
1061
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 30, n. 63; Swelim, "Pyramid Research," p. 343.
Lepsius, Denkmaler Text (1897), pp. 209, PL 243.
1063
1062
281
scholars explain that the debris could have been removed while some structures may have
been covered by more recent activities. Nonetheless, there are so many missing features
that one must be cautious until further research can be undertaken at the site of Mazghuna
and elsewhere.
XI.A.4.g. Possible Court Cemeteries DAS 46, 49-52

In the 1.50 km zone between the pyramid of Ameny Qemau and its surrounding
monuments and those at South Mazghuna, there is a distinct change in the geography as
the landscape is made up of elevated areas cut periodically with wadis forming narrow
peninsulas that run from southwest to northeast.1064 Until recently, this area had never
been surveyed, but investigation produced many sites with Dynasty XIII pottery. Many
of these locations likely contain the tombs of Late Middle Kingdom elite. However, it is
possible that some larger tombs are pyramids.
DAS 46 is the first in the southern geographic zone of Dahshur. At this location,
the slopes of the wadi contained granite and quartzite fragments, possibly indicating the
presence of a structure above.1065 Unfortunately, neither pottery nor an indication of any
architecture was found.
Located to the south of DAS 46, DAS 49 is a round, 12 m diameter pit containing
limestone fragments, brick debris, and a Late Middle Kingdom sherd.1066 Down toward
the wadi to the north, the surveyors found quartzite, granite, basalt, which may have
1064
Alexanian, et al., "The Necropolis of Dahshur Excavations Report Spring 2006;" Schiestk "Neues zur
1065
Alexanian, et al., "The Necropolis of Dahshur Excavations Report Spring 2006."
1066
282
originated from a structure in the area. Whether or not DAS 49 and this area DAS 49/1
were connected is unclear. Since the data is not overwhelmingly convincing that there
was a Late Middle Kingdom pyramid in this area, it is likely that private (mastaba) tombs
could have occupied this particular region.
DAS 50, which is located on the next ridge to the south of DAS 49, seems to be a
grouping of elite tombs with Dynasty XIII pottery. 7 Three sizes of pits were found in
the area, including those ranging from 11-12, 6-9, and 4-6 m in diameter. In some cases,
surveyors could see brick debris and limestone.
The next ridge to the south houses both DAS 51 and 52 as well as a quarry.1068
Both were between 8.5 and 10 m in diameter, and DAS 52 had visible bricks. It is likely
that these monuments were mastabas belonging to officials of Dynasty XIII.
The discussion of the likely private tombs above has been included in this
discussion of possible Late Middle Kingdom royal tombs due to the fact that none of
these sites have been investigated archaeologically. Since, scholars are not yet sure as to
the nature of all royal tombs from this period, it cannot be stated with certainty whether
or not some of the locations above may contain small pyramids or even mastabas of the
weaker rulers of the period. It is also possible that these tombs belonged to elite officials
and family members of Ameny Qemau, and perhaps even to other unknown rulers with
pyramids in the area as well as the owners of the pyramids at Mazghuna to the south.
Certainly, an investigation of these small monuments would provide a great deal of
insight as to the identity of the kings, who built tombs in the surrounding regions, the
7
68
Residenznekropole," pp. 51-52.
283
existence of more pyramids in the areas nearby not surveyed, and the development of the
private and royal cemeteries overall at this time.
XI.A.4.h. DAS 53
On the southern-most, L-shaped ridge at Dahshur, there is a potential Dynasty
XIII pyramid.1069 This 20 m monument stretches over most of the crest of the ridge. If a
traditional royal tomb stood here, it would have looked as though it formed the top of a
much larger structure, due to the continuation of the pyramidal lines of the slopes below.
Here, limestone fragments, brick debris, and Dynasty XIII pottery were found within the
extensive spoil heaps and in the wadi below. Schiestl and his colleagues believe that this
site was the most likely of all of those they surveyed at Dahshur to have been a Late
Middle Kingdom royal pyramid. However, it is also likely that the tomb was a large,
private mastaba and was a part of the cemetery possibly connected to both known and
unknown pyramids of Dynasty XIII.
XI.A.5. Lisht
Another possible location for a Dynasty XIII royal funerary monument is Lisht,
the site of the royal necropolis of the first two kings of Dynasty XII located near their
new capital at Itjatawy.1070 Here, a son of Khasekhemre Neferhotep I, Wahneferhotep,
and an official, Bener, had funerary monuments near the pyramid complex of Senwosret
Amenemhet I may have begun to construct a pyramid at Sakkara before moving the capital to Itjatawy
and building the monument at Lisht (Do. Arnold, "Amenemhet I," p. 20, n. 102; Silverman, "Non-Royal
Burials"),
284
I. Thus, Hayes proposed that Neferhotep I may also have had a tomb in this area.1071 At
this point in time, no scholars have proposed specific sites as being the possible locations
of Dynasty XIII pyramids at Lisht. Nonetheless, there are also wooden statues of a king
found near the enclosure wall of the pyramid of Senwosret I at Lisht, which can possibly
be attributed to the reign of one of the early Dynasty XIII kings since they are similar to
the style of the reign of Amenemhet III.1072 Aldred has suggested that these objects are
cult statues, which may indicate that one of the first few rulers of the dynasty had a
funerary monument nearby.
XI.A.6. el-Lahun
To the southeast of Hawara near the entrance to the Faiyum, the Dynasty XII
king, Senwosret II constructed a pyramid complex. During the excavations of this site,
an ostracon naming another pyramid, Sekhem Ameny (shm-imny), was found.1073 This
same name is also found inscribed into the stelae of Khentiemsemt of unknown date (BM
839).1074 It is unclear whether or not these inscriptions refer to a Dynasty XIII
Amenemhet (Ameny being a shortened version of the name). Nonetheless, since some of
the later kings seem to have used Dynasty XII monuments as the headquarters for the
construction of their tombs located nearby, and the associated town of Kahun survived
Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 50. See also Grimal, History, p. 184.
Aldred, Middle Kingdom Art, pp. 137-138.
1073
W.M.F. Petrie, et al., Lahun II (London, 1923), p. 13, PI. 49; Ryholt, "Royal Names," pp. 108-109.
Sekhem Senwosret refers to the mortuary temple of Senwosret I at Lahun. See S. Quirke, "Gods in the
Temple of the King: Anubis at Lahun," in S. Quirke, ed., The Temple in Ancient Egypt (London, 1997), p.
29; Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 18, 29, 224-226, 290.
1074
Note that Ryholt discusses another stela (BM 569, Sahathor), which is dated to Amenemhet II that lists
a shm-imnw. He believes that this site is different from the one in the el-Lahun ostracon (Ryholt, "Royal
Names," p. 108). Note that BM 839 has the determinative for both a pyramid and a pyramid city while BM
568 only had that of a pyramid (E.A.W. Budge, Hieroglyphic Texts from Egyptian Stelae &c, in the British
Museum 2 (London, 1912), pp. 6, 8, Pis. 7, 20). See also Helck, Zur Verwaltung, p. 248.
1072
285
well into Dynasty XIII, it is possible that a Late Middle Kingdom royal tomb lies in this
area.
XI.A.7. Hawara
Grajetzki has proposed that the tombs of Amenemhet IV and Nefrusobek may be
located near the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara.1075 However, there is no specific
evidence that these last kings of Dynasty XII were buried within monuments at this
location.
XI.B. Delta
The search for the missing Dynasty XIII royal tombs has led some scholars to
locations within the Nile Delta. In the Late Middle Kingdom, this region had no
traditional royal cemeteries, and a new circumstance had to arise to inspire rulers to
construct their funerary monuments here. One option is that an individual ruler without
ties to the previous royal family desired to be buried near the locations of his own
ancestral origin. Also, fragmentation within the state could have prevented certain kings
from having access to the Memphite necropolis. Below, sections will provide the
analysis of the rather scant evidence for Late Middle Kingdom tombs in two regions in
the Delta.
XI.B.1. The Tell el-Dab'a Region

Tell el-Dab'a is an important site located in the eastern Delta. Established early
1075
Grajetzki, "Zwei Pyramiden," pp. 23-27.
286
in the Middle Kingdom,
this city (Avaris) became the capital of the Asiatic states
ruled by Dynasties XIV and XV. Three pyramidions, two of which certainly were found
in this area, have lead some scholars to propose that Khataana, located to the west of Tell
el-Dab'a, may have been the location of a royal necropolis of Dynasty XIII.
Unfortunately, however, there is evidence that objects such as statues of Nefrusobek and
Qemau Saharnedjeritef were taken from Memphite temples, possibly during raids by the
Hyksos, to Avaris.1077 Thus, tombs may also have been violated at this time, including
the pyramidions discussed below.
XLB.l.a. Pyramidion of Merneferre Ay

A portion of a granite pyramidion of Merneferre Ay was discovered at Khataana.
Some scholars believe that there may have been a Dynasty XIII cemetery in this area,
including an undiscovered pyramid of this king.1078 However, this pyramidion, which
certainly dates to Dynasty XIII, was more likely removed with the destruction of a
funerary monument in the Memphite region to the south, possibly at the hands of the
M. Bietak, "Avaris and Piramesse, Archaeological Exploration in the Eastern Nile Delta," Proceedings
of the British Academy, 65 (London, 1979), p. 228; "Canaanites," p. 43; "Connections," p. 19; The Capital
of the Hyksos, pp. 5-6, 19, 31; M. Bietak, et al., "Neue Grabungsergebnisse aus Tell el-Dab'a und 'Ezbet
Helmi im ostlichen Nildelta (1989-1991)," A&L 4 (1994), pp. 26-24; Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, p.
114; W.A. Ward, "Foreigners Living in the Village," in L.H. Lesko, ed., Pharaoh's Workers: The Villagers
ofDeir el Medina (Ithaca, 1994), p. 61. For evidence that earlier kings actually founded this town, see Z.E.
Szafranski, "Limestone Relief Fragments from Tell el-Dab'a," Proceedings of the Seventh International
Congress of Egyptologists (Leuven, 1998), pp. 173-175.
1077
Bietak, "Tell ed-Dab'a, Second Intermediate Period," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 779; Habachi, "Importance," pp. 459-460,468-470;
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 214, n. 737; Ryholt, "Hotepibre, a Supposed Asiatic King in Egypt with
Relations to Ebla," BASOR 311 (1998), p. 3; Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 4, no. 8.
1078
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 43; The Canopic Equipment, p. 36, n. 90; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu
el Naga," p. 32; Habachi, "Importance," pp. 471-474, 478, 558; Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 52;
Kemp, "Social History," p. 153; Swelim, "Pyramid Research," p. 343.
287
Hyksos.1079
It is interesting to note that the pyramidion of Merneferre Ay, who had the longest
known reign of Dynasty XIII at thirteen or twenty-three years, as well as other of these
structures from the Delta were small and easily transported in relation to that of Khendjer
and the two from the "'Unfinished' Pyramid" at South Sakkara.1080 Thus this king, who
reigned relatively late in Dynasty XIII, must have had a funerary monument notably
smaller than these structures at South Sakkara. Such a monument may have been one of
the proposed pyramids discussed above or an unknown structure in the Memphite region.
XI.B.l.b. Pyramidion from Ezbet Rushdi

Another pyramidion was found at Ezbet Rushdi.1081 This capstone was made of
basalt and provided evidence that it had once been covered with a thin sheet of metal.1082
As in the case of the pyramidion of Merneferre Ay, this object has also led some to
believe that another Dynasty XIII pyramid may have once rose above the area.1083
However, it is also likely that this object found its way to this region when the Hyksos
removed it from its original location.1084
1079
Dodson, After the Pyramids, p. 15; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 436; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen,
pp. 59, 73. Ryholt argues that a Dynasty XIII necropolis could not have been located here due to his
chronological reconstruction in which Dynasty XIV began at the end of Dynasty XII, giving the Late
Middle Kingdom rulers no access to the eastern Delta (Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 80, 82, n. 254).
1080
Habachi, "Importance," p. 478.
1081
Habachi, "Importance," pp. 474-476.
Rossi notes that Middle Kingdom pyramids have pyramidions made of dark stones, a reason why this
particular example might be placed in this group (Rossi, "Note," p. 221).
1083
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 43; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 32; Habachi,
"Importance," pp. 478, 558; Swelim, "Pyramid Research," p. 343; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of
Ameny-Qemau," p. 334, n. 379.
1084
Dodson, After the Pyramids, p. 15.
288
XLB.l.c. Pyramidion (Anchor) from Unknown Provenience

A partial pyramidion, measuring 60 cms in height, is now located at the Egyptian
Museum in Cairo though its origin is unknown.1085 The limestone pyramidion had been
cut into an anchor, leaving only three decorated sides intact. One side is blank while the
other two each show a god seated on a throne including Anubis and Re-Horakhty.
Though Nibbi dates this original object to Dynasty XVIII, Swelim has included this
architectural feature in his list of possible Late Middle Kingdom funerary structures at
Khataana.1086 However, it does appear that this object derives from the New Kingdom,
as it does not have the same structure or style as the other Dynasty XII and XIII
pyramidions.
XI.B.2. Athribis
In 1800, Napoleon's team of artists observed and noted a fully preserved pyramid,
which they discovered at the site Athribis in the southern part of the Delta.
Though,
presumably, only the subsurface remains at this time, Rowe was able to relocate the
structure in the late 1930's.1088 However, he did not complete any excavations. More
recently, Dodson has suggested that this pyramid might belong to the Dynasty XIII royal
1US5
A. Nibbi, "A Half Pyramidion," GM56 (1982), pp. 57, 61, Pis. Ia-IIb.
Swelim, "Pyramid Research," p. 343, n. 318.
1087
Anonymous, "Instructions Donnes par l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres en sa Seange du
Vendredi 7 Octobre 1859 a Auguste Mariette sur les Principales Recherches a Executer en Egypte dans
l'lnteret de l'Histoire et de l'Archeologie," ASAE 2 (1901), p. 115; Commission and d.s.e.a. d'Egypte,
Description de I'Egypte, ou, Recueil de observations et des recherches qui ont etefaites en Egypte pendant
1086
Vexpedition de Varmee francaise, publie par les ordres de Sa Majeste I'empereur Napoleon le Grand V
(Paris, 1809), PI. 27; C. Lenormant, et al., "Instructions Donnees par l'Academie des Inscriptions et BellesLettres en sa Seance du Vendredid 7 Octobre 1859 a Auguste Mariette sur les Principales Recherches a
Executer en Egypte dans L'lnteret de L'Histoire et de l'Archeologie," ASAE 2 (1901), p. 115; Verner, Great
Monuments, p. 436.
1088
A. Rowe, "A Short Report on Excavations of the Institute of Archaeology, Liverpool at Athribis (Tell
Atrib)," ASAE 38 (1938), p. 524.
289
funerary corpus.
The identification of this pyramid with Dynasty XIII must remain very tenuous at
best. It is quite odd that the pyramid represented in the Napoleonic drawing is so wellpreserved, as it is shown in a complete form. If this was the true nature of this monument
in the 1800's, it is very unlikely that it would date to Dynasty XIII, as it would be the <
best-preserved funerary structure of the Middle Kingdom. Also, it would be the only
certain finished monument of Dynasty XIII, meaning that a king would have had ample
time to complete the structure during his reign. It seems unlikely that an enduring king,
who might have enjoyed considerable power, would have chosen such a non-traditional
tomb site in the Delta. Until excavations provide more substantial evidence, it is
necessary that the dating of this pyramid be approached with caution. In fact, Verner has
proposed that this structure may have been a non-funerary, step pyramid from the early
Old Kingdom like those found at Elephantine and Abydos (Sinki) as well as other
sites.1090 Alternatively, Dodson has suggested the possibility that this structure might be
of Ptolemaic date like much of the rest of the site1091 while Ryholt adds that there is
nothing to show that this structure was a pyramid or a royal structure nor is there any
indication that dated to Dynasty XIII.1092
1089
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 43; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 32.
Verner, Great Monuments, p. 173. These pyramids served as the locations of the cults of the living
kings Huni and Sneferu (H. Papazian, "Domain of Pharaoh," pp. 101-108; S. Seidelmayer, "Town and
State," p. 122).
1091
1092
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 80, n. 242. Note that a late Dynasty XII/Dynasty XIII royal statue head
has been found at Kom el-Hisn, showing that there was royal activity in this region, though no signs of a
royal cemetery are at this site. See Silverman, "Royal Head with White Crown," in Z. Hawass,
Tutankhamun. The Golden King and the Great Pharaohs (Washington, 2008), p. 90.
1090
290
XI.C. The Missing Tombs

From the discussion of the excavated and potential sites for the Late Middle
Kingdom royal tombs above, a pattern emerges that can allow one to establish a set of
assumptions regarding the missing monuments. It is clear that the zone for Late Middle
Kingdom tombs is similar to that for pyramids of Dynasty XII proper, extending from
South Sakkara in the north to the entrance to the Faiyum in the south with largest
concentration in the Sakkara/Dahshur region.
The Dynasty XIII kings clearly desired to locate their tombs in the vicinity of the
Dynasty XII royal cemeteries, likely for both economic and political reasons. Existing
pyramids and their associated workforces allowed for the planning, building, and staffing
of the new royal tomb and the cult of the deceased king. Meanwhile, ideological ties to
the powerful Dynasty XII kings served to legitimize the reigns of the relatively weak
rulers who followed.
More than likely, the largest of the Late Middle Kingdom pyramids are already
known. The pyramidion of Merneferre Ay indicates that even in his 13 or 23 year long
reign, he was only able to construct a relatively small funerary monument. Thus, many
pyramids from this period may be so small that they are misinterpreted as mastabas or
other more minor constructions. Thus, it is important that, in the areas outlined above,
archaeologists must search for small monuments meeting the profile of Late Middle
Kingdom tombs.
At Thebes, there is a religiously significant site with a royal lineage in the form of
the tombs of the Dynasty XI rulers and the possible initial monument of Amenemhet
291
I.
In fact, a statue from Kamak mentions the Mansion of Millions of Years of
Sobekhotep IV. Thus, some scholars believe that this structure, as well as an associated
tomb may be located nearby.1094 However, at this point, no funerary monuments of
Dynasty XIII kings have been found in the Theban region.
Ryholt and Dodson have suggested that the lack of Dynasty XIII royal tombs for
the majority of the more than fifty kings of the period may be the result of a revolvingdoor mortuary practice.1095 Ryholt elaborates that families may have used the same tomb
and/or that usurpers may have left portcullis stones and sarcophagi open so that they
could clear the tombs and reuse the structures as their own pyramid complex.
Meanwhile, Dodson suggests that the erasure of Khendjer's names from the Osiris bier at
Abydos may provide evidence for the hostile usurpation of this king's monuments.1096 It
is possible that some monuments were begun by one king and then finished by another or
occupied by another. However, some of the tombs, which remained open, those at North
Mazghuna and the "Unfinished" Pyramid at Sakkara, contained no elements, which
would suggest that they had been used, much less reused (mummy fragments, wood, etc.)
if the excavators' reports are to be believed. Thus, until additional research is undertaken
at these and the other sites, one must assume at this date that some of the tombs of
Dynasty XIII kings remained unused.
Scholars have also suggested that the tomb of Awibre Hor may provide a model
Do. Arnold, "Amenemhet I," pp. 5-48; Silverman, "Archaism and Innovation." For views against the
ownership of this tomb by Amenemhet I, see Brovarski, "False Doors"; Grajetski, Middle Kingdom, 29-30.
1094
E. Delange, Statues Egyptiennes du Moyen Empire, p. 68; Habachi, "Vizier Iymeru," p. 263, Fig. 262;
von Beckerath, "Theban," p. 23. See also von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 73.
1095
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 35; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 81.
1096
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 35, n. 86; Monarchs, p. 68.
292
for the funerary installations of many of the kings of Dynasty XIII.
It is assumed that
many kings did not have the time or resources to build large tombs,1098 being buried on
the grounds of their royal ancestors (through blood or ideology) instead. However, it
must be remembered that practically unknown kings, such as Ameny Qemau and
Khendjer, built pyramids near the beginning of their reigns. More affluent rulers-like
Sobekhotep III, Neferhotep I, and Sobekhotep IV should have monuments, yet no tombs
have been attributed to them, though some have suggested that the second of these was
buried at Lisht.1099 Other monuments may lay undiscovered at South Sakkara and
Dahshur.1100
XII. Conclusions
The known tombs of the kings from the time of Amenemhet III at Hawara
through Merneferre Ay of Dynasty XIII developed from an earlier prototype during
Dynasty XII. However, during the Late Middle Kingdom the architectural characteristics
of the tombs are relatively standardized. Except in the case of the "Unfinished" Pyramid
at South Sakkara, one of two types of sarcophagi are found within each tomb (this
pyramid has both). These monuments also have quartzite portcullis stones which, when
closed, hid the entrances to the corridors. Staircases composed of shallow steps with
ramps on either side are also common. The superstructures of the monuments, which
were more complete, included a brick pyramid and subsidiary structures such as
encasement walls (some being sinusoidal), a small pyramid, chapels, and possible
1097
Aldred, Middle Kingdom Art, p. 136; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 333.
Dodson, Monarchs, p. 67.
1099
Grimal, History, p. 184; Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 50.
1100
Verner, "Pyramid," p. 94.
1098
293
causeways. The characteristics of these monuments can then be compared to the visible
properties of the sites thought to belong to this known corpus. Though some can be
eliminated based upon their descriptions, others would have to be excavated to confirm
that they belong to this group of pyramids.
294
Chapter 4
The Late Middle Kingdom Royal Tombs at South Abydos
I. Introduction
An area of Abydos known as Umm el-Gaab was the location of the tombs of the
first kings of Upper and Lower Egypt. As time progressed, the ancient Egyptians came
to identify this site as the final resting place of the divine ruler of the dead, Osiris, who
they believed had been the first regent of the state. Around the beginning of the Middle
Kingdom, rulers began to expend great resources at Abydos, including the construction of
ka chapels within the enclosure walls of the Osiris Temple, in order to experience a
greater relationship with this god.1101 They also cleared and restored some of the ancient
royal tombs, including those of Den and Djer of Dynasty I.1102 The latter monument
contained the Osiris bier, a basalt work displaying the deceased god on a funerary bed
flanked with falcons. Amelineau, who discovered the object, suggested that it indicated
that this monument was the site of the symbolic tomb of Osiris known through ancient
texts.1 03 Though a debate ensued over this interpretation,1104 scholars today generally
accept this Early Dynastic structure as the tomb of Osiris of later times.
Leahy, Osiris 'Bed,' p. 433; D. O'Connor and D.C. Patch, "Egypt's Sacred Sands: Exploring the
Tombs and Temples of Ancient Abydos," Archaeology 54 (2001), p. 46. For ka-chapels of the Old
Kingdom at Abydos, see O'Connor, "The Status of Early Egyptian Temples: An Alternative Theory," in B.
Adams and R. Friedman, eds., The Followers ofHorus. Studies Dedicated to Michael Hoffman (Oxford,
1992), pp. 84, 87, 92-93, 96; E. Brovarski, "Abydos in the Old Kingdom and First Intermediate Period, Part
II," in D.P. Silverman, ed., For His Ka, Chicago, 1994, pp. 16, 18-21.
1102
Dreyer, "Abydos, Umm el-Qa'ab," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient
Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 112; Wegner, Mortuary Temple, p. 6.
1103
Amelineau, Tombeau, pp. 109-115, Pis. 102-104.
V. Loret, "Le tombeau d'Osiris," Sphinx 5 (1902), pp. 34-52; Amelineau, Tombeau; "Le Tombeau
d'Osiris: Reponse a l'Article de M. Loret," Sphinx 5 (1902), pp. 234-246; V. Loret, "Un dernier mot a
propos du tombeau d'Osiris," Sphinx 5 (1902), pp. 247-248.
295
fC !. 1 t " . V . i . )
i icn !m.'v'i 0*lll!i.
,N
i a
500 m
,>- Vmm
**
'*
SCU\% O H . i l l '
t'l-(itinh
s ! Plinth-. uS'shc fn*.*
Complex
Îkm&ifh'. ^tsd sMttfroW

h>Si^ u f U s l u s t
S9andS10-
<_,
lill'|N>K
>
f .' f EpiC\
loir'.i
urni.i.
Illih lU-M-ri ( lilts i
Figure 4.1. Map of the site of Abydos including the mortuary complex of
Senwosret III, tombs S9 and S10, and the site of Umm el-Gaab. After
Wegner 2006, p. 9.
During the Middle Kingdom, private pilgrims also placed their mark on Abydos
when they traveled great distances in order to witness the annual Festival of Osiris, which
centered upon the temple, a sacred road, and the tomb of the deity.
05
They established
their own, cenotaphs, or symbolic tombs and stelae at the "Terrace of the Great God"
(rwdn ntr 9) near the Kom el-Sultan that they too might become associated with this god
in the afterlife.1106
1105
W. Helck, "Die Herkunft des Abydenischen Osirisrituals," Archiv Oriental 20 (1952), pp. 72-85;
Geschichte, p. 117; Leahy, "Protective Measure," pp. 55-59; S. Quirke, Ancient Egyptian Religion (New
York, 1992), pp. 52-62, 85; Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," pp. 50-56, 58-59, 6768.
1106
D. O'Connor, "The 'Cenotaphs' of the Middle Kingdom at Abydos," Melanges Gamal Eddin Mokhtar,
1985); "Abydos, North, ka Chapels and Cenotaphs," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of
Ancient Egypt (London, 1999), pp. 101-102; Simpson, Terrace of the Great God; Simpson, "Twelfth
296
In the reign of Senwosret III, the royal worship of Osiris reached a new pinnacle,
as the king himself built a tomb at South Abydos to the east (local south) of the site of the
funerary structures of the first kings, including that now associated with this deity (Fig.
4.1). Though Senwosret III had built a pyramid complex at Dahshur, it is likely that he
was actually buried in his large, hidden, underground tomb at South Abydos.1107 This
structure was located beneath a natural pyramid in the cliffs, referred to as the "Mountain
of Anubis" (dwi'npw), which may have served as the precedent to the Gurn in the Valley
of the Kings during the New Kingdom.
This complex included a town and a valley
temple, in which the decoration emphasizes the connection between the deceased king
and the god Osiris.1109
Senwosret Ill's mortuary activity at the site of Abydos provided a Middle
Kingdom precedent for the use of this ancient royal cemetery by some of the following
Dynasty," p. 456; J. Wegner, "Abydos," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 1
(Oxford, 2001), pp. 9-10; "Cenotaphs," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 1
(Oxford, 2001), pp. 247-248.
1107
Di. Arnold, "Cult Complexes," p. 80; The Pyramid Complex of Senwsoret III; E.R. Ayrton, et al.,
Abydos, Part III (London, 1904), pp. 11-13, 18-20, 22-28; Wegner, "Burial Place of the Third Senwosret?,"
pp. 60, 69-71; "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," pp. 140-282, 357-380, 388-401; "Nature and
Chronology," p. 257; "Cenotaphs," p. 246; Mortuary Temple, p. 393; "Excavations at the Town."; "A
Middle Kingdom Town at South Abydos," Egyptian Archaeology 17 (2000); "The Organization of the
Temple NFR-KA of Senwosret III at Abydos," A&L 10 (2000), pp. 83-125; "The Town of Wah-Sut at
South Abydos: 1999 Excavations," MDAIK 57 (2001), pp. 281-308. Weigall had suggested that Senwosret
III was buried temporarily at South Abydos before his body was moved to his tomb in Dahshur. Wegner,
Mortuary Temple, pp. 5, n. 7; Weigall, Guide to the Antiquities.
1108
J. Wegner, "Seat of Eternity," Archaeology 54 (2001), pp. 58-59; Mortuary Temple, pp. 6, 17-18, 21,
32-33; J. Wegner and M. Abu el-Yazid, "The Mountain-of-Anubis: Necropolis Seal of the Senwosret III
Tomb Enclosure at Abydos," in E. Czerny and A. Schwab, eds., Timelines: Studies in Honour of Manfred
Bietak, 1 (Dudley, MA, 2006), pp. 419-435.

1109
Wegner, "Excavations at the Town," pp. 4, 34; "Organization of the Temple," p. 86; "Abydos," p. 11;
"Institutions and Officials at South Abydos: An Overview of the Sigillographic Evidence," CRIPEL 22
(2001), pp. 77, 81, 85; "The Town of Wah-Sut," p. 281; "The Archaeology of South Abydos," Expedition
48 (2006); "Hidden", pp. 15-22 ; "Echoes of Power: The Mayor's House of Ancient Wah-Sut," Expedition
48 (2006); Mortuary Temple, p. 19.
297
CLIFFS
Senwosret III
?M
111
*****$ H
S10
--r-fcB^^T
I I
S9
A(VkAAA*%ftAi*W\AAWj
J8 T
Sfei
WKfi* n*WOK*
lUli I -JL-i
u
Figure 4.2. Weigall's plan of S9 and S10 in relation to the tomb of Senwosret III.
After Ayrton, 1904, PI. 36.
298
rulers.
Interestingly, Bresciani has noted the existence of a possible Dynasty XIII
chapel, belonging to Khaankhre Sobekhotep II, between the temples of Ramses II and
Sety I at Abydos.1111 However, though fragments of this monument were recorded in
sketches by Giuseppe Acerbi in 1829, and small pieces of it may be located in museums
(Louvre, Leiden, and Amherst), the structure itself has not been recovered
archaeologically.
The Dynasty XIII royal funerary monuments in the Memphite region are located
in the vicinity of the Dynasty XII pyramids. In this time period, there was not only a
geographic connection to the monuments of the Dynasty XII (and even Old Kingdom)
rulers but also a desire to adhere to the royal tradition of locating these tombs near the
capital, then at Itjatawy. There is also a sense that some Dynasty XIII kings attempted to
legitimize their reigns by copying and tying themselves to their successful predecessors,
especially in the construction of their mortuary structures. As was shown in the last
chapter, one king, Awibre Hor, was buried in a shaft tomb within the pyramid complex of
Amenemhet III at Dahshur.
At South Abydos, "mastabas" S9 and S10 are located to the north (local
southeast) of the tomb of Senwosret III.1112 S9 is the closest to the Dynasty XII tomb,
while S10 sits a little further to the west (local northwest). These two monuments were
1110
It is also possible that this trend began in the reigns of Amenemhet IV and Nefrasobek at Abydos as
well as the Memphite locations.
1111
E. Bresciani, "Un Edificia di Kha-Anekh-Ra Sobek-Hotep ad Abido," EVO 2 (1979), pp. 8-17. See
also Leahy, "Protective Measure," p. 59, n. 80; Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," pp.
133, 384; Mortuary Temple, p. 16.
S9 and S10 are located at South Abydos and are not a part of Peet's Cemetery "S," which is a part of
North Abydos (Peet, Abydos Cemeteries, pp. 30-47, Fig. 1).
299
excavated in 1901-02 by the twenty-one year old Arthur Weigall,
who was working
under the aegis of Petrie in the Egypt Exploration Society project.111 He was the first to
excavate a tomb of this type, and, thus, had no parallels to which to refer. Therefore, the
date of these tombs as well as their significance went unnoticed for about ten years.
In 1912, Mackay recognized the fact that the sarcophagus at South Mazghuna and
that of S9 at Abydos were practically identical.1115 Thus, it is difficult to understand why
scholars failed to make a connection between these structures and the corpus of Late
Middle Kingdom royal funerary monuments from that point until Wegner began to
reanalyze the area in 1994.1116 Through further research and work with the primary
sources, it has become even more apparent how similar these monuments actually are.1117
Thus in this chapter, Weigall's excavations will be outlined, and the general arguments
for investigating the site further will be noted. Data from my excavations at S9 will also
be discussed. Finally, the justification for including S9 and S10 in the royal mortuary
corpus of Dynasty XIII will be presented.
1113
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, pp. 11, 13-16.

J. Hankey, A Passion for Egypt: A Biography of Arthur Weigall (New York, 2001), pp. 26-31; B J.
Kemp, "Abydos," in T.G.H. James, ed., Excavating in Egypt: The Egypt Exploration Society 1882-1982
(Chicago, 1982), pp. 80, 82.
1115
1116
O'Connor, "North, ka Chapels and Cenotaphs," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of
Ancient Egypt (London, 1999), p. 106; Wegner, "Burial Place of the Third Senwosret?," p. 60; "A Study of
Middle Kingdom State Activity," pp. 133, 381-383, 386, 388.
This connection was more completely developed in a paper presented at the American Research Center
in America's annual meeting in Baltimore in 2002 (D. Landua-McCormack, "Evidence for Dynasty XIII
Royal Mortuary Activity at South Abydos," Paper presented at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the American
Research Center in Egypt, Baltimore, Maryland, 2002). See also D. McCormack, "The Significance of
Royal Funerary Architecture in the Study of 13th Dynasty Kingship," in W.V. Davies, ed., The Second
Intermediate Period (13th-l 7th Dynasties), Current Research, Future Prospects (London, Forthcoming).
1114
300
II. WeigalPs Excavations of S9

Prior to Weigall's excavations at S9 in 1901-02, Amelineau had begun clearing
this tomb.1118 However, he abandoned his efforts before reaching any architecture due to
the fact that sand poured incessantly into the excavations, causing him to be uncertain
that his effort would be rewarded sufficiently with the finds below. Later, Petrie gained
an interest in the tomb and eventually assigned Weigall to excavate the crater within the
mounds of debris in 1901-02. Unfortunately, the excavations of S9 and S10 were
recorded in only a few pages in a book on the expedition's work at Abydos.
19
Also, the
plans of the site were roughly made as the detailed measurements and mapping were left
for the following season led by Currelly, who claimed that he did not have the time to
devote to this task. Thus, Weigall reports that, "the hasty plan.. .does not pretend to be
very accurate."1120 In this plan and the text, the measurements have all been rounded to
the nearest half-foot. Thus, in this discussion, these rough measurements have been
converted into the metric system with the realization that they are probably far from
accurate.
II.A. The Elements of the Superstructure

Weigall excavated a portion of the features of the superstructure of S9, while
focusing primarily upon the subsurface components. In the publication of S9, Weigall
describes a rectangular enclosure wall, which he believed was filled with sand and
pebbles and was possibly covered with bricks, though none were found in this position
1118
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, pp. 11, 13.

Ayrton, st&l, Abydos III, pp. 11, 13-16, Pls.36-38.
1120
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. 21, n. 21. For additional issues with the plan, see Wegner, Mortuary
Temple, pp. 365-367.
1119
301
(Fig. 4.2). m i He believed that the superstructure was in the form of a mastaba. Several
m to the east of the enclosure wall, Weigall found a sinusoidal wall, which he describes
as a "frontage."1122 He also suggested that a courtyard may have existed in front of the
tomb.
II.B. The Components of the Substructure

Weigall noted that S9 had been built by the, now familiar, method of excavating a
large pit, into which the quartzite sarcophagus and limestone passages were set.
He
reports that the average limestone block size had dimensions of 1.23 by 0.91 by 0.76
m.1124 Generally, the tomb had been completely emptied, and much of the subterranean
architecture, especially the roof, had been destroyed.
The entrance to the tomb, which was located in the local east, had a three-sided
retaining structure with a brick floor to the east of it (Fig. 4.3.A).1125 The walls were
about 2.44 m tall and were whitewashed on the sides visible from the entrance. A brick
staircase, which is not shown in the plan, descended from the surface to the tomb in one
corner.
This area, which was about 3 m below the surface, was hidden when
architects filled it with sand after the deceased owner of the tomb had been placed inside.
The substructure of the tomb was not as elaborate as that in other royal
monuments dated to the Late Middle Kingdom, though it does have many familiar
1m
1122
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. 14.
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. 14, PL 36.

1123
Ayrton, et al, Abydos III, p. 13.
1124
In Egyptian architecture, blocks used for building monuments were usually of varying sizes (Arnold,
Building, p. 122). The same is true for S9.
1125
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. 14, Pis. 37, 38.
1126
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. 14, PI. 37.
302
characteristics. The entrance itself had been roofed with a vaulted ceiling made of a
single slab of limestone, measuring 2.43 by 3.5 m.1127 From this point, a corridor gently
descends around 7.62 m (1.07 m wide) toward the west until it ended at a quartzite
portcullis (around 3.05 by 1.52 by 1.52 m; Fig. 4.3.B-C).
Figure 4.3. The substructure of S9 at South Abydos. The symbol indicates local
north. After Ayrton 1904, PI. 37.
The portcullis blocked a passageway, found at a higher level, measuring 1.23 m in

length (Fig. 4.3.D).1128 This corridor ended in a turning chamber, measuring 2.13 by 3.05
m (Fig. 4.3.E). A section of the flooring of this room could be removed from its 13 cm
1127
1128

Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, pp. 13-14, Pis. 37, 38.
303
supports, allowing one to enter a hidden passage below (Fig. 4.3.F). This corridor was
10.67 m long and extended toward the north before turning to the west for about a m
(Fig. 4.3.G). Then, the passageway led to the north again for about 3.05 m (Fig. 4.3.H).
Weigall believed that a limestone blocking stone may have been placed in this position,
but he did not include it in the plan. Finally, the hallway turned again to the west (3.66
m) and then to the south (3.05 m, Fig. 4.3.1-J). Here, there was a smaller quartzite
portcullis (1.83 by 0.38 m, Fig. 4.3.K), after which the corridor narrowed and continued
at a slightly lower level for 2.13 m (Fig. 4.3.L), ending at the sarcophagus lid (Fig.
4.3.M). The outside of the sarcophagus was roughly hewn while the interior surfaces
were finely finished but uninscribed and undecorated, and the sarcophagus chamber was
composed of limestone blocks.
The sarcophagus had a base, made up of a single piece of quartzite (4.28 by 2.74
by 1.83 m), while the lid was composed of two blocks of the same material (Fig. 4.3.MN).1129 The container had a coffin niche, measuring 2.74 by 0.91 by 1.52 m, with a place
for the canopic box to the south (0.61 cms on each side). The fixed section of the lid
(3.81 by 1.22 by 0.91 m) at the south had a rounded end that extended beyond the line of
the sarcophagus base. It was thicker from the tip of this curve until it met the base. From
this point on, where the funerary material would have been placed within, the lid was
hollowed out and had a convex shape on the interior side. The northern part of the lid
was mobile prior to the burial and measured 2.74 by 1.83 by 2.13 m.
Like in many of the Memphite tombs, there was a small corridor leading from the
floor of the passageway east of the burial chamber to the sarcophagus (Fig. 4.3.0). In S9,
1129
304
this area was just less than 3 m long and was 0.51 m wide and 0.61 m tall.1130 Though
Weigall did not understand the sand lowering system, he did suggest that the stones
holding the sarcophagus lid in the air would have been broken with the use of this
passageway after the coffin had been placed inside.
Interestingly, both the portcullis stones as well as the sarcophagus lid were closed
in S9. As will be shown below, this tomb was certainly occupied. However, much of it
had been destroyed when people from an unknown era broke through the limestone
1111
ceiling of the monument.
In fact, they removed much of the roofing stones and some
of the upper regions of the walls. Once they found the sarcophagus, the "robbers" were
able to break a hole through it where the two lid components met. From here, they were
able to remove the body and the funerary items, and Weigall noticed that some remnants
of the contents were burned.
III. Weigall's Excavations of S10
If it were not for S9, S10 would probably remain an unknown example of Late
Middle Kingdom royal funerary architecture. As far as is known currently, this
monument, which is located roughly 35 to 40 m to the local north and slightly west of
S9,
132
is much simpler and/or wrecked than the others discussed previously.
Nonetheless, there are still specific, more significantly diagnostic markers as to the date
of this tomb.
1UU

Note that Weigall's map shows these two tombs to be much farther apart than reported here. For these
computations, a new map of the monuments and their craters was used. The actual direction is southwest.
1131
305
III.A. The Elements of the Superstructure

Like in S9, the tomb itself had been covered with sand and pebbles, possibly
making a mastaba-like feature, but it was in the form of a mound of sand around a crater,
when Weigall began his excavations.
Passing over the limestone substructure near the
entrance to the tomb from north to south, there is a brick wall measuring 0.91 m tall (Fig.
4.2). To the north of the area where this wall crosses the entrance, there are two
whitewashed walls running from west to east with a space of 7 m between them. Since
there was a brick surface in this area, Weigall suggested it was the site of the offering
cult.
In the text of the report, Weigall recalls finding another whitewashed (on the
eastern side) brick wall 2.74 m to the west of the one described above.1134 However, he
does not include this feature on the plan, so the purpose of this structure is unclear.
Nonetheless, there was another wall further to the west, which may have delineated the
back of the tomb structure. This wall was thick and short and seemed to have lacked any
connections with the walls to the east.
About 19.81 m to the east of S10, there is a whitewashed, mudbrick structure
measuring 11.28 by 3.66 m.1135 Weigall referred to this feature as a "platform." He
presented no evidence as to why he believed this feature is related to S10 (such as brick
sizes and composition), but the orientation of the structure does seem to match that of the
tomb. The exact nature and purpose of this mass of bricks remains unknown. Near the
location of this platform, magnetometry has revealed a brick-lined ramp filled with
1,33
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, pp. 14-15, Pis. 36-37.

Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. 15, Pis. 36-37.
1135
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. 15, PI. 36.
1134
306
limestone debris.1
III.B. Components of the Substructure

The entrance to the tomb was located on the eastern side (Fig. 4.4.A).1137 Brick
walls extended out from either side- of the entrance with a brick floor between them. At
the eastern end of this room, there was a staircase, made up of six deep steps that
extended from the surface just to the south of the chamber into its north end.
From the entrance, the floor of the limestone passage sloped downward gradually
1 1 TO
(Fig. 4.4.B).
The corridor was 1.07 m wide and ran for 7 m toward the west until it
came to a room, which was poorly preserved (2.4.C). Though the northeastern corner
appears to be displaced in the plan, this room was likely to have been a turning chamber.
A section of the floor in this room was false, and hid the entrance to a ramped staircase,
leading 7.92 m to the north, below (2.4.D). The shallow stairs were 0.51 m wide with
ramps measuring about 0.28 m. At the end of the steps, the passage turns to the west and,
after descending at an angle for a few m, dead ends at a portcullis (Fig. E-F). This
quartzite blocking stone has the exact measurements of the first of those of S 9 (3 by 1.52
by 1.52). The passage continues behind the blocking stone until it reaches the burial
chamber (Fig. G). Here, Weigall found a flat, out-of-context, quartzite sarcophagus lid,
lying northeast/southwest (Fig. H). It is likely that the sarcophagus originally sat below
the level of the floor. Weigall proposed that this object had been made of limestone and
had been broken apart, but he cited no evidence to support his theory. More recently,
1136

Ayrton, et al, Abydos III, p. 15, Pis. 37, 38.
1138
1137
307
Wegner has suggested that a field of quartzite debris near the temple of Senwosret III
may be the remains of the base of this sarcophagus.1
H.-
Figure 4.4. The substructure of S10. After Ayrton 1904, P1.37.

It is unclear whether or not the sarcophagus lid represents the primary interment.
The missing burial chamber, which was often composed partly of heavy quartzite blocks,
308
would likely have been the first section of a Late Middle Kingdom royal tomb to have
been finished. In the pyramid of Ameny Qemau, hasty modifications in the entrance to
the tomb seem to suggest that this section was not yet completed at the time of the death
of the king, but the burial chamber appears to have been finalized. Thus, in the future, it
is hoped that careful excavation of S10 may result in new clues, which may shed light
upon the nature of the burial chamber and the corridors leading to it. If the small room is
a chapel, it is likely that the original sarcophagus chamber is located directly to the west
as it is in S9.
In the area around the sarcophagus lid, Weigall found calcite canopic jar
fragments.1140 These vessels had standard spells, which were written in mutilated
hieroglyphs like those of Awibre Hor. It is unfortunate that Weigall did not find the
name of the person buried in the tomb; Awibre Hor's canopic jars had his name upon
them.
IV. Problems with WeigalPs Plans

There are some significant problems with Weigall's plans of S9 and S10 that are
apparent after the analysis of the Late Middle Kingdom tombs in the Memphite region.
These potential errors are, no doubt, due to Weigall's inexperience as an excavator in
Egypt as well as the fact that he did not construct the plan from measurements taken for
that purpose (see Section II. above). Also, it may be the case that the architectural
remains were extremely fragmentary, and, since these monuments were the first of the
Late Middle Kingdom royal tombs to be excavated, Weigall may not have had the tools
1140
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, pp. 15, 19; Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," p. 382.
309
he needed to understand them.

In Weigall's plan of S9, there are three major problems (others will be discussed
in the section concerning the re-excavation of this tomb). The first of these is an issue
pertaining to the quartzite portcullis stone in the first corridor. Weigall believed that this
stone had been lowered from the ceiling.1141 However, as one could see from the other
six examples of these monuments (including Hawara), this pattern only occurs once in
the pyramid of Ameny Qemau at Dahshur, in which a modification had been made to the
plan. Instead, the portcullises are usually encased in a niche in one of the limestone
walls.
As one might recall, the portcullises in the Late Middle Kingdom tombs usually
work using the same technique (See Fig. 3.7). The large quartzite stone sits in its niche,
with one side at the edge of a ramp, usually made of a polished piece of quartzite. The
blocking stone is held a little above horizontal by another stone that prevents it from
sliding down prematurely. Once the burial was complete, the stone holding up the large
block would have been knocked out, allowing the quartzite stone to proceed down the
slope, presumably with the aid of levers.
There was a second, smaller niche in the opposite wall. As the stone slid down
the ramp, it would finally come to rest with one end in this niche, stretching across the
corridor, the final end remaining in the original chamber. Thus, the portcullis stretched
completely across the corridor into both walls. The stone would then block the next
passage, found at a higher level (usually about 1 to 1.5 m). Thus, the stone formed a low
ceiling in its chamber, suspended on three sides via the niches and the ramp at the back.
1141
310
WeigalPs section and plan of S9 reveals that the portcullis stone is in the expected
location for this sort of tomb.1142 The stone is suspended on three sides above the surface
of the first corridor, blocking the entrance to the next passageway at a higher level. In the
plan, it is also clear the portcullis sits further into the southern wall than it does into the
northern one. Again, this characteristic parallels the other tombs exactly. However,
Weigall's plan shows a recess in the ceiling, allowing for the stone to be lowered from
above.
It is likely that the ceiling in the portcullis chamber was not preserved. With this
in mind, it is understandable why Weigall may have thought that the giant stone had been
lowered from above. Also, he may not have been able to see the large niche in the
southern wall because it was either not preserved or was blocked completely by the
portcullis stone. Further evidence that the portcullis stone here follows the normal royal
Late Middle Kingdom model is the increase in the thickness of the southern wall at this
point.
However, it seems to be the case that Weigall did not reconstruct the thickness of
this wall correctly, as it would need to be larger to house the entire blocking stone prior to
sealing the tomb.
Another problem with Weigall's plan is the lack of turning chambers in the
northern part of the tomb. Clearly, there was one of these specialized rooms just to the
west of the first portcullis. This type of room was found whenever the direction of a
corridor turned ninety degrees so that the workers would be able to rotate the coffin and
maneuver this inflexible object down the halls to the sarcophagus chamber.1143 In S9,
1142
1143
Ayrton, et al., Abydos 111, Pis. 37, 38.

The size of the coffin is estimated using the interior measurements of the sarcophagus.
311
there is a lack of these chambers for the other four ninety degree turns after the first.
Based upon the size of the coffin niche in the sarcophagus, it is not possible that the
structure of the first two turns was negotiable without a turning chamber even though
they are close to one another, creating some extra space. The last two would not have
allowed for the transport of the coffin as they are drawn in Weigall's plan. Either there
actually were two more turning chambers, which Weigall was unable to see in the ruins,
or the halls must be much wider than he recounts.
The final problem with Weigall's plan is the structure of the sarcophagus
chamber. Since the pattern of the Late Middle Kingdom sarcophagus chambers was
outlined above, the reader should immediately recognize the fact that this example must
be a Type 2. In this form, a section of the sarcophagus lid (usually two or three stones
total) is propped up on two pillars sitting on sand within a chamber with a saddle roof.
When the burial was complete, the sand would be released via a small corridor on each
side. Thus, the lid would slowly lower, sealing the burial.
Weigall believed, however, that the lid of the sarcophagus was lowered from the
ceiling,1144 but he seems not to have recognized the mechanics used in this system. He
reconstructed a flat roof, when it is more likely that the ceiling was in the saddle form.
Also, he only shows a small corridor for the release of the sand on the eastern side. Thus,
there must be some other component of this system, whether it was a hidden corridor on
the west side or some sort of mechanism within the sarcophagus itself.
Like in S9, there are similar problems with the plan of S10. The structure of the
southern wall indicates that there was likely a turning chamber at the first turn in the
1144
312
tomb. Weigall's plan displays a very irregular northern wall for this chamber, probably
due to the condition of the ruins in this area.
A more significant problem is the lack of a turning chamber at the end of the
staircase. Here, the joining of one passage at 1.07 m and another or similar dimensions
* seems too constrained for maneuvering a coffin, measuring around 2.74 by 0.91 by 1.52
m.1145 Here, the structure of the northern wall, with its projection toward the north before
the portcullis stone, could indicate the presence of another turning chamber.
Like in S9, the portcullis in S10 should operate by the same system as the other
Late Middle Kingdom tombs, though Weigall thought it was lowered from the ceiling.1146
Instead, it is clear from the other examples that a portcullis niche would have been
housed in the southern wall of the chamber, meaning that that wall would have had to be
much thicker than shown in the plan. The northern wall obviously has a smaller niche
used to hold that end of the portcullis. In Weigall's section,1147 it is clear that the
portcullis stone hangs above the surface of the preceding corridor, but he is vague about
the architectural plan here, simply moving to the next corridor. However, it would seem
that the ceiling is represented poorly here and that the actual corridor should be at a
higher level, as they are after every other portcullis of this nature, including that of S9.
Thus, the plan of the remainder of the tomb must be regarded as tenuous at best.
Weigall reconstructs the burial chamber without having found anything in this
area except the sarcophagus lid.1148 Therefore, the location of the sarcophagus as well as
1145
The estimate for the coffin size of S10 was taken from the dimensions of the coffin niche in the
sarcophagus of S9. Even a significantly shorter coffin could not have been turned in this space.
1146
Ayrton, et al, Abydos III, p. 15, Pis. 37, 38.
1147
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. PI. 38.
1148
313
the limestone blocks, which encased it, are simply conjecture. Thus, in the plan, Weigall
shows the lid as if it were dropped from the ceiling. If this placement is correct, then a
system, similar to that found in the subsidiary pyramid of Khendjer (the lid is supported
by pillars until after the burial), must have been used. Otherwise, it may be the case that
this tomb extended a little further to the west or, more likely, to the south. In this case, a
Type 1 sarcophagus could be proposed for this tomb.
Interestingly, the beginning of S10 is identical to that depicted in the tomb model
at Dahshur described previously (Figs. 3.17, 2.4).l
The staircase leading to the tomb,
the entranceway, the stairs leading to the north, and the position of the portcullis are all
identical. As Weigall has depicted the plan of S10, at this point the tomb ends in a Type
3 sarcophagus. However, the tomb model has a complete sand lowering system and,
thus, a Type 2 sarcophagus. The model may not represent S10; nonetheless, the
resemblance is remarkable and may indicate some sort of chronological relationship
between the two.
Only further excavation can provide the answers to the questions resulting from
the comparison of the Memphite monuments to S9 and S10 at Abydos. Excavations of
exterior sections of S9 produced even more problems with WeigalPs plan. Thus, only
additional inspection of the substructure of the monument as well as other areas will
produce the complete picture needed to truly understand these tombs.
V. Recent Excavations at S9
As shown above, the two tombs, S9 and S10, at South Abydos have many of the
1,49
Di. Arnold, Amenemhet III, PL 67.
314
same characteristics as the royal Late Middle Kingdom monuments found in the
Memphite area.1150 Recent excavation of one of these tombs, using modern techniques,
has resulted in new, more complete data concerning the structure of these tombs.
From February through March of 2003, the Pennsylvania-Yale-Institute of Fine
Arts Expedition to Abydos, undertook additional excavations of "mastaba" S9.1151
Previously, in the summer of 2002, Dr. J. Wegner, in conjunction with Dr. Herbich,
completed a subsurface survey of the area, indicating that structures existed around the
tomb, which Weigall had not recorded and remained unexcavated.
*1
Figure 4.5. View of excavations in the local southeast of S9. Note the large spoil
heap and the pyramidal cliff in the background.
1150
See D. McCormack, "The Significance of Royal Funerary Architecture in the Study of 13th Dynasty
Kingship."
1151
See the acknowledgements as they relate to this project.
315
Figure 4.6. Plan showing the results of the 2003 excavations season at
S9 at South Abydos.
The plan for the season was to begin with the architecture indicated to be to the
east of the tomb by the subsurface image. After completing these excavation units, the
316
team set out to clear the subsurface part of the tomb and create a plan of the remaining
architecture, correcting any mistakes made by Weigall. The excavators also intended to
process all of the objects as they were retrieved to ensure the collection of useful data in
an efficient time period.
Excavations began with the opening of five 10 by 10 m squares-and a unit of
this same basic shape, which was truncated from the southwest corner to the middle of
the northern side due to the presence of a large spoil heap (Figs. 4.5-4.6). Five of the
units were located to the southeast of the tomb and one to the northeast. In the southern
units, the hope was to uncover a sinusoidal wall visible in the magnetometry image, as
well as the southeastern corner of the enclosure wall. The northern unit was believed to
be the site of the northeastern corner of this structure.
In the following pages, the focus will be to document the results of the 2003
season at South Abydos and describe the finds in detail in order to provide a source of
comparison for the other monuments already investigated in the previous chapter. In a
following chapter, the significance of S9 and S10 in the study of Dynasty XIII kingship
will be discussed.
V.A. The Elements of the Superstructure

Since it will likely take a number of seasons to complete the excavation of S9, it
is expected that the future work will allow us to better understand this monument and its
construction. However, after investigating only a few areas, it is clear that many of the
features of the structure are intact.
317
S9 and S10 are both located on the lower desert to the south of the visible
cultivation. The monuments were constructed according to local directions, based upon
the line of the cliffs (east/west) and the Nile River (north/south), rather than cardinal
ones, with the canopic niche being to the local south (actual east) of the sarcophagus.1152
Since these designations are confusing, the following text will refer to local directions as
such, and the plans will be labeled using both systems. However, it should be noted the
ancient Egyptians themselves would have acknowledged the cliffs behind the tombs as
being the west, the direction, in which the dead traveled, while the part of the tomb facing
the cultivation was the east, the point, from which the sun rose every day giving life to
the world. It is the position of the sarcophagus as well as the corridors of the tomb that
make such a statement certain in light of the Memphite corpus.
The directional orientation of the site did not begin with the Dynasty XIII activity;
the architects of Senwosret III of the previous period had established the South Abydos
area as a royal cemetery. They had chosen this spot, no doubt, due to the fact that the
area was in the region of the sacred wadi and had originally been the focal point of the
tombs of the earliest kings of Egypt. At that point, it was the center of the Osiris cult and
had become crowded with private tombs and cenotaphs, as well as ritual structures.
During Dynasty XIII, rules preventing these structures from encroaching upon the Early
Dynastic tombs themselves were recorded in Khutawyre Wegaf s stela (JE 35256), which
For a short discussion of orientation, see Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 167. For the use of local
directions at South Abydos, see Wegner, Mortuary Temple, p. 10.
318
was later usurped by Khasekhemre Neferhotep I.1153 Thus, in the Late Middle Kingdom,
there would have been no place for a large royal tomb in Abydos proper.
When Senwosret's officials searched for a place for his tomb complex, they must
have noticed that, from the base of the cliffs at South Abydos, the landscape appears to
form a natural pyramid. Thus, they chose this spot for a hidden tomb and extended the
corridors underneath this formation ("Mountain of Anubis").1154 With the temple at the
edge of the valley, Senwosret's tomb formed a complete pyramid complex. The owners
of the Dynasty XIII tombs, presumably kings, not only benefited from closeness to the
natural pyramid, they also associated themselves with the legendary Senwosret III by
constructing their tomb in this vicinity.1155 Therefore, this part of Abydos became a Late
Middle Kingdom royal cemetery.
The landscape at South Abydos slopes downward from the cliffs to the cultivation
and also decreases in elevation from southwest to northeast. Much loose sand and debris
litters the virgin desert surface. The construction of the tomb likely began with the
excavation of a large pit, where the subsurface elements of the structure were to be
placed. As mentioned previously, the dates recorded in the tomb of Khendjer
demonstrated that the central pit and the substructure of the tomb were the first
components of the complex to be constructed.
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 179; Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, pp. 40-41; Helck, HistorischeBiographische,pp. 18-19, no. 26; Leahy, "Protective Measure," pp. 41-60; Mioso, A Reading Book, pp. 13; O'Connor and Patch, "Sacred Sands," p. 46. Richards suggests that the stela is earlier than Neferhotep I
but does not specify the king (J.E. Richards, "Abydos, Middle Kingdom Cemetery," in K.A. Bard, ed.,
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 95).
1154
J. Wegner, "Seat of Eternity," pp. 58-59; Mortuary Temple, pp. 6, 17-18, 21, 32-33; Wegner and Abu elYazid, "The Mountain-of-Anubis," pp. 419-435.
1155
For a similar situation in which Amenemhet I chose to place his initial pyramid in the north at Sakkara
near the Pyramid of Teti, see D. Silverman, "Non-Royal Tombs" in J. Wegner and D. Silverman,
eds., Archaism and Innovation: Studies in the Culture of Middle Kingdom Egypt, Yale Egyptological
Studies vol. 8, New Haven and Boston, 2009.
319
During the 2003 season, excavations focused upon the corners of the northern part
of the enclosure wall (Figs. 4.5, 4.6. A, 4.7). The northeastern corner was well-preserved
while the northwestern one was fragmentary. The eastern end of the wall was set into a
foundation trench, which cut down through the virgin desert surface. The western side
sat upon the loose sand on a platform, which extended beyond the northern face of the
wall. The level of the wall base on the western side of the northern enclosure was 1.82 m
higher than that of the eastern end.
v .
Figure 4.7. The local southeastern corner of the enclosure wall of S9. The shorter
wall on the right extends toward the Senwosret III tomb complex. In the bottom
center, the blocked entrance is visible.
In the subsurface survey results, the enclosure of S9 is visible on all sides, though
most corners seem to be poorly preserved, if at all. The shape of the enclosure is not
320
completely square, though it does appear to be around 54.5 m in length on each side. The
walls were made of bricks measuring 36-42x17-21x11-14 cms with no correlations
between the sizes. The composition of the bricks of the enclosure of S9 varied
considerably. One type was more dense, weighing about 12.00 kilograms, with a large
'amount of ehaff, while another, measuring 11.00 kilograms contained small gravel stones
and sherds and was hard like concrete.1156 The outer bricks were laid with the use of
mortar, made of mud with small limestone chips.
The northern (local eastern) wall was 1.16 m wide and was preserved to a height
of 1.88 m while the eastern (local southern) one is 1.45 m in width at the base and 1.3 m
wide at the top and is up to 2 m in height. The northern (local eastern) wall also would
have been smaller at the top as it, like the eastern (local southern) one, occasionally had a
herringbone line pattern, used to decrease the width of the wall as it was built
upwards.
In this case, the reduction in width was taken equally from both sides. The
base of the eastern (local southern) wall was constructed with the use of a trench near the
corner and proceeded to follow the landscape to the south (local west), terracing upwards
along the way. Like in the pyramid encasement trench at South Mazghuna, at least one
uncut boulder was within the trench, being visible at the base of the wall.
A floor surface of mud had been laid inside the enclosure about 0.7 m up from the
base of the northern (local eastern) wall. After the floor, which was about 8 cms thick,
was in place, the wall had been covered with mud plaster and whitewashed. To the north
1156
In S10, the hard bricks (38 by 17.5 by 11.5 cms) were lighter in color than those of S9 and contained
substantial chaff as well as small limestone specks.
1157
Spencer, Brick Architecture, pp. 137, 138, PI. 8 (A17); Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 35; U. Holscher,
Da Hohe Tor von Medinet Habu (Leipzig, 1910), p. 29, Abb. 23; B. Kemp, "Soil (Including Mud-Brick
Architecture)," in P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, eds., Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology
(Cambridge, 2000), p. 90.
321
(local east) of the northern (local eastern) wall, a similar floor, being around 10 cms
thick, had been constructed roughly 0.59 m above the level of the wall base. This side of
the wall had likewise been coated with whitewashed plaster.
The eastern (local southern) side of the enclosure wall had a slightly more
complex history. A small wall even on the northern (local eastern) face of the enclosure
abutted the structure (Figs. 4.9.B, 2.Y). Its base sat upon loose sand and was about 0.9 m
wide and 0.62 m in height, the base being about 0.36 m above that of the enclosure wall.
The original floor surface was in this area and 0.12 m above base of the small wall and
approximately 0.48 m above that of the enclosure.
The original floor of this area was relatively well-preserved and occupied the
majority of the section of the excavation unit to the east (local south) of the enclosure
wall. This surface also ran up under part of the wall on the southern end of the
excavation unit. Close examination revealed that this section represented a blocked
entrance in this area (Figs. 4.6.C, 4.7). One layer of whitewashed plaster had coated the
wall up to this point before the entrance had been closed. Presumably, once the owner of
the tomb had been placed inside, and the funerary rituals had been completed, sand was
laid over the floor, and bricks were placed in line with the wall in order to close the
entrance to the interior.
Some time thereafter, the surface was raised as the area was filled with debris and
limestone chips. It is uncertain whether the new floor was laid before or after the robbing
of the tomb (mummy fragments and wood were found). Interestingly, the stratigraphic
layers between the first and second floors contained a large amount of Marl A ceramics,
possibly indicating a slightly later date (below the original floor, a significant number of
322
Marl C sherds were found). As of now, however, the exact dating of these layers is
uncertain. Nonetheless, about 1 m above the original floor, the new surface had been
constructed, and a fresh layer of whitewashed plaster had been applied to the enclosure
wall.
The layer of concentrated limestone chips as well as the new floor ran up over the
preserved level of the small wall at the north (local east) of this area. Since the
whitewash of both the northern (local eastern) enclosure wall and the first layer of the
eastern (local southern) one ran up onto this feature, it is clear that the wall was a part of
the first phase. If this wall never reached a height more than it currently stands, then it is
possible it was meant to form a terrace between the upper and lower levels of surfaces. It
is clear that this wall was not considered to be a formal part of the S9 enclosure as it was
neither plastered nor whitewashed. The wall extended to a brick-lined ramp filled with
limestone debris to the local south in the vicinity of the structures connected with the
Senwosret III tomb.1158 At the time when the second floor was constructed, the interior
of the small wall was no longer visible, as this area had been filled with debris.
Directly upon the preserved area of the new surface, more debris from the tomb
was found. Large amounts of wood, some being burnt, as well as two sets of senet game
pieces were discovered here. These objects found outside S9 are quite plebian for a royal
tomb as these items were often made of faience.1159 There was also a concentration of
dung next to the wall.
1158
Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 374, 380, 381.

P. Piccione, "The Historical Development of the Game of Senet and its Significance for Egyptian
Religion," dissertation, University of Chicago, 1990, p. 19; Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 133.
1159
323
The location of the entrance to the tomb is interesting for two reasons. First of all,
the entrance to the pyramid of South Mazghuna was located in this same region with the
complex. Second, the small wall continues toward the Senwosret III enclosure to an area
once thought to be related to this earlier king's mortuary establishment. Now, however,
it is clear that the small wall and this structure are in the line of S9 and not the Senwosret
III mortuary complex. Thus, it is possible that activities related to the administration of
the construction of S9 and the burial itself occurred in the area to the local east of the
Senwosret III tomb. Consequently, above and below the surfaces in the excavated
portions of S9, there were a few seal impressions, as well as a number of clay rods,
thought to be the portable source of sealing clay near the entrance.1160
Above the floor level of the area to the north of the enclosure, there was a great
deal of brick and limestone debris. It is unclear when the deposit of this material
occurred. The brick material was not simply wall fall as there were no patterns
discernable. Rather, it seems that this debris was collected either in the destruction of the
tomb or in Weigall's excavations. Within this debris, there were many fragments of
funerary provisions including small pieces of plaster with gold leaf, alabaster vessel
fragments, and wood (discussed below).
To the local east of the tomb (north), there is a section of a sinusoidal wall
preserved (Fig. 4.6.D). The wall stretches toward the north (local east) and then turns to
the west (local north). From crest to crest, the waves in the wall are 2.6 to 3.5 m across
while being about 0.5 to 0.55 m deep. The corner, which was 2.1 m wide at its base, 0.7
1160
These unbaked, clay objects were cylindrical in shape. One preserved example was 9.59 cm in length
and 2.2 cm in diameter while another was 8.98 cm in length and 2.21-2.54 cm in diameter.
324
m at the narrowest point, and 2.2 m deep, is narrower as in the other example of these
walls in the Memphite region.
The preserved section of the wall included 17.5 m from south to north (local
east/west) and 7.8 m east to west (local north/south). In the former direction, the wall
clearly continued to the south, though its connection with the enclosure wall is unknown.
Likewise, there were traces of the wavy wall all the way to a central structure, making its
full extent close to 15 m. The wall was preserved from a few brick fragments to around
0.65 m in height and was one brick (laid as stretchers) in width. From the evidence of the
wall fall, it was originally at least 1.6 m in height
The construction of the sinusoidal wall was of economical quality. Unlike the
wavy walls in the Memphite region and others around South Abydos, this structure was
very thin, measuring about 0.2 m wide, which must have limited the height of the
sinusoidal wall. Thus, the estimated height of the wall from the fallen bricks may
represent the original one. The preservation of the wall became taller as the excavations
proceeded to the southwest, and future work will likely confirm or dispel the 1.6 m
estimate.
The sinusoidal wall had no foundation trench and was placed upon the loose sand
after applying a plaster-like wall base.
The base of the wall sloped downward along
with the surface being about 0.98 m lower at the corner than in the southern-most extent
uncovered in the 2003 season. Like in the rest of the complex, the bricks were 35-40 by
17-21 by 10-14 cms without any patterns of correlation between the sides. Other
components of the wall included brick fragments as well as triangular wedges, with
1161
This mud wall base is typical of Egyptian construction. See Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 34.
325
curved ends, used to accentuate the rounded areas of the wall. The bricks were laid with
a thick mud mortar.1162 After completing the wall, a thick layer of plaster, made of mud
and large pieces of chaff, was placed on both of its sides, which were then
whitewashed.1163
Figure 4.8. The sinusoidal wall of S9.

An interesting buttress was located inside the second interior curve to the south of
the corner of the sinusoidal wall. Here, small bricks and brick fragments outlined a
curved area. Bricks and debris were then placed inside, filling the space between the wall
and the outline. Unfortunately, the original height of this feature is unknown as it was
only one brick high at the time of excavation.
The sinusoidal wall at S9 m a y have served multiple purposes. It is possible that it
1162
The use of mortar is very rare in Egyptian architecture. However, the mortar used here, as well as in
the enclosure wall, is typical with limestone chips and clay. Not to be confused, plaster usually contains a
high straw content to prevent cracking (Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, pp. 34, 155; Kemp, "Soil," p. 92).
1163
The whitewashed plaster was normally applied to walls to protect them from the natural elements. See
Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 34. However, in this case, the plaster seems also to add to the stability of the
rapidly constructed sinusoidal wall.
326
connected to the enclosure wall and that it also had a counterpart on the western side of
the southern face. Its purpose is uncertain, but it seems to have formed a courtyard in
front of the enclosure wall. If the wall did continue on the western side, then both walls
would have connected to a central rectangular structure similar to that found at South
Mazghuna (see below). Thus, the sinusoidal wall at S9 may have been an abbreviated
outer enclosure wall, connected to a cult structure.
Figure. 4.9. The remains of the cult structure of S9.

The sinusoidal wall stretches to the west until it meets a rectangular-shaped
feature (Figs. 4.6.E, 4.8). Unfortunately, this building was in very poor condition as the
preserved section including its northern (local eastern) wall and its eastern (local
southern) corner stood to a height of less than one course. The bricks measured
approximately 39-39.5 by 11-15.5 by 8.5-9.9 cms and were laid on their sides (the
shortest length). This line of bricks would have formed the foundation for a wall, which
was only one brick wide (about 40 cms). Though this feature may appear rudimentary,
327
its placement near the central line of the enclosure wall and tomb indicates that it was
likely a structure intended for the offering cult of the deceased person interred in the
tomb. This building is in the local east of S9 and holds the same position as that in the
South Mazghuna monument.
Both inside and outside the sinusoidal wall, there were areas with construction
debris. There was no surface preserved here, and it may be the case that one had never
existed in this potential courtyard. Due to the fact that the construction debris was on
both sides of the sinusoidal wall, it is likely that this structure was raised after the work in
the zone had been completed.
Much of the construction debris was made up of large and small deposits of
limestone chips, ground stone, and possibly fine, powdery gypsum.
In other
locations, small areas of an unidentified organic material were found. Some of the
limestone chips may have resulted from the cutting of limestone blocks. However, many
of the deposits appear to be related to the manufacture of whitewash and mortar for the
stone architecture. The organic material may have been used in the wall plaster.
Samples of all such deposits were collected, and, in the future, these materials will be
analyzed and compared to the makeup of the components of the complex.
Near the southern end of the excavation of the sinusoidal wall, two more construction
features were found. Here, there was one small plaster pit, which was at a higher level,
and a larger one. The hard surface of these pits was about 5 to 10 cms thick. The smaller
feature was approximately 3.1m from north to south with a width of more than 1.3 m.
The second plaster pit was 3.1 by 2.9 m (Figs. 4.6.F, 4.10). Both of these areas had
1164
For information about gypsum, see Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 101.
328
clearly been used for the mixing of plaster or mortar and had finger, hand, and footprints
preserved in their surfaces.
>
"-<
x.
.
J
-**
"*
*M
i.
t_sr
Figure. 4.10. The large plaster pit.
V.B. The Components of the Substructure

In the 2003 season, only a small area of the interior of the tomb was exposed.
These excavations included brickwork in the crater, the smaller of the two components of
the lid of the sarcophagus, limestone architecture to the southwest of the sarcophagus,
and the eastern face of the second portcullis stone.
The work of the excavation team in 2003 revealed several significant brickwork
structures, which Weigall had not recorded. These constructions are most prolific to the
local west of the tomb near the sarcophagus chamber (Fig. 4.6.G). It is possible that
some of the preserved brickwork in the substructure of S9 served as a means of holding
329
back the sand during construction. Excavation of such a deep pit in the desert sand
proves to be a difficult task. Like other excavators, we had extreme difficulties in
clearing the pit even though only the upper extent of the substructure was reached.
During the 2003 season, 4 to 6 m of sand were removed from the crater, the greater
amounts being from the sides, while the smaller amount was taken from the center. At
this depth, any work results in sand pouring in from the sides. Thus, the deeper one digs
the worse the problem with the loose sand becomes.
*%&4+J&
r
.,
A' ."'*;'^vitiHUL
^^fe*^
Figure 4.11. The exposure of the subsurface elements of S9 in 2003. The mobile
component of the sarcophagus lid, the portcullis stone, the surrounding limestone,
and the supporting brickwork are visible.
330
The brick structures are often only a few courses thick as in the ones on the local
eastern side (Fig. 4.6.H).1165 However, those closest to the sarcophagus chamber reach to
a height greater than a meter as they terrace back into the sand from the edge of the
limestone walls (Fig. 4.11). In this area, it may be the case that the brickwork served not
only to hold back the sand in the lowest part of the tomb, but also as a platform, from
which the lowering of the large quartzite components could be facilitated, and the support
of the saddle roof as well as a large superstructure could be provided. It may also be the
case that the brickwork within the pit may represent the preserved sections of the
superstructure. It is hoped that future work will clarify the nature of the brickwork within
the substructure of S9.
The crater itself measured roughly 25 by 21 m while the area between the
northern (local eastern) and southern (local western) mudbrick structures of the crater
was about 14 m. The northern (local eastern) one joined at what might be a corner with
the eastern (local southern) side (probably corresponds with the western (local northern)
side of the entrance corridor or the first portcullis chamber).
In the area next to the sarcophagus, there was a large structure of bricks with one
part being higher than the other. In the corner of these two sections, limestone fragments
were piled up in order to keep the sand back. Though it cannot be certain, it is likely that
this makeshift construction was the work of Wei gall's men, especially considering the
fact that the workers of the 2003 season often attempted similar means of holding it back.
1165
The brick structures on the eastern side had limestone flakes within them. Therefore, their exact date,
whether ancient or modern is unknown at this point. However, parallels to these walls in the Memphite
region would suggest that they are ancient. For example see the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara
(Chapter 3, section II.B.) and South Mazghuna (Chapter 3, Section VII.B).
331
The top of the sarcophagus lid component was 2.32 m below the desert virgin soil
(Fig. 4.6.1).1166 This large monolithic structure was made of a quartzite stone of variable
qualities (considerable inclusions in some areas). It measured approximately 2.7 by 1.82
m and had a height greater than 1.07 m. The corners were rounded and the local northern
36 cms were recessed. The cutting of the stone was irregular, and it was left roughly
finished on the top.
Though many of the features of the tombs are similar to those of the Memphite
region,
excavations at S9 revealed that this monument had limestone of a somewhat

1 1 /"Q
lesser quality than the fine Tura limestone found in the tombs in the north (Fig. 4.6.J).
Most of these stones are like the sarcophagus top in that they were put in place with very
little smoothing of their surfaces. One stone contained a portion of a dovetail cramp.
The material of the cramp itself, which was missing, was not determined.1169 The blocks
were positioned with the aid of gypsum mortar, which ran down the sides of many of the
blocks.1170
The quartzite portcullis was about 1.5 m from the local northern face of the
1171
sarcophagus lid (Fig. 4.6.K).
It was 1.6 m wide and approximately 0.4 m in depth.
The local southern side of the face of the stone was incredibly smooth, and the quality of
This layer is composed of hard, compact sand with small limestone inclusions.
See Chapter 3, section X; Chapter 4, sections III.B. and V.B.
1168
The lower quality of the limestone may not be as important as one might think. Since limestone was
readily available locally, it may simply have been more practical to quarry the blocks from the area,
especially since they would be visible (Di. Arnold, Building, p. 159; Encyclopedia, p. 134; B.G. Aston, et
al., "Stone," in P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, eds., Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology (Cambridge,
1167
2000), p. 13; R. Klemm and D.D. Klemm, Steine und Steinbruche im Alten Agypten (London, 1093), p. 30).
1169
For a description of the types of cramps used in ancient Egyptian architecture, see Di. Arnold,
Building, p. 124; Encyclopedia, p. 60; S. Clarke andR. Engelbach, Ancient Egyptian Construction and
Architecture (Ancient Egyptian Masonry: the Building Craft) (New York, 1990), pp. 112-113.
117
Gypsum mortar was commonly used in this manner (Di. Arnold, Building, pp. 118, 123, 291;
Encyclopedia, pp. 101, 133, 155; Clarke and Engelbach, Ancient Egyptian Construction, pp. 78-79).
1171
Note that Weigall measured this length as 2.13 m (Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. 14).
332
the quartzite was markedly better than that of the sarcophagus lid. It is likely that the
portcullis stone had been maneuvered into position from a niche in the wall to the local
west. This placement would fit perfectly with a Type B portcullis, which often occurs in
this position when it is paired with a Type 2 sarcophagus. Though this is a Type 1
sarcophagus, it appears that there might be just such a slot in the limestone walls for a
Type B blocking stone position, but only further excavations will confirm this hypothesis.
V.C. Further Problems with Weigall's Plan

Thus far, Weigall's plan of the substructure of S9 seems to correlate in general
size with the remains found in the 2003 season. Further excavations will be needed in
order to confirm and correct the probable errors explained in an earlier section (IV).
Nonetheless, the above ground features of S9 seem to be quite off in Weigall's plan and
do not correlate with the new data.
The first major problem with Weigall's plan is that his enclosure wall is much
smaller than that recovered recently. Thus far, no wall has been found inside of the first,
leading one to the conclusion that Weigall did in fact excavate part of the enclosure wall.
The dimensions, however, are not accurate.
Another perplexing problem with the original plan is the placement of a
sinusoidal wall just beyond the enclosure. In the recent excavations, the sinusoidal wall
was well beyond this point. Also, some areas where the wall was completely preserved,
Weigall's plan shows it as missing. Thus, either there is currently a sinusoidal wall
beneath the spoil heaps just in front of the enclosure, forming a potential square, or
Weigall's plan does not reflect accurately the architectural features of this potential
333
courtyard. Finally, the distances between the structures related to the Senwosret III
complex to the local south and S9 and that of the latter and S10 are also inaccurate.
V.D. Foundation/Ritual Deposits

In the excavations of S9, three foundation deposits were found to the northeast
(local southeast) of the northern section of the enclosure wall.
Two of these deposits
were in the form of a small pit containing ceramics and other objects while the third was
composed of a line of bricks. A discussion of the nature and contents of each deposit will
appear below.
V.D.I. The Pit Deposits with Ceramic Material

At 1 m and 3.4 m from the edge of the northern (local eastern) enclosure wall of
S9, the two foundation deposits revealed through excavations appeared to be in the ideal
position for a double deposit often found in Late Middle Kingdom tombs.1174 However,
unlike parallels to these kinds of pits,1175 the ones found in the 2003 season were not
lined with bricks. The small, circular pits were cut into the virgin desert surface. The
one closest to the wall was larger, being about 0.54 m in diameter while the smaller one
was approximately 0.31 m across. Both pits were 0.2 m in depth, being at the maximum
in the center and shallower around the edges.
On the general nature and contents of foundation deposits, see J. Weinstein, "Foundation Deposits in
Ancient Egypt," dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1973; Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 93.
1173
Revez, "Medamud," p. 476; Sambin, "Medamud," pp. 351-353.
1174
Weinstein, "Foundation Deposits," pp. 54, 55.
1175
Weinstein, "Foundation Deposits," pp. 52, 54-55.
334
r: ~
7i X
_
v
- '
-y
A.
/
/
B.
1
\\
>
1 '' \ k
c.
_
J
'i !
10
20
Figure 4.12. Pottery found in the smaller of the two foundation deposits.
Contents included hemispherical cups (A.) (the second of which contained
plaster), a funnel necked jar (B.), and a beaker (C.)
The smaller of the two foundation deposits contained ceramics including four
hemispherical cups (one filled with gypsum plaster), a beaker, and a funnel-necked
jar.1176 The second foundation deposit was packed with many items including twelve
hemispherical cups; two, small flat bowls; one large, flat-based bowl with fabric adhered
to it; the rim of a funnel necked jar; one large jar stand; one tall jarstand; two jar stoppers;
two rings of rope; a calf rib; two bird bones; and a collection of sticks, leaves, and
This deposit was not initially recognized as being in a pit as it was partly beneath the baulk, made of
loose sand, which poured into the excavation unit. Thus, the full nature of its contents is uncertain, and it
likely included additional items.
335
Figure 4.13. The second foundation deposit. Hemispherical cups (A.), flat, open
bowls (B.), a pulled-rim jar rim (C), a funnel-necked jar rim (D.), jar stands (E.), a
tall jar stand (F.) (which had been broken into segments), and a large bowl (G.)
336
seeds.1177
It is difficult to determine the date of the deposits due to the placement of older
forms of pottery within such contexts. The vessel indices (width divided by height,
multiplied by 100) of the hemispherical cups have been shown by Do. Arnold to be an
indicator of date, becoming deeper over time.1178 In the smaller pit, the average vessel
index is 186 with a range of 162 to 197 while, in the larger one, it is 191 with a range of
176 to 218. These vessel indices indicate that the deposits date to the earlier phase of the
Late Middle Kingdom (Late Dynasty XII to early Dynasty XIII).1179 Though
fragmentary, the ceramic evidence found so far in the rest of the S9 tomb may point to a
later date than the foundation deposits with deeper hemispherical cups as well as a more
advanced phase of Marl C jars (see Section V.E.l.c. below).
Weigall found similar unlined pits, packed with ceramics, around the Senwosret
III enclosure at South Abydos.1180 In his study, Weinstein expressed doubt that these pits
For parallels to the hemispherical cups, tall jar stand and funnel neck jar, see Bourriau, Pharaohs and
Mortals, pp. 134-136; Umm el Ga'ab. Pottery from the Nile Valley before the Arab Conquest. (Cambridge,
1981), pp. 56, 69. Though S.J. Allen suggests that Queen's Ware was found in a foundation deposit at the
Senwosret III tomb at South Abydos by Petrie, the intact pit of S9 contained no true examples of this type,
though some of the shapes were similar (S.J. Allen, "Queens' Ware: Royal Funerary Pottery in the Middle
Kingdom." in C.J. Eyre, ed., Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Egyptologists (Leuven,
1998), pp. 47-48).
1178
Do. Arnold, "Keramikbearbeitung in Dahschur 1976-1981," MDAIK 38 (1982), pp. 60-62, Abb. 17-18;
S. Swain, "Pottery, Early Dynastic to Second Intermediate Period," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p. 627.
1179
Bourriau states that the vessel index marker of 145 sits between early and late Dynasty XIII (J.
Bourriau, "The Dolphin Vase from Lisht," in P. Der Manuelian, ed., Studies in Honor of William Kelly
Simpson, 1 (Boston, 1996), p. 113). Wegner points to indices between 155 and 165 as dating to
Amenemhet III though he does warn about regional trends, especially since the index is built upon the
Memphite corpus (Wegner, "Nature and Chronology," p. 260). Note that he also assigned a vessel index of
178 to the reign of Amenemhet ITT (Wegner, "The Town of Wah-Sut," p. 296); he states that hemispherical
cups from an average of 190-160 date to late Dynasty XH-mid Dynasty XIII while those with a mean of
160-135 belong to mid-Dynasty XIII through the end of this era (Wegner, Mortuary Temple, p. 233). Di.
Arnold {The Pyramid of Senwosret I, The South Cemeteries of Lisht 1 (New York, 1988), pp. 140-141)
indicates that in the late Dynasty XII to early Dynasty XIII in the Memphite region, indices can vary
between 190 and 150 with a range between 200 and 145.
1180
Ayrton, et al., Abydos 111, p. 19, PI. XXXIX.
337
actually represented foundation deposits. 1181 However, the presence of rope, plaster, and
other goods related to the building process may prove otherwise, though a ritual deposit
cannot be excluded at this time. Unfortunately, Weigall did not present photographs or
drawings of the contents of the other pits found at South Abydos. Thus, no comparison
can be made at this time. Wegner also found deposits of pottery near the ramp, which
may be contemporary with S9. It is possible that the deposited material originally
belonged to the complex of Senwosret III and that the architects of S9 found them and
reburied them in these locations. It is unfortunate that the dating of any foundation/ritual
deposits is unreliable especially since, at S9, these pits supplied the most complete
ceramic vessels, and it is difficult to study the tiny fragments from the rest of the area.
V.D.2. The Brick Deposit

To the west of the pits discussed above, there was another form of foundation deposit.
Here, a line of five bricks, set at the same angle as the wall, sat upon a layer of clean sand above
the virgin desert sand. The full-sized bricks were about 1.7 m northeast of the wall and
approximately 10 cms below the plaster surface.
Interestingly, a deposit with full-sized bricks set in this fashion was not previously known
after the reign of Kheperkare Senwosret I.1182 During the Late Middle Kingdom, one would
expect to find miniature copies of bricks placed within a foundation deposit pit. Nonetheless, the
small line of bricks at S9 was in a very clear context, and, maybe future excavations at Abydos
and elsewhere will provide further parallels to this practice later than the reign of Senwosret I.
Due to the size and fabric of the bricks, it is clear that this foundation deposit is contemporary to
1181
Weinstein, "Foundation Deposits," pp. 82-83.

Weinstein, "Foundation Deposits," pp. 46-47.
1182
338
the construction of S9.
Figure 4.14. The brick deposit.
V.D.3. Other Deposits

It is likely that foundation deposits in S9 were located beneath the corners of the
enclosure walls. A large pit had been dug into the wall base on the northwestern corner of the
complex, possibly indicating that treasure had been found here. Since the northeastern corner is
so well-preserved, there is no way to determine whether or not a deposit exists there.
Nonetheless, further work may eventually lead to the discovery of more foundation deposits.
V.E. The Artifacts from S9

Since the tomb of S9 seems to have had a short lifespan, the cultural material is
not incredibly dense like that of the town site of Senwosret III to the north. Thus, all
339
artifacts collected were fully examined and processed during the excavation season.
Though this material is only a small sample of what will be recovered from S9 in the
future, it can be seen as representative especially, since a portion of the old excavation
spoil heaps were screened.
Most of the artifacts are in small pieces. It appears that the destruction of the
tomb was comprehensive and that the intruders left many, if not most, of the objects at
the site, once they had smashed them. Thus far, there is no evidence that points to a
specific date of destruction, nor can one yet be sure as to which reign in the Late Middle
Kingdom to assign the tomb. Nonetheless, there are some hints as to the general time
period. The following sections will outline the nature of the material from S9.
V.E.I. Ceramics
Pottery is one of the most important sources of information recovered through
archaeology. Without the rare find of textual evidence giving one the exact reign, to
which a site belongs, ceramic material can allow one to establish a relative date. The
evidence from S9 at South Abydos is extremely important as it provides a small,
presumably short-lived set of material from the Late Middle Kingdom sequence. Though
the study of pottery dating to this period still requires additional study,1183 a few types of
pots allow a general date for the site. If, in the future, excavations reveal the name of the
king, who may have owned this tomb, the material described below will become a set
1183
Note that Williams produced a chronological typology of Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate
Period pottery including Nubia and the Near East. However, many of the contexts, which were primarily
from cemeteries, were heavily disturbed, resulting in the mixing of forms from different time periods.
Also, no analysis of fabrics was undertaken due to the fact that the vessels were studied through primary
sources (Williams, "Problems", pp. 59-1275). More reliable site-specific studies have been undertaken by
other scholars and can be found in the footnotes in this section.
340
point in the relative chronology tied to the absolute. Firchow suggested that one of the
sealings found at S8 pointed to a Dynasty XIII date for at least some of the structures in
the area, including this "dummy mastaba."1184 However, it is likely that this structure is
connected to the Senwosret III complex, and this seal, which could represent a period of
restoration or cult activity at South Abydos, may or may not be connected to S9 and
S10.1185
The ceramic assemblage from the limited excavations of the 2003 season is likely
representative of the corpus. Thus, it is not expected that the general statistics will
change with further excavation. Nonetheless, all of the material collected, except for that
from the foundation deposits, was composed of small, deteriorated sherds, not allowing
for a comprehensive illustration of the types found. However, the ceramic assemblage
makes up a small subset of that found at the town of the Senwosret III complex, making it
possible for types to be identified, using the drawings from this partly contemporary site.
V.E.I.a. Foundation Deposits
As discussed before, the foundation deposits can be dated to the earlier Late
Middle Kingdom based upon the vessel indices of the hemispherical cups. As will be
outlined below, this material likely predates that found in the S9 ruins proper. Thus, this
material, which makes up about 3.00 percent of the total ceramics from the excavations,
will be eliminated from the statistics discussed below.
O. Firchow, "Studien zu den Pyramidenanlagen der 12. Dynastie," dissertation, Georg-AugustUniversitat, 1942, p. 54. Note that Firchow accidentally refers to this feature as S18. Kemp mistakenly
writes that Firchow believed that the Dynasty XIII date applied to the Senwosret III tomb (Kemp,
"Abydos," p. 37).
1185
Wegner and Abu el-Yazid, "The Mountain-of-Anubis," pp. 419-435.
341
V.E.l.b. Roman Pottery

The discussion of another subset of the ceramic material must also be set aside
from the main corpus. This pottery can be dated to the Roman Period, making up 24.00
percent of the fabric types and 18.00 percent of the identified vessels. The most
prevalent form of Roman pottery was amphorae at 70.00 percent (Fig. 4.15.A).
However, this number may be misleading due to the fact that these vessels were often
made of a soft, brown clay, which easily disintegrated into numerous pieces. The bases
from these vessels were often filled with resin. In some cases, this material seemed to
have been burned, possibly indicating that the base from these vessels may have been
reused in the process of making offerings. Basins (similar to the Late Middle Kingdom
forms) made up 26 percent of the corpus while 4.00 percent were other forms such as
bowls and jars (Fig. 4.15.B-C).
The Roman Period pottery was only found in the upper layers of the excavated
units, often being a part of the spoil heaps around the tomb crater. The activity at S9,
which is represented by the Roman Period pottery, is not entirely clear. Currently, there
is no indication that Roman burials were placed inside the structure, though evidence may
be found in the future. Thus, the use of this tomb as a cemetery would be much later than
that of the Memphite tombs, which often became the burial sites of the lower classes in
Dynasty XVIII.1186 Roman pottery was also found at the temple and tomb of Senwosret
III.1187
Note that there were later tombs to the local east of S10 (Ayrton, et al, Abydos III, p. 16; Wegner,
Mortuary Temple, p. 369).
1187
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, pp. 20, 27-28.
342
yy-.
\v
10
20 cms
D.
Figure 4.15. Pottery from S9 dating to the Roman Period. Forms shown here
are amphorae (A.), a bowl (B.), and ajar (C.) Another common form was that
of basins (not shown).
V.E.l.c. The Late Middle Kingdom Ceramic Assemblage of S9

The total number of identifiable Late Middle Kingdom diagnostic sherds was 644.
Untyped fragments were not counted in this number though they made up 14 percent of
the material collected (including Roman forms). The remaining 68 percent could all be
343
identified as Late Middle Kingdom forms.

Before describing the frequency of the forms, the discussion will begin with the
fabric types found (see Fig. 4.16).1188 The most common fabric was Nile C, being at 75
percent, with its large chaff content. It was often used in the production of large vessels
including basins, platters and jars. Nile Bl and B2 were less^common with percentages
of 7 and 8 respectively. Most Nile Bl vessels were hemispherical cup fragments while
B2 was found in a variety of forms. Marl C was the next most frequent with 6 percent
and included large storage jars, wine jars, and other less frequent closed forms.
Meanwhile, Marl A3, making up 4 percent of the corpus, was found in both closed forms
and a few open ones. Finally, a single pan grave fabric was found.
S9 Late Middle Kingdom Pottery Fabric
Distribution
NileC
Figure 4.16. S9 Late Middle Kingdom pottery fabric distribution.
The significance of the fabric distribution is difficult to assess since no statistics
are available concerning the pottery from the royal Late Middle Kingdom monuments in
1188
For standardized descriptions of the fabric types, see Do. Arnold, "Keramikbearbeitung," pp. 45-46; H.A. Nordstrom and J. Bourriau, "Ceramic Technology: Clays and Fabrics," in Do. Arnold and J. Bourriau,
eds., An Introduction to Ancient Egyptian Pottery (Mainz, 1993), pp. 171-174, 176-181.
344
Figure 4.17. The Late Middle Kingdom open Nile and Marl A3 forms from
S9. A. Hemispherical cups; B. Carinated bowls and cups; C , E. Bowls, D.
Incense burner, F. Basins, G. Platter, H. Bowl with interned rim.
the Memphite region. However, it is interesting that Nile C, a rapidly produced

utilitarian fabric, remains so common in such a high status burial. On the other hand,
345
however, it is important to recognize the fact that the Marl C fabric from the Memphite
region outnumber the Upper Egyptian Marl A3. The fact that the Marl C fabric is in such
abundance, though relatively small compared to the Nile fabrics, indicates that the owner
of this tomb certainly had access to the resources of the Memphite/Faiyum region.1189
Thus, along with other evidence, it is clear that the construction and use of this tomb
predates a split of the north and south of Egypt. However, along side the styles of the
residence, the development of Upper Egyptian forms continued (Marl A3 being from this
area),1190 eventually overtaking the corpus in the Second Intermediate Period.
One can characterize the ceramic corpus overall as being made up of large
numbers of a few types with examples of other varieties being much rarer, sometimes
occurring only once. The most frequent vessel type was that of the hemispherical cup (21
percent, Fig. 4.17. A). Unfortunately, most diagnostic fragments of these vessels were
very small, and only a few allow for a rudimentary reconstruction of their form.
Nonetheless, it is clear that at least some examples display smaller vessel indices,
meaning that they are deeper than the earlier ones visible in the foundation deposits.1191
Others, however, still seem to be shallow indicating, like other forms below, that S9
belongs to a transitional phase.
Other frequent open, Nile forms include various styles of bowls (11
percent, Fig. 4.17.C, E), large platters (5 percent, Fig. 4.17.G), and basins (3 percent, Fig.
A production zone for this material has been discovered at Lisht (Do. Arnold, "Pottery," in Di. Arnold,
The Pyramid of Senwosret I (New York, 1988), p. 127; Bourriau, "Patterns of Change," p. 6, n. 10;
"Beyond Avaris," p. 163; J. Bourriau, et al., "Pottery," in P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, eds., Ancient
Egyptian Materials and Technology (Cambridge, 2000), pp. 131-132; Bourriau, Umm el Ga'ab, p. 14).
1190
Bourriau, et al., "Pottery," p. 131; Umm el Ga'ab, pp. 14-15).
1191
Do. Arnold, "Keramikbearbeitung," pp. 60-62, Abb. 17-18; Bietak, "Egypt and Canaan," p. 50, Fig. 14.
346
Figure 4.18. Examples of closed Nile vessels from the Late Middle
Kingdom at S9. A. Water jar rims, B. Jars with pulled rim, C. Jars with
straight rim, D. Beer jar, E. Beakers (other types not shown), F. Beer beaker,
G. Miniature storage jar, H-J. Bases.
347
Figure 4.19. Closed marl forms from S9, dated to the Late Middle
Kingdom. Forms include: A. Marl C storage jars, B. Marl C wine jars,
C. Marl C jar with pulled rim, D-E. Marl A3 forms.
4.17.F). More forms were found in a frequency of less than one percent including
carinated cups and bowls (Fig. 4.17.B), carinated incense burners (Fig. 4.17.D), trays (not
shown), and bowls with interned rims (Fig. 4.17.H). The last of these is also found in a
single example each in Marl A3 and stone. One hemispherical cup rim was also in Marl
A3.
The Nile closed vessels were also frequent, not surprising since many are made of
Nile C. Water jars and other types of closed forms with pulled and straight rims made up
13 percent of the corpus (Fig. 4.18.A-C, H)1192 while beer jars were at 11 percent (Fig.
4.18.D, I). Beer beakers composed 7 percent of the Late Middle Kingdom material
For parallels, see Bourriau, Umm el Ga'ab, p. 133. The shape of the rims of these jars place them into
the Dynasty XIII categories at Tell el Dab'a (Bietak, "Egypt and Canaan," p. 36, Fig. 37).
348
collected while other forms of beakers made up about 2 percent (Fig. 4.18.E.-F, J.). In
the drawing in Figure 4.18.E, these forms are much like hemispherical cups in their
composition, shape, and decoration. Finally, five examples of a type with a rim similar to
the large Marl C storage jars were recovered through excavations (Fig. 4.18.G). This
form might be a miniature Nile B version of the earlier form of this marl rim. <
Marl C jars were much less prevalent than their Nile counterparts. Storage jars
(Fig. 4.19.A) and wine jars (Fig. 4.19.B)1193 made up a little over 1 percent each while
one example of a possible Marl C fabric was also found (Fig. 4.19.C). Each type of Marl
A jar made up less than one percent of the corpus and included those with rounded rims
(Fig. 4.19.D), globular ones (not shown), and others (Fig. 4.19.E).
yn
r\
/ ^.
c.
B.
t"
/- -1
0
D.
1 1
1 1
10
20
Figure 4.20. Examples of other ceramic forms found at S9. A. Lid, B.

Breadmould, C. Model vessel, D. Jarstand.
As mentioned earlier, the presence of the Marl C wine and storage jars is very
important, since it indicates contact with the Memphite region. The shape of the rims of
the storage jars may also be chronologically significant. In the earlier part of the Late
1193
For parallels, see Bourriau, Umm el Ga'ab, p. 66.
349
Middle Kingdom, these rims were a more squat shape. However, possibly in Dynasty
XIII, they become more elongated.1194 The examples of these jars found at S9 are the
more elongated version, connecting them with Do. Arnold's Sector 7 at Dahshur.1195
Other forms of pottery found at S9 are shown in Figure 4.20. In the Late Middle
Kingdom corpus, 8 percent of the vessels were simple lids (Fig. 4.20. A) while 4 percent
were breadmoulds (Fig. 4.20.B).1196 Four miniature vessels, including that shown in
Figure 4.20.C were found. Jarstands, including ring stands, made up four percent of the
pottery identified (Fig. 4.20.D).
Within the ceramic material collected, two Marl A3 fragments had potmarks,
neither being complete enough to reconstruct. Also, one Nile C fragment displayed a lug,
something found commonly on carinated bowls of the Second Intermediate Period
though it is likely that such types of decoration originated in Dynasty XIII as at least one
example of a lug was found in Sector 7 at Dahshur.1197
V.E.2. Stone Objects

The most prevalent stone objects were those made of Egyptian alabaster
(travertine).1198 In total, fifteen fragments of these various vessels, including three small
rims, were found. It is not surprising that so much alabaster might be discovered in the
1194
See Bietak, "Egypt and Canaan," p. 37, Fig. 37. Note that the shape of the rim of wine jars matches the
Late Dynasty XII/XIII shapes at Tell el Dab'a (Bietak, "Egypt and Canaan," p. 37, Fig. 38).
1195
Do. Arnold, "Keramikbearbeitung," p. 35, Abb. 11.33-34.
1197
For parallels, see Bourriau, Umm el Ga'ab, p. 65.
Do. Arnold, "Keramikbearbeitung," p. 34, Abb.10.37. See also the late Dynasty XII to XIII pottery
corpus from Qasr el-Sagha (Di. Arnold and Do. Arnold, Der Tempel Qasr el-Sagha, Archaologische
Veroffentlichungen 27 (Mainz am Rhein, 1979), pp. 29-40; J. Sliwa, "Qasr el-Sagha," Fontes
Archaeologici Posnanienses 36 (1987-1988), pp. 207-215).
1198
For general information about the composition of this material, see Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 7;
Aston, et al., "Stone," pp. 59-60.
350
debris from the tomb. In the burial of Awibre Hor, the canopic jars, as well as other
objects, were made of this material. Other alabaster canopic jar fragments were found at
the pyramid of Ameny Qemau as well as at SI 0 during Weigall's excavations. However,
these examples all had inscriptions in mutilated hieroglyphs along, with the king's names
(no royal name was found in S10, though it still may be found on pieces in the debris).
Thus, it is possible that such fragments in the remainder of the mounds of S9 may also
provide inscriptional evidence in the future. Also, more pieces will undoubtedly be
recovered, and some of them, along with those already collected, may be reconstructed in
later seasons.
Two other stone vessels were more easily identified. The first was likely made of
marble and was in the form of a bowl with an incurved rim. The same shape was also
found in both Nile and Marl A fabrics in low frequencies at S9. Due to the nature of the
hardness of the stone, the interior, which would have been visible from the top, was more
finely smoothed than the exterior. Another vessel was made of a dark stone which had
been weathered due to exposure.
In the excavation of S9 in 2003, other stone objects or parts of them were found,
such as several lithic tools of uncertain date. Also, a worked fragment of basalt, diorite,
or some other dark stone was discovered, though its original form could not be
determined. Likewise, fragments of granite were found in low numbers, indicating that
either this stone had been reused from other parts of Abydos or, more likely, the owner of
this tomb had access to Aswan in the south, where the source of this material was
351
located.1199 Another object was made of a dark, unshaped stone, two sides of which were
marked with team marks in faint red paint.1200 This item was found to the north of the
enclosure wall beyond the extents of the preserved section of the floor.
The use of large blocks of quartzite within S9 indicates, like the Marl C ceramic
fabric, that the owner of this tomb certainly had access to the north. This material is
available at Gebel el-Ahmar near Heliopolis in the Memphite region as well as near
Aswan.1201 However, the latter was not used until a later date.
V.E.3. Wood
The most prevalent material found at S9 other than limestone was wood. Much of
this material was deteriorated from exposure to the sun, and all had been thoroughly
destroyed. In fact, no object could be reconstructed, and only a few edges could be
identified. Nonetheless, the wood likely originated from funerary furniture and other
objects such as statuary, palettes, coffins, and shabti boxes. Some of the wood fragments
were visibly charred. In his report of his own excavations of S9, Weigall reported that
there was burnt wood within the sarcophagus.1202 Thus, some of the wood may have
originated from the coffin of the tomb owner. Though no certain specimens of paint were
found on the wood itself, one piece of wood putty had a small patch of red paint upon it.
Another type of wooden object was in the form of sticks, often with bark upon
them (11 fragments). Often these short sticks had resin on their ends. The purpose of
Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 100; Aston, et al., "Stone," p. 53; Klemm and Klemm, Steine, pp. 305310.
1200
For information on team marks, see Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 59.
1201
Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, pp. 192-193; Aston, et al., "Stone," p. 12; Klemm and Klemm, Steine, pp.
284-296.
1202
352
these objects cannot be certain at this time; analysis of the resinous substance will be
undertaken in the future in order to identify its composition.
V.E.4. Faience
Faience is a common material found in cemetery sites throughout Egypt. It is
made from a non-clay material, composed primarily of ground silica, formed and then
coated with a metallic oxide glaze, which, when fired, is green or blue in color.
At
S9, several different objects were made of this material. The first items were in the form
of beads in the following shapes: tubular (6),1204 tubular with larger diameters in the
centers (4),1205 spherical (1), and discs (3). A faience amulet was also found, but its
shape could not be matched with any known symbols.
Another type of faience object found at S9 was that of inlays. In all, twenty inlays
and fragments were found during excavations.1206 The majority of these pieces
originated from rectangular inserts, one of which measured 7.7 by 2 by 0.6 cms. The
backs of these inlays, which were the color of and texture of cement, were slanted on the
edges so that they could be placed in their designated spots, probably within wooden
1203
For the development of faience with a comprehensive bibliography, see P.T. Nicholson and E.
Peltenburg, "Egyptian Faience," in P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, eds., Ancient Egyptian Materials and
Technology (New York, 2000, pp. 177-194). Richards notes that one of the differences between the private
tombs of Dynasties XII and XIII is that the frequency of precious metals and stones decreases while the
occurrence of faience increases (Richards, "Mortuary Variability," pp. 101, 198). This trend may also
occur in the royal tombs.

1204
One tubular bead was made of gold.
One of these beads may have been made of lapis lazuli.
1206
For similarly-shaped inlays dated to the Early Dynastic Period, see F. Friedman, Gifts of the Nile:
Ancient Egyptian Faience (New York, 1998), p. 73. An additional small, trapezoidal inlay, which was dark
orange in color, was also found.
353
furniture or boxes.
Other shapes of faience inlays were also found including thin
curved and round ones.

A final faience fragment was three-dimensional with the blue color resonating
from all four sides. At this point, it is impossible to determine the nature of this object,
which may have been a handle or some other component of a free-standing vessel.
V.E.5. Mummy Remains

One of the most important questions related to S9 is whether or not later
intrusions upon the tomb included burials. Thus, far, investigations have revealed no
evidence of later interments within S9. Thus, human remains and mummy components
found at the site likely belong to the owner of the monument.1208
Interestingly, human bones and mummy fragments were only found in certain
parts of the excavations. These pieces, including seven fragments of mummy wrappings,
were all located within a concentrated area inside and outside of the northeastern part of
the enclosure wall. As one might expect, they all came from levels above the original
surfaces. In the north, these elements were found above the strata with the bricks and
limestone debris, indicating that they may have come from ancient plundering or even
Weigall's excavations. Meanwhile, those from the eastern side were in levels above and
around the later surface and above the limestone strata. In a different location, a portion
of a human jaw was in the upper section of the southern spoil heaps. The condition of
1207
B. Crowell suggested that these pieces may have originated from decorative boxes (Personal
communication).
1208 j j j e s e r e m a j n s cou l(j a i S o belong to the tombs to the local east. However, the archaeological context of
some of these would suggest that they come from S9 itself.
354
this specimen is very good, and it will be examined in the future for any information it
can provide regarding the health and age of the individual from which it originated.
V.E.6. Decorated Plaster

In the tomb of Awibre Hor, this king had a funerary mask composed of a plasterlike substance, which was inscribed and covered with gold leaf.1209 Similarly, in the
pyramid of Neferuptah, Farag and Iskander discovered plaster pieces with wooden
backing from 7.00 cm wide coffin bands as well as covering other items such as staves
while the material-backed fragments were from an anthropoid coffin/mummy mask made
of layers of linen and glue. Similar material was found in the water in the sarcophagus of
this same Neferuptah in the pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara.
The excavations
at S9 revealed nine small fragments of a similar type of material (Fig. 4.21). Some of
these pieces were inscribed with hieroglyphs and other decorations. Their backs are often
covered or impressed with wood or linen, indicating that these pieces may come from the
covering of the mummy itself.
Like the fragments of the mummy, the inscribed plaster, covered with gold leaf,
was only found in certain areas. These fragments came from the outside of the
northeastern corner of the enclosure wall. In both the north and the east, the plaster
fragments were found in the same strata as the mummy linens.
For the development of these masks in the Late Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period, see
Ikram and Dodson, Mummy, pp. 169-170.
1210
Farag and Iskander, Neferwptah, pp. 27-28, 32, 40-41, 43, 59, Figs. 30-32, Pis. 28, 37a-c.
355
1 2
3 cms.
Figure 4.21. Fragments of inscribed, gilded plaster.
V.E.7. Senet Pieces

An interesting set of objects came from the eastern side of the enclosure upon the
later floor next to the wall. Here, two sets of game pieces, presumably belonging to a
senet set, were found. They were all made of unbaked clay. The first set had seven
pointed cone pieces, and seven with flat, round ends and inward-curving centers.
Meanwhile, the other set of senet pieces had nine cone-shaped examples with small bulbs
atop, five truncated cones, and seven with flat, round ends (spool).1211 Another bulbed
example was found to the north of the enclosure wall.
Senet, which had its origins in the Early Dynastic Period, was associated with the
The use of pieces with two different shapes is common in the New Kingdom (Piccione, Senet, p. 18).
356
challenges in achieving a successful afterlife.
There are parallels to the game pieces
at the site of the Late Middle Kingdom royal tomb at South Mazghuna, excavated by
Mackay.1213 These objects were reportedly found in a Dynasty XVIII grave in the
southwest corner. The only items in this burial were a body within a coffin and a box
containing the game pieces, and there was no pottery. However, it is relatively clear,
based on other burials in the same area, that this tomb and its contents likely date to the
reign of Thutmosis III.1214 The dating of the senet pieces found just outside the enclosure
of S9 at South Abydos is uncertain.
V.E.8. Sealings and Sealing Clay

Though the recent excavations at the tomb of S9 clearly revealed a few examples
of sealings from Dynasty XIII, there were no names, which could be reconstructed. Only
a common name component, Seneb, was visible. The other sealings display decorative
motifs incorporating both hieroglyphs and borders.
Most were attached to wood and
cords while one had the impression of papyrus upon it.

Another set of objects, which may be related to seal impressions is that of
cylindrical clay rolls. A similar, longer version of these items were found in the
Senwosret III town site at South Abydos, and Wegner believes that these objects are
1212
For a complete study of this game, see Piccione, "Senet." See also T. Kendall, "Games," in D.B.
Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2 (Oxford, 2001), p. 2.
1213
Since this dating is based upon seals, it should be noted that these objects carry the name of this king
long after his reign, making this a terminus post quem.
1215
For a discussion of the types of geometric designs, see R. Bianchi, "Scarabs," in D.B. Redford, ed., The
Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 3 (Oxford, 2001), p. 180; D. O'Connor, "The Chronology of
Scarabs of the Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period," JSSEA 15 (1985), pp. 21-28.
357
portable clay rolls to be pinched off and used as sealing mud.1216 At S9, these objects
were only 8.98-9.59 cms in length and 2.54 to 1.72 cms in diameter. Some of the 152
fragments (three complete) were more oval than truly round, and it was not uncommon
for these objects to have both white and red pigment upon them. Similar red paint was
found upon the jar stoppers within the larger foundation deposit.
Interestingly, these objects were found beneath the surfaces to the north and east
of the northeastern corner of the enclosure wall. Inside the enclosure, these objects were
found above and around the surface as well as below it. The reason why such objects, if
they were indeed portable sealing clay, would be beneath the floors is uncertain unless
they were placed there as foundation deposits. Also, no evidence was found that any of
these rolls had been pinched in order to make a sealing.
V.E.9. Other Objects

Two small objects were found in the excavations of S9 in 2003. One bone needle,
measuring 5 by 0.2 by 0.1 cms, was broken at its tip. Another bone object was the top of
an unknown item with horizontal lines inscribed into it.
VI. Owners of Tombs S9 and S10 at Abydos

The Dynasty XIII Ramesseum Onamastacon has a list of temples, towns, and forts
from south to north, including a mortuary monument of Amenemhet III (bS(?J Imn-m-hct
m^-hrw), the town of Wah-Sut, which is associated with the funerary establishment of
Personal communication.
358
Senwosret III at South Abydos, and the town of Abydos itself, respectively.1217 In the
list, there is no mention of the temple of a Dyansty XIII king to the north of that of
Senwosret III. Thus, it is either the case that a temple had not yet been constructed, the
cult was centered inside the Senwosret III temple or was considered to be a part of this
establishment, or the owners of S9 and S10 were venerated elsewhere at Abydos. An
offering table found to the north of the Senwosret III temple suggests that the cult of
Amenemhet III was located in the area.1218 Interestingly, Brooklyn Papyrus 35.1446 lists
a temple of an Amenemhet at Abydos with a different name than the one mentioned
above (hnw?Imn-m-hit
nh dtrnhh)}219
Prior to the recent development of the new chronological relationship between the
Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period, it seemed likely that some of the
Dyansty XIII kings may have been buried at Abydos, as they lost access to their
traditional cemeteries in the Memphite region due to the activities of the Hyksos there.1220
However, now it seems more likely that the location of tombs at Abydos was a deliberate
decision following in the tradition of Senwosret III of Dyansty XII.
In the temple of Senwosret III at South Abydos, the seals of Neferhotep were
prolific within the strata dated to him.1221 There is also a treasurer prior to Neferhotep
named Senebsumai.1222 It is possible that this treasurer was a participant in the
1217
A. Gardiner, Ancient Egyptian Onomastica (Oxford, 1947), PI. 2, lines 210-212. Along with this
source, a monument of Amenemhet is denoted as belonging to the third king of that name in a list of his
emit establishments in the Rekhmire scenes (Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 31. 43-45).
1218
1219
1220 O'Connor suggests that some of the later tombs of Dynasty XIII might be present at South Abydos,
since there is no trace of them at Thebes (O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," pp. 57, 64, n. 25).
1221
Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 41, 313-315.
1222
Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 41, 343-344, 348.
359
construction of S9 or S10.
One attractive explanation for the ownership of the S9 and S10 at South Abydos
is that they belonged to important national or local officials, possibly during the reign of
Senwosret III or a subsequent ruler.1223 At Dahshur, Mastaba tomb 17 has been identified
by Simpson as belonging to a vizier, Sobekemhet (northeast of the Pyramid of Senwosret
III) based on fragments of offering table and its inscriptions.1224 This tomb is located
within the enclosure wall of the king, suggesting an elevated status of this already high
position during late Dynasty XII.1225 Mastaba 2, also found north of the pyramid
complex of Senwosret III, belonged to another vizier, Khnumhotep.1226 Though viewing
S9 and S10 as subsidiary monuments to the Senwosret III tomb at South Abydos might
be plausible, it seems more likely that these tombs follow that of Amenemhet III at
Hawara based upon their architectural components. In fact, S9 itself seems to be an
abbreviated form of a pyramid in its subterranean plan with a superstructure similar to
that at South Mazghuna. Certainly, structurally, these tombs fit well into the Late Middle
Kingdom royal funerary monument corpus, regardless of the owner. If they do prove to
be non-royal, then certainly a reevaluation of the others in the north would be necessary,
especially since the owners of most remain unknown.
Interestingly, without knowing about S9 and S10, Stadelmann hypothesized that
the "Unfinished Pyramid" at South Sakkara may have simply been the Memphite tomb
and that the actual tomb of this king, maybe Neferhotep or Sobekhotep, presumably
1223
Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 45, 369, 381, n. 338; Weigall, Pharaohs, p. 98.
Simpson, "Sobkemhet," pp. 26-27.
1225
See Chapter 3, Section VIII.
1226
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 18-23; B. Porter and R.L.B. Moss,
Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs, and Paintings III (Oxford,
1931), p. 229. See also Chapter 1, Section II.A.l.
1224
360
Userkare Neferhotep I and Sobekhotep III or IV, may have been located at Abydos,
making the Memphite tomb a cenotaph.1227 Though he does note that the nearby tomb of
Khendjer was used, it does leave one with another interesting prospect for evaluating the
tombs at Abydos.
< The Dynasty XIII name found closest to S9 and S10 is that of a mayor of the
town, vizier, overseer of the six great temples, Aymeru from the "Dummy Mastabas" to
1 J'JQ
the east of the Senwosret III enclosure.
Quirke carefully suggests that this vizier, who
was contemporary to Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV is the same as that of a statue at Karnak

of a Neferkare Aymeru.1
The inscription on this statue makes the first reference to a
"Mansion of Millions of Years" {hwtnthh n rnpwt). Though admitting that this

institution, called Hotepka-Sobekhotep, might have been located in Thebes, Quirke also
notes that, since the sealing was found at South Abydos, that the monument might be
located between the Senwosret III enclosure and the pyramid of Ahmose.1230 Due to the
fact that most scholars have believed that all of the royal monuments in the South Abydos
region are cenotaphs, he suggested that a Dynasty XIII cult center might be located in this
area. Since the Theban and Abydos location for the "Mansion of Millions of Years,"
1227
Stadelmann, Agyptischen Pyramiden, pp. 253-254.

Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, p. 18, PL 39.13, 15; Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 259; Two Treasurers, p.
41; Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," p. 384. Other officials with seals in this area
included an overseer of the royal harem, Ay (imy-ript-nswt iy), and the guard of the hallway, Seneb (iry-ct
snb). See also Martin, Egyptian Administrative and Private-Name Seals, pp. 7, 10 nos. 18, 49, PL 14.14.
1229
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 260; G. Haeny, "New Kingdom 'Mortuary Temples' and 'Mansions of
Millions of Years,'" in B.E. Schafer, ed., Temples of Ancient Egypt (Ithaca, NY, 1997), p. 89; Mariette,
Karnak, Etude topographie et archeologique, PL 8.r; Quirke, "Temple of the King," p. 42. Vemus
identifies this inscription with the vizier of Neferhotep I and Sobekhotep IV. He has the same second name
1228
as his father Iymcru (Vernus, Le Surnom, p. 4). It should be noted that the vizier Iymeru Neferkare is
connected with the official Nubankh, who created many of the graffito found in the Cataract region for
members of the family of Neferhotep I. This official was active at Abydos during the reign of Sobekhotep
IV when he was promoted (Habachi, "Vizier Iymeru," pp. 261-278). See also D. Franke, Das Heiligtium
des Heqaib auf Elephantine, Geschichte eines Provinzheiligglim im Mittleren Reich, Studien zur
Archaologie und Geschichte Altagyptens 9 (Heidelberg, 1994), p. 71.
1230
Delange suggests a location near Karnak (Delange, Statues Egyptiennes du Moyen Empire, p. 68).
361
belonging to Sobekhotep IV, are both possible, an associated funerary complex could
also be found at Abydos. However, if either S9 or S10 belonged to this king, then he
possessed a true tomb here rather than a cenotaph. If this identification is correct, then a
likely candidate for the second monument might be this king's brother Neferhotep I.
Interestingly, Amenemhet Ill's cartouche fragments have been found at the
1 O'X 1
Senwosret III mortuary temple at South Abydos.
Wegner suggests that Senwosret III
may have died before he could complete his mortuary temple at Abydos, and it may be
the case that his son quickly finished the monument before the funeral. Nonetheless,
Leahy notes the stela of Sehotepibre, Cairo CG 20538, vs. 21-2, which refers to a single
group of priests for both Amenemhet III and Senwosret III as being housed at WahSutm2
Obviously, this statement refers to either the temple of Senwosret III with the
elements belonging to Amenemhet III or to a separate temple of the latter nearby. It may
be the case that a cenotaph of Amenemhet III is located in this area. Several candidates
are possible including an unfinished tomb to the local south of that of Senwosret III as
well as S9 or S10. After Amenemhet III, there is evidence that Dynasty XIII kings were
also represented by activity at South Abydos. The temple of Senwosret III and its
associated town at South Abydos extend from the reign of this king through the end of
Dynasty XIII (temple) and possibly through the early New Kingdom (town) as indicated
by ceramics and seal impressions.1
Sealings of the following rulers have been found at
South Abydos: Nymaatre Amenemhet III (cylinders and impressions), Neferhotep I

1231
Randall-Maclver and Mace, El Amrah and Abydos I, pp. 59, 60; Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom
State Activity," pp. 259-259; Mortuary Temple, pp. 167-169.
1232
Leahy, "Protective Measure," p. 59, n. 80. See also Wegner, Mortuary Temple, p. 43.
1233
Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," pp. 177-182,186; "Excavations at the Town,"
pp. 4,14, 37-38; "Organization of the Temple," pp. 83, 96; "Institutions," p. 104; "The Town of Wah-Sut,"
pp. 306-308.
362
(impressions-numerous),1234 Khahotepre (Sobekhotep V) (5), Merneferre Ay (scarabs and

impressions3; many at mayor's house), Wahibre Ibiaw (mixed contexts), as well as
Swadj[en]re Nebiriau I (impressions; Dynasty XVIl).1235
At the Osiris temple, there were fragments from ka chapels and other monuments
of Amenemhet III, Khaankhre Sobekhotep II, Neferhotep I, and Sobekhotep IV.
The
private stela of Amenysoneb also records the renovation of the temple originally
constructed by Senwosret I in Dynasty XII.1237 A treasurer, named snb-sw-m-c(i) was
active at Abydos (prior to Neferhotep I).1238 There is also a possible ka chapel of
Sobekhotep III.1239 Neferhotep I clearly also participated in activities at Abydos as
represented by the inscription of Iykhernofret as well as his own stelae (originally set up
by Wegaf).
Along the edge of the cultivation, more chapels have been proposed,
including one of Khaankhre Sobekhotep II, possibly including a tomb or cenotaph,

between the temples of Ramses II and Seti I.1241 Wegner has dated a statue, now located
in the courtyard of the Sety I temple within a naos, that was originally found at Abydos in
Another seal of Khasekhemre Neferhotep was found at Abydos (Hornung and Staehelin, Skarabaen
und andere Siegelamulette, pp. 215, no. 126, PL 211).
1235
Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," pp. 178, 180, 386, 187-189; "Excavations at the
Town," pp. 37, Fig. 20; Mortuary Temple, pp. 41, 313-315, 340.
1236
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 41; Kemp, "Abydos," p. 31; Leahy, "Protective Measure," p. 59;
Mariette, Monuments d'Abydos, p. 234; W.M.F. Petrie, Abydos I, Egypt Exploration Fund 22 (London,
1902), pp. 2, 15, 20, 29, 74, 88; Petrie, Abydos II, pp. 17, 34, 35,43, PI. 28; Wegner, "A Study of Middle
Kingdom State Activity," pp. 102,107, 108,127,409, 385; Weigall, Guide to the Antiquities, pp. 5-6;
Weill, "Complements," p. 27. See also Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 5, 36, nos. 10, 40.
1237
Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 63; Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," pp.
103, n. 147, 115-116, 120, 385. For a translation of this text, see Breastead, Ancient Records, pp. 342-344.
1238
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 57-59, a, b, f-n; Two Treasurers, pp. 5, 21, 41; Wegner, Mortuary
Temple, p. 343.
1239
Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," p. 384.
1240
Leahy, "Protective Measure," pp. 41-60; Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," p. 121.
1241
Bresciani, "Un Edificia," pp. 11-17; Leahy, "Protective Measure," p. 59, n.80; Wegner, "A Study of
Middle Kingdom State Activity," pp. 133, 384.
363
the 1960's, to late Dynasty XII-XIII or XVI/XVII.
Thus, there may have been
significant royal activity at this site, including kings, whose inscriptions have not been
found archaeologically.
Ceramic evidence from S9 may also be considered in the discussion of the dating
of the South Abydos tombs. Some caution, however, must be extended to such an
endeavor as funerary assemblages can be misleading with older forms being used.
Unfortunately, the most diagnostic forms are from the two foundation deposit pits. The
vessel indices of the hemispherical cups seems to indicate a very early date for these
tombs. However, other forms fall more within the Complex 6/7, dating to Amenemhet
III through Awibre Hor, of the Memphite region.1243
The ceramic material at S9 certainly falls within the Late Middle Kingdom era.
Due to a lack of royal names within the context of intact archaeological contexts in
general, it is uncertain as to exactly when the characteristic Lower Egyptian forms such
as Marl C storage jars fall out of use in Upper Egypt. Though these types may extend
until the end of Dyansty XIII, there is no doubt that they continue until at least the reign
of Awibre Hor as is evident in the sequence in the funerary complex of Amenemhet III at
Dahshur (Sectors 4-6).1244
~ Wegner, "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," p. 386; Mortuary Temple, p. 45; D. Wildung,
Egyptian Saints. Deification in Pharaonic Egypt (New York, 1977), pp. 15, Fig. 11. This statue has
parallels to those of Amenemhet III (Cairo 43289, Copenhagen AEIN 1482, and those at Hawara).
1243
Bietak connects Dahshur complex 3,6 and 7 to Tell el-Dab'a H(d/2) and Gl-3(c) (Bietak, "Hyksos
Rule," p. 126; Holladay, "Eastern Nile Delta," pp. 184-185). The ceramic corpus from the temple is also
similar to complex 6/7 at Dahshur (Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 233-252).
1244
Bourriau, "Relations," pp. 129-130.
364
VII. Conclusions
At South Abydos, there are two previously excavated "mastaba" tombs, S9 and
S10, which have many of the architectural characteristic of the Late Middle Kingdom
royal mortuary corpus in the Memphite region. Though these tombs are not located
within the key region identified in the previous chapter, their relationship to theJunerary
complex of the Dynasty XII king, Senwosret III, is significant. Due to the veneration of
the god Osiris both as an early mythical king of Egypt as well as his association with
deceased rulers, Abydos became the location of a secondary Middle Kingdom royal
cemetery.
S9 and S10 are typical monuments within the Late Middle Kingdom royal
mortuary monument corpus. While S9 is most closely linked with South Mazghuna, S10
shares many characteristics with the tomb model from the complex of Amenemhet III at
Dahshur in a deposit dated to early Dynasty XIII. These monuments share limestone
corridors, quartzite portcullis stones, hidden passages, turning chambers, quartzite
sarcophagi, enclosures, sinusoidal walls, ramps, and possible chapels.
New excavations at S9 have revealed problems with Weigall's original plan.
Further investigation in the future will likely provide affirmation for the changes
proposed here including aspects of the corridors and the mechanics of the portcullises and
sarcophagus lid. Additional elements of the superstructure have already been discovered
including a blocked entrance in the enclosure wall and a possible chapel, which is linked
spatially to the sarcophagus chamber.
Though so far only highly fragmentary remains have been recovered, the objects
from S9 have parallels in other contemporary royal tombs. It appears that most of the
365
objects were destroyed and thrown outside of the tomb, allowing for the reconstruction of
the contents of the burial through careful excavation and recording. Pottery, which is
also in small pieces, indicates that this tomb dates to the first half of Dynasty XIII, but a
more precise assignment is not yet possible.
366
Chapter 5
Analysis of the Late Middle Kingdom Royal Funerary Monuments and
Their Impact on the Current Understanding of Dynasty XIII Kingship
I. Introduction
In Chapter 3, a typology of architectural characteristics which constitute the
Dynasty XIII royal funerary monument corpus was formed while, in Chapter 4, two
structures at Abydos were added to this group. In this section, the discussion will turn to
the overall corpus including the order of the tombs and the differences between these and
contemporary court and private tombs. Additional common traits of the Late Middle
Kingdom tombs and the religious ideology expressed through their architectural forms
will also be addressed. The date of the destruction of these royal tombs will be discussed,
and a comparison between the features of these funerary monuments and those of the
Dynasty XVII kings will also be made.
II. Chronological Order of the Late Middle Kingdom Royal Tombs

Determining the chronological order of the Late Middle Kingdom tombs is a
difficult if not impossible task. Nonetheless, a detailed study of these structures would
not be complete without a consideration of this topic. Thus, here, Dodson's
chronological arrangement of these tombs will be outlined, and a new order will be
proposed.
367
II.A. Dodson's Chronological Arrangement

Dodson has attempted to place all the accepted and many of the potential Dynasty
XIII monuments into chronological order (Table 5.1).1245 His methodology centers
around the concept that the complexity of the tombs increases, the sarcophagus chambers
become deeper and the monuments progress from north to south within each location.1246
Dodson also points to the characteristics of the tombs identified with specific monarchs
in order to assign other rulers from the Turin King-List to monuments with unknown
owners.1247
The first three monuments in Dodson's sequence are all unexcavated, and the
precise order of these tombs is unclear since several combinations are possible (Lepsius
LIV, DAS 2, and DAS 16). As mentioned in Chapter 3, Section XI.AAa., relief
fragments found at Lepsius LIV, located to the southeast of the pyramid of Amenemhet II
at Dahshur, may indicate that the monument belonged to a ruler with this same name
(Amenemhet).1248 Thus, Dodson suggests that Amenemhet IV is a candidate for being
the owner of this tomb, while other kings with this name, such as Sekhemkare
Amenemhet, are also possible.1249 Next, Dodson argues that the pyramids to the north
and northwest (DAS 2 and 16) of the tomb of Ameny Qemau belong to two of the kings
1245
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 39; After the Pyramids, p. 15; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga,"
pp. 25-32, 38; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 330.
1246
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 43; The Canopic Equipment, pp. 29-36; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu
el Naga," p. 27; After the Pyramids, p. 8; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 326-329.
1247
1248
See Chapter 3, section XI.AAa.
1249
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 27, 31, 38. Note that Dodson states that other kings
with the name Amenemhet are not considered since they have double nomens. However, there could be
problems with these exclusions since private individuals with these names do not always use both in their
inscriptions (Dodson, After the Pyramids, p. 8).
368
Sequence Reign
Number
Khendjer
Khendjer
8
Intef/
"Unfinished" 9
Sobekhotep III/
Pyramid
Neferhotep I
Amenemhet IV/
Pyramid SE l o r 3
Sekhemkare Amenemhet
of
Amenemhet
II
Awibre Hor
Awibre Hor 6
DAS 2
Amenemhet IV/
lor 2
Nefrusobek/
(Dodson's
South
Wegaf/
Dahshur A)
Amenemhet Senebef/
S ekhemrekhutawy/
Sehotepibre/
Sankhibre Ameny Intef Amenemhet
DAS 17
(Dodson's
South
Dahshur B)
2 or 3
Ameny
Qemau
North
Mazghuna
South
Mazghuna
4
5
7
Nefrusobek/
Wegaf/
Amenemhet Senebef/
S ekhemrekhutawy/
Sehotepibre/
Ameny Qemau
Hotepibre Saharnedjeritef/
Khaankhre Sobekhotep II
Sedjefakare Kay Amenemhet/
Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet
Table 5.1. Dodson's chronological proposal for the Late Middle

Kingdom royal funerary monuments. The structures are listed from
North to South, and all possible owners are noted according to the von
Beckerath/Franke chronologies.
between Amenemhet IV and this ruler.1250 Because this scholar believes that the DAS 2
(Dahshur A) was built first, he excludes Amenemhet IV from possible ownership of the
369
DAS 17 (Dahshur B).1251

As for the excavated tombs, Dodson believes that of Ameny Qemau is the earliest
with its simple sarcophagus and overall plan.1252 Also, DAS 2 and 16, which are to the
north of the pyramid of Ameny Qemau, are placed prior to his following Dodson's northto-south chronological principle within each location. Using the same logic, Dodson
believes that the northernmost pyramid at Mazghuna, which is a more complicated
version of that of Ameny Qemau at Dahshur, dates to within a few reigns after it.1253
Awibre Hor, who was buried in a reused shaft tomb, appears in the Turin KingList (7.17) before Khendjer, and Dodson places his tomb between the two Mazghuna
pyramids since it displays a sarcophagus design similar to the earlier monuments while
the burial chamber has a gabled roof like those of South Mazghuna and Khendjer.1254
The structure of this tomb is reminiscent of those with a Type 2 sarcophagus (North
Mazghuna and Ameny Qemau).1255
Since Dodson places the shaft tomb of Awibre Hor between the pyramids of
North and South Mazghuna, the possessor of the former is a king that fits between
Ameny Qemau and Awibre Hor. Dodson chooses the two kings, Hotepibre
Saharnedjeritef and Khaankhre Sobekhotep II, whom he believes had relatively long
reigns, as potential owners of this tomb.1256 However, there are no indications as to how
1251
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 43; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 31, 38.
Naga," pp. 27, 30, 31; After the Pyramids, p. 14-15.
1253
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 33; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 28; After the
Pyramids, pp. 9, 14.
1254
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, pp. 35-36; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 30, 38.
1255
For common features with the Mazghuna pyramids, see Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," p. 13.
1256
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 43; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 31, 38; After the
Pyramids, p. 14.
1252
370
long the reigns of these rulers were, except the number of attestations. The two kings
with known regnal lengths are Sankhibre Amenemhet and Khaankhre Sobekhotep II,
each with four years.1257 Saharnedjeritef and Sehotepibre each had two years on the
throne, though the latter lacks significant archaeological monuments.
According to Dodson, the South Mazghuna pyramid follows the tomb of Awibre
Hor, as well as its northern neighbor with its more complex sand lowering system for the
sarcophagus. Thus, the South Mazghuna pyramid, which has a deeper burial chamber
than that of Ameny Qemau with room for the placement of goods above the coffin,
is
positioned between the first few reigns after Ameny Qemau and that of Khendjer, more
specifically being between Awibre Hor and the latter ruler.1259 Dodson considers
Sekhemrekhutawy Khabaw (H) and Sedjefakare Amenemhet as the likely builders of the
monument at South Mazghuna.1260 The similarly-structured Khendjer pyramid, at
Sakkara, has a deeper and larger burial chamber than that at Mazghuna.1261 Also,
Khendjer himself can be placed after the other two kings discussed above in position 7.20
in the Turin King-List.
Finally, the "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara (to the south of the tomb of
Khendjer) is dated to well after the reign of Khendjer due to the size and the increased
complexity of its halls and chambers.1262 Jequier had preliminarily assigned this tomb to
1257

Note that the change in the structure of the sarcophagus is due to the use of sand lowering system rather
than to increase the space for funerary goods, though certainly this area would have served such a purpose
1258
secondarily.
1259
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," pp. 40-41,43; The Canopic Equipment, pp. 33, 35; "From Dahshur to
Dra Abu el Naga," p. 29; After the Pyramids, pp. 10-11, 14.
1260
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 31, 38.
1261
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," pp. 40-41; The Canopic Equipment, pp. 33, 35; "From Dahshur to Dra
Abu el Naga," p. 29; After the Pyramids, pp. 10-11.
1262
Dodson, After the Pyramids, pp. 12, 14.
371
Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw.1263 Though Dodson agrees that this tomb must date to after
the reign of Khendjer, he thinks that the tomb shows far too many advances and must be
assigned to a later king such as Sobekhotep III or Neferhotep I.1264
Due to the fact that a large fragment of a pyramidion of Merneferre Ay was found
in the Delta, it is certain that this king had a pyramid. This evidence makes him the last
king of Dynasty XIII known to have had a large funerary monument. Dodson believes
that there may have been a royal cemetery in the Delta region, where this and another
uninscribed pyramidion were found.
He then suggests that other royal figures may
have also been buried outside of the Memphite region, as kingship weakened, and the
structure of the government fragmented.1266 Dodson also considers that the cemeteries of
the Dynasty XIII kings may have been moved southwards with the last being at Dra Abu
el-Naga near Thebes.1267
II.B. Problems with Dodson's Chronological Arrangement

Dodson's chronological arrangement of the tombs is not widely accepted, as
many Egyptologists, who have conducted general overviews of the architectural aspects
of pyramids, are reluctant to place them in any defined order. 26 Also, the sample size of
the corpus of royal funerary inscriptions, available for Dodson or any other scholar to use
1263

Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 43; The Canopic Equipment, p. 36, n. 91; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu
elNaga,"pp. 31, 38.
1265
1266
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 44; After the Pyramids, p. 15. C.C. Edgar found the head of a late
Dynasty XII or early Dynasty XIII king's statue out of context at Kom el-Hisn (Silverman, "Royal Head
with White Crown," p. 90). There is no evidence for Dynasty XIII royal tombs at this site.
1267
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 44.
1268
For example, see Verner, Great Monuments, p. 437.
1264
372
in order to create a meaningful chronological typology is too small.12 9

Another major caveat to the chronological assignment of royal funerary structures
is that the order of the rulers in the Turin King-List is still debated, so it is difficult to
make a correspondence between rulers and monuments based upon this document.
For example, Ameny Qemau's nomen does not appear as such in this document, his
prenomen remains unknown, and his canopic jars provided the only evidence that he
existed.1271 Nonetheless, the fact that Hotepibre Saharnedjeritef, who is found in Turin
King-List 7.8 is known to have used the phrase, "son (sj) of Qemau" allows for him to be
placed after this king with some degree of certainty.1272 As discussed in Chapter 1, he
may be listed as Amenemhetre in line 7.7.1273
Dodson, as well as other scholars,1274 often rely on a model, whereby the tombs
become more complex over time, moving in sequential order over the terrain of the
Memphite region.1275 However, one must note that the first tomb to display the Late
Middle Kingdom characteristics including the sand lowering system was the Dynasty XII
ruler, Amenemhet III, at Hawara. Thus, the tomb of Ameny Qemau, if regarded as more
simple due to its use of a Type 2 sarcophagus, is actually a regression in progress.
Though Dodson recognizes that the Hawara monument has this basic system,1276 he
ignores this problem due to the fact that this earlier monument lacks built-in coffin and
1269

1271
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 43; After the Pyramids, p. 14; Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of
Ameny-Qemau," pp. 329-330.
1270
1272
1272
Section IV.B.4.
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, pp. 29-36; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga."; Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 83.
Scholars have also questioned the method of ordering tombs according to their geographical positions,
since the royal cemetery was often moved from one site to another (Lehner, Pyramids, p. 285).
1276
1273
1274
373
canopic niches in its monolithic quartzite base, something, which cannot itself nullify the
significance of the displayed technological development. It is also important to realize
that the "Unfinished" Pyramid at South Sakkara, supposedly the most advanced of all,
incorporates both types of sarcophagi in its two-burial chamber design. Thus, it is clear
that the development of the architecture may be more complicated than it would first
appear. The chronological framework of the Late Middle Kingdom tombs may not be
tied to the structure of the sarcophagus chamber and may have a more standardized form
than acknowledged in the past.
Interestingly, other scholars have also used the designs of the sarcophagus
chamber to arrange the tombs in chronological order, but many have come to different
conclusions than Dodson. While Dodson places South Mazghuna after North Mazghuna,
Verner argues that the latter is later than the former, due in part to the fact that the
southern monument has the same structure as that in the complex at Hawara.1277 He also
stresses the fact that the passageways in the southern tomb are more complex, thus,
assigning a date based on the corridor arrangement rather than the structure of the burial
chambers. Though Verner has criticized Dodson's chronological placement of the Late
Middle Kingdom corpus, his own dating of the Mazghuna tombs is hampered by his
belief that these monuments must belong to the last kings of Dynasty XII. Like Verner,
Stadelmann dated South Mazghuna from the end of Dynasty XII to the beginning of
Dynasty XIII based on its likeness to Hawara, while placing the northern one into
Dynasty XIII.1278 Meanwhile, Hayes argues that the Mazghuna pyramids are closer in
1277
1278
Verner, Great Monuments, p. 432-433, 437.

Stadelmann, Agyptischen Pyramiden, pp. 247-248.
374
date to the pyramids at South Sakkara because of their structural similarities.
II.C. Suggestions for the Order of the Tombs

There are many possible combinations for the order of the excavated Late Middle
Kingdom tombs from Amenemhet III through Dynasty XIII. Thus, any further
development of a chronological order can serve as little more than a suggestion unless
further archaeological investigations take place at these sites. A sequence for the tombs
based upon an analysis of the available architectural evidence would appear to represent a
valid starting point.
The Pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara is the first example of the Late Middle
Kingdom tomb type as defined in this thesis (Fig. 3.3). The plan of the corridors leading
to the sarcophagus with portcullises and changes in level are the characteristics of the
royal funerary monuments of the era. Next, it is likely that the pyramid at South
Mazghuna was constructed either at the end of Dynasty XII or the beginning of Dynasty
XIII (Fig. 3.13). The plan of the substructure of this monument is a condensed form of
that found at Hawara. The location of the entrance to the tomb remained in the south, but
rather than being constructed in separate trenches, the ones at South Mazghuna are all
within a single pit. In turn, S9 at Abydos appears to be an abbreviated form of the
pyramid at South Mazghuna with a tightly arranged substructure as well as a chapel on
the eastern side of the enclosure (Fig. 4.3). S10 likely closely follows S9 since the latter
is located in the primary position next to the tomb of Senwosret III, and a tomb model
1279
Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 43. Lehner also thinks that the pyramid at North Mazghuna may
date well into Dynasty XIII (Lehner, Pyramids, p. 285).
375
closely resembling S10 was found in an early Dynasty XIII context in the funerary
complex of Amenemhet III at Dahshur (Figs. 4.4, 3.17). It is also possible that S9 and
S10 were constructed after the monument of Ameny Qemau at Dahshur (Fig. 3.11). The
general form of this tomb is the same as S9 except it is less condensed and has the
simpler Type II sarcophagus type. Whichever order these tombs- should be in, there is
little doubt that they are closely related chronologically.
The tomb of Awibre Hor likely follows that of Ameny Qemau since the level of
the sarcophagus and its arrangement mimic that of the former king's pyramid (Fig. 3.15).
Khendjer's tomb may be the next in the sequence, as he returns to the Amenemhet III
model with a Type I sarcophagus (Fig. 3.6). Interestingly, both of these pyramids also
had a wooden door at the base of the stairs leading to the tomb. The following royal
tomb may be North Mazghuna since it also has the wooden door (Fig. 3.12). However,
this example is a linear expansion of that of Ameny Qemau including the Type II
sarcophagus. The "Unfinished" Pyramid also follows the linear plan but has two burial
chambers, one of each type (Fig. 3.9). This arrangement confirms that the two
sarcophagus types were contemporary and may have represented different religious ideas
(or two different manifestations of the same idea), which were then combined within this
monument. The pyramid of Merneferre Ay was likely the last of Dynasty XIII and was
relatively small as indicated by the slope of the pyramidion. It is likely that other
unidentified Dynasty XIII tombs between Khendjer and Ay may also be relatively small
in size.
376
III. Tombs of Royal Women and Private Officials

Before turning again to the royal tombs of the Late Middle Kingdom, it is
essential to discuss the nature of the known tombs of royal women and private officials
from the period. In this manner, it will be possible to determine the uniqueness of royal
funerary'provisions.- Unfortunately, like the royal examples, there are few datable court
and private tombs for this period, and the objects from within are often in mixed contexts,
making it difficult to piece together the original contents of the tombs.
III.A. Tombs of Royal Women

III.A.1. Neferuptah
At Hawara, funerary equipment of a princess Neferuptah, who may have been a
sister or daughter of Amenhotep III, was found within the burial chamber of the king.128
However, later, this princess was interred in her own small pyramid within the region.12.
The excavators, Farag and Iskander, suggested that the monument had no entrance
because the princess was already dead when it was constructed.1282 Thus, her body was
laid within the burial chamber 2 kms southeast of Hawara once preparations had been
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 170; Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, p. 29; Lehner, Pyramids, pp. 182183; Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara, pp. 15-16, Pis. 13-14; Uphill, Gateway, pp. 79-81; Vemer, Great
Monuments, p. 430.
1281
Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 161; Callender, "Renaissance," p. 170; Farag and Iskander, Neferwptah;
Franke, "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt," p. 746; L. Habachi, "Nagib Farag- Zaky Iskander, The Discovery
of Neferuptah," Studies on the Middle Kingdom, Studia Aegyptiaca 10 (Budapest, 1987), pp. 199-200;
Holzl, "Hawara," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology) of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999),
p. 365; Janosi, Die Pyramidenanlagen, pp. 67-70; B. Williams, "The Date of Senebtisi at Lisht and the
Chronology of Major Groups and Deposits of the Middle Kingdom," Serapis 3 (1975-1976), p. 44.
Williams argues that this monument was simply a stone chamber with no shaft or pyramid, though a
superstructure of unknown type may have originally topped it. Unlike the tombs of earlier princesses, this
one contained no queen's ware, though certain special forms were present (S.J. Allen, "Queens' Ware," p.
47).
1282
Farag and Iskander, Neferwptah, pp. 1, 105-106. Note that human skin and mummy wrappings were
found within the flooded sarcophagus of Neferuptah within her pyramid. Thus, it is certain that this tomb
was used for her body.
377
made, and the structure was built above her remains.
III.A.2. Princess Nubheteptikhered

Though several female burials, which were found in Dynasty XII royal contexts,
have been proposed to date to Dynasty XIII, only one, that of Nubheteptikhered
(Nebhotepti, the Child), is relatively certain. The burial of this princess was found in the
shaft tomb to the west of the interment of king, Awibre Hor in the pyramid complex of
Amenemhet III at Dahshur.1283 Though there is no reference to Awibre Hor in her tomb,
the proximity of the burials may indicate that the princess was the daughter or possibly
even the wife of this king.1284 Also, her coffin contained two texts, CT 788a and PT 638,
which were located in similar positions to that of Awibre Hor (exterior foot and head).1285
Like the tomb of the ruler, that of Nubheteptikhered appears to have been
enlarged and reshaped for her burial. It had been the location of the interment of a
member of the court during the reign of Amenemhet III. The gallery itself was 14.6 m in
length, with a vaulted, brick ceiling.1286 This hallway ended in a stone wall, which
blocked the entrance to the burial chamber.
The burial chamber was almost intact, and the excavators found many objects
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 107-115, Pis. 136, 138-139; Cron and Johnson,
"De Morgan at Dahshur," p. 62; Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 42. For further bibliography concerning
the tomb and its contents, see Porter and Moss, Topographical Bibliography III (2), p. 889. For a
discussion of the similarities and differences in the contents of this tomb, that of Awibre Hor, and others,
see Aufrere, "Le roi Aouibre Hor," pp. 38-39.
1284
Cron and Johnson, "De Morgan at Dahshur," p. 60; Williams, "Date of Senbtisi," p. 44.
1285
Lesko, Spells, p. 54, Da 2 C and Da 4 C. See also Lapp, Typologie der Sarge, p. 240, Da8.
1286
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, p. 107, Fig. 249.
378
within the room.
These items included eight ceramic jars; four platters, two of which
contained small bowls holding organic material; one plate, in which black powder was
preserved; parts of bird and bovine bones; a long, rectangular case housing a mace, eight
arrows, canes of various varieties (was, crook, etc.); a silver mirror with a blue-painted,
wooden handle; and an object of unknown identity. A second case contained jars (two
types), which held ointments. Each vessel was labeled with the name of its contents.
The sandstone sarcophagus was located in the floor of the burial chamber beneath
the pavement stones, upon which the items described above sat.
The coffin was made
of wood and was decorated with bands of inscribed gold leaf, most of which were poorly
preserved and had fallen from their original positions. The mummy itself was also in bad
condition as most of the flesh had deteriorated due to humidity, leaving only the skeleton.
The body was laid in an extended position with the head at the north and the feet at the
south. The head was turned to the east, and the hands rested upon the pelvis. The body
had been covered with gilded plaster, including a cartonage funerary mask, all of which
had collapsed to powder. The funerary mask had been adorned with a uraeus and a
vulture, inlaid with precious stones and metals. In death, the princess wore a silver
diadem, bracelets of gold and valuable beads, a beaded collar with golden falcon
terminals, and a carnelian net. Within the coffin, other objects included a dagger, a
flagellum, three scepters and canes, and two alabaster jars. To the east of the southern
end of the coffin, the canopic box rested with its decoration matching that of the former.
The canopic jars were made of alabaster and had lids in the form of human heads. On the
1287
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 108-110, Figs. 251-262. S.J. Allen suggests that
the publication of the pottery may show queen's ware, though this is not certain (S. Allen, "Queens' Ware,"
p. 47).
1288
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894, pp. 110-115, Figs. 263-269.
379
1980
canopic jars, the texts are found in three columns and contain later forms of the spells.
For example, the canopic jars of Nubheteptikhered, like the chest of Awibre Hor,
discussed above, exchanged hip cwy for sjp-si, the former carrying the idea of an
"protective embrace," commonly found in later versions as well as using ddmdwto
introduce the formulae.
290
The style of the coffin and canopic box was also of a later
Middle Kingdom style with curved end-boards, something not found in the tomb of
Awibre Hor, though already in existence before his reign.1291
III.A.3. Other Princesses
In recent years, there has been a debate concerning whether other examples of
Dynasty XIII royal female burials have been found. Today, some scholars have
dismissed a number of examples originally proposed by Williams to date to this time
period.
Williams used the coffin styles and the characteristics of the funerary
equipment to suggest a Dynasty XIII date for these tombs.

The court tombs, which possibly date to Dynasty XIII, include those of Ita and
Khenmet, and Keminebu at the Amenemhet II pyramid complex at Dahshur and that of
1289
1290

Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 328. See also Liischer, Untersuchungen, pp. 24,
27.
1291
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, pp. 32-33, n. 74; "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 30.
Swelim and Dodson report that there are no bird hieroglyphs represented on the canopic jars of this
princess (Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 328). However, there is the head of a duck
in the phrase "king's daughter." The symbol for the duck is likely abbreviated due to space rather than
indicating a further development in the evolution of mutilated hieroglyphs. It should be noted that the Other
inscriptions in the burial chamber do have the mutilated birds expected for the time period.
1292
B. Williams, "Date of Senebtisi"; J.K. Hoffmeier, "The Coffins of the Middle Kingdom," pp. 72-76;
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 83-84; Williams, "Problems," pp. 103-115. Dodson originally also dated
these tombs to Dynasty XIII before later reassigning many of them to Dynasty XII, often, but not always,
within the reign of their associated royal funerary complex (Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," p. 42; "From
Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," p. 31).
380
Senebtisi in the mortuary installation of Amenemhet I at Lisht. Dodson has suggested

that the members of the court desired to be buried near the affluent Dynasty XII kings.129j
This phenomenon is found in the tombs of officials from the time period, who were
buried in underground structures, which extended beneath the walls of the funerary
complex of Teti at Sakkara.1294
As Williams noted, coffin lid shapes have included flat (Awibre Hor), arched
without rectangular ends (Ita and Khenmet), and arched with rectangular ends
(Nubheteptikhered and Senebtisi).
With the use of this information, as well as styles
of maces and flails, he established the order: Awibre Hor, Ita and Khenmet, and
Nubheteptikhered and Senebtisi.
Dodson, who also studied coffin types, states that the style of the coffin and
canopic box of Senebtisi, with its curved upper and flat under sections, dates to late
Dynasty XII,
while Lapp argues for a late Dynasty XII to Dynasty XIII date.
The
structure of these objects later evolves into truly "arched" versions that continue into the
Second Intermediate Period. It should be noted that such a small sample of royal coffins,
with only one precisely datable specimen (Awibre Hor), certainly cannot provide for a
reliable chronological typology, especially in the Late Middle Kingdom, when a
relatively large amount of experimentation is visible on many cultural fronts. Thus, one
must rethink the dating of the tombs of these royal women using other material, which
has been ignored by scholars or has not been incorporated into a previous discussion.
1293
Dodson, "Tombs of the Kings," pp. 42-43.

Silverman, "Teti Pyramid Cemetery," pp. 267; 268, n. 32; 269; 271-272; "Non-Royal Burials."
1295
Farag and Iskander, Neferwptah, pp. 83-85, PI. 38; Williams, "Date of Senbtisi," pp. 42-43,45-47.
1296
Dodson, The Canopic Equipment, pp. 32-33, n. 74.
1297
Lapp, Typologie der Sarge, p. 286, L6a. See also W.K. Simpson, "Senebtisi," LA 5 (1984), p. 848.
1294
381
The tombs of the princesses Ita and Khenmet likely date to Dynasty XII, near the
reign of Amenemhet II.1298 Though these tombs are similar in content to that of
Nubheteptikhered of Dynasty XIII, some important differences are present. First of all,
these two women appear to be the original occupants of the burials, which are part of the
same monument, rather than having reused older tombs. Second, the structure of the
monument, buried deep within the sand, included significant layers of precisely cut Tura
limestone over the monument, a structure and quality of workmanship rare for Dynasty
XIII. Also, the quantity and materials (including lapis lazuli and other highly expensive
items) of the objects within the tomb were greater than those of Nubheteptikhered,
though Khenmet's possessions greatly outnumbered those of Ita, possibly showing a
difference in status. However, since Nubheteptikhered was buried adjacent to the king, it
would be expected that her tomb was well-furnished for her time. Next, the hieroglyphs
used near the body of the deceased in the tomb of Ita and Khenmet were not mutilated,
something completely inconsistent with the current data for Dynasty XIII royal family
burials. Finally, the hemispherical cups shown in the excavator's drawings appear to be
quite shallow, indicating that they are of a relatively early date.
However, it must be
noted that in the area with Khenmet's burial there was a paving stone, which had been
formed from a stela of a Dynasty XII prince, Amenemhet-Ankh, who must therefore
For the publication of the tomb, see de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour,l894-1895,
(Vienna, 1903), pp.
40-68; Figs. 96-110; Pis. 2, 5-12; Cron and Johnson, "De Morgan at Dahshur," pp. 51-56. Lilyquist
suggests that the jewelry may date to Amenemhet III (C. Lilyquist, "Granulation and Glass: Chronological
and Stylistic Investigations at Selected Sites, ca. 2500-1400 B.C.E.," BASOR 290 (1993), pp. 36-37). See
also Lapp, Typologie der Sarge, pp. 180-181, Da8, DalO, DA18; 286-287, L6a.
1299
de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchourl894-1895, Fig. 105; Do. Arnold, "Keramikbearbeitung in Dahschur
1976-1981," MDAIKSZ, (1982),pp. 60-62, Abb. 17-18.
382
predate her death,1300 though the date of this monument may well have been earlier in the
era.
To the south of the tombs of Ita and Khenmet, were two additional monuments.
The more eastern of these contained the interments of Queen Keminebu and an official
by the name of Amenhotep.1301 These tombs had suffered great damage at the expense of
tomb robbers. Fragments of inscriptions from objects from the burial chamber revealed
the names of the (latest?) owners. The hieroglyphs in these passages are mutilated,
possibly indicating that they are of a later date than the original complex. However,
whether they represent late Dynasty XII or Dynasty XIII cannot be determined. It has
been proposed that Keminebu belongs to Dynasty XIII due to the popularity of her name
at this time and the treasurer Amenhotep may be matched to that on a seal type, which
several scholars date to the reign of Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV or later.1302 Also, the
Book of the Dead, Chapter 30B appears on Keminebu's tomb, as it does in that of
Nubheteptikhered, indicating a Dynasty XIII date.1303
The tomb of Senebtisi was located between the enclosure wall and a mastaba to
the west of the pyramid of Amenemhet I.1304 Do. Arnold has suggested that this tomb
1300
Williams, "Problems," p. 105; "Date of Senbtisi," pp. 42-43.

Cron and Johnson, "De Morgan at Dahshur," pp. 57-58; J. de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour en 18941895 (Vienna, 1903), pp. 69-71, Figs. 113-117.
1302
Franke, Personendaten, p. 88, Doss. 87a; W. Grajetzki, "Der Schatzmeister Amenhotep und eine
weitere Datierungshilfe fur Denkmaler des Mittleren Reiches," BSEG 19 (1995), pp. 5-11; Two Treasurers,
p. 35; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 83, n. 260. Note that inscriptions from Amenhotep's burial chamber
were composed of mutilated hieroglyphs (de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour en 1894-1895, pp. 70, Figs.
1301
113-115).
1303
Lapp, Typologie der Sdrge, pp. 180-181, Dal 8; T.G. Allen, The Book of the Dead or Going Forth by
Day (Chicago, 1974), p. 40.
1304
Porter and Moss, Topographical Bibliography IV, p. 79; Williams, "Date of Senbtisi," p. 43. Hayes,
Scepter, pp. 285, Fig. 187; H. Willems, Chests of Life. A Study of the Typology and Conceptual
Development of Middle Kingdom Standard Class Coffins (Leiden, 1988), pp. 104-105; Liischer,
Untersuchungen, p. 28.
383
dates from late Dynasty XII to early Dynasty XIII based upon the rim shape of a Marl C
jar.1305 Bourriau has narrowed this time period further, noting that Senebtisi's burial
chamber does not contain objects with mutilated hieroglyphs, placing her in the reign of
Amenemhet III, prior Neferuptah.1306 Meanwhile, Ryholt pushes the date of this woman
into the first decade of Dynasty XIII, in order to argue that she is'likely the grandmother
of the brother kings (Khasekhemre Neferhotep I, Menwadjre Sahathor, and Khaneferre
Sobekhotep IV).1307 This correlation could be further supported by the more recent
argument of Bourriau that the tomb of Senebtisi belongs to early Dynasty XIII based
upon the fact that her tomb was likely constructed after a house, which is stratigraphically
associated with it and can be dated to Dynasty XIII.
It has become clear that the dating of the royal tombs of the Late Middle
Kingdom must be approached with the use of a multitude of data including context,
ceramics, and style of objects.1309 The analysis discussed above must end with the
following chronological suggestion: Ita and Khenmet (Amenemhet II), Keminebu (late
Dynasty XII/Dynasty XIII), Senebtisi (early Dynasty XIII), and Nubheteptikhered
(Awibre Hor).1310
1305
Di. Arnold, Senwosretl, p. 37, n. 114; Mace and Winlock, Senebtisi, pp. 110, Fig, 182.122, PI. 134.
The furnishings of the tomb of Senebtisi are similar to those of Nubheteptikhered and Awibre Hor.
However, there are no mutilated hieroglyphs.
1306
Bourriau, "Patterns of Change," p. 17.
1307
1308
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 83-84, n. 264, 126.
Bourriau, "Dolphin Vase," p. 114.

1309
See the concerns of Lilyquist regarding the use of style of limited objects to date this group in C.
Lilyquist, "A Note on the Date of Senebtisi and Other Middle Kingdom Groups," Serapis 5 (1979), pp. 2728.
1310
Note that Dodson now believes that all of these tombs are Dynasty XII except for the last (Dodson,
"The Tombs of the Queens," p. 131).
384
III.B. Private Elite Tombs

Many private elite burials of the Late Middle Kingdom appear to be in reused and
often modified tombs in Dynasty XII royal pyramid complexes.1311 Often, these
structures are made up of three rooms and do not resemble the form of royal
monuments.'1312 Others-, found outside of royal funerary structures, are also remarkably
different than those of kings. In other cases, a shaft leads to the tombs of multiple people
like in the case of those in the funerary complex of Khendjer.
Unfortunately,
however, the plans of very few of these tombs are published. Instead, early scholars
focused upon the objects found within them. Thus, it is difficult to discern the
architectural development of private tombs in the Late Middle Kingdom. Also, the
objects themselves often come from both primary and secondary burials within the tombs
or are in very disturbed contexts, and dating these individuals within this relatively short
expanse of time is often difficult if not impossible.1314 The provisions within these tombs
are fairly standardized including some royal insignia.1315 Overall, there is a decrease in
the amount of goods produced specifically for tombs during the Late Middle Kingdom,
and coffin styles in the north and south begin to diverge.1316
1311
For forms of elite tombs earlier in the Middle Kingdom, see Silverman, "Tombs of the Nobles in the
Middle Kingdom," pp. 364-381.
1312
For example, see the tomb of Amenysoneb at Hawara. This man likely lived during the reign of
Khendjer. His tomb was topped with a chapel displaying offering scenes (rare at this time) (E. FioreMarochetti, "Inscribed Blocks from Tomb Chapels at Hawara," JEA 86 (2000), pp. 43-44; Franke,
Personendaten,p. 108, Doss. 125; Petrie, Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara, pp. 18, Pis. 17.10, 11.12-14).
For an example at Lisht, see Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 221. See also Grajetzki, "Multiple Burials,"
pp. 16-34.
1314
Grajetzki, Burial Customs, p. 58.
1315
Grajetzki, Burial Customs, pp. 54-55.
1316
385
III.C. The Tombs of Royal Women and Private Officials and the Power of Kingship
Most of the royal family members and upper elite were buried in reused tombs
dated to Dynasty XII. These structures do not seem to have the same characteristics of
royal tomb substructures including that of Awibre Hor. Though it is possible, it is
unlikely that any of the Late Middle Kingdom pyramids were the tombs of anyone other
than deceased kings. There appears to have been a distinct difference in the nature of a
royal tomb, likely indicating that the king was superior in status both in living society as
well as in death.
The contents of the royal tombs, as represented by the furnishings in the tomb of
Awibre Hor, may not have been considerably different from those of elite private tombs.
It would appear that the king and his family likely set the example for the items to be
included in these tombs. Rather than being an infringement on the king's power, the
appearance of items including royal insignia within tombs and ideology concerning the
Osirian afterlife, was a continuing phenomenon dating at least to the end of the Old
Kingdom.1317 Lower level burials lacked the royal insignia, containing daily life objects
instead.1318
IV. The wig; Tomb Type

From the descriptions and definition of the tomb corpus in Chapter 3, it is clear
that the elements of the Dynasty XIII tombs became standardized in ways in which the
Kamrin, Cosmos, p. 10; D.P. Silverman, "Coffin Texts from Bersheh," pp. 140-141.
386
Dynasty XII monuments never had.1319 Also, many of the components, including those
thought to be measures of security, may have served more of a religious purpose than a
practical one.1320
Interestingly, the shape of the tombs of the Late Middle Kingdom rulers
resembles the hieroglyph for wsht(uBroad Court") (Fig. 5.1). This term is found in
contexts including palaces, temples, and (later) kings' tombs, and it may be the case that
the design of these structures in royal funerary monuments was meant to ideologically
place the deceased in the court (wshi) of Osiris.
Interestingly, in the New Kingdom,
Chapter 125 of the Book of Going Forth by Day (Book of the Dead) sets the judgment of
the dead before Osiris in the wshtmiHy ("Broad Hall of the Two Maats").1322 This term
is also used for a chamber in the royal tombs of the New Kingdom in the Valley of the
Kings.1 23 In the Middle Kingdom, Chapter 30, which was inscribed on heart scarabs
1319
See also D. McCormack, "The Significance of Royal Funerary Architecture in the Study of 13th
Dynasty Kingship."
1320
Di. Arnold ("Tombs: Royal Tombs," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt,
3 (New York, 2001), p. 427) argues that the hidden passages and blocking stones are measures of security
derived from those of Dynasty XII. While the origins of such components are certainly from the height of
the Middle Kingdom, it is suggested here that a change began to occur in the reign of Amenemhet III,
reinterpreting features as religious elements. Ropler-Kohler argues that these features reflect the hours of
the Amduat beginning with Senwosret II (RoBler-Kohler, "Konigliche Vorstellungen I," pp.73-96).
1321
R. Hannig, Agyptisches Worterbuch I (Mainz, 2003), p. 383; Grofies Handworterbuch (Mainz, 1995),
pp. 216-217. A. Erman and H. Grapow, Worterbuch der dgyptischen Sprache (Leipzig, 1926-1950), p.
366. Note that Old Kingdom pyramid complexes had a symbolic palace associated with the sed festival,
originating with the Djoser complex which has a sed festival court (Hawass, "Funerary Establishments of
Khufu, Khafra and Menkaura during the Old Kingdom," dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1987,
pp.
6, 136, 361-365, 389, 498, 545, 550, 632; H. Goedicke, "Zoser's Funerary Monument. 2. The 'Heb-sed
court'," BACE 8 (1997), pp. 33-48; J.P. Allen, "Reading a Pyramid," in C. Berger, et al., Hommages a Jean
LeclantI: Etudes Pharaoniques. Bibliotheque d'Etude 106/1 (1994), pp. 24-28).
1322
For a translation, see T.G. Allen, The Egyptian Book of the Dead Documents in the Oriental Institute
Museum at the University of Chicago (Chicago, 1960), pp. 200, S202; Going Forth By Day, pp. 97-102;
R.O. Faulkner, The Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead (Austin, 1972), pp. 29-34. For the text of this
section, see E. Naville, Das Aegyptische Todtenbuch der XVIII. bis XX. Dynastie (Berlin, 1886), p. 200.
1323
Erman and Grapow, Worterbuch, pp. 366-367; J. Romer, Valley of the Kings (New York, 1981), p. 280.
387
and other objects, refers to the judgment of the dead in the domain of the god.1324 Thus,
it may be the case that the concept of the wsMmJcty as envisioned in the later Book of the
Dead had already evolved and influenced the shape of the royal tomb, especially since
chapters of this compilation began to emerge in Sakkara, Dahshur, Bersha, Abydos,
Dendera, and Thebes during the Middle Kingdom.1325
antechamber
Un
burial
chamber
corridor on
eastern side
J ti
Figure. 5.1. The Hieroglyph for wsht"Broad Court."
Besides the overall shape of the tombs, other aspects of the royal funerary
monuments of the Late Middle Kingdom also appear to reflect religious ideas about the
afterlife rather than being practical architectural features. For example, the Type A
quartzite portcullis stones, many of which remained opened, are always encased in
limestone. As is evident from the robbers' tunnel found in the "Unfinished" Pyramid at
South Sakkara, this design was not an effective guard against thieves.1326 Likewise, the
1324
S. Quirke, "Judgment of the Dead," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Essential Guide to Egyptian
Mythology (New York, 2002), p. 174. For a translations of this spell, see T.G. Allen, Going Forth by Day,
pp. 39-40.
1325
See S. Quirke, "Book of the Dead 'Chapter 178': a Late Middle Kingdom Compilation or Excerpts?,"
in S. Grallert and W. Grajetzki, ed., Life and Afterlife in Ancient Egypt during the Middle Kingdom and
Second Intermediate Period (London, 2007), pp. 100-122; Lapp, Typologie der Sarge, p. 280, Dal8; T.G.
Allen, Going Forth by Day, pp. 242-243, 246-247: Da3c, SqlBe, B9c, Cairo Stela 20520, Die, T7c, T13c,
Papyrus ofMwty.
1326
Weigall remarked that the limestone ceilings of S9 were short-sighted, especially since the concealing
of the entrances drove people to look in the sand, eventually finding the limestone and then would likely hit
388
ceilings of many of the corridors and chambers were also limestone, allowing robbers to
simply smash into the structures after removing the brick material above.
Though the portcullis stones likely had some security implications, their
placement, often after entrance stairwells or shafts, also leads one to suspect that there are
other purposes for these structures. The reality of the matter, however, may have less to
do with the portcullis stones themselves, acting as doorways, than with the changes in
levels within the tombs.1327 Curiously, these level changes often add up to six, half the
number of hours in the night as the sun god and the deceased king journey through the
netherworld (See Table 5.2 and Appendix III).1328
In the tombs with more linear plans (S9, North Mazghuna, and the "Unfinished"
Pyramid), the changes in level seem to play less of a role in determining the "hours," and
several options have been proposed. North Mazghuna and the "Unfinished" Pyramid are
more complex and may represent a variation of the more standard types discussed above,
especially since they were larger than the other monuments (the "Unfinished Pyramid" is
almost double the size of the other Dynasty XIII royal funerary monuments). Also, the
latter integrates both sarcophagi types, requiring it to have a more complicated plan.
It may be the case that texts, such as the Book of the Hidden Chamber, are associated
with these particular architectural manifestations of the netherworld.1329
the sarcophagus chamber right away despite the closed porculli (Weigall, "Tomb and Cemetery," pp. 1516).
Ropier-Kohler understood the doorways as being important in the architecture of the tombs from
Senwosret II through Dynasty XIII, but she missed the significance of the changes in level beginning with
Amenemhet III at Hawara. See Ropier-Kohler, "Konigliche Vorstellungen I," Fig. 3.
1328
For the interpretation of late Dynasty XII-XIII royal tombs as Amduat tombs see, Ropier-Kohler,
"Konigliche Vorstellungen I," pp.73-96; Wegner, "Amduat Tomb."
9
For the possible relationship between this book and the tomb of Senwosret III at Abydos, see Wegner,
"Amduat Tomb." See also Hornung, Texte zum Amduat I(Geneve, 1987).
389
Hawara
Stairs D/N
(Portcullis U)
Corridor N
(Wooden Door)
Corridor D/E
(Portcullis U)
Corridor U/N-W
(Portcullis U)
Antechamber W
Corridor/
(Floor Passage D) Sarcophagus S
Khendjer
Stairs D/E
(Portcullis U)
Stairs D/E
(Portcullis U)
Corridor D/E
(Floor Passage D)
Corridor N
(Ceiling Passage U)
Antechamber W
Corridor/
South
Stairs D/N
Mazghuna (Portcullis U)
Stairs D/N
(Portcullis U)
Corridor? E
(Floor Passage D)
Corridor N
(Ceiling Passage U)
Antechamber W
Corridor/
Ameny
Qemau
Corridor W
(Portcullis U)
Corridor W
(Stairs D/N)
Corridor N
(Stairs D/W)
Corridor W
Antechamber S
(Portcullis)
Sarcophagus S
S9(2)
Corridor W
(Portcullis U)
Corridor W
Corridor N
(Floor Passage D)
Corridor W
Corridor S
(Portcullis D)
Corridor/
Sarcophagus S
Model
Shaft Base W
(Threshold)
Corridor W
Stairs/Corridor D/N- Corridor W-S
Antechamber
Corridor/
(Floor Passage D) W (Portcullis U)
(Floor Passage? D?) (Floor Passage D) Sarcophagus S
Table 5.2. Diagram showing the hours and their associated components within each monument. The actual
hours are shown with the transitions being in parentheses. Directions are indicated as N (north), S (south), E
(east), W (west), U (up), and D (Down). North Mazghuna, the "Unfinished" Pyramid and S10 are omitted.
However, unlike in the New Kingdom, when these texts were painted on the walls of
royal tombs, they may have been recited during the funeral at this time.1330 During part
of the Old Kingdom (starting with Dynasty V), Pyramid Texts lined the walls of the
rulers' tombs. These hieroglyphic resources provided the king with certain spells aimed
at keeping the rulers' spirit and body protected and giving him the tools necessary to
obtain a successful afterlife. These texts were often associated with specific parts of the
pyramid as they related to symbolic special orientation of each architectural
component.1331 Thus, already at this earlier date, it is clear that religious texts and
architectural components were used together in royal funerary structures.
The means, through which the architectural features of the tomb became used
during the funeral and presumably the daily perpetuation of the afterlife, cannot be
determined with certainty. However, one can imagine the general scene. The stairway
leading down into the tomb may have been connected to Re's descent into the
netherworld at sunset, with the transitions between "hours" being represented by changes
1330
W. Federn, "The 'Transformations' in the Coffin Texts. A New Approach," JNES 19, pp. 241-257; J.
Baines, "Modeling Sources, Processes, and Locations of Early Mortuary Texts," in S. Bickel and B.
Mathieu, D'un Monde a VAutre. Textes des Pyramides et Textes des Sarcophages ("Cairo, 2004), pp. 22, 25.
Wegner has suggested that papyrus versions of the Book of the Hidden Chamber may have existed in late
Dynasty XII (Wegner, "Amduat"). It should also be noted that eight secular documents have been found in
private tombs of the Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period, including Papyrus Bulaq 18. It
has been suggested that these texts were placed in tombs for religious purposes, related to obtaining an
afterlife (Quirke, "Investigation," p. 8). See also S. Quirke, '"Book of the Dead Chapter 178': a Late Middle
Kingdom Compilation or Excerpts?," in S. Grallert and W. Grajetzki, ed., Life and Afterlife in Ancient
Egypt during the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period (London, 2007), pp. 100-122.
Excerpts?," in S. Grallert and W. Grajetzki, ed., Life and Afterlife in Ancient Egypt during the Middle
Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period (London, 2007), pp. 100-122.
J.P. Allen, "Reading a Pyramid," pp. 5-28; "Pyramid Texts," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (Oxford, 2001), pp. 95-97; "The Cosmology of the Pyramid Texts," in W.K.
Simpson, ed., Religion and Philosophy in Ancient Egypt, Yale Egyptological Studies 3 (New Haven, 1989),
pp. 25-26. This same sort of link between location and spell is also found in the Coffin Texts and the Book
of Two Ways (on the floor most of the time) (L. Lesko, "The Texts on Egyptian Middle Kingdom Coffins."
in L'Egyptologie en 19791 (Paris, 1982), pp. 39-43; Index, pp. 8-110; Silverman, Coffin Texts from
Bersheh,pp. 129-141).
391
in level. The approach to the burial chamber would have been the most important, as this
space marks the sixth hour of the night, which texts of the early New Kingdom associate
with the uniting of the gods Re and Osiris with the deceased king.1332
It should be noted that the discussion by U. RoBler-Kohler concerning the
Amduat tomb type that develops from the reign of Senwosret II through Dynasty XIII
and into the New Kingdom is valid in some respects.1333 There are common ideas
between the features of the pyramid of Senwosret II, the Abydos tomb of Senwsoret III
and that of Amenemhet III at Hawara. However, it is likely that the architectural
manifestation of the Amduat tomb (or the emphasis) diverged after the reign of
Senwosret III. While the Late Middle Kingdom type (the wsht) tomb continued into
Dyansty XIII through the model established by Amenemhet III, the Amduat type, as
constructed by Senwosret III ceased to exist until the Dynasty XVIII kings resurrected it
after entering this tomb.1334
For the tomb as a depiction of the underworld, see Hornung, Valley, pp. 27-31; 71-80, 87-94; Hornung,
Valley, pp. 71-80, 87-94; Di Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 235; J. Kamrin, The Cosmos of Khnumhotep IIat
Beni Hasan (London, 1999), pp. 139-151. Wegner notes that quartzite may have been used in the
Senwosret III tomb in areas where associations with the solar cycle were desired and suggests that the tomb
of this king at Abydos is similar to the New Kingdom conception of the netherworld found in The Book of
the Hidden Chamber (Wegner, "Hidden," p. 17; Mortuary Temple, pp. 199, 392, 393; "Royal AmduatTomb"). See also RoBler-Kohler, "Konigliche Vorstellungen I," pp. 73-96; Gestermann, "Konigliche
Vorstellungen II," pp. 97-110. For the concept of the unification of Osiris and the deceased ruler in the Old
Kingdom pyramid of Unis (J.P. Allen, "Reading a Pyramid," pp. 24-25). O'Connor has suggested that the
structure of some Old Kingdom private tombs, such as that of Pepyankh, may reflect the cosmological
layout of the afterlife (D. O'Connor, "Society and Individual in Early Egypt," in J.E. Richards and M. Van
Buren, eds., Order, Legitimacy, and Wealth in Ancient States (Cambridge, 2000), pp. 33-35).
1333
RoBler-Kohler, "Konigliche Vorstellungen I", pp. 73-88. See also, Wegner, "Amduat Tomb;"
Gestermann, "Konigliche Vorstellungen II," pp. 97-110.
1334
See Wegner, "Amduat Tomb." Figures 1 and 3 in the RoBler-Kohler article ("Konigliche
Vorstellungen") do not reflect the architectural realities of the tombs from Amenemhet III (Hawara) into
Dynasty XIII. For hours 4-5, the scenes show a steady decent whereas the tombs have points of increased
as well as decreased elevation, often ending at an elevation not far from where the interior of the tomb
began. Also, Figure 2 misses one critical aspect of the Late Middle Kingdom tomb corpus as it shows the
approach to the antechamber as being from west to east. Every tomb from the reign of Amenemhet III on
has an approach running from the east to the west.
392
Another important issue that remains is whether or not a ruler, such as Awibre
Hor, buried without a complete wsht tomb, would have been able to achieve the same
royal afterlife as those who possessed the more elaborate tombs. Possibly, this king was
buried within the tomb complex of Amenemhet III at Dahshur in order to take advantage
of the provisions of this Dynasty XII ruler in order to achieve a position in his afterlife
much like some Middle Kingdom officials (Ihy, Hetep, Sahathoripy, and Sekweskhet) at
Sakkara presumably wished to accomplish with their tombs extending under the walls of
the pyramid of Teti at Sakkara.1335
V. The Significance of Selected Components of Late Middle Kingdom Royal Tombs

Besides the presence of the wsht tomb type, other features of the Late Middle
Kingdom royal funerary monuments may be significant in religious or practical ways.
Below, a select group of these will be discussed including locations, reuse of Dynasty XII
supporting facilities, pyramid pairs, monument size, terracing, and sinusoidal walls.
V.A. Location
In the past, the possible locations of Late Middle Kingdom royal tombs in the
Delta have been used to support the theory that Egypt broke up into numerous polities
ruled by contemporaneous kings during Dynasty XIII. In general, the placement of royal
tombs in the Old and Middle Kingdoms indicates the location of the political capital.1336
However, in the case of Senwosret III of Dynasty XII, a second location near the
Silverman, "Teti Pyramid Cemetery," pp. 267; 268, n. 32; 269; 271-272. For these and similar
examples such as Intefoker and Senwosretankh at Lisht, see Silverman, "Non-Royal Burials."
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 4; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 70.
393
important religious site of Abydos was chosen. It is likely that this king wished to
connect himself to the ancient kings of Dynasties I and II and the god Osiris himself.
Following these models, the Dynasty XIII kings were buried in the vicinity of earlier
kings often being intimately connected with the funerary complex of a Dynasty XII
ruler.1337 Thus, the discovery of Dynasty XIII pyramidions in the Delta is likely the
result of plundering by the Hyksos rather than the existence of a nearby royal, Late
Middle Kingdom cemetery.1338 However, like Abydos, Thebes may be a location where
Dynasty XIII king's tombs may be discovered in the future since a Dynasty XII ruler had
constructed a funerary monument there. Certainly, the Dynasty XVI/XVII kings chose
the form and location of their tombs according to those of the earlier Dynasty XI rulers,
who may have served as a historical president in order to the legitimize the new line of
kings there.
V.B. Reuse of Earlier Pyramid Towns and Temples

Another important aspect of any royal funerary complex is the cult that continued
after the king's death in order to support his spirit in the afterlife.1339 In ideal
circumstances, the king would build his complex, including the tomb and supporting
temples as well as establish a funerary estate to pay for the labor and offerings needed for
the cult.1340 It appears that the Dynasty XIII kings may not have been able to set up their
1337
1338
Verner, Great Monuments, p. 434; Hawass, "Funerary Establishments," pp. 573-599, 631-633.
See Section VI. There was royal activity in the Western Delta during late Dynasty XII/Dynasty XIII as
illustrated by the statue head of a king found at Kom el-Hisn (Silverman, "Royal Head," p. 90). However,
there is no evidence of a royal cemetery at this site.
1339
1340
For the Old Kingdom, see Hawass, "Funerary Establishments," pp. 423-557, 631-633. See also Di.
Arnold, "Cult Complexes," pp. 31-85.
394
own independent valley temples to house their funerary cults. Thus, one must
contemplate the effect of the economic limitations on the king's afterlife.
It actually appears that, rather than have their own elaborate cults and their
associated buildings, some or most Dynasty XIII kings may have appended their tombs to
the better-equipped Dynasty XII complexes.1341 'In other words, it is likely that the
majority of the Dynasty XIII cults existed in conjunction with those of the earlier kings.
In effect, this policy must have prolonged the activity at the Dynasty XII sites and
possibly some of the Old Kingdom complexes, while allowing the kings of a less
economically successful time to enjoy the benefit of a funerary cult they otherwise would
have been unable to afford.1342 For this reason, the towns and temples associated with
Dynasty XII funerary establishments often contain material through the reigns of at least
some Dynasty XIII rulers. This situation may imply that the Dynasty XIII kings were
unable to provide for their own funerary estates, which included temples and priests
along with towns and the fields and treasury to support them. For the Old and Middle
Kingdoms, O'Connor suggests that these institutions may have displayed more economic
power than the large funerary monuments themselves.1343 Thus, if the Dynasty XIII
kings could not afford such self-sufficient provisions, it may indicate that they did not
carry the political and economic clout of their predecessors. However, with the
combination of environmental and political factors, which the kings of Dynasty XIII may
Wegner notes that royal Dynasty XIII tombs tend to be near those of Dynasty XIT kings (Wegner, "A
Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity," p. 386).

1342
In Dynasty XII at Sakkara, officials were buried within the sacred space of the Pyramid of Teti, and
people of various social levels established cenotaphs around those of more powerful individuals. See
Silverman, "Non-Royal Burials"; Simpson, Terrace of the Great God; O'Connor, "The 'Cenotaphs,'" pp.
161-178.
1343
O'Connor, "Political Systems," p. 17.
395
have had to face,1344 it is not surprising that certain economic cutbacks were necessary
even for the royal burial.
V.C. The Question of Pyramid Pairs

In his discussion of the pyramids of Amenemhet III at Dahshur and Hawara,
Lehner ponders if these two distinctly different monuments were constructed for religious
purposes rather than simply to replace the former with the latter due to its architectural
faults.1345 It also might be notable that Amenemhet's predecessor, Senwosret III also had
two tombs, a pyramid at Dahshur and a funerary complex at South Abydos.1346 In
looking at the remaining Late Middle Kingdom tombs, it is interesting that many of them
occur in sets of two (Khendjer and the "Unfinished" Pyramid, DAS 2 and DAS 16, and
DAS 17 and Ameny Qemau, North and South Mazghuna, and S9 and S10).
The question arises as to if such a pattern is significant and whether or not each
set might belong to a single king. In several of the cases listed above, the two pyramids
at each site contain similarly constructed elements, while having different sarcophagus
forms (one had Type 1 and the other Type 2). Interestingly, in the "Unfinished" Pyramid
at South Sakkara, both sarcophagus structures are housed in a single monument.
Unfortunately, there are also factors, which imply that the dual monument
situation is coincidence. First of all, one must be cautious in matching similar
measurements and features within the monuments, since the styles and methods of each
investigator, who often studied monuments in close proximity, differ. Thus, each set may
1344
See Chapter 7.
1346
It is also possible that Amenemhet I built two pyramids, one at Sakkara and another at Lisht (Do.
Arnold, "Amenemhet," p. 20, n. 102; D.P. Silverman, "Non-Royal Burials").
1345
396
appear more unique than it is in reality. Also, if there are missing funerary structures,
they may appear in clusters along with the already known monuments as, is the case near
the pyramid of Ameny Qemau (with DAS 2 and 16). Finally, a comparison of the control
notes from the pyramids at South Sakkara reveals no matches in the names of officials
working at the complexes, suggesting that the monuments were not constructed
simultaneously.1347
At this point in time, there is no means of proving or rejecting the possibility that
Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary monuments occur in pairs. However, it is an idea
that should be kept in mind in future studies of these structures and their significance.
Other reasons for the close proximity of two or more monuments may be family groups,
chronological sequence or the decreasing availability of suitable land for large
monuments in the Memphite region.
V.D. The Size of the Tombs

One method for determining the relative power of the king through time is
through observing the sizes of the royal funerary complexes.1348 Also, at any specific
point, the rulers' tombs can be compared to those of private individuals to determine the
status of the king in society. When Amenemhet I reintroduced the pyramid as a royal
tomb at the beginning of Dynasty XII, his monument at Lisht was considerably smaller
that those of the powerful Dynasty IV kings.1349 Similarly, the other tombs for this era
1347
F. Arnold, Control Notes, pp. 176-183.

Lehner, Pyramids, p. 15-17
1349
Di. Arnold, "Cult Complexes," p. 77. It is also possible that Amenemhet I began the construction of a
pyramid at Sakkara before abandoning it in favor of building another funerary monument closer to the new
capital at Itjatawy (Do. Arnold, "Amenemhet I," p. 20, n. 102).
397
(as well as for the rest of the Old Kingdom) were also relatively small for a but the
emphasis turned to the mortuary temples. Thus, despite the fact that the pyramids were
small and had more economical mudbrick cores, the size of the temples was greatly
expanded, and the overall nature of the pyramid complex became part of the expression
of the king's power in Dynasty XII.
Some scholars see the diminutive size and small associated structures of Dynasty
XIII monuments as an indication of a decline in royal power.1350 However, it is
important to remember, that no Dynasty XIII monument seems to have been finished.
The most complete monument was that of Khendjer, and his complex certainly was
smaller than the Dynasty XII predecessors (no valley temple has been found). On the
other hand, the "Unfinished" tomb at South Sakkara would have had a pyramid, which
was comparable in size to those of the Dynasty XII kings. Though the remainder of the
complex was not yet begun, it is possible that the size of this monument would have
rivaled those of the Amenemhet's and Senwosret's had it been completed.
Finally, one should keep in mind the relativity of power. In a time of economic
problems, the power of a king cannot be determined, based upon comparisons to eras of
great wealth for the polity. Instead, the power of the king must be related to that of the
elite. Unfortunately, that sort of comparison is difficult considering the dire state of
preservation for both the royal and private tombs from this period. However, the
exclusive architectural style of the royal tombs, as well as their locations seem to indicate
that the power of the kings continued to be relatively high, well into the Late Middle
1350
For example, see Di. Arnold, "Cult Complexes," p. 84; Verner, Great Monuments, p. 432. For
arguments against using this approach for art and literature, see Quirke, "Visible and Invisible," pp. 63-64.
1351
According to Dodson the monument were either unfinished or quarried (Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra
Abu el Naga," p. 27).
398
Kingdom, especially if the pyramidion of Merneferre Ay represents such a structure.

Similarly, Quirke argues that the status of the king in Papyrus Bulaq 18 and the Kahun
Papyri suggests that the he was considered on a level similar to that of the great kings
from the Old and Middle Kingdoms.1352
V.E. Terracing
Though smaller than the Dynasty XII pyramids, royal tombs of Dynasty XIII had
some of the same characteristics as these monuments. Uphill has argued that at least
some Dynasty XII pyramids were built upon platforms, allowing for the pyramid to rise
substantially above the enclosure walls as well as providing the attached temples with a
terraced appearance found at the tomb of Nebhepetre Mentuhotep of Dynasty XL
As
a continuation of this practice, the tombs at Hawara and South Sakkara and possibly
others may also have been built upon a platform.
The excavations of S9 revealed a wall to the local south of the tomb, which
contained sand at a level higher than that of the floor to the east and within the
enclosure.1355 This structure may indicate that this area was terraced. However, in this
case, terracing was likely needed to correct for the uneven ground rather than serving
simply as an architectural feature of the tomb. This sort of structure is not found to the
north where the ground is lower and the base for the enclosure wall is constructed
differently than on the southern end.
Like in S9, the other examples of terracing in the Late Middle Kingdom
1352
Quirke, "Visible and Invisible," pp. 63-71.

Uphill, Gateway, pp. 11-12, 51, 63-64.
1354
See Chapter 3, section II.A, III.A, and IV.A.
1355
See Chapter 4, section V.A.
1353
399
(Amenemhet IIP pyramid at Hawara and the tomb of Khendjer and the "Unfinished"
pyramid at South Sakkara) may have been a result of the uneven ground upon which
many of the pyramids were built. Since much of the best areas had already been used by
earlier kings and private individuals, these structures are often in less desirable locations,
which required adjustments before and during the construction of these tombs. Thus,
until further examination of these sites occurs, the reasons for the terrace, whether
religious, visual or structural, cannot be confirmed.
V.F. The Significance of the Sinusoidal Walls

Excavation has revealed sinusoidal walls in both royal and settlement
environments dating to Dynasties XI through XVIII.1356 However, they are most
prevalent in and near the funerary complexes of the late Dynasty XII-XIII kings. It
appears that sinusoidal walls served as temporary enclosure walls, dividers between
active areas, retaining walls, and visual screens.1357 Studies have shown that wavy walls
could be constructed using fewer bricks and resources than equivalently stable
rectangular ones, making them well-suited for these temporary purposes.
Besides the practical explanations for the appearance of sinusoidal walls, scholars
have also proposed ritual ones. For example, they have stated that the sinusoidal
Di. Arnold, Encyclopedia, p. 63; Kemp, "Soil," p. 88. One example was found at Amarna (H. Frankfort
and J.D.S. Pendlebury, The City ofAkhenaten II, Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir 40 (London, 1933),
p. 5, PL 3). Note that sinusoidal walls have also been used in Upper Egypt in modern times as Holscher has
pointed out (U. Holscher, The Temples of the Eighteenth Dynasty (Chicago, 1939), pp. 70-71).
J. Sliwa, "Z Badan Nad Osadnichtwem Okresy Sredniego Paristwa I II Okresu PrzejsciowegO W Qasr
el-Sagha. TZW. Mur Sinusoidalny," Meander 40 (1985), pp. 176-183; "Qasr el Sagha," p. 206; Wegner,
Mortuary Temple, pp. 377-378; "A Study of Middle Kingdom State Activity, pp. 383-384; Clarke and
Engelbach, Ancient Egyptian Construction, pp. 213; Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, pp. 12, 18; Jequier, Fouilles
a Saqqarah, p. 39.
1358
Clarke and Engelbach, Ancient Egyptian Construction, p. 213; J. Vercoutter, Mirgissa I (Paris, 1970),
pp. 97-101.
400
enclosure walls in the royal monuments at South Mazghuna and South Sakkara may
symbolically represent the primordial watery abyss, stone palace facade walls, or reed
fences.1359 The watery abyss theory is based upon the parallel with later temple enclosure
walls, within which there are often wave patterns.1360 It is also possible that more
substantial sinusoidal walls were intended to imitate similar palace facade structures.
Nonetheless, these walls should still be considered to be abbreviated forms of the more
formal ones found in earlier pyramid complexes.
Sliwa suggests that sinusoidal walls in the context of cities may have been ritual
in nature, since he found one in the western settlement at Qasr el-Sagha, which was only
one brick high at the time of excavations.1361 He insists that this was the final height of
the wall and that it had a ritual function beneath the street under which it was found.
However, the sinusoidal wall was close to the enclosure of the town, possibly indicating
that it was replaced by this structure and originally served as the wall surrounding the
settlement. It is possible that the wall was removed, and the bricks were reused, leaving
only the base behind. Sinusoidal walls have also been found in the Late Middle Kingdom
levels of Tell el-Dab'a, where such structures made up a temporary enclosure wall.1362
Thus, both in residential and tomb contexts, sinusoidal walls appear to have been
temporary structures with the more substantial ones being abbreviated versions of more
ideal forms.
G. Jequier, Manuel d'Archeologie Egyptienne (Paris, 1924), pp. 64-65; Lehner, Pyramids, p. 186.
A.R. David, Religious Ritual at Abydos (Guildford, 1973), p. 3.
Sliwa, "Mur Sinusoidalny;" "Qasr el-Sagha," p. 206, Figs. 13, 24.
Bietak, The Capital of the Hyksos, pp. 10, 11, Fig. 17.
401
VI. The Destruction of the Tombs

All of the Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary monuments suffered from
quarrying and plundering. Even the substructures of tombs such as the pyramid of
Ameny Qemau, the Mazghuna tombs, S9, and S10 were heavily damaged.
Unfortunately, there is only a small amount of material, which has been reported from
these sites that might shed light upon the specific date of their destruction. Within
several of the monuments in the Memphite region, there are Dynasty XVIII pit graves.1364
Thus, it is likely that if these monuments were destroyed at the same time, this event
occurred either during the Second Intermediate Period or in the early years of the New
Kingdom.1365
At tomb S9 at South Abydos, there was no evidence of any ceramic material
between Dynasty XIII (or early Dynasty XVI/XVII) and the Roman Period (there are a
number of Late Period or Greco-Roman tombs nearby).1366 Thus, there is no indication
of New Kingdom activity there. In other words, the date of the destruction of the tomb
seems to have been relatively soon after their construction.
Another interesting facet of the material from the excavations of S9 was that the
contents of the tomb appear to have remained at the site. The "robbers" seemed to have
been more interested in destroying the contents of the tomb rather than taking the items.
Numerous wooden fragments from unrecognizable objects (possibly furniture, the coffin,
1363
1364
See Chapter 3, Sections V.D., VI.A., and VII.E.; Chapter 4, Section V.E.
The pit graves were found at South Sakkara (Khendjer and Unfinished) and South Mazghuna. See
Chapter 3, Sections III.G., IV.F., and VII.E.
13
Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 334, n. 379. Ryholt suggests that the royal tombs
were looted and destroyed by the Hyksos, who then took their booty to the Delta with them (Ryholt,
Political Situation, pp. 144-145).
1366
Ayrton, et al., Abydos III, pp. 16-17; Wegner, Mortuary Temple, p. 369.
402
and etc.), some of which were burned, were found. Also, small fragments of the mummy
were distributed over the site. Every item from within the tomb was scattered around the
debris and was in small to tiny fragments. Such objects included pottery, faience, gilded
plaster, and calcite and other stone vessels.
It is also likely that a large force would have been needed in order to remove the
bricks and sand from the top of S9 in order to reach the tomb. The degree of the
destruction must have been extreme due to the problems Weigall had in reconstructing its
plan. Here, there must have been an organized workforce sanctioned by an authority with
sufficient power to demolish this tomb in broad daylight.1367 It is likely that this activity
occurred during the rival Hyksos or contemporaneous Theban Dynasties (XV or
XVI/XVII) or some time prior to the construction of the pyramid of Ahmose at Abydos.
Literary sources of later times, some of which may have been purely propaganda,
record evidence that the Hyksos sacked temples and other monuments in Egypt.1368 In
fact, the Hyksos king Apepi may have maintained a policy of taking components from
Middle Kingdom monuments and transferring them to Avaris and abroad.
At the site
of the Dynasty XXI/XXII capital (Tanis), excavators found a sphinx of Nubkaure

Amenemhet II (originally from Heliopolis), four sphinxes of Nymaatre Amenemhet III, a
sphinx of Khakhaure Senwosret III, two colossal statues of Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw,
1367
The partial excavation of this tomb in 2003 was difficult even with a crew of 50-100 men. Sand
continuously poured into the excavated area from above. In order to remove the upper parts (limestone) of
substructure, a similarly sized pit would have had to have been dug by the invaders. Amelineau had
stopped his work at S9 before reaching the tomb because of such issues (Ayrton, et a]., Abydos III, pp. 11,
13). It is likely that the Hyksos invaded the pyramid of Merneferre Ay since his pyramidion has been
found in the Delta. See Chapter 3, Section XI.B. 1 .a.
1368
Bietak, "Hyksos Rule," p. 111. Note that pottery dated to the Hyksos was found in the pyramid of
Amenemhet III at Dahshur. See Di. Arnold, "Zur Zerstorungsgeschichte der Pyramiden," MDAIKA1
(1991), p. 23.
1369
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 84, n. 265; 133; 139-140.
403
and monuments of Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV, which had been taken by this Hyksos
ruler.1370 Most likely, this statuary, which had originated primarily from the Temple of
Ptah at Memphis,1371 had been recovered from the site of Tell el Dab'a (Avaris, the
Hyksos capital) by the Third Intermediate Period builders in their search for reusable
stone for their construction projects.
One of the potential clues for the date of the destruction of the Dynasty XIII royal
monuments is the location of the pyramidion of Merneferre Ay from Khataana, a site,
which is near Tell el-Dab'a (Avaris),1372 and may represent evidence that the Hyksos
destroyed the tomb of this king. Some scholars, however, have suggested that it marks
the location of a missing Dynasty XIII tomb in the Delta.1373 Nonetheless, other evidence
(see note 1269) implies that the Hyksos clearly appropriated statuary of Dynasty XIII
kings and, in so doing, may have destroyed their funerary monuments. Other possible
evidence for the deliberate pillaging of Middle Kingdom royal mortuary establishments
includes graffiti showing Asiatics within the pyramid of Senwosret III and the relocation
of sphinxes of Amenemhet III to Avaris, possibly originally from this king's funerary
1370
Bourriau, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 196; Callender, "Renaissance," p. 172. Ryholt, Political
Situation, pp. 133, n.468; 258, n. 927; Clayton, Chronicles, p. 92; Drioton and Vandier, L'Egypte, p. 285;
Petrie, History, p. 215; Bietak, "Hyksos Rule," p. 111. For one of these statues, see Delange, Statues
Egyptiennes du Moyen Empire, pp. 17-19. Blocks from Old and Middle Kingdom rulers as well as from
the reign of Sobekhotep III were reused in Osorkon I's Entrance Hall at Bubastis (L. Habachi, "The SoCalled Hyksos Monuments Reconsidered," SAK 6 (1979), p. 83; J. Vandier, Manuel d'Archeologie
Egyptienne: Les Grandes Epoques II, part 2 (Paris, 1955), pp. 602-603). For the inscriptions on the statues
of Imyremeshaw and Sobekhotep IV, see Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 13, 37, 56; nos. 18, 45, 77.
Statues of Sobekhotep IV were also found at Tanis (Bourriau, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 196;
Callender, "Renaissance," p. 172). A sphinx of Maakherure Amenemhet IV and a statue or sphinx of
Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV, originally from Heliopolis, were recovered in modern times in Beirut (Bietak,
"Hyksos Rule," pp. I l l , 113; Hornung, History, p. 68; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 76, n. 225). Other
statues, both private and royal, have been found in the Levant and Crete (Bietak, "Hyksos," (1999), p. 379).
1371
1372
Swelim and Dodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," p. 334, n. 379.
1373
404
complex at Dahshur.
The Hyksos may have had some help from the Nubians in the destruction and
raiding of some monuments, especially in the south.13'5 During the wars between the
Hyksos and the Dynasty XVII kings, there were also invasions into Upper Egypt from the
south by a coalition led by the Kushites. For this reason, statues of Sobekhotep IV were
found beyond the third cataract. Some scholars, however, suggest that these statues were
from this region, and the king had control over it,1376 it is more likely that these objects
were removed either from an Egyptian fort to the north or from a site within Egypt itself,
since there is evidence that the Nubians conducted raids as far north as Karnak.
In 1976, Redford found a destruction layer near the top of the Dynasty XIII strata
in the ancient town at East Karnak.1377 Here, a small trench showed that House A had
been burnt and was then deserted. Redford suggests that the destruction at East Karnak
may have occurred during Dynasty XIII due to "restless bands of Nubians (?)" that may
have been taking advantage of the weakened political scene in Egypt as possibly
described in a stela of Sekhemre Sankhtawy (Iykhernofret) Neferhotep. It is during such
raids that certain statues and monuments may have been taken to the south, though
venues such as Elephantine are more likely to have been the sites of such thievery.
Ryholt also notes that Ahmose's Unwetterstele may refer to destruction of monuments by
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 147-148, 165, 167; de Morgan, Fouilles a Dahchour en 1894-1895, pp.
92-96, figs. 138-140.
1375
For the later Dynasty XVII alliance with the Hyksos, see the evidence clearly states in the Kamose
Stela (Habachi, Second Stela, p. 49).
1376
1377
Bourriau, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 204; D.B. Redford, "Interim Report on the Excavations at
East Karnak (1979 and 1980 Seasons)," JSSEA 11 (1981), p. 253; Redford, Akhenaten, pp. 85, 96, 98-100;
Egypt, Canaan and Israel, pp. 103, 113.
405
raids into the Dynasty XIII territories (mentions pyramids directly).1378 Also, the stela of
Sobeknakht revealed that the Nubians (Kushites) attacked Southern Egypt and proceeded
at least as far as El Kab.1379
VII. Tombs of Dynasty XVII .

The royal tombs of Dynasty XVII, located at Dra Abu el-Naga on the west bank
of Thebes, are much different than those of Dynasty XIII, reflecting the influence of local
tradition rather than the continuation of the wsht style.
After being discovered by
nearby villagers in 1827, Mariette excavated in this royal necropolis in 1859-1860;

Winlock found a pyramid near Deir el-Bahari in 1913, after which the exact location of
any of the tombs was lost, until Polz recently began to reinvestigate the area.1381 The
pyramids of the kings of Dynasty XVII may continue a Theban tradition initiated by the
rulers of Dynasty XI including those found at el-Tarif and that of Nebhepetre Mentuhotep
at Deir el Bahari.
Like these structures, the pyramids of Dynasty XVII were relatively
steep, providing, in turn, the model for the superstructures of private tombs of the New
Kingdom, as well as those for the future Nubian and Meroitic kings.1383 These Dynasty
XVII royal monuments included a chapel whether cut into the bricks of the pyramid or
from the limestone below. The burial chamber itself was reached through a shaft from
1378
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 143-145. The effects of the Santorini (Thera) volcanic eruption have
also been suggested as the cause of this storm (E.N. Davis, "A Storm During the Reign of Ahmose," in
D.A. Hardy and A.C. Renfrew, eds., Thera and the Aegean World III, 3 (London, 1990), p. 234; H.
Goedicke, "The Chronology of the Thera/Santorin Explosion," A&L 3 (1992), pp. 60-61).
1379
Davies, "Sobeknacht," pp. 18-19.

Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 176. See also Dodson, After the Pyramids, pp. 16-22; Lehner, Pyramids,
pp. 188-189; Williams, "Problems," pp. 146-153.
1381
Di. Arnold, "Royal Tombs," p. 427; H.E. Winlock, "Tombs," JEA 10 (1924), pp. 217-277.
1382
Polz and Seiler, Pyramidenanlage, pp. 41-43.
1383
Dodson, "From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga," pp. 32-33.
1380
406
outside the visible monument. The substructure was simple without all of the turns,
changes of level, and portcullises valued during Dynasty XIII. The coffins, canopic
boxes, and other items from the tombs were taken by robbers; fortunately some are now
in museums, where they were studied, even though the exact nature of the tombs, from
which they came, remain unknown. The objects of the early Dynasty XVII rulers
followed the style, which developed in the Late Middle Kingdom including the
sarcophagus with the arched lid with the additional pieces on the ends. Later in the
period, however, a new form known as the rishi coffin emerged.
It is interesting that in Dynasty XX, the tombs of the Dynasty XVII rulers were
still intact as revealed through the papyri recording tomb robberies {Leopold II and
Amherst Papyrus)}3
Today, Polz finds these monuments in relatively good condition,
as far as the architecture is concerned. Even monuments, which have been robbed in
modern times, retained coffins, jewelry, and other items. The condition of this material is
in stark contrast to what excavators have found at Dynasty XIII monuments. These
earlier structures, along with their belongings, were completely smashed in antiquity. It
is obvious that the reverence for the Dynasty XVII monuments was not extended to those
of Dynasty XIII if they had indeed survived the rule of the Hyksos. However, Ahmose,
the first king of Dynasty XVIII did build a cenotaph, including a pyramid, at the site of
Abydos, connecting him with the Late Middle Kingdom rulers buried there and the god
Osiris.1386
1384
Ikram and Dodson, Mummy, pp. 204-205.

For more bibliographic information concerning these texts, see Bellion, Catalogue des Manuscrits, pp.
5-6, 174.
1386
S. Harvey, "Monuments of Ahmose at Abydos," Egyptian Archaeology 4 (1991), pp. 3-5; "The Cults of
King Ahmose at Abydos," dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1998.
1385
407
The Dynasty XVII royal tombs are small and show that the economic difficulties
of the Dynasty XIII kings continued in the south, even with the regime change in this
region. In fact, no tombs of Theban Dynasty XVI have been found, and they do not
appear in the tomb robbery papyri.1387 However, Ryholt does believe that the tombs were
in the region of Dra Abu el-Naga and that they were destroyed by the-Hyksos when,
according to his theory, they invaded the Theban region, ending Dynasty XVI. However,
it is probable that the tombs of these initial Theban kings are minimal in size and
elaboration.1388
VIII. Conclusions
The precise chronological order of the Late Middle Kingdom royal tombs is
uncertain. Suggestions as to the arrangement of the excavated tombs can be made, but
they differ greatly according to each scholar, who has analyzed them. Methods involving
the chronological placement of tombs within each location should be dismissed in favor
of those focused upon the architectural features of the tombs. Also, caution should be
exercised, since pyramids in close proximity to one another were often excavated by the
same scholar, and the resulting publications can erroneously suggest that they are
concurrent due to the style and interests of the investigator. With so many missing and
unexcavated royal tombs, it is important that further archaeological research be
conducted into the pyramids of the Dynasty XIII kings.
When comparing the tombs of the kings to those of royal women or officials, it is
1387

There was a pyramid in the causeway of the funerary temple of Thutmosis III (Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 176; H.E. Winlock, Excavations at Deir el-Bahari 1911-1931 (New York, 1942), pp. 7-8, Fig.
!)
1388
408
clear that the main difference in these funerary provisions was the nature of the
architecture. The objects buried with Awibre Hor are comparable to those from the
tombs of high status women and court members. Thus, even if the more elaborate tombs
of the kings of this period were equally provisioned, this situation does not necessarily
indicate that the rulers had lost power to the elite. Instead, the importance of the royal
tomb was primarily the form of the substructure. The kings were the only individuals
with access to this tomb form.
The relatively consistent components of the Late Middle Kingdom royal funerary
monuments suggest that the architectural form of the tombs was ideologically significant,
as they were in early Dyansty XVIII. The core of these pyramids is reminiscent of the
hieroglyphic representation for the word wsht, meaning "court." In this context, this
architecturally rendered word likely denotes the court where the throne of Osiris was
believed to be located in the netherworld. The Book of Going Forth by Day (the Book of
the Dead) places the judgment of the dead in a specialized hall of this type (wsht-m3cty).
However, in this earlier context, the body of the king becomes one with the figure of
Osiris.
The destruction of the Late Middle Kingdom tombs appears to have occurred with
the fall of Dynasty XIII. At that point, the Hyksos may have ravaged these pyramids
along with other monuments, taking artwork back to their capital at Avaris. The tombs at
Abydos appear also to have suffered similarly during the Second Intermediate Period or
1389
It should be noted that Awibre Hor only had CT 788a and PT 638 on his coffin, and Khendjer had CT
788 on his pyramidion. Private people had these texts plus other Coffin Texts and Pyramid Texts as well as
passages from the Book of Two Ways and early chapters from the Book of the Dead. See Lapp, Typologie
derSarge, pp. 272, 282-289, 298-298, 304-311; Lesko, Spells, pp. 54-55, 62-63, 68, 84, 95, 9-99, 102-103
(Da4c, Da2c, M7c, M8c, M42c, S14c, Sq2Sq, SqlSq, TIBe, T2Be, T7c, T13c, T3Be, TlOc. King
Sewedjare Montuhotep
409
early New Kingdom.

Interestingly, the form of the Dynasty XVII tombs was drastically more simple
than those of the Late Middle Kingdom. These rulers wished to follow the models of the
Dynasty XI kings, with whom they identified due to their situation of being Theban
rulers, who wanted to reestablish the single Egyptian state. Thus, the tradition of the
wshttomb likely ended with the death of Merneferre Ay.1390
1390
At the same time that the use of the wshttomb type likely ends, the use of royal seals also becomes
rare, indicating either a change in the structure of the government or the collapse of the administration
(Ryholt, Political Situation, 298-299; personal communication).
410
Chapter 6
Administration, Officials, and Operation of Kingship
I. Introduction
The pinnacle of the regular hierarchy of the .state under the king included the
vizier, treasurer, general, royal scribe, and the chief lector-priest. The local
administration also served the king and, in, fact, these small governments appeared to be
set up in a fashion similar to that of the state but with less power and on a smaller scale.
Mayors, local officials who answered directly to the vizier (the most powerful office
beneath the king), collected taxes and drafted persons for corvee service.1391
This chapter will explore the backgrounds and status of the top officials of the
state, including the king. Symptoms of the loss of power of kings will also be evaluated.
Relationships between kings and the methods of indicating filiation will be explored as
the nature of succession changed from the beginning to the middle of Dynasty XIII.
II. The Top Three Offices in the Late Middle Kingdom Governmental Structure
The increased use of titles during the Late Middle Kingdom provides substantial
information as to the operation of the government and the progression of the careers of
the officials. According to Quirke, titles from the Late Middle Kingdom are related to
four spheres including national/court administration, local government on behalf of the
king, temple positions, and those related to wealthy estates.1393 In some cases, the
1391
Pardey, "Administration," p. 18.

See Chapter 6, Section IV.B.
1393
Quirke, Titles and Bureau, p. 16.
1392
411
monuments of these officials or their associates allows for the precise dating of their
careers. Unfortunately, after the reign of Sobekhotep IV, it is difficult to place the
officials into specific reigns.1394 The following sections will evaluate the offices and
known careers of the kings, viziers and treasurers of Dynasty XIII. The relationships
between these offices as well as that of their counterparts in the Second Intermediate
Period will be addressed in order to come to a greater understanding of the nature of
kingship during Dynasty XIII.
II.A. The King

II.A.1. The Role of the King
The role of Middle Kingdom rulers in domestic and foreign contexts was
described in the Hymns to Senwosret III,1395 as well as in Merikare, Teaching of
Amenemhet, and the Stela of Sehotepibre at Abydos.1396 According to these textual
sources, the ruler was at the apex of the administrative bureaucracy, the military, the
judicial system, the treasury, and the religious sphere.1397 Though the king was
responsible for all the facets of the operation of the state, in reality, he distributed power
amongst court and local elite.1398 Through these delegates, many state activities were
undertaken such as tax collection, monumental construction, mining, quarrying, military
1 94
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 261; Two Treasurers, p. 37.

1397
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 273; Lorton, "Legal and Social," p. 354; O'Connor and Silverman,
"Kingship," p. XIX; Robins, "Legitimation," p. 286; Teeter, "Kingship," pp. 412-413; Hornung, "Ancient
Egyptian Religious Iconography," in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East 3, (Peabody,
MA, 1995), p. 1725; Quirke, Religion, p. 81.
1398
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 273; te Velde, "Theology, Priests, and Worship in Ancient Egypt," in
J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East 3 (Peabody, MA, 1995), p. 1731.
1395
412
campaigns, domestic policing, judicial proceedings, and religious rituals.1399

The identity and nature of the power of these officials varied through time.
Important players could include segments of the Egyptian bureaucratic system such as
royal family members, the vizier and other state officials, the military, religious estates,
local mayors, and the administrative units within Nubia.1400 The shifts in the power
between such groups and the ruler define the status of the institution of kingship through
time. However, for the period when this sort of analysis would be the most useful, such
as during the majority of the Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period, the
information is so inconclusive that major mistakes are easily made, and the complexity of
the problem results in few studies to corroborate or disprove previous examinations.
II.A.2. The Background of Kings

Dynasty XIII appears to have been composed of many groups of kings or
individual rulers who may or may not have been related to one another. When the office
of kingship was passed from father to son, the traditional ideology of the position would
have embraced the line of succession. However, as outlined in Chapter 2, new methods
for achieving royal legitimacy were developed to attempt to overcome this turbulent
period for kingship. With the prospect of having multiple non-royal kings within
Dynasty XIII, it is interesting to pursue the backgrounds of these men in order to
determine which branches of the government may have profited from the loss in power of
kingship, allowing members of their order to become rulers.
1399
Baines, "Practical Religion," p. 80; "Definition," p. 13; Bonheme and Forgeau, Les Secrets, p. 131;
Leprohon, "Royal Ideology," p. 278; B.E. Schafer, "Temples, Priests, and Rituals: an Overview," in B.E.
Schafer, ed., Temples of Ancient Egypt (Ithaca, 1997), p. 9; Tobin, Theological Principles, p. 99.
1400
Cruz-Uribe, "Model for the Political Structure," pp. 107-112.
413
For the few kings for whom information concerning their non-royal origins are
available, the evidence points primarily toward military offices. For example, Franke has
suggested that Wegaf was previously the senior commander (imy-rmsc wf) of the same
name found in a seal.1401 It is also possible that this king was of foreign descent, making
it even more probable that he ascended to the throne from a military background since his
name may be derived from a foreign word, based upon Semitic wkf, a military title.1402
However, it may also be that case that the name is Egyptian: wglf, "May he chew."
It has also been suggested that Woserkare Khendjer may have been another
foreigner, whose rise to power came through the military.1404 Ward points to Ugaritic
and Canaanite parallels to the name and reveals that it means "swine" in Semitic tongues
(hnzr).1405 There is no evidence linking Khendjer to the military.
Another king, who may have risen to power through the military is Imyremeshaw
Semenkhkare. Imyremeshaw (imy-r msc) can be translated as "overseer of the
troops/gang" or "the general."1406 However, Quirke suggests that this name may
represent a "family tradition" rather than a connection to the military.1407 Alternatively,
he suggests that the name imy-rc msc, which is also the name of a private individual,
1401
Franke, "Zur Chronologie," p. 249; Martin, Egyptian Administrative and Private-Name Seals, p. 39, no.
439; PI. XIX, number 36; C.R. Lepsius, Denkmdler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien IV (Leipzig, 1901), p. 54;
1402
Quirke, "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396; "Investigation," p. 232; "Royal Power," pp. 131-132.
1403
1404
Quirke, "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396; "Investigation," p. 232; "Royal Power," pp. 131-132.
1405
Ward, "Comparative Studies," pp. 34-35. See also Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 220-221.
1406
Bietak, "Overview," p. 54; Drioton and Vandier, L'Egypte, p. 285; Petrie, History, p. 209; Stock, 13. his
17. Dynastie Agyptens, pp. 50, 51; Weigall, Pharaohs, pp. 151-152; Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 231, n.
272. This name has lead some scholars to believe that military usurpations occurred during Dynasty XIII
(von Beckerath, "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," p. 1443). Von Beckerath has also suggested that Imyremeshaw
may have been referred to by his former title because he was of foreign origin, and his name could not be
pronounced by Egyptians (von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 52).
1407
414
"need not be considered literally."1408 Nonetheless, it is likely that this name links this
king or his family with the military, and it is likely significant that this term is used as his
nomen at this point in Dynasty XIII.
Before achieving the office of kingship, a native Egyptian ruler, Sobekhotep III
may have been the wcrtwntthkl ("officer of the ruler's crew") Sobekhotep, son of
Montuhotep with the same titles.1409 Though Sobekhotep Ill's family was of common
background as indicated by the title of his maternal grandfather (cnhw-n-nwt),
Dedusobek, though his first wife, Senebhenas may have been the daughter of the vizier
Senebhenaf.1410 Thus, this king with a potential military background may have married
into a family with direct connections to the office of the vizier. It is possible that support
from his reign was derived from both departments of the government.
Like that of Sobekhotep III, the grandfather of Neferhotep I, Sahathor and
Sobekhotep IV was a commoner, cnh n niwt, with possible military links.1411 However,
there is no evidence that the brother kings themselves or their father ever held a position
in the military.1412 Nonetheless, it is interesting that these kings may have come from a
family similar to that of the predecessor, Sobekhotep III. A final king, Wahibre Ibiaw
may have also had a military background. Several scholars have linked Ibiaw with an
imy-rmscwof
the same name.1413
1408
S. Quirke, "Review of P. Vernus Le Surnom au Moyen Empire," DE 8 (1987), p. 109.

Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 222. This relationship is visible on seals as indicated in Martin, Egyptian
Administrative and Private-Name Seals, pp. 49-50, numbers 575-588.
1410
Franke, Personendaten, p. 439, Doss. 761. For the ranking of this title, see Quirke, "Investigation," p.
69.
1411
Berlev, "Les Pretendus 'Citadins,'" pp. 23-48; Ward, Essays, p. 48; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 225226; Franke, "Zur Chronologie," p. 246; Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 30; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 130;
"Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396; Titles and Bureau, p. 100.
1412 Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 131; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 282.
1413 Habachi, "Vizier Ibi'," p. 126.
1409
415
Perhaps the possible military kings occur from the reign of Wegaf to that of
Wahibre Ibiaw. A time period that expanded between the blood decedents of the
Dynasty XII kings and the localized rulers of late Dynasty XIII rulers when their
kingdom broke apart with the emergence of Dynasties XIV and XVI. It should be noted
that the title imy-r msc in combination with htmw-bity, which some of the future kings
may have held, is a high-ranking title in the national government (highest position of
military).1414 Such a title suggests a high position in the court. Thus, this situation may
indicate that these officials were usurpers in a time when internal and external factors
threatened the state, making their claim to power attractive to those in the other offices.
In at least one case, the alliance between a military king and the office of vizier may have
been sealed through marriage.
H.B. The Vizier

The composition, Duties of the Vizier, which was found in the Dynasty XVIII
tomb of Rekhmire at Thebes (Tomb 100), may have originally dated to Dynasty XIII. It
allows for a direct understanding of the role of this official in the ancient Egyptian state
during the Late Middle Kingdom.1415 The vizier was to meet with the king and the
Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 41, 49. Unfortunately, there is no direct evidence connecting any Dynasty
XIII king with the combination of these two titles.
1415
Doxey, Egyptian Non-Royal Epithets, p. 175; Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 38; Helck, Zur
Verwaltung, pp. 2, n. 1, 29-43; Kemp, "Social History," p. 84; E. Martin-Pardey, "Administrative
Bureaucracy," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt (New York, 1999), p.
116; Quirke, "Texts," p. 28; Titles and Bureau, pp. 18, 23, 85; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 95.
Berlev cites Dynasty XII as the earliest possible date of this story due to the use of the title "chief steward"
(O.D. Berlev, "The Date of the 'Eloquent Peasant,'" in J. Osing and G. Dreyer, eds., Form und Mass
(Wiesbaden, 1987), pp. 82-83). O'Connor presents the date of the text as "uncertain" (O'Connor, "Hyksos
Period," p. 60). Quirke notes that though the original text must have dated to the Late Middle Kingdom, it
cannot be certain whether or not parts of the document were amended (Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 6, 183184). The terms Itwntthkl, knbtyn w, and hurt wronly occur in the Late Middle Kingdom, suggesting
416
treasurer to discuss matters of the state. He received reports concerning the opening and
sealing of strongholds, the condition of fortresses, items entering and departing the
Domain of the King as well as the Residence, disputes, and districts. The vizier acted as
judge and arbitrator of disputes and petitions, and he enforced the corvee system. He also
sent envoys, district councilors, and expeditions and issued decrees. The vizier appointed
officials in Upper and Lower Egypt, the Head of the South and the Abydos district and
heard reports concerning these areas every four months. He sent military expeditions and
was in charge of payments. He also received accounting information in order to establish
and collect taxes. Thus, the office of the vizier handled administrative actions on behalf
of the king.1416
Taking the analysis of viziers of the Late Middle Kingdom by Grajetzki and the
discussion of bureaus and offices by Quirke, some information concerning the
backgrounds of the occupants can be discerned (Table 6.1).1417 It would seem that the
that this document is from that era (Quirke, Titles and Bureau, p. 23). It should be noted that van den
Boom had argued for the placement of this document in the reign of Ahmose, though he clearly was biased
against the Late Middle Kingdom era, referring to it as the "royal misery of the 13th Dynasty" (Van den
Boom, Duties of the Vizier, pp. 334-376). He presented a more convincing argument as to the New
Kingdom date of this text in an earlier article based upon language markers, absence of any signs of the
waret system, as well as the archaism practiced at this time (G.P.F. van den Boom, "On the Date of the
'Duties of the Vizier,"' Orientalia 51 (1982), pp. 369-381).
1416
Helck, Zur Verwaltung, pp. 51-64; Quirke, "Investigation," p. 187; Titles and Bureau. For a list of
viziers of the Late Middle Kingdom and information on the office, see Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 942. See also von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 97-100.
1417
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 9-42; Quirke, Titles and Bureau. Viziers of Dynasty XIII and
possibly Dynasty XVII included: Khenmes, Father of Ankhu, Ankhu, Iymeru Son of Ankhu, Iymeru
Neferkare, Ay, Aymeru son of Ay, Resuseneb, Samont Resuseneb, Dedumont Senebtyfy, Ibia, Minhotep,
Hori, Sobekaa Bebi, Djedptah Dedutseneb, Amenemhet, Iuy, and Senebhenaf. Quirke, "Investigation," pp.
189-196; "Royal Power," pp. 132-133. For seals of Djedptah Dedutseneb and Ay, see Martin, Egyptian
Administrative and Private-Name Seals,?. 136, nos. 1775,1778, PI 1716.1772, 1720.1733; Newberry,
Scarabs, p. 125, PI. 111.121-122; Franke, Personendaten, pp. 19, 286, Doss. 461 (Khenmes); p. 137 , Doss.
173 (Ankhu); p. 254, Doss. 398 (Resseneb), p. 54, Doss. 24 (Aymeru); p. 55, Doss. 26 (AyMeru/Neferkara); p. 66, Doss. 46 (Ay); p. 339, Doss. 565 (Aymeru); pp. 74, 387-388, Doss. 62, 660, 661
(Ibiaw); pp. 387-388, Doss. 660, 661 (Senebhenaf); p. 319, Doss. 526 (Samont), p. 431, Doss. 745
(Dedumont Senebtify); p. 83, Doss. 80 (Amenemhet).
417
Name
Titles
Sector of
Translation of
Titles
Government
overseer of the half local (ties to
dominion, governor central), local
governor
local
(son of iy above)
overseer of the hnrt, bureau for
director of the broad workforce issue,
court
outer palace
elder of the portal,
outer palace,
chief of the tens of
bureau of the
Upper Egypt
vizier
iy
imy-rgs-pr, hlty-c
iy-mrw
hity-c
ib-icw
imy-rhnrt ox hrp
wsht
imnw-m-
smswhiyt, wr
md(w) smcw
mnw-htp
hrp wsht
rsw-snb
ss wrn pty
director of the broad outer palace

court
secretary to the
bureau of the
vizier
vizier
sbk-cibbi
imy-rhnrt
overseer of the hnrt
snb-hnc.f
imy-rhnrt
overseer of the hnrt
dd-pth
(dd.tw-snb)
wr md(w) sm cw
chief of the tens of

Upper Egypt
bureau for
workforce issue
bureau for
workforce issue
bureau of the
vizier
Table 6.1. The known and possible viziers of Dynasty XIII whose previous
positions have been discovered.
viziers were chosen from the lower ranks of offices under the authority of this position.
The viziers, whose previous positions are known, occupied offices related to the outer
palace (where business was conducted within the court), the bureau of the vizier, the
bureau for workforce issue (also under the vizier), or local administration (which reported
to the vizier). Thus, it might be assumed that at least some of the occupiers of this high
office had shown exceptional ability as they performed their jobs within the jurisdiction
of the office of the vizier. Even when a son became vizier after his father, he seems to
418
have first occupied a lower office. From this analysis, it is clear that the vizier was either
chosen after serving some other capacity within the lower ranks of this office or was
placed within this structure in order to gain essential experience. Three of the viziers
held offices with the designation htmw-bity (Vo-iasx, Sobekaabebi, and Senebhenaf),
indicating a close relationship to the court.1418
The vizier with known family background which definitely did not include any
holders of this office is Aymeru, son of the director of the broad court {hrp wsht) by the
same name. In contrast, Aymeru and Resuseneb were the sons of the vizier Ankhu.
The precise careers of Ankhu and Aymeru are not known though it is possible that
Ankhu's father, Simontu, may also have been a vizier.1420 Provincial backgrounds for
viziers are present in late Dynasty XHI/early Dynasty XVI when the state system was at
its weakest (Ay and Aymeru).1421
It should be noted that Ay and his son Aymeru were governors of El-Kab, prior to
becoming viziers. According to Bennett's chronology, Aymeru belongs to Dynasty
XVI.1422 However, it may be the case that he was the last southern vizier of Dynasty
XIII. Later, a member of his family sold the office of governor to another group.1423
II.C. The Treasurer

The bureau of the treasury was concerned with the economic activity of the king
1418
For the ranking of officials within Papyrus Bulaq 18 and other sources, see Quirke, "Investigation," pp.
41-71.
1419
Franke, Personendaten, p. 254, Doss. 398; Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 132, 133.
1420
Habachi, "Vizier Ibi'," pp. 122-123; Quirke, "Investigation," p. 192.
1 x
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 42.
1422
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 128-129.
1423
419
both inside and outside the palace.
According to the Duties of the Vizier, the treasurer
was to report to the king and to confer with the vizier concerning that which has been
relayed to him. The office of the treasury was in charge of food production at the palace
(sncw) and possibly also with expeditions.1425 It was also represented at the sites of
* monumental construction commissioned by the king. It seems that the treasury was also
involved in the maintenance of the cult of the kings as evidence from the temple of
Senwosret III at Abydos suggests.1426 There appear to have been three or four levels of
officials under the treasurer within this bureau, including the rh-nswt, the imy-r st, and
the iry-ctwdpw.
Name
Titles
imny
hry-sst? h wt-ntr
smiw
snb-sw-m- c(i)
imy-rpr-wr
snb
ssnpr-hd
snbi
rh-nswt
Translation of
Titles
master of the
secrets of the
temple of Upper
Egypt
high steward
Sector of
Government
temple
secretary of the
treasury
one who is known
to the king
treasury
treasury
treasury
Table 6.2. The known and possible treasurers of Dynasty XIII whose
previous positions have been discovered.
Analyzing the titles of the treasurers of the Late Middle Kingdom is less
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers; Helck, Zur Verwaltung, pp. 77-88; Quirke, Titles and Bureau, pp. 19, 4860. Dated treasurers include: Imenw-Hetep (after Sobekhotep IV), Ib-iaw (Wahibre Ibiaw), Ay
(Merhetepre Ini), Ay-Meru (son of Iy, 13th or 17th) (Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 261). Quirke has
suggested that the pr hd (treasury) as well as the pr c3 (the residence) were aspects of the Inner Palace
(Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, p. 68, n. 16).

1425
For a study of the prsnc of the Old Kingdom temples, see Papazian, "Domain of Pharaoh," pp. 119189.
1426
Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 343-351, 353, 359.
1427
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, pp. 75-76, 78. For the use of rh-nswt as a rank title, see Franke,
"Probleme," pp. 106-107.
420
productive than that of the viziers due to the lack of information concerning the previous
positions of these officials (Table 6.2).1428 Nonetheless, three of the four treasurers with
known backgrounds came from the bureau of the treasury, while one had worked in the
sphere of temple administration.
Senebsumai (snb-sw-m-c(i)), who dates prior to the reign of Neferhotep I, was a
high steward (imy-rpr wr) before he became treasurer.1429 This office was high-ranking
(associated with honorific title htmw-bity) and was associated with the administration of
non-royal estates.1430 Senebsumai's parents were not of high status but had ties to the
military.1
An official named Titi {titi), who was roughly contemporary with the
treasurer Senebsumai, also has a clearly defined career. He began as a wdpw of relatively
low rank and eventually reached the high status position of an overseer of sealers and
high steward.1432 Though this man did not become a treasurer, his career is another
example of promotion under the authority of the treasurer.
Senebi (snbi) held the rank title, rh-nswt, "one who is known to the king," prior to
becoming a treasurer.1
33
This title was connected to the bureau of the treasury.1434 The
father of a treasurer Senebi, named Nebpewptah had previously held the same title as
king Neferhotep's grandfather (cnh-n-niwt).
1428
Senebi was included in the rock
For a list of the treasurers and discussion of their titles, see Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 43-78;
Two Treasurers; Quirke, Titles and Bureau, pp. 48-84.
1429
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 57-59, a, b, f-n; Two Treasurers, pp. 5, 21, 41; Wegner, Mortuary
Temple, p. 343.
Quirke, Titles and Bureau, p. 61. For the ranking of this title, see Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 47, 149.
1431
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 260.
1432
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, pp. 46, 78.
1433
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 26; Franke, "Probleme," pp. 106-107.
1434
Quirke, Titles and Bureau, p. 60.
1435
This title reflects a low-level local position with possible ties to the military. See Berlev, "Les
Pretendus 'Citadins,'" pp. 23-48; "Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 78, 233; Two Treasurers, pp. 6, 30;
421
inscription showing Neferhotep I's family at Sehel. Like a similar inscription at Wadi elHudi showing Sobekhotep IV and his family, this one also had the name of the rh-nswt,
nb-cnh, who likely commissioned both monuments as well as his own statue in the shrine
of Heqaib at Elephantine.1436 Sealings of this official were also found in the mayor's
house at Abydos. 1437
II.D. The Relationships between the Three Most Powerful Offices

The use of honorific titles provides some insight into the ranking of the highest
officials of the Egyptian government of the Late Middle Kingdom. The king held the
highest office followed by the vizier. Other high officials, including the treasurer, had
the title "seal bearer of the king" (htmw-bity), indicating that they were in the national
government.1438 Treasures represented the state when they had this title and "sole
companion" (swr-wcti) which differentiated them from their local counterparts as well as
other officials in their seals.1439 The treasurer was the third most powerful person in the
administration at this time.1440
Some scholars have suggested that the treasurer may have sometimes held as
much power as the vizier during the Late Middle Kingdom.1441 However, the designating
titles of the treasurer suggest that he was considered to be the highest official of those
Franke, "Zur Chronologie," p. 246; Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 130; "Thirteenth Dynasty," p. 396; Titles and
Bureau, p. 100; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 225-226; Ward, Essays, p. 48.
1436
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, p. 260; Two Treasurers, pp. 29-30.
1438
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, pp. 30, 4 1 ; Wcgner, "Excavations at the Town," pp. 37, no. 24, Fig. 19.38.
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 1-2, 220, 224, 256; Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 34, 39-43; Titles and
Bureau, pp. 12, 16.
1439
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 67, 224-225; Quirke, "Investigation," pp. 40, 149; Titles and Bureau,
pp. 48-49; Franke, "Probleme," p. 108.
1440
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 42-78, 265; Two Treasurers, p. 2; Helck, Zur Verwaltung, pp. 77-88.
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 51; Martin-Pardey, "Bureaucracy," p. 118.
422
beneath the level of the vizier. Nonetheless, the treasurer was in an office functionally
parallel to the vizier and not under his authority.
It may be the case that instances in which treasurers appear to outrank viziers may
simply reflect the nature of these positions and the preservation of their names within
archaeological contexts. For example, the treasurer's name and those of his officials
often appear at sites related to expeditions and royal mortuary establishments (in the
construction phase), which were under his authority. Though rare, these sites are often
the best preserved and most significant evidence for the nature of the government in
Dynasty XIII. Therefore, conclusions of ranking between the vizier and the treasurer
must be derived from an overall understanding of the office as well as the provenience of
the evidence, which is likely too sporadic to provide anything more convincing than that
from the titles discussed above. Unfortunately, like in the case of the king, some caution
must be exercised as titles can often mask the reality of the situation.
It should be noted that no direct evidence exists to prove that Dynasty XIII kings
served as treasurers or viziers prior to taking the throne. Instead non-royal rulers were
from military backgrounds or lower offices. It may be the case that viziers and treasurers
were too close to the previous king to be involved in usurpations. Though some of the
viziers appear to have served during multiple reigns, it is unclear what happened to the
others.
423
II.E. Viziers and Treasurers of the Second Intermediate Period

Only a few viziers are known for Dynasty XVII.1442 Grajetzki has noted that no
monuments of treasurers can be dated between the reign of Sobekhotep IV and that of the
Dynasty XVII king Kamose, though some names are known through sealings.1 4 Since
the treasurer represented the economic wing of the office of kingship, Grajetzki surmises
that, with the downfall in the financial power of the ruler, this office disappears from the
record. He also that monuments of other major officials are only known from Thebes and
areas to the south, with only a few exceptions.1444 Thus, one must consider such factors
in the distribution of the power of late Dynasty XIII and the possibly contemporary
Dynasty XVI rulers while recognizing that there is a substantial gap in the records from
Itjatawy, the administrative capital that may never be recovered archaeologically, since
the site is likely covered by substantial alluvium, as well as modern settlement.
Treasurers rather than viziers are known for Dynasties XIV and XV.1445 The use of this
title may have little connection to the actual role of this office holder in the Middle
Kingdom Egyptian state, and it may only be the word used for an administrative title in
the language of these Asiatic rulers.1446
II.F. Marriage between the Royal Family and Officials

At least during some parts of Dynasty XIII, kings arranged for marriages between
4 2
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 262, 263.

Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 66, 262; Two Treasurers, pp. 36-38.
1444
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, pp. 36-38.
1445
von Beckerath, Untersuchungen,p. 150.
1446
Grajetzki, Hochsten Beamten, pp. 61-63, 66-67, 263-264; Two Treasurers, p. 37.
1443
424
their daughters and important officials of the land.1447 In fact, towards the end of the
dynasty, powerful families were located in Edfu, El Kab and Thebes, the region where a
new dynasty would soon emerge.1448 It is likely that the kings between Sobekhotep III
and Merneferre Ay strengthened their hold on the state by incorporating important local
families into the-national government through appointment and marriage.1449
Interestingly, just like in Dynasty XIII, the Dynasty XVI kings were connected to the
families of El Kab and Edfu through marriage.1450
Some scholars believe that the Dynasty XIII king, Wahibre Ibiaw (or some king
between Sobekhotep IV and Merneferre Ay) was married to Nebkhas, whose father
(Dedusobek) and uncle (Nubankh) were important officials during the reign of
Sobekhotep IV.1451 In turn, Nebkhas bore a princess, Khonsu, who married the vizier Ay.
The eldest likely son of Ay, Sobekmose, succeeded his father to the office of Governor of
El-Kab. However, this son died before his father, who then had children with a second
wife, Reditenes, whose father was likely the king, Merneferre Ay.1452 At this point, Ay
filed a junction shifting the office to his eldest son by Reditenes, during the reign of
Merhotepre Sobekhotep VI, showing favor to her children possibly due to her connection
1447
Franke, "Zur Chronologie," p. 246.

1449
For examples of officials from other areas who may have been married to Dynasty XIII princesses, see
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 249, 250; J. Wegner, "Social and Historical Implications of Sealings of the
King's Daughter Reniseneb and other Women at the Town of Wah-Sut" in M. Bietak and E. Czemy, eds.,
Scarabs of the Second Millennium BC from Egypt, Nubia, Crete and the Levant: Chronological and
Historical Implications (Vienna, 2001), pp. 221-240.
1450
1451
Bennett, "King's Daughter;" pp. 19-22; "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 134-139; Spalinger,
"Remarks;" Troy, Patterns ofQueenship, p. 160. For the dating and lineage of Nubkhas, see Spalinger,
"Remarks." For other options, see Franke, "Review of Ward, Essays," p. 230. Kemp, "Social History," p.
112.
1452
Bennett, "King's Daughter," pp. 21-22; "Genealogical Chronology," p. 138; Ward, Essays, p. 53.
1448
425
to the contemporary royal family.
Bennett proposes that this king was the son of
Merneferre Ay, whereas Wahibre Ibiaw had likely been a single king or the end of a
different group. After Ay the Younger died, his father Ay shifted the office of governor
of El Kab to his younger brother, Aymeru, who may have served as a vizier during the
reign of the Dynasty XVI king Djehuty. The office of governor remained in the family
through much of the rest of the dynasty.
Here, where there is some indication that the royal family changed, it is
interesting to contemplate the fact that the new king (Merneferre Ay) married his
daughter (Reditenes) to a presumed widower (Ay) of the princess (Khonsu) of an earlier
ruler (Wahibre Ibiaw). The beneficial relationship of such marital arrangements would
have affected both the king and his subject, maintaining important ties, creating support
for the ruler, as well as occupational security for the local families.1454 However, there
are no examples of any of these families producing a king on the throne. Where these
rulers came from is still a mystery.
Countering reconstructions similar to the one cited above, Ryholt argues that Ay
the vizier and Ay the governor of El Kab noted above are not the same person.1455
However, his alternative reconstruction does not deny that a princess married an official
at El-Kab. The connection between the courts of Dynasties XIII and XVI/XVII to this
town existed regardless of the specific relationships between the various groups.
Interestingly, Djehuty's (Dynasty XVI/XVII) wife, Mentuhotep was the daughter
of the vizier Senebhenaf, the likely son of Ibiaw, who held the same office under the king
1453
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 124-125.

Spalinger, "Remarks," pp. 112-115. Other marriages between officials and princesses are known, see
Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 66.
1455
1454
426
Wahibre Ibiaw.1456 Thus, in this case, the status of a family remained high through the
formation of a new group of kings at a new capital. Interestingly, the family, which had
previously been granted a princess for one of its sons, later provided a queen to a ruler. It
is not known if the marriage of such women to rulers was also practiced in Dynasty XIII.
Another example of a princess marrying a local official has been found through
excavations of the town associated with the funerary complex of Senwosret III at South
Abydos.1457 Here, in the mayor's house, sealings of a Dynasty XIII princess were found.
It is likely that similar arrangements were made with officials throughout the
country,1458 and, in some cases that such links may have led to centers of power, which
broke away from the core. In fact, it has been noted that many of the El-Kab officials
with connections to the royal family, had military titles,1459 adding another dimension to
their importance. Franke suggests that these powerful officials of Dynasty XIII may have
come to disagree with the policies of the kings, establishing their own rule based upon
these differences.1460
III. Filiation and the Question of Relationships between Kings

In the sections above, the non-royal backgrounds and relative status of kings,
viziers, treasurers and other officials was outlined. Though little information is known
1456
Bennett, "Genealogical Chronology," pp. 126-128; Franke, Das Heiligtium, pp. 79-80; Habachi, "Vizier
Ibi'," pp. 119, 125; Macadam, "Royal Family," pp. 24-25; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 77, 259, 306;
Franke, Personendaten, pp. 387, Doss. 660; 388, Doss. 661.
It may be the case that this princess was the daughter of Merneferre Ay, whose sealings were found in
large numbers in the mayoral residence. For the sealings, see Wegner, Mortuary Temple, pp. 41-43, 313315.
1458
For example, the High Steward Nebankh's (Sobekhotep IV) niece married a successor of Sobekhotep
IV (Dodson, Monarchs, p. 69).
1459
Spalinger, "Remarks," p. 103.
1460
D. Franke, "Erste und Zweite Zwischenzeit - Ein Vergleich," ZAS 117 (1990), p. 121.
427
concerning most of the occupiers of the top positions, some patterns did emerge. Kings
of non-royal origin appear to have had military backgrounds, while those in the other two
offices seem to have worked within the bureaus that they ultimately headed. Though
father-to-son inheritance of offices is sometimes apparent, it was not necessarily always
' present. Here, an analysis of the ways in which kings may have linked themselves to one
another through filiation or name structure will be presented. The latter will then be used
to determine if there are relationships between the kings of the Second Intermediate
Period dynasties.
III. A. Chronological Methods of Filiation

During the Late Middle Kingdom, the terms used for filiation evolved. This
section outlines the chronological development of the phrases and discusses Ryholt's
interpretation of double names. Finally, a possible political reason for the reversal of the
names of fathers and sons will be suggested.
In general, father/son relationships could be expressed, using the following: N sS
(N, son of F, where N is the name of the offspring; F is the name of the father;); N ir.n F
(N, whom F begot); and it.f F (his father F).1461 The mother/son relationship is
expressed, N ir.n/ms.n M (N, whom M made/bore, where M is the name of the mother; N
is the name of the offspring) or mwt.fM. (his mother M).1462
Obsomer sets a chronological sequence for the terms mentioned above (See Table
Robins, "The Relationships Specified by Egyptian Kinship Terms of the Middle and New Kingdoms,"
C'dE 54, pp. 198-200.
1462
Robins, "Relationships," pp. 198, 200.
428
6.3).1463 He shows that N ms.n M preceded a form N ir.n M (both sdmw.n.f relatives),
the latter being used from year 32 in the reign of Senwosret I, extending into Dynasty
XIII.1464 These forms both correspond with F si N (displaying honorific transposition
out of respect for the father), well-known as being a Middle Kingdom construction,
presumably originating from the Old Kingdom F s/./N. 1465
At some point in Dynasty XIII, the term N ms(t) M returned along with the new
term N ir(t) (where the place of mother is replaced by the name of the father).
Obsomer hypothesizes that the emergence of this term corresponds to the change from F
siN to N siF, the latter being a pattern known in the New Kingdom. Thus, Obsomer
claims that the N ir(t) F would not be compatible with F siN, replacing F &?N, ms(t).n M
and F s/N, ir(t).n M with N ms.n M, irn F and N ir.n F, ms.n M, where the name of the
individual always precedes that of both parents. In the latter case, the form *N siF,
ir(t).n M, is not possible because the relative does not follow the referent and the
construction is awkward (suggesting the mother refers to the father). He does note,
however, that it is unclear whether or not double names represent N (si) F or an
abbreviation of the pattern N (m.fnir)~N2, where both names refer to the same person.1466
1463
C. Obsomer,"' di.fprt-hrw et la Filiation ms(t).n/ir(t).n comme Criteres de Datation dans les Textes du
Moyen Empire," in C. Cannuyer and J.-M. Kruchten, eds., Individu, societe et spiritualite dans I'Egypte
pharaonique et copte. Melanges egyptologiques au Professeur Aristide Theodorides (Bruxelles, 1993), pp.
163-200). See also H. Ranke, Die Agyptischen Personennamen II (New York, 1952), pp. 9-10; Rosati,
"Note," p. 276; W. Schenkel, Fruhmittelagyptischen Studien (Bonn, 1962), p. 75.
1 64
For an example of the formula N ir.n M in a stela dated to late Dynasty XII (stela oiNj-swhwj) using
other criteria, see Franke, Personendaten,
p. 187, Doss. 268; D.P. Silverman, "The Chamberlain NJ-SW
HWJ," Serapis 3 (1975-1976), Plate I, beginning with the end of line 2, for the dating of the stela, 35-40.
1465
For filiation in the early Middle Kingdom, see W.K. Simpson, Papyrus Reisner I (Boston, 1963), pp.
86-88. Obsomer notes that it is uncertain whether the Middle Kingdom form indicates just the son or the
son and the father (Obsomer, "Filiation," p. 171).
1466
Obsomer, "Filiation," p. 171. See also M. Malaise, "Les monuments prives du Moyen Empire, leur
classement, un corpus, une histoire des institutions," in W.F. Reineke, ed., Acts. First International
429
Obsomer believes that the earlier form F f&^N was used with royal names in the NesouMontou stela of Senwosret I, son of Amenemhet I (many interpret this as a double dated
stela), used in part to justify what may have been a difficult succession of the younger
Table 6.3. The chronology of the filiative markers for the Late Middle Kingdom.
Robins notes that the Instruction of Any (Dynasty XVIII) describes it as a woman's duty,
"to make sons" (with the verb ir) for her husband {iry stn.k sJw.Jc).1
Though she
relates this statement to fertility in ancient Egyptian art, it is interesting to find this verb
used in this manner, showing that the phrase ir could also refer to the "making"
(conceiving or growing) of a baby by the mother.
Obsomer's chronological outline of the filiative terms has great ramifications for
Ryholt's reconstruction of the chronology of Dynasty XIII. In Obsomer's study, the
Congress of Egyptology (Cairo, 1979), p. 451; Bourriau, Pharaohs and Mortals, p. 50; H.G. Fischer,
Varia: Egyptian Studies I (New York, 1976), p. 76; Ward, Index, p. 99; Essays, p. 8.
1467
Obsomer, "Nesou-Montou," pp. 117, 127, 133, 140. The owner of this stela also has a block statue
carrying his name (D. Wildung, "Ein Wiirfelhocker des Generals Nes-Month," MDAIK 37 (1981), pp. 503507; R. Schulz, Die Entwicklung undBedeutung des kuboiden Statuentypus, I, (Hildesheim, 1992), PL
111.)
1468
G. Robins, "Problems in Interpreting Egyptian Art," DE 17 (1990), p. 47; E. Suys, La Sagesse d'Ani,
Analecta Orientalia 11 (Rome, 1935), p. 24, Maxime VI.21. For further bibliographic information
concerning this text, see Bellion, Catalogue des Manuscrits, pp. 332-333.
430
exact point at which the shift in the order of the filiation formula occurs is unknown. If
this shift did occur some time during Dynasty XIII, obviously, one could interpret the
double names as indicators of filiation. It is imperative to keep this in mind when
deciding who is the son of whom. Misinterpreting these names could theoretically result
in a reversed chronology.
In Ryholt's interpretation of double (and triple) names in royal examples of
Dynasty XIII, the order of the names of the king and his father reflects the standard
Middle Kingdom form F (sJ) N.1469 All of the examples of supposedly filiative nomens
are relatively early in Dynasty XIII and may indicate a common practice at that time.
This system was used, according to Ryholt, to distinguish the "illegitimate" kings of his
contemporary Dynasty XIV from those of rightful decent in Dynasty XIII. Meanwhile,
those Dynasty XIII kings without filiative nomens are considered by him to be
1470
usurpers.
Ryholt's chronology of Dynasty XIII depends in part on his interpretation of these
names. He identifies nine potential instances of such double naming: Sekhemrekhutawy
Amenemhet Sobekhotep I; Sekhemkare Amenemhet Senebef; ... Ameny Qemau;
Hotepibre Qemau Saharnedjeritef; Sankhibre Ameny Intef Amenemhet; Amenemhet
Reniseneb, Hor ...i Djedkheperew; Seb Kay; and Sedjefakare Kay Amenemhet, some
being more certain than others.1471 Those without filiation in the relevant period
included: Sekhemkare Amenemhet, Semenkhkare Nebnun, Khaankhre Sobekhotep II,
Khutawyre Wegaf, Woserkare Khendjer, Sehotepkare Intef V and Semenkhkare
1469
Ryholt, "Royal Names," p. 105.

Ryholt, "Royal Names," p. 101; Political Situation, pp. 207-209.
1471
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 208, Table 246.
1470
431
Imyremeshaw.1472
Though Ryholt has argued that royal double names indicate father-to-son
succession and, thus, legitimacy,1473 his theory requires the double names to indicate both
kinship and royal identifications, the former being used in some (but certainly not all)
private examples and the latter being unproven for any cases.
Vermis studied the use of double names as indicating filiation, analyzing
primarily private examples.
Interestingly, in a significant number of cases where the
names of the father and mother were known, neither the first nor the second name
matched that of a parent. Thus, Vermis concluded that double names can represent
nicknames, family names, dual identification, or honorific names, especially to
differentiate people of the same name, rather than indicating lineage. An example of the
use of double names to identify like-named relatives is that of a vizier Aymeru, who
could be referred to interchangeably as Aymeru Neferkare or Neferkare Aymeru (nfr-k3rc iy-mrw). His father's name was also (the director of the broad court) Aymeru (hrpwsht i'y-wrw)}475 Also, Haankhef Iykhernofret was a son of Sobekhotep IV and was
named after his grandfather Haankhef.
In periods through Dynasty XII, double names were often expressed with the use
of the term rn.fnfr ("his good name"), which Vermis interprets as a common name,
1472
1473
1475

Ryholt, "Royal Names," p. 101; Political Situation, pp. 207-209, 284.
P. Vemus, "Nonis Propres Juxtaposes au Moyen Empire," Rd'E 23 (1971), pp. 193-199; Le Surnom.
Delange, Statues Egyptiennes du Moyen Empire, p. 68; Franke, Personendaten, p. 55, Doss. 25-26;
Habachi, "Vizier Iymeru," pp. 261-278; Quirke, Titles and Bureau, p. 31; Vermis, Le Surnom, p. 4. Note
that Habachi suggests that some people carried a double name reflecting the reign in which they were born
(Habachi, "Vizier Iymeru," p. 266).
1476
Franke, Personendaten, p. 353, Doss. 592; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 229-230; Simpson, "Dynasty
XIII Stela," pp. 157-158.
432
obtained by the person during life and pertaining to some identifiable characteristic
(whether direct, expression of parental relationship, vocation, or religion).
77
In Dynasty
XIII, this expression was replaced by ddwn.f. At times, the phrase could be omitted,
leaving juxtaposed names instead, which can sometimes lead to confusion with the rare
occurrence of expressed filiation (A (sJ)B). According to Hayes, the phrase, ddwn.f
was used in Brooklyn Papyrus 35.1446 to denote the Egyptian name of Asiatic workers,
showing that this was their common name.1478
In private examples, double names can refer to a specific person, especially if it is
popular, as well as indicating a family name. Filiation could sometimes be false,
referring to a worker's relationship to his superior.1479 Two names could also appear as
alternatives for one another. Often the first name in those juxtaposed expresses
something about the person, while the second is something outside [endophoric (himself
or family) versus exophoric(king or god)].1480 Thus, Vermis' studies seem to reveal a
very complicated situation in which the interpretation of juxtaposed names cannot be
taken for granted.
Interestingly, Quirke notes that the double names occur far more often in the Late
Middle Kingdom than previously, suggesting that this phenomenon was due to the desire
to be more specific, as evident in the titles of this time.1481 Grajetzki points out that it is
difficult to distinguish whether one or more individuals is the same person in different
This phrase emerged in the Old Kingdom (Vermis, Le Surnom, pp. 78-81).
Hayes, A Papyrus, p. 100. See also Vermis, Le Surnom, p. 84.
Vermis, Le Surnom, p. 116.
Vermis, Le Surnom, p. 131.
Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, pp. 109-110; "In the Name of the King," p. 263.
433
monuments, especially when the name is common.1482 One must compare the titles that
accompany the name in the different contexts to determine how many individuals are
represented. Thus, it may be the case that double names became common in this period
because of the popularity of names in order to differentiate one person from another.
In light of the use of double names by private individuals, it is important to again
consider the royal cases. Besides filiation, these royal double names could also possibly
denote alternative names, the nomen and prenomen, differentiation for kings with the
same or similar names, non-royal relatives, grandfathers, ancestors, or even unrelated
predecessors to the throne.1483
In all likelihood, some royal double names in Dynasty XIII do indicate filiation.
For example, Qemau Saharnedjeritef seems to indicate that, at least in this case, filiation
is clear from the translation of the elements of the name: "Qemau's son
Harnedjeritef."1484 However, Ryholt argues that Saharnedjeritef is probably the full name
without the si being separate. He argues it would be strange for this component to be
within the cartouche especially since sirc is not written in this way.1
Quirke argues
that, for the most part, royal double names do not indicate that Ryholt's theory is
valid. 4
He cautions against creating "ghost" reigns based upon this principle (such as
Ryholt's inclusion of kings Seb and Kay). He suggests that the only certain way to
483
Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, pp. 5-6.

For some of these options, see von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 46. For doubt concerning filiation
and royal double names, see Quirke, "Royal Power," pp. 129-130.
1484
J.P. Allen, "Turin," p. 50. For an inscription with this king's name, see A. Kamal, "Rapport sur le
necropole d'Arabe-el-Borg," ASAE 3 (1902), p. 80.
1485
Quirke, "Review Surnom," pp. 108-109; Ryholt, "Royal Names," p. 101. For the possible occurrence
of sirc within the cartouche of Teti in the name of one of his pyramids in the tombs of lhy and Hetep, see
(Silverman, "Non-Royal Tombs," n. 4).
1486
Quirke, "In the Name of the King," p. 264.
434
identify royal parentage is the use of king's mother and king's wife for a queen, but there
1487
are only two examples of this at this time (Nebhotepti and Aahotepti).
Von Beckerath and Quirke have suggested that Seb Kay,
which appears on a
magic wand from Abydos, is short for Sedjefakare (Amenemhet), but Ryholt rejects this
idea.1489 Quirke later suggests that Seb Kay is a double name and that it may have been a
child ruler due to his name being on a birth wand.
It is also possible that the object
found here is an example of propaganda, in which the names of the father and grandfather
of Sedjefakare Amenemhet have been placed in cartouches to claim father-to-son
succession to the throne.1491 Also, the quality of the inscription on this object is poor and
may not be as significant as it would first seem.
It is likely that double names used by kings had varying meanings, as they did in
the private sphere. Interestingly, only one king, Sekhemkare Amenemhet Senebef, is
referred to by a double nomens in the Turin King-List U92 Meanwhile, though double
names are not listed as such in this document, Ryholt notes that inscriptions of
Sobekhotep I and Reniseneb always contain both. However, the evidence is skewed.
Many of Sobekhotep I's monuments used double names, perhaps denoting a relationship
to an Amenemhet of Dynasty XII, while a double name with Reniseneb is attested by his
only preserved inscribed object, a bead. This difference may be an accident of
preservations, or it may suggest that some inscriptions may not have included the double
1487
1488
Quirke, "Royal Power," p. 130; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, p. 46.

Ryholt, "Royal Names," pp. 101, 103; Political Situation, p. 208. Later, Quirke agrees with Ryholt that
this is not the case (Quirke, "In the Name of the King," p. 263).
1490
Quirke, "In the Name of the King," p. 263.
1491
J.P.Allen, "Turin," p. 51.
1492
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 209, n. 714.
1489
435
name as in the case with the other kings.

Quirke has suggested that several kings in Dynasty XIII may be condensed into
one ruler if a double name is assumed. Candidates for such a move include Mersekhemre
Ined (8.6) and Mersekhemre Neferhotep (unplaced) and Merhotepre Sobekhotep VI and
Merhotepre Ini (entry for prenomen in 8.4).1493 In both of these cases, only one king is
identified in the Turin King-List, and it is likely that these were alternative nomens for
these rulers. Thus, in these cases, such double names are definitely not filiative.
Quirke also proposes that Amenemhet Senebef and Amenemhet (Ryholt 7.6; 7.7)
may denote the same king, since they both have Sekhemkare as their prenomen. Quirke
posits that it would be unusual for two kings to have same prenomen in one dynasty,
especially when they are so close in chronological sequence.1494 In the Turin King-List,
Sekhemkare only appears in the first entry, while Amenemhetre (a nomen rather than a
prenomen) is in the second position. On a statue, the inscription of Sekhemkare
Amenemhet is the only attestation of this name combination. If one were to interpret the
name Amenemhet Senebef as a double name without filiation, there may have been a
king with the name Sekhemkare Amenemhet Senebef, in which Amenemhet and Senebef
were alternative names for the same person.
With the coalescence of Sekhemkare Senebef Amenemhet and Sekhemkare
Amenemhet, the identity of Amenemhetre in the Turin King-List must be addressed.
Perhaps it refers to Ameny Qemau, known through objects in his funerary monument at
Quirke, "Investigation," p. 214; "Review Surnom," pp. 108-109.

Quirke, "Review Surnom," pp. 108-109.
436
Dahshur, as well as on an unprovenienced plaquette.'495 Ryholt, however, argues that

this name represents two kings, Ameny and his son Qemau, the former being
Sekhemkare Amenemhet, while the latter is not preserved.149 However, it may also be
the case that Ameny Qemau fits into 7/7 and has been written more formally by the
authors of the sources for the Turin King-List.U91 This name may still show filiation with
Senebef (possibly making Nerikare his prenomen or his brother, if this position is
correct).
If Ryholt's theory of filiative nomens is correct, then the method of identifying a
father changes in the middle of Dynasty XIII, when kings were not of royal blood.
Ryholt defines three types of Dynasty XIII royal seals for the period between Sobekhotep
III and Merneferre Ay.1498 The most frequent type, belonging to kings from Sobekhotep
III through Sobekhotep V, display filiation. In these seals and sealings, the formula
revealing the mother is sirc N ms.n mwt-nswM "Son of Re, N (nomen) whom the
King's Wife, M, bore" and the father: ntrnfrFN ir.n itntrF,"Good God, PN (prenomen),
whom the god's father, F begot."
Obviously, the use of the designation of father and
mother with the verbs /rand msrespectively, would indicate, according to Obsomer's
theory discussed previously, that the reversal between the order of the juxtaposed names
of father and son occurred in or before the reign of Sobekhotep III. It is interesting to
contemplate the origin of this change and its purpose. At this point, there is no means of
1495
Swelim andDodson, "Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau," pp. 325-328; Fischer, "ArchaeologicalAspects, "p .

49, Fig. 5.
1496
1497
J.P. Allen, "Turin," pp. 50-51.
1498
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 34-37, Figs. 31-35. See also, Hornung and Staehelin, Skarabaen und
andere Siegelamulette, p. 50.
1499
Note that Sobekhotep III has both names in each seal (maternal and paternal) (Ryholt, Political
Situation, p. 35, Figs. 31, 37).
437
determining whether the new wording developed in the royal or the private sector first.
However, here one might note the fact that Sobekhotep III and the brother kings appear to
have had no direct connection with the royal family/ies of preceding kings. Thus, it is
possible that the change in order of the formula F siN may have been prescribed by these
kings in order to show their elevated'status above that of their non-royal fathers by
placing their names in the first position.1500
It is uncertain as to why Sobekhotep III and the following three or more kings
rejected practices of traditional legitimization and disassociated themselves from the
previous rulers. Ryholt has suggested that Seth and possibly some of his predecessors
had taken unfavorable actions, to which the later kings reacted.1501 He states that
Sobekhotep III and Neferhotep I may have deliberately usurped monuments of Seth from
Medamud and possibly Abydos.
It is not clear when the change in filiative formulae occurred in the private sector,
since stelae rarely have a king's name. However, there are some datable examples.
Aymeru-Neferkare of the reign of Sobekhotep IV used the form N ir.n F and N siF to
identify his father, Aymeru, controller of the hall.1502 The inscriptions of the sons of the
vizier Ibiaw contain the later forms of filiation in the reign of Ibiaw or Merneferre Ay
when this official served. In one stela (MMA 22.3.307), the form used to denote filiation
isS5*F. 1503
By Dynasty XVI/XVII, it would seem that the change in the formulae for the
1500
For stelae dating to the period of the brother kings and displaying the formula N Jr.nF, see Habachi, "A
Score of Important Officials," pp. 47-56.
1501
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 285-286, nn. 1032-1033; 297.
1502
Habachi, "A Score of Important Officials," pp. 262, 266-269 Figs. 261, 263b, 264, 265, 266.
1503
Habachi, "Vizier Ibi'," PI. 4.A. For other examples, see Habachi, "Vizier Ibi'," p. 115, PI. IV. B; H. de
Meulenaere, "La statue d'un contemporain de Sobekhotep IV," BIFAO 69 (1971), pp. 61-64.
438
expression of filiation had been completed. For example, in the Stela of Horemkhauef
(son of Herikhat, Hori; wife Sobeknofru), the later form of the offering formula is used
along with the Nir. n F construction for filiation.1504 This private stela dates to Dynasty
XVI during its overlap with Dynasty XIII.
III.B. Analysis of Nomens and Prenomens

An interesting method for identifying family lines within dynasties appears in
Bennett's study of fratrilineal succession in Dynasty XVII.
Here, the prenomen and
nomen of each king will be compared with those of other rulers to indicate familial
relationships1506 or to determine if there are definable groups of kings, including the ones
that might be expected in a system of circulating succession. Another relevant issue is
that of how dynasties XII, XIII, and XVII are related. Thus, a comparison with these
dynasties has also been performed, including Ryholt's Abydos Dynasty, even though it is
likely a part of Dynasty XVI.
Table 6.4 shows the matches grouped according to nomen and prenomen,
arranged according to Ryholt's chronology. As one can see, there are three main
potential family groups shown here. The first is that of Amenemhet, which is made up of
three members with the same nomen, one of which shares the prenomen, Sekhemkare
with Senebef. Thus, this group of names, which seem to refer to a relationship with the
1504
R. Engelbach, "Two Steles of the Late Middle Kingdom from Tell Edfu," ASAE 23 (1923), pp. 185186, Fig. 182.
1505
Bennett, "Structure," p. 29. Note, however, that this suggestion is made regarding names that appear
together indicating the appearance of brothers, within family groupings. Weill attempted to identify family
groups based upon the structure of names in his early study (Weill, La Fin du Moyen Empire, pp. 267-519).
See also Quirke, "In the Name of the King," p. 265.
1506
Berlev states that it was customary for grandchildren to be named after their grandparents. See Berlev,
"Eleventh Dynasty," p. 375, n. 325.
439
Reign Number
(Rvholt/Franke)
Family Nomen
Prenomen
imn-m-htt
shm-k3-rc
s. cnh-ib-rc
s.dB-k!-rc
4/4
8/7
20/15
nfr-htp
hc-shm-rc
mr-shm-rc
27/22
sbk-htp
shm-rc-h w-Gwy
hc-cnh-rc
shm-rc-s. w?d-tiwy
h c-nfr-rc
mr-htp-rc
hc-htp-rc
mr-kiw-rc
1/16
13/12
26/21
29/24
30/28
31/25
38/32
(sbk-htp)
i-n.i
mr-htp-rc
30/28
34/28
ind
{nfr-htp)
mr-shm-rc
36/30
__/--
s. wld-ki-rc
11/10
37/31
s.htp-ib-rc
Dyn. 12
10/9
(sbk-htp)
shm-rc-hw-tiwv
1/16
16/?
snb.f
(imn-m-hit)
shm-ki-rc
2/2
4/4
hrw.i
imn-m-hJt
../..
Table 6.4. Correlations in the nomens and prenomens of kings of

Dynasty XIII. Transliterated names are taken from Ryholt. Reign order
numbers are from Ryholt and Franke (see Appendices I-II).
Dynasty XII Amenemhets, a possible clue to the specific lineage of the members. One
king with an unknown nomen shares his prenomen, Sehotepibre, with the Dynasty XII
440
king, Amenemhet I. Ryholt believes that the name was actually Hotepibre and was
confused with that of Amenemhet I.15 7 The second possible family group is that of
Neferhotep. Here, two members have this nomen while one additional member, Ined
Mersekhemre, shares his prenomen with Neferhotep Mersekhemre. However, these
names may refer to a single king as mentioned before.
The third set of kings is the largest and is centered around the nomen,
Sobekhotep. Seven rulers of Dynasty XIII share this name, while an additional two kings
can be linked to it through their prenomens. These monarchs are Merhotepre Ini (sharing
with Merhotepre Sobekhotep VI; these names may belong to a single ruler as shown in
Fig. 6.5) and a king with unknown prenomen, Sekhemrekhutawy (identical to
Sekhemrekhutawy Sobekhotep I). Thus, there are nine Dynasty XIII rulers in this group.
If the nomen and prenomen matches do indeed represent familial links, then it is
quite simple to take another step. Since it is well-known that Khasekhemre Neferhotep I
and Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV are brothers and that at least one of the following
Sobekhotep was a member of the next generation of this family, then it is possible to join
these two groups together, making Neferhotep/Sobekhotep a group of thirteen.
As an exercise, one can take Ryholt's filiation occurrences, which may be
problematic in reality, and bring additional kings into this family group (See Fig. 6.5).
Three kings, Sekhemrekhutawy Sobekhotep, Sekhemkare Senebef, and Reniseneb, all
display filiation with Amenemhet. As one might notice, the first of these examples
brings the Neferhotep/Sobekhotep family together with that of Amenemhet.
For Ameny Qemau, the former name is likely short for Amenemhet, and Qemau
1507
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 16; "Hotepibre," p. 3.
441
also becomes affiliated with the Amenemhet family. Another king, Hotepibre
Sahamedjeritef claims filiation with Qemau directly and can, then, also be placed in this
group. Finally, Sankhibre Amenemhet shows filiation with Ameny, and as has already
been done before, he too is placed with the Amenemhet.
Filiation
imn-m-h3t
Prenomen
Nomen
reian
shm-rc-hw-tiwy
shm-ki-rc
sbk-htp
snb.f
rn.i-snb
1/16
2/2
14/-
imny
(grandfather)
s. cnh-ib-rc
kmSw
imn-m-hlt
518/7
in-it.f
s. cnh-ib-rc
imn-m-h3t
8/7
hrw
... -l-rc
...i
17/-
sb
kiy
13/19
kmlw
htp-ib-rc
si-hrw-nd-hr-it. f
61-
Jdy
s.d8-kl-rc
imn-m-htt
20/15
Table 6.5. Dynasty XIII kings showing filiation according to

Ryholt.
The next patrilineal name association is that of Intef, who is proclaimed to be the
father of Sankhibre Amenemhet, seen above to be the son of Ameny. The name of Intef
appears again later in Dynasty XIII with the reign of Sehotepkare Intef (24/19). During
Dynasty XI, four kings used the nomen Intef.1508
' Von Beckerath, Handbuch, pp. 76-78, 90-81.
442
According to Ryholt's chronology, another family line also can also be linked to
the Amenemhet's through filiation. Sedjefakare Amenemhet claims that his father is
Kay. Meanwhile, the king, Kay shows his father to be Seb. Thus, these kings can be
added to the total for the Amenemhet/Neferhotep/Sobekhotep family.
Group
Subgroup(s)
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
H
A/S/N
A/S/N
H
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
H
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S
A
A
A
A
A
A
H
S
A
H
S
A
A
A
A
S
N/S
N/S
N/S
N/S
S
N/S
N
H
S
H
Name
Reign
Sekhemrekhutawy Sobekhotep I
1/16
Sekhemkare Senebef
2/2
Sekhemkare Amenemhet
4/4
Qemau
5/~
Hotepibre Saharnedjeritef
61Sankhibre Amenemhet
8/7
Sehotepibre
10/9
Sewadjkare
11/10
Khaankhre Sobekhotep II
13/12
Reniseneb
14/Awibre Hor
15/14
S ekhemrekhutawy
16/Seb
18/Kay
19/Sedjefakare Amenemhet
20/15
Sehotepkare Intef
24/19
Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep 11126/21
Khasekhemre Neferhotep
27/22
Menwadjre Sahathor
28/23
Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV
29/24
Merhotepre Sobekhotep VI
30/28
Khahotepre Sobekhotep V
31/25
Merhotepre Ini
34/28
Mersekhemre Ined
36/30
Sewadjkare Hori
37/31
Merkawre Sobekhotep VII
38/32
...webenre Hor
53/-
Table 6.6.. List of kings with family links in the order of Ryholt's list.
Abbreviations are as follows: A. Amenemhet, S. Sobekhotep, N. Neferhotep,
and H. Hor. Reign numbers are listed as Ryholt/Franke.
443
Finally, a king with an incomplete name ...kare shows filiation with a Hor. This name
matches perhaps that of Awibre Hor (15/14) and possibly Sewadjkare Hori (37/31) and
...webenre Hor... (53/--). Sewadjkare Hori, in turn, shares the same nomen as a king with
an unknown prenomen (11/10). However, there is no evidence of a link with the larger
Amenemhet/Neferhotep/Sobekhotep family at this time.
When the subfamily groups are plotted according to either Ryholt or Franke's
chronology, there is an interesting pattern with the Amenemhet/Sobekhotep/Neferhotep
group (Fig. 6.6). Not surprisingly, the Amenemhet line appears in the first half of the
dynasty and phases out by Ryholt's twenty-four and Franke's king number nineteen,
since this is the part, which follows Dynasty XII most closely. Meanwhile, the
Sobekhotep group occupies positions within the middle third of the dynasty (Ryholt 1,
sporadically within 13-38 and Franke periodically between 12 and 32). The Neferhotep
family appears to be a subgroup within the larger Sobekhotep line (appearing between
Ryholt 27-36 and Franke 22-30).
At this point in the analysis, it is beneficial to modify Ryholt's chronology,
according to suggestions that have been made by various scholars. Also, the names of
kings, whose groupings cannot be determined, are shown in order to bring the chart
closer to the Turin King-List, as it was written. The results of this more-condensed list
are found in Figure 6.7. These lines are drawn to separate trends in the names of the
kings. The Amenemhet group extends from Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep
I to Sehotepibre (six kings with three uncategorized). Meanwhile, from Sewadjkare to
Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III, the groups are mixed or unidentified. The next
block includes the Neferhotep family from Khasekhemre Neferhotep through Khahotepre
444
Group
A/S/N
A/S/N
Subgroup(s)
A/S
A
A/S/N
A/S/N
A
A
A/S/N
A/S/N
H
A
H
A/S/N
A/S/N
H
A/S/N
S*
A
H
A
A/S/N
A/S/N
S*
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
A/S/N
N/S*
N/S*
N/S*
S
A/S/N
S*
A/S/N
H
A/S/N
N
H
S
A/S/N
Name
Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep I
Sekhemkare Amenemhet/Senebef
Unknown King
... Ameny Qemau
Hotepibre Qemau Saharnedjeritef
... Jewefni
Semenkare Nebnun
Sehotepibre ...
Sewadjkare ...
... Nedjemibre
Khaankhre Sobekhotep II (Neni)
... Amenemhet Reniseneb
Awibre Hor
Sedjefakare Amenemhet
Khutawyre Wegaf
Woserkare Khendjer
Semenkhkare Imyremeshaw
Sehotepkare Intef
Meribre Seth
Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep III
(Montuhotep)
Khasekhemre Neferhotep (Haankhef)
Menwadjre Sahathor
Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV
Khahotepre Sobekhotep V
Wahibre Ibiaw
Merneferre Ay
Merhotepre Sobekhotep Vl/Ini (father?)
Sankhenre Sewadjtew
Mersekhemre Neferhotep/Ined
Sewadjkare Hori
Merkawre Sobekhotep VII
(14 kings)
...webenre Hor
(4 kings?)
Table 6.7. List of kings with modifications to Ryholt's list. Possible familial
links shown. Abbreviations are as follows: A. Amenemhet, S. Sobekhotep, N.
Neferhotep, H. Hor, * non-royal parents.
445
Sobekhotep V. The remainder of the kings, beginning with Awibre Ibiaw, are once again
mixed.
In Figure 6.8, one can clearly see that the most stable times are characterized by
the occupation of the office of kingship by a family. As stability breaks down, patterns in
names become more random, though continuing in the practice of the times (possibly
fashion).
It is likely that the Amenemhet group (group one) was related to the kings of
Dynasty XII. Ryholt believes that the first kings of Dynasty XIII were sons of
Amenemhet IV, whom he thinks married into the Dynasty XI family.1509 However, it
may make more sense, if there were heirs with different royal fathers in the line of
succession in group one. It would seem that after the reign of Nefrusobek, kingship
became available to a wide range of relatives, who had short, unstable reigns. There is no
evidence from this study that there were any defined family groups within this line,
which evolves into the Sobekhotep family (including those of Neferhotep). In sum, until
the point where the names of the kings become too fragmentary to reconstruct in the
Turin King-List, the fringe elements of the Dynasty XII family appears to continue and
flourish in Dynasty XIII. This conclusion parallels those of Bell, who has noted that the
names of Dynasty XIII kings may imply a Theban origin along with a relationship to the
Dynasty XII rulers.1510
Another interesting trend is that of the seven kings with Sobekhotep as part of
their names, three are known to have had non-royal fathers. The only other kings in this
1509
1510
Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 75, 209-212, 214-215.

Bell, "Climate," pp. 262-263.
446
category are the brothers of Sobekhotep IV. Thus, this grouping, overall (outside of
N/S), must be considered to be fragmentary and does not represent a single family. The
fact that non-royal parents as well as a non-royal grandfathers are known for several
kings of Dynasty XIII presents a problem for reconstructing family groups with the use of
names. It is difficult to comprehend how both familial origins could be true. Thus, it is
possible that, at least, this group of kings was attaching itself to certain "family" groups
symbolically. This conclusion is especially interesting since the use of non-royal filiation
seems to function with the opposite message, i.e. some rulers were not affiliated directly
with the royal line.
One interesting omission in Dynasty XIII is the name Senwosret from Dynasty
XII,1511 especially since Amenemhet is so common. It is probable that the kings of
Dynasty XIII traced their origins back to either Amenemhet III or Amenemhet IV.
One king with an unknown nomen (10/9) shares his prenomen (Sehotepibre) with
Amenemhet I of Dynasty XII, but this Dynasty XIII use of Sehotepibre is likely an
example of honorific acknowledgement rather than a statement of familial origins.1513
Nonetheless, here, the continuation of the Amenemhet line, which others have noted,1514
can be quantified, if the use of nomen and prenomen in this way is a viable method. It
should be noted that Wegaf links himself to a Senwosret in an inscription {Palette
1511
There is an unplaced Senwosret, which scholars assign to either Dynasty XIII or XVI. Here, this king
is placed in Dynasty XVI with uncertainty. See Bennett, "Structure," p. 26; von Beckerath, "Theban," p.
23.
1512
Bell suggests that the Dynasty XIII kings were from the extended family of Amenemhet III as well as
the kings prior to his reign (Bell, "Climate," p. 260).
1513
For the use of this prenomen, see Postel, Protocole, p. 287, n. 1273.
1514
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 214; Quirke, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 260; "Thirteenth Dynasty,"
p. 394; Bell, "Climate," p. 260.
447
Rubensohri).1515 Also, on Sehel island, Neferhotep I carved inscriptions similar to those

of Senwosret III and sometimes even incorporated his name.151
III.C. Connections Between the Nomen and Prenomen across Dynasties

The last section concentrated on the connections between DynastieS'XII and XIII.
This part will focus on the matches in nomens and prenomens between Dynasty XIII
kings and others in the Second Intermediate Period.1517 Also, this section will rely on
Ryholt's labels for Dynasties XIV and Abydos and Ryholt and Franke for Dynasties XIII
and XV, and Franke and Bennett for Dynasty XVI/XVII.1518
Ryholt's Dynasty XIV has two matches within the prenomens, which may link
these names to the Amenemhet and Hor families. A Sankhibre (14.24) with an unknown
nomen shares his prenomen with the Amenemhet, who possessed filiation to Intef and
Ameny. Also, Sewadjkare appears with kings of unknown nomen in Dynasties XIII
(13.11/10) and XVII (14.11) as well as one member of the family of Hor (13.37/31).
The next correlation in prenomen probably serves as a reminder to the danger in
performing such an academic exercise as this. The Dynasty XV king Khamudi (15.6/6)
has the same prenomen, Hotepibre, as Saharnedjeritef (13.6/-), possibly of the
Amenemhet group. However, it is unlikely that this match is in any way associated with
1515
Legrain, "Notes," p. 251, Fig. 251. Drioton and Vandier suggest that the Senwosret referred to here is
Seneferibre Senwosret, making them close in time (Drioton and Vandier, L'Egypte, p. 285). However, now
this king is considered to have been a member of Theban Dynasty XVI (Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 202,
Table 242).
1516
Habachi, "Neferhotep I Family," p. 77.
1517
See N. Dautzenberg, "Die Wahl des Konigsnamens in der Hyksoszeit. Das Entstehen einer eigenen
Tradition, Beziige zu den thebanischen Herrschern und Schlussfolgerungen fur die Chronologie," GM159
(1997), pp. 43-51.
1518
448
a familial relationship.
Ryholt's Abydos Dynasty (likely part of Dynasty XVI) is full of fragmentary
names. However, there is a prenomen, Sekhemrekhutawy, which may link one of the
Sobekhotep's (13.1/16) to Pantjeny. Unfortunately, this king is not placed within this
group of local rulers? Ryholt argues that there are three Sekhemrekhutawy's. He basis
the Khabaw conclusion on the architrave with the name Hor also to connect the two
(318).
Dynasty XVI is a group of Theban kings. Several matched nomens in this group
might indicate links to Dynasty XIII, though earlier, this thesis has suggested that this
dynasty has no direct association with Dynasty XIII.1519 Name preference and distant
familial relationships could also be playing a part here. Nonetheless, it is interesting that
these names appear only in Dynasty XVI and not XVII. However, it might be possible to
see these links as a Theban branch of Dynasty XIII, as this group of kings continued to
hold the seat of kingship at Memphis, while this branch of the family ruled from Thebes.
In sum, the Dynasty XVI nomens, which are familiar to those seen above, include
those of Sekhemresewwosertawy Sobekhotep (16.3/17.2), Sekhemresankhtawy
Neferhotep (16.4/17.3), and a later match with the Intefs (17.14-16/12-14). As was
shown above, the Intef group may be associated with the Amenemhet family. Perhaps
more relevant is the fact that this last name also hearkens back to that of the leaders of
Theban Dynasty XL In support of this suggestion may be another Dynasty XVI example
matching that of Dynasty XIIIMentuhotep (13.5/-, 16.-/-, 16.5/17.4)the name of
Chapter 1, Section III.A.4.
449
the last king of Dynasty XI.
The use of this name certainly must relate to Theban
Dynasty XI rather than to a family in Dynasty XIII. The final interesting nomen is that of
a Seneferibre Senwosret of Dynasty XVI, a name that does not appear in Dynasty XIII.
Bennett suggests that Merneferre Ay and Merhotepre Sobekhotep VI are related due to
the similarity in the construction of their prenomen.
In the meantime, Weill had noted
connections in the constructions of names within the Second Intermediate Period in

general.1522
III.D. Patterns in the Royal Titulary

Horus names of the Dynasty XIII kings are not well-preserved. However, of the
fourteen kings with preserved names (2 being partially preserved), nine contain the
formula X tJwy, with four having X-i'b #w^7(Senebef (2) mh-ib-Gwy, Amenemhet VI (8)
shr-ttwyls. cnh-ib-Uwy, Sehotepibre (10) swsh-tiwy, Sobekhotep II (13) sm3-tiwy, Awibre
Hor (15) htp-ib-tiwy, Amenemhet VII (20) hry-tp tiwy, Sobekhotep III (26) hw-tJwy,
Neferhotep I (27) grg-ttwy, Sobekhotep IV (29) cnh-ib ttwy). All of these occurred
within the first twenty-nine kings. An apparent earlier occurrence of this formula occurs
with Senwosret II (ssm-tSwy). There is also one king in Dynasty XVI/XVII (Nebiriau I
(6) swid-Gwy). These names are likely a style preference, but it may be the case that
there were many more. For the most part, they convey messages of keeping the land and
appeased, but some of the initial verbs are more "proactive." For example, Sehotepibre
refers to expanding the borders (Byblos?), while Sobekhotep II notes uniting the two
This name was popular with kings throughout Dynasty XI (J. von Beckerath, Hcmdbuch der
Agyptischesn Konigsnamen, (Mainz, 1999), pp. 76-81).
1521
Bennett, "King's Daughter," p. 21.
1522
Weill, "Les Successeurs," pp. 153-154, 156.
450
lands, and Sobekhotep III states his will to protect the two lands. This latter expression
appears earlier as well in the Nebty names of Amenemhet I (shtp-tJwy), Amenemhet III
(it-iwct-8wy), Amenemhet IV (shb-tiwy), and Nefrusobek (st-shm-nbt-tiwy). Two
Dynasty XVI kings have Nebty names built on this formula.
Of the 9 kings with Horus names X-tiwy, four had Nebty names X-ifw.
(Amenemhet VI (8) shm-hcw, Sobekhotep II (13) dd-hcw, Awibre Hor (15) nrhcw,
Sobekhotep IV (29) widhcw). Three Dynasty XVI kings have this pattern in their
Golden Horus names. The pattern dd-X is found in two cases: Sobekhotep II (13) ddhcw and Djedkheperew (17) dd-msw. The last also has this pattern in the Horus name
dd-hprw. Another pattern X-shm.fis found in two cases, Senebef (2) it-shm.f'and hcshm.f. Khendjer (22) uses a different form, X-mswt, i.e. wJh-mswt, like the
Horus/Nebty name of Amenemhet I and the pattern of the Nebty names of Senwosret I
c
nh-mswt (also Horus and Golden) and Senwosret III ntr-mswt. Several Horus names
match those from Dynasty XI kings including shr-tiwy (Intef I); scnh-ib-tlwy and sm3Gwy (Montuhotep II); and g/g-^wyÎjibchantre) while Mentuhotep III has the same
Horus name pattern (scnh-tJwy.^ as those of the Dynasty XIII kings.1523
The Golden Horus names of three kings are X-ntrw. Sobekhotep 1(1) cnh-ntrw,
Sobekhotep II13 kiw-ntrw and Awibre Hor (15) nfr-ntrw. Dynasty XII kings with this
pattern are Senwsoret II Mp-nfrwand Amenemhet IV shm-ntrw. Two kings have X-mict
hk-mlet Amenemhet VI (8) and htp-hr-mlct Sobekhotep III (26). Dynasty XII kings with
this pattern are Nebty and Horus of Sobekhotep II shc msctan.& Nebty hkn mict for
Amenemhet II (also Horus). The next pattern is cnh-X with cnh-ntrwabove and cnh
1523
Postel, Protocole, pp. 60, 191, 196, 255, 384.
451
tnptwwith parallels cnh-mswtoiSenwosret I and whm-mswtoiAmenemhet
I.
Using Ryholt's list, there are thirteen kings with the prenomen pattern X-iJ-rc(2,
3, 4, 9, 11, 17, 20, 22, 23, 24, 37, 48, 54) and seven with X-ib-rc(6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 25, 32).
Three have X -hp-re (30, 31, 34) and two X-nfr-rc (29, 33). X-/2-r' is 5 (35, 55, 57, ?, ?)
and X shm-rcis 3 (27, 36, ?) and shm-rc-X-tlwy\s 3 (1, 16, 26).
The most popular pattern X-k3-rc is also used for Senwosret I and Nefrusobek, with plural
kcwfox Senwosret III and Amenemhet II. X-ib-rc was used by Amenemhet. I. The
components that appear most frequently are mr(9), shm (7), hc(A), htp(A), swld(3), ttwy
(3), shtp(2), scnh (2), and nfr(2). Of these, A r and shtpwere used in Dynasty XII.
The most common nomen was Sobekhotep, occurring seven times, Amenemhet
three and Neferhotep two. Amenemhet was juxtaposed with a second nomen five times,
two of these with Ameny. The name Seneb was used in three names (Reniseneb (14),
Senebef (2), and Senebmiew (?). The link with Amenemhet of Dynasty XII is obvious.
III.E. Results of the Study of Royal Names

The above study of Dynasty XIII nomen and prenomen correlations would seem
to indicate that Dynasty XIII was made up of one primary family, evolving over time
(though this may be deliberate misinformation). Unfortunately, the exact familial ties are
uncertain, and some evidence indicates that some kings did not have a royal mother or
father. In many cases, it is likely that these relationships were symbolic, tying kings
together when they who had no familial links to one another. Additionally, there is no
sense of distinct groupings expected in such theories as circulating succession.
Relationships in nomens and prenomens between dynasties show that there may
452
have been some actual or symbolic connections with families, who were able to assume
the throne in their various localities, once fragmentation of the country occurred, to
whatever degree that may have been. In the first part of Dynasty XVI there are three
kings with the name Sekhemre, a name, which seems to be derived from the Sobekhoteps
of Dynasty XIII.1524 Meanwhile, the later part of Dynasty XVII seems to have had little
connections with the names of the rulers of Dynasty XIII, indicating that the division of
traditional Dynasty XVII into two distinct units (XVI and XVII) is warranted.
III.F. Name Divisions and Changes in Royal Ideology

Though there may have been some royal connections between the kings of
Dynasty XIII, the fact remains that several steps were taken to distinguish some kings
from the families of their predecessors. Some of the kings named their parents, stating
clearly that they were non-royal. Also, these kings may have intensified their use of
divine marriage to compensate for their non-royal origins. As has been discussed in
previous sections, The Westcar Papyrus is the first textual source, in which this event
occurs overtly.1525 This text states that the god Re came to the non-royal wife of a priest
of the sun god to produce the future regents. Thus, the fact that the mother of the three
brothers was not royal was insignificant because Re, their actual father, determined their
destiny. Thus, through this concept, the traditional rules of heredity were bypassed,
resulting in a series of unrelated kings.1526

The use of &-Rcduring Dynasty IV implies the same concept. See Chapter 2, Section II.B.
Redford, "Concept," pp. 157-158.
453
IV. Conclusions
The analysis of titles and names of kings and officials reveals that the political
nature of Dynasty XIII changed over time. In the beginning, kings were actually or
symbolically connected to their predecessors, while viziers and treasurers were promoted
within their offices. Some of the viziers may have-inherited their ultimate positions from
their fathers after having served within the office. However, it is currently uncertain,
whether or not they served in succession. Later on, some of the kings may have had
military backgrounds with no connection to the royal blood line. Likewise, viziers began
to come from local offices that reported to the bureau of the vizier rather than from
within.
At the same time that shifts occurred with royal succession and the selection of
viziers, kings began to form alliances by marrying their daughters to local officials
throughout Egypt. Some of these families, such as that at El-Kab with its military
connections, became particularly powerful during the reigns of the last successful kings
of Dynasty XIII. After the reign of Merneferre Ay, they appear to have broken away
from the north and formed their own Dynasty XVI. Interestingly, however, it is unclear
as to the origin of this new royal family in the south.
The nomens of the kings of Dynasty XIII may suggest that the rulers wished to
link themselves to Dynasties XI and XII and to one another despite the overt terms used
by Sobekhotep III and the brother kings to demonstrate their non-royal origins. These
sometimes artificial links, however, do not support the existence of a system such as
circulating succession. The situation of having many unrelated kings after the beginning
of the dynasty resulted in the development of many new forms of legitimization,
454
including the use of common names.
455
Chapter 7
Conclusions: The Fall of Dynasty XIII
I. Introduction
Chapter 6 examined kingship and its power relative to the elite of Dynasty XIII.
In general, evidence suggests that the traditional succession of kings and the background
of the vizier shifted during the part of Dynasty XIII for which data is available. This
information refines the phases of Dynasty XIII outlined in Chapter 1, Section IV.C.
(Table 7.1). Phase 1 includes the kings from Sekhemrekhutawy Amenemhet Sobekhotep
I through Sedjefakare Kay Amenemhet while the second includes Khutawyre Wegaf
through Merneferre Ay. The remainder of the rulers compose the third group. In the
following sections, the development of each phase will be outlined in order to create a
possible model for the fall of Dynasty XIII.1527
II. Phase 1
The nature of the administration in Dynasty XIII is similar to that of late Dynasty
XII, except that, in the former, the reigns of the kings are significantly shorter. It is
unclear exactly why the former is divided from the latter in the Turin King-List.
However, the reign of Nefrusobek may indicate that there were no appropriate heirs upon
the death of Amenemhet IV. After the queen's reign of four years, there may have been
1527
Gundlach also created a less-detailed model for the fall of Dyansty XIII within a greater expanse of
Egyptian history. This model focuses on the political situation alone and includes the division between
Wegaf and the preceding kings. He believes that the viziers had actual control while the kings were
symbolic rulers during the middle of Dynasty XIII. Neferhotep I then revitalized the power of kingship,
which eventually fell due to the Hyksos (Gundlach, "Grundgegebenheiten," pp. 84-85, 86, 90).
456
Prenomen:
1. Sekhemrekhutawy
2. Sekhemkare
3. Nerikare
4,
6. Hotepibre
8. Sankhibre
9. Semenkare
10. Sehotepibre
11. Sewadjkare
12. Nedjemibre
13. Khaankhre
14.
15. Awibre
20. Sediefakare
21.Khutawyre
22. Woserkare
23. Semenkhkare
24. Sehotepkare
25. Meribre
26. Sekhemresewadjtawy
27. Khasekhemre
28. Menwadjre
29. Khaneferre
31. Khahotepre
32. Wahibre
33. Merneferre
34. Merhotepre
35. Sankhenre
36. Mersekhemre
37. Sewadjkare
38. Merkawre
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46. Mer[...]re
47. Merkheperre
48. Merkare
49.
50. Sewedjare
51. [...]mosre
52. [...Jmaatre
53. [...Jwebenre
54. Se[...]kare
55. Sehekenre
56. [
]re
57. Se[...]enre
Nomen
Amenemhet Sobekhotep I
Amenemhet Sonbef
Amenemhet/Ameny Qemau
Qemau's Son Harnedjeritef
Jewefni
Ameny Intef Amenemhet
Nebnun
Seweskekhtawy
Sobekhotep II
Amenemhet Reniseneb
Hor
Kav Amenemhet
Wegaf
Khendjer
Imyremeshaw
Tntef
Seth
Sobekhotep III
Neferhotep I
Sahathor
Sobekhotep IV
Sobekhotep V
Ibiaw
_Ay
Ini Sobekhotep VI
Sewadjtew
Ined
Hori
Sobekhotep VII
1
2
3
Montuhotep
Ibi
Hor (..?)
Sankhptahi
Table 7.1. The phases of Dynasty XIII using Ryholt's list of kings as modified in
Chapter 1. The numbers to the left reflect Ryholt's order. Missing numbers indicate that
one or more kings, have been combined or eliminated.
457
several lines of potential rulers descended from Amenemhet III and/or Amenemhet IV.
II.A. Legitimization
Interestingly, all of the kings with double names except for Merhotepre
Ini Sobekhotep VI are in phase I. Of these, all but Hotepibre Saharnedjeritef, whose
name likely expresses filiation, include the component "Amenemhet." Thus, it is likely
that these names either designate an actual descent from one or more of the Dynasty XII
rulers by this name or serve as a legitimization tool to link these kings with that
successful group or figure. Thus, this phase of Dynasty XIII valued the ideal of father-toson succession and expressed it through either literal or symbolic links to this illustrious
earlier period.
II.B. Internal Conditions
The operation of the state structure appears to have continued from late Dynasty
XII. Prior to taking their ultimate positions, high officials such as viziers worked in
lower offices within their departments in order to gain experience. At least some kings
were buried in pyramids with substructures modeled after that of Amenemhet III,
suggesting the continuing royal ideology of the afterlife. However, these pyramids were
significantly smaller than those at the prime of Dynasty XII. In fact, all forms of royal
expression through funerary monuments decreased in number and size. The afterlife
preparations of the elite seem to have followed suit at this time as they too have fewer
and smaller monuments. These phenomena may suggest an economic crisis that affected
all of Egyptian society at this time.
458
II.B.l. Changes in the Annual Inundation of the Nile

From the beginning of the Late Middle Kingdom into Dynasty XIII, there are
records of Nile flood levels in Nubia. Taking into consideration other inscriptions
through the Second Intermediate Period, it has been suggested that instability in the
annual floods may have disrupted the economic system according to which the ancient
Egyptians lived. Unfortunately, like most of the sources addressed in this study, the
records are limited. The Egyptians did not comment upon regular floods, and the small
number of inscriptions related to the subject are not necessarily representative of the era.
For now, however, this data can provide the basis for a tentative model for the problems
faced by Dynasty XIII kings, though other possibilities exist.
Environmental factors such as flood and drought can cause severe pressure to be
applied to a political infrastructure.1528 In ancient Egypt, part of a king's role was to
ensure that order remained in the world by appeasing the gods and ruling fairly over his
land. In return, the gods would grant an annual inundation adequate for plentiful crops
and a comfortable existence.1529 However, the Nile system was fragile, and floods, which
were too high or too low, were catastrophic, resulting in too little food from poor
harvests.1530 Lorton suggests that one-in-five floods were unfavorable, and, thus, the king
Richards, "Modified Order," pp. 36, 38; S.J. Seidelmayer, "The First Intermediate Period," in I. Shaw,
ed., The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford, 2000), pp. 129-130.
Berlev notes that the administration was expected to provide for the people regardless of the level of the
inundation (O. Berlev, "Bureaucrats," in S. Donadoni, ed., The Egyptians (Chicago, 1997), pp. 88-89).
Note that Habachi states that "high floods were welcomed" (L. Habachi, "A High Inundation in the Temple
of Amenre at Karnak in the Thirteenth Dynasty," SAK 1 (1974), p. 213). However, this statement is not
true as too much water could also cause crop failure. For the negative effects of high and low floods, see
Butzer, Early Hydraulic Civilization in Egypt: A Study in Cultural Ecology, (Chicago, 1976), pp. 43-56.
1529
Butzer stresses the connection between the inundations and the perpetual reenactment of creation
(Butzer, "Long-term Nile Flood," p. 103). For the Heliopolitan Cosmogony, see, Lesko, "Cosmogonies
and Cosmology," p. 92.
K.W. Butzer, "Nile, Flood History," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient
459
and the administration had to collect and store grain surpluses in order to provide for
people when the harvest was insufficient.1531 However, more frequent disruptions in this
cycle resulted in substantial economic hardship. Eventually such pressures could lead to
the destabilization of the political leadership.1532
According to Bell, in her study of the Nile flood records in Nubia, the annual
inundation levels became significantly higher in Dynasty XII (especially in the reign of
Amenemhet III).1533 Also, the Fayum lake reached substantially high levels at least three
times in the Middle Kingdom.1534 The Egyptian authorities seem to have adjusted to this
situation by developing methods to prosper with the higher Nile floods (including waterrelated constructions in the Fayum area). Leprohon adds that the higher Nile level may
have instigated a population increase both through a higher native birth rate and the
Egypt (New York, 1999), pp. 568-569. Butzer describes the ill effects on the fishing industry due to
unfavorable (high or low) inundations. This factor would also have an enormous impact upon the
economic vitality of the country. This notion is also discussed by Bell ("Climate," p. 258). Butzer
discusses the impact of increased salt levels during low floods and the problems (Butzer, "Long
term Nile Flood," p. 105).
of insects, disease, and loss of stored items due to high inundations. For a possible reference to the effects
of a low flood in Hekanakht, see Interrogative Constructions with JN and JN/JW in Old and Middle
Egyptian, Malibu, 1980, p. 39, Ex. 7, n. 214.
1531
Lorton, "Legal and Social," p. 354.
1532
O'Connor and Silverman, "Kingship," p. XX.
1533
Bell, "Climate," pp. 224, 265; K. Butzer, Hydraulic Civilization, pp. 29, 33, 41, 52; Peden, Graffiti, p.
41; Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, p. 155; B.G. Trigger, Nubia Under the Pharaohs (London, 1976),
pp. 82-84. Note that Trigger believes that the high floods ended early in Dynasty XIII, due to the fact that
no more Nile records occur in Nubia later in the period. For commentary on Bell's study, see Quirke,
"Investigation," pp. 236-237. Note that the rise in the inundation level is also supported by evidence from
Lake Rudolf on the Ethiopia/Kenya border. See K. Butzer, "Environmental Change in the Near East and
Human Impact on the Land," in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, 1 (Peabody, MA,
1995), p. 136. The increase in water level in late Dynasty XII-XIII averaged 7.3 m above those of modern
records (Peden, Graffiti, pp. 40, 51; Kemp, "Social History," pp. 160, 180). For Nile level records of
Amenemhet III, Amenemhet IV, Nefrusobek, Amenemhet Sobekhotep I, Nerikare, and Senebef (?), see
Dunham and Janssen, Semna Kumma, pp. 131-133, 135, 139-141, 145, Pis. 193, 195-196, 198. See also F.
Hintze, "Preliminary Note on the Epigraphic Expedition to Sudanese Nubia," Kush 13 (1965), p. 14;
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 320. J. Leclant, "Fouilles et Traveaux en Egypte et au Sudan, 1962-1963,"
Orientalia 33 (1964), p. 382.
1534
Butzer, "Flood History," p. 570.
460
attraction of foreigners to Egypt.1535 Unfortunately, according to Bell's theory, the

inundations returned to a more normal height at the end of Dynasty XII. She
hypothesizes that, in Dynasty XIII, the breakdown in the line of succession may have
come at a terrible time, causing the Egyptians to be unable to shift their infrastructure
back to its original form to accommodate the environmental change. Thus, political
problems and environmental factors may have prevented the office of kingship from
stabilizing itself, and the normalization of the Nile levels without the ability to prosper
under them, may have resulted in dissatisfaction with the king, according to her theory.
A ruler, who could not provide enough food and wealth for his people may have either
been killed or replaced.
Unfortunately, there are some problems with Bell's argument. Some of the kings
ruled for only days or months. Thus, there would have been no time to test to see if the
new king would be able to correct the environmental problems through his relationship
with the gods. Also, other kings ruled for longer periods, indicating, either that the floods
would have had to return to their elevated heights or that the infrastructure had been
sufficiently changed to accommodate the return of the regular inundations. However,
these possibilities do not explain the vacillations in the stability of kingship, as indicated
through the lengths of reigns over the course of the period. Likewise, multiple changes in
the trend of Nile heights within the 150 or more years of Dynasty XIII would completely
undermine Bell's theory concerning the overall nature of the floods during this time
period. Finally, the inscriptions related to the Nile inundations only exist for the first
Leprohon, "Amenemhet III," pp. 187-188.
461
seven or so years of Dynasty XIII, leaving the levels of the remaining years unknown.
Butzer believes that the level of the Nile would not have dropped drastically
between the end of Dynasty XII and the bulk of Dynasty XIII, as Bell has proposed.1537
Instead, while he acknowledges the scarcity of the evidence, he suggests that the level of
the Nile may have vacillated wildly between low and high within its general trend. In
other words, rather than being a result of the "normal" Nile floods after having
constructed an infrastructure to manage high inundations, the problems faced by Dynasty
XIII kings may have occurred due to the effects of unpredictable water levels over a
relatively long period of time.
The unpredictable nature of the Nile can be illustrated through an event in the
reign of Senwosret III. During Senwosret Ill's military campaign to Nubia in regnal year
19, the Nile level became so low that the expedition members had difficulties returning to
Egypt. 5
Though this event could have been associated with catastrophic harvest yields,
the Egyptians were able to sustain themselves through occasional unfavorable years.
Thus, this particular problematic drop in the level of the Nile may not have affected the
economic power of the Dynasty XIII kings directly. However, it does illustrate that the
level of the Nile could vacillate in unexpected ways.
Alternatively, Vercoutter believes that the Nile levels at Semna recorded the
height of the water at a man-made dam, created late in Dynasty XII in order to allow
easier Nile travel further south, upriver, during more of the year and fell out of use after
the beginning of Dynasty XIII, due to the fact that transport further south down the Nile
15

Butzer, Hydraulic Civilization, p. 52; "Long-term Nile Flood," p. 109.
1538
Bell, "Climate," pp. 238, 244-245; Peden, Graffiti, pp. 40-41; Callender, "Renaissance," p. 166; Delia,
"Study," pp. 77-79.
1537
462
was no longer needed.
Much debate has ensued over the merits of Vercouter's
improbable theory.1540
It is likely that lower inundations at the beginning of Dynasty XIII may have
provided one more pressures in a series of events, which prolonged the instability of the
institution of kingship at this time. It is unfortunate that the records of the Nile levels
only exist through the first few reigns of Dynasty XIII. However, there are some minor
lines of evidence such as the stela of Sekhemresewwosertawy Sobekhotep,1541 wherein
the king claims to have waded in the hall of the Temple at Karnak as part of a festival
during a particularly late inundation, suggesting that the level of the Nile was higher than
normal. Though the publications of the inscription attributes it to Dynasty XIII, this king
is assigned to Theban Dynasty XVI by Ryholt and is only known through the Turin and
Karnak King-Lists, in addition to this stela. Nonetheless, the exact nature of the event
recorded in this stela is unclear, though it has been suggested that it presents a sacred
ceremony, which may have included blocking the water, and was related to the divinity
of the king.1542
In a stela of Sekhemre Sankhtawy Neferhotep III (JE 59635, Dynasty XVI), the
iiiV
Vercoutter, "Semna South," pp. 125-164; "Roi Ougaf," pp. 224, 229, 233-234; "Les Barrages
Pharaoniques. Leur Raison d'Etre," Les Problemes Institutionnels de l'Eau, Bibliotheque d'Etude 110
(Cairo, 1994), pp. 316-326; "Les Inscriptions Rupestres de Semna et Kumma. Une Mise au Point," SAK21
(1994), p. 23.
1540
L. Zabkar and J. Zabkar have supported Vercoutter's theory with little evidence (Zabkar and Zabkar,
"Semna South: A Preliminary Report on the 1966-68 Excavations of the University of Chicago Oriental
Institute Expedition to Sudanese Nubia" JARCE 19 (1982), pp. 13-16)). Scholars such as Bell ("Climate,"
pp. 234, 237; Peden, Graffiti, p. 41) argue against the theory that there was a dam at Semna South, causing
the high levels of silting in this area.
Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 46-47, no. 63. See also J. Baines, "The Inundation Stela of
Sebekhotpe VIII," AcOr 36 (1974), pp. 39-54; "The Sebekhotpe VIII Inundation Stela: An Additional
Fragment," AcOr 37 (1976), pp. 11-20; Bell, "Climate," p. 245; Butzer, Hydraulic Civilization, p. 51; L.
Habachi, "High Inundation," pp. 207-214; D.M.A.-Q. Muhammad, "Recent Finds," ASAE 59 (1966), pp.
146-149; Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 3. This stela was found within the Third Pylon of the Karnak Temple.
1542
Baines, "Inundation Stela," pp. 42-53; "The Sebekhotpe VIII Inundation Stela: An Additional
Fragment," pp. 14-18.
463
king claims that he has saved Thebes from its needs, implying that there was a famine
and possible foreign raids.1543 He also changed his cartouche to Iykhernofret, meaning
"he who comes bearing good things." This text may present another small fragment of
evidence that the Nile floods were unpredictable at this time, causing much potential
instability in the land and its territories, including a lack of food. Another stela of a
Mentuhotep (Dynasty XIII) also records famine and incursions in a more formulaic
tone.1544
It should be noted that the environmental changes discussed here would not have
been comparable to the 300 year drought proposed for the end of the Old Kingdom and
the collapse of other early states.
In contrast to this era, ice coring at Mount
Kilimanjaro has not resulted in any anomalies for the Late Middle Kingdom/Second
Intermediate Period. Thus, there was no widespread catastrophic environmental event
lasting the duration of this period. Instead, it is likely that there was a short period of
anomalous floods at the end of Dynasty XII and the beginning of Dynasty XIII. This
event may have contributed to the destabilization of kingship in phase 1. From that point
on, the strength of the state during the prime of the Middle Kingdom could not be
recovered. Occasional irregular floods during the Late Middle Kingdom and Second
Intermediate Period may have added to the problems faced by the kings due to their
inability to prepare for these natural phenomena.
1543
Helck, Historische-Biographische, p. 45, no. 62; Mioso, A Reading Book, pp. 15-16, lines 14-15;
Redford, Akhenaten, pp. 99-100; "The Hyksos," p. 3; Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 306.
1544
Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 21.
1545
For the 300 year drought, see L.G. Thompson, et al., "Kilimanjaro Ice Core Records: Evidence of
Holocene Climate Change in Tropical Africa," Science 298 (2002), pp. 592-593. Butzer notes that there is
textual evidence for low inundations during the First Intermediate Period, but it is unclear how often they
occurred (Butzer, Environment, p. 136).
464
II.B.2. The Asiatics in Egypt

Foreigners streamed through the borders of Egypt periodically due to immigration
as well as the practices of acquiring such populations for voluntary or mandatory
military, labor, or domestic service.1546 During the Middle Kingdom, foreigners began
to create permanent settlements in the western Delta, allowing them to gain power in this
area.1547
Sehotepibre Amenemhet I of Dynasty XII founded the city of Tell el-Dab'a (at
Ezbet Rushdi), which began as a fully Egyptian settlement, early in the Middle
Kingdom.1548 Over time, this site became the destination of immigrants from SyroPalestine, who seem to have been soldiers (mining expeditions), sailors (to the Near
Eastern ports), traders (olive oil, wine, wool sheep, and possibly horses), and craftsmen
(especially coppersmiths). As more Asiatics arrived during Dynasties XII and XIII,15 9
1546
Leahy, "Ethnic Diversity," pp. 225, 228, 229.

Leahy, "Ethnic Diversity," p. 230; D. Warburton, State and Economy in Ancient Egypt: Fiscal
Vocabulary ofthe New Kingdom, Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 151 (Freiburg, 1997), pp. 332-333.
1548
Bietak, "Avaris and Piramesse," p. 228; "Canaanites," p. 43; "Connections," p. 19; The Capital ofthe
Hyksos, pp. 5-6, 19, 31; Bietak, et al., "Neue Grabungsergebnisse," pp. 26-24; Redford, Egypt, Canaan and
Israel, p. 114; Ward, "Foreigners," p. 61. For evidence that earlier kings actually founded this town, see
Szafranski, "Limestone Relief Fragments."
1549
Oren, "The Hyksos EnigmaIntroductory Overview," in E.D. Oren, The Hyksos: New Historical and
Archaeological Perspectives, (Philadelphia, 1997), p. xxii. The Asiatic remains at Tell-el Dab'a
encompass Middle Bronze IIB-C. See Mumford, "Syria-Palestine," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 3, (Oxford, 2001), p 339. For the correlations between Dynasties XII-XIII
and the Middle Bronze Age in the Syro-Palestinian region, see W.M.F. Albright and T.O. Lambdin, "An
Indirect Synchronism Between Egypt and Mesopotamia, cir. 1730 BC," BASOR 99 (1945), pp. 9-18; M.
Bietak, "Problems of Middle Bronze Age Chronology. New Evidence from Egypt," AJA 88 (1984), pp.
471-485; "Egypt and Canaan;" "Hyksos Rule," pp. 87, 91, 97, 98; W.G. Dever, "'Hyksos', Egyptian
Destruction, and the End ofthe Palestinian Middle Bronze Age," Levant 22 (1990), pp. 75-79; "The
Chronology of Palestine in the Second Millennium B.C.E.," BASOR 281 (1991). pp. 1-25; "Tell el-Dab'a
and Levantine Middle Bronze Age Chronology: A Rejoinder to Manfred Bietak," BASOR 281 (1991), pp.
73-79; "The Chronology of Syria-Palestine in the Second Millennium B.C.," A&L 3 (1992), p. 41;
"Settlement Patterns and Chronology of Palestine in the Middle Bronze Age," in E.D. Oren, ed., The
Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives (Philadelphia, 1997), p. 293; J.K. Hoffmeier,
"Reconsidering Egypt's Part in the Termination ofthe Middle Bronze Age in Palestein," Levant 21 (1989),
pp. 181-191; "Some Thoughts on Weilliam G. Dever's "'Hyksos', Egyptian Destructions, and the End ofthe
Palestinian Middle Bronze Age," Levant 22 (1990), pp. 83-87; "James Weinstein's 'Egypt and the Middle
1547
465
Egyptian kings selected some of these foreigners to act as local mayors and to control
trade and expeditions in areas, such as Syria, the Sinai, the Aegean, and elsewhere, for
the benefit of the state.1550
Bietak has found a large dwelling at this site,1551 which parallels the large mayor's
house at South Abydos in the Senwosret III funerary complex.1552 Objects from the Tell
el-Dab'a residence indicate that the occupant was Asiatic rather than Egyptian. Though
the foreign official may have held an Egyptian administrative office and had lived in
standard, government-supplied housing, his statuary, with its characteristic "mushroom"
hairstyle, indicates that he held on to his own cultural identity as well.1553 Likewise, the
overall composition of the population shifted from native to being primarily Asiatic over
Bronze IIC/Late Bronze IA Transition': A Rejoinder," Levant 23 (1991), pp. 117-122; Kemp, "Social
History," p. 137; Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, p. 100; J.W. Weinstein, "Egyptian Relations with
Palestine in the Middle Kingdom," BASOR 217 (1975), pp. 1-16; "The Chronology of Palestein in the Early
Second Millennium B.C.," BASOR 288 (1992), pp. 27-46; "Egypt and the Middle Bronze IIC/Late Bronze
IA Transition in Palestine," Levant 23 (1991), pp. 105-111; "Reflections on the Chronology of Tell elDab'a," in W.V. Davies and L. Schofield, eds., Egypt, the Aegean and the Levant (London, 1995), pp. 8490. Occupation of the site may have begun during the First Intermediate Period in the reign of King Khety
(Bietak, "Hyksos Rule," p. 97; "Tell ed-Dab'a, Second Intermediate Period," p. 779; Kemp, Anatomy, p.
166). Activity of Amenemhet I is also noted nearby at Ezbet Rushdi (S. Adam, "Report on the Excavations
of the Department of Antiquities at Ezbet Rushdi," ASAE 56 (1959), pp. 208-218, 221-225).
1550
Bietak, "Connections," p. 19; "Hyksos," p. 377; "Tell ed-Dab'a, Second Intermediate Period," p. 779;
"Hyksos," (1999), p. 351; Holladay, "Eastern Nile Delta," p. 209; Quirke, "Second Intermediate Period," p.
261; S.T. Smith, "People," p. 30. Note that Ryholt believes that this process was completed at an earlier
date Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 293.
1551
Bietak and his associates have claimed that this building is a palace, possibly of Hotepibre Qemau
Saharnedjeritef (Bietak, "Canaanites," p. 50; "Der Friedhof," p. 57; "Egypt and Canaan," p. 34;
"Connections," p. 19; The Capital of the Hyksos, pp. 21-30; "Raumprogramm," p. 30; "Hyksos Rule," pp.
100-105; "Tell ed-Dab'a, Second Intermediate Period," p. 779; Eigner, "Palace," pp. 73-80). See also
Kemp, Anatomy, p. 166; Schneider, Lexikon der Pharaonen, p. 128. However, with the excavation of the
mayor's house at Abydos, the identification of this structure as a royal dwelling is unlikely (Wegner,
"Excavations at the Town," pp. 4, 24-25). Others have also noted problems with the "palace" label of this
structure (O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," pp. 53, 64, n. 15). F. Arnold used the phrase, "so-called 'palace'"
(Arnold, "Settlement," p. 15). Ryholt suggested that this palace belonged to Dynasty XIV kings. However,
it is unclear why Canaanite kings would have constructed a completely Egyptian architectural structure as a
palace. Ryholt uses this "palace" as evidence that Dynasty XIV began in late Dynasty XII. See also van
Seters, A New Investigation, pp. 87-96.
1352
Chapter 7, Section I.
1553
Bietak, "Der Friedhof," p. Fig. 10; The Capital of the Hyksos, pp. 20-21, 18, Fig. 17; "Hyksos Rule,"
pp. 101, Fig. 104.114; "Dab'a, Tell Ed-," in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt,
1 (Oxford, 2001), p. 351; S.T. Smith, "Model for Imperialism," p. 155.
466
time.1554 With a distinct culture, it is no wonder that these areas eventually separated
from Dynasty XIII as it became weaker.
II.C. Foreign Affairs and Territorial Extent

Foreign affairs proceeded during the first part of Dynasty XIII as they had in the
previous time period. Relations with Byblos, Palestine, and Nubia continued as indicated
by the discovery of seals, sealings, and other inscribed objects carrying kings' and
officials' names.1555 In phase 1, the Nile records suggest activity continued at Semna,
Kumma, and Askut, while a cylinder seal with the prenomen of Seweskekhtawy was
found at Byblos.1556 Other objects from the Syro-Palestinian region, such as an oftencited vase with a very rudimentary inscription, which may have the name Hotepibre,
cannot be certainly associated with Dynasty XIII kingship,1557 though seals of
Nedjemibre and Hotepibre have been found in Canaan.1558 It is unclear whether or not
activity in Nubia and Syro-Palestine continued during this entire era or whether there
were ebbs and flows, depending on the strength of the king. Egypt itself remained
unified throughout phase 1.
1554

Callender, "Renaissance," p. 171; Helck, Historische-Biographische, pp. 19-20, nos. 28, 30; von
Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 101-108. Ben-Tor believes that private seals found in Palestine were
amulets and arrived there via the Asiatics living at Tell el-Dab'a (D. Ben-Tor, "The Historical Implications
of Middle Kingdom Scarabs Found in Palestine Bearing Private Names and Titles of Officials," BASOR
294 (1994), p. 11).
1556
See Chapter 7, Section II.B. for references for the Nile Records. For bibliography related to the activity
of Seweskekhtawy, see Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 338-339.
1557
Dever, "A Rejoinder to Manfred Bietak," pp. 77, n. 73; "Chronology of Syria-Palestine," p. 44.
1558
Giveon, "The Impact of Egypt on Canaan in the Middle Bronze Age," in A.F. Rainey, ed., Egypt,
Israel, Sinai: Archaeological and Historical Relationships in the Biblical Period (Jerusalem, 1987), p. 32.
467
III. Phase 2
There are some indications that the kings of phase 2 came from military
backgrounds. Thus, at this point in Dynasty XIII, the damage of the likely abnormal
floods to the office of kingship resulted in opportunities for usurpers to take the throne.
Once this initially occurred, the office appears to have changed families within this group
at least at some points. Despite the fact that these kings came to the throne due to some
weakness in the office of kingship, they were able to preserve the status of this office and
sometimes even flourished. At least some of these kings continued to construct pyramids
with wsM-type substructures.
III.A. Legitimacy
Four of the kings in phase 2 emphasized that their fathers were not royal. Thus,
by the middle of this period, there must have been some acceptance of a non-traditional
background for kings. Also, it is at this time, that the concept of divine marriage may
have become further elaborated in literary texts to allow for rulers of non-royal blood
through the will of the sun god. Interestingly, none of the kings outside of phase 1 used
the nomen Amenemhet. This step may suggest that direct connections with this name
was no longer desirable for kings, possibly due to its association with the phase 1 rulers.
III.B. Internal Conditions

In the beginning, the kings of phase 2 continued to utilize the administrative
system of the earlier rulers. However, by the end of the period, they offered their
daughters as wives to important local officials in the land. Also, viziers began to come
468
from local offices within the bureaus controlled through this position. Some of these
kings had relatively long reigns, including Merneferre Ay, who may have ruled for 23
years. Despite the fact that some of these kings were successful, the apparent loss of
power in the office of kingship to local families would prove catastrophic in phase 3.
As noted for phase 1, Asiatics were active within Egypt as a contributing element
of the state's economy. For phase 2, there is additional evidence that these foreigners
worked in royal estates and the domains of the highest officials.1559 In a section of the
verso of the Brooklyn Papyrus 35.1446, dated to the second year of the reign of
Sobekhotep III, a list indicates that forty-eight of seventy-seven (56%) servants had
Asiatic names and were, thus, of Near Eastern descent.
Though these foreigners, most
of which were women, are often regarded as slaves, possibly captured during warfare,1561
this conclusion is not necessarily correct as they seem to have been textile specialists
working on a royal estate.1562 The way in which they came to work in this institution is
unclear, and, thus, one should be cautious in determining their status or their impact on
greater Egypt. Interestingly, titles from documents at Kahun also indicate that there were
Asiatics in that town. One of these officials was the "scribe of the Asiatics" while a
1559
Quirke, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 261. Hayes argues that this household might be
representative of all of those in Egypt and that a large number of Asiatics lived throughout the country
(Hayes, A Papyrus, pp. 148-149; Oren, "Enigma," p. xxii).
1560
Hayes, A Papyrus; Kemp, "Social History," p. 155; Lesko, "Textual Sources," p. 797; Mumford,
"Syria-Palestine," pp. 338-339; G. Posener, "Les Asiatiques en Egypte sous les Xlle et Xllle Dynasties (a
Propos d'un Livre Recent)," Syria 34 (1957), pp. 146-156; Quirke, The Administration of Egypt, pp. 147149; W.K. Simpson, "New Light on the God Reshef," JAOS 73 (1953), pp. 86-89; S.T. Smith, "People," p.
30; van Seters, A New Investigation, p. 78.
1561
Hayes, A Papyrus; Helck, Die Beziehungen Agyptens, p. 77; Kemp, "Social History," p. 155; A.
Loprieno, "Slaves," in S. Donadoni, ed., The Egyptians (Chicago, 1997), pp. 196-200; Posener, "Les
Asiatiques," pp. 146-156; Simpson, "New Light."; van Seters, A New Investigation, p. 78.
1562
Hayes, A Papyrus; Kemp, "Social History," p. 155; Posener, "Les Asiatiques," pp. 146-156; Simpson,
"New Light," pp. 86-89; van Seters, A New Investigation, p. 78; W.A. Ward, "Non-Royal Women and their
Occupations in the Middle Kingdom," in B. Lesko, ed., Women's Earliest Records from Ancient Egypt and
Western Asia (Atlanta, 1989), p. 39.
469
second was "officer in charge of the Asiatic troops."1563 Unfortunately, the exact nature
of these positions is unclear. It is interesting to note that, even Asiatics, who worked
outside of the eastern Delta, maintained their foreign identity through their names, which
are easily distinguished from those of native Egyptians.
III.C. Foreign Affairs and Territorial Extent

There is significantly more evidence for the activity of kings of phase 2 in both
Nubia and Syro-Palestine. It is clear through the increased number of attestations of
kings such as Sobekhotep III, Neferhotep I and Sobekhotep IV that these rulers in
particular were relatively successful. Thus, the decline of Dynasty XIII was not
necessarily steady and progressive.
Some of the forts of the Second Cataract in Nubia still functioned in the reign of
Sobekhotep IV (Semna/Kumma),1564 and archaeologists found a plaque of Neferhotep I at
Buhen, showing that this important fort was still active.1565 Beyond the Third Cataract at
Argo, investigators found a statue of Sobekhotep IV with a strange wreath around the top
of the Lower Egyptian section of the double crown. Some scholars have suggested that
this statue was taken to this location during Dynasty XXV when Nubian kings ruled over
Egypt.1566 However, Petrie suggested that these statues were carved out of local
1563
Kemp notes that the titles "scribe of Asiatics" and "officer in charge of Asiatic troops" are found in
documents from Kahun indicating that Asiatics lived in that town (Kemp, "Social History," p. 155).
However, Quirke argues that the overseer's title is actually iry-ct n kmiw, making him the "keeper of a
center used by winnowers and housing their tools" (Quirke, Administration, p. 186). See also Ward, Index,
pp. 29, 61, 72, nos. 206, 492, 589.
1564
Vercoutter, "Roi Ougaf," p. 229.
1565
Kemp, "Social History," p. 160; Save-Soderbergh, Agypten undNubien, p. 119; Trigger, Under the
Pharaohs, p. 84; Bourriau, "Relations," p. 130.
1566
Bourriau, "Relations," p. 130; Drioton and Vandier, L'Egypte, p. 286; Trigger, Under the Pharaohs, p.
84.
470
stone.
Nonetheless, other Egyptian objects made their way south during the Second
Intermediate Period when statues and other items were taken through raids into Nubia
and Egypt. For example, tombs at Kerma contained the statues of Dynasty XIII kings
and officials.1568
Smith has proposed that the forts of the Second Cataract mark the border between
Egypt and Kush.1569 These forts had been designed to conduct trade and expeditions and
launch military campaigns. He suggests that trade routes with Kerma may have needed
to be protected from other Nubian groups while the size of these structures served as
political propaganda for the surrounding C-group settlements, which did not adopt any
part of Egyptian culture. However, it might seem that the Egyptians had retreated, by the
reign of Merneferre Ay especially since no seals or inscribed objects from this king's
relatively long reign have been found in Nubia.1570 Thus, it may be the case that the
rulers of Kerma applied pressure to the Egyptian forts, which lacked the resources to
stand up to the threat.
Seals of kings and officials found in the Syro-Palestinian region, primarily dated
to Sobekhotep III, Neferhotep I and Sobekhotep IV, have been noted by many authors,
1567
Lepsius, Denkmaler Blatt (1897), p. PI. 120; Petrie, History, pp. 216, Fig. 127; Weigall, Pharaohs, p.
162.
1568
Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 77; S.T. Smith, Askut in Nubia, p. 86; Trigger, Under the Pharaohs, pp.
91-92; von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 105-106; Vercoutter thought objects found at Kerma were
from abandoned forts of the second cataract region (Vercoutter, "Roi Ougaf," pp. 233-234). However, it is
now known that Nubians ventured into Egypt, eventually making it close to Thebes itself. One of the
statues may have belonged to Dedumose (W.S. Smith, Art and Architecture, p. 216). A stone jar with an
inscription of one of the Sobeknakhts from El-Kab was also found during excavations at Kerma (Bietak,
"Avaris and Piramesse," p. 234).
1569
S.T. Smith, "Askut and the Role of the Second Cataract Forts," JARCE 28 (1991), pp. 111, 125-128; "A
Model for Egyptian Imperialism in Nubia," GM122 (1991), pp. 83-84. For updated information on
Imperialism in the New Kingdom, see E. Morris, The Architecture of Imperialism (Boston, 2005).
1570
Trigger suggests that Kush may have gained control over Lower Nubia (C-Group) through peaceful
agreements due to trade interests (Trigger, Under the Pharaohs, pp. 97-98). Ryholt does not believe that
Kush caused the withdrawal of the Egyptian state from Nubia, since there is no evidence of direct conflict
(Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 92).
471
1 C-71
though such portable objects could easily have reached the region through trade.
scarab of Sobekhotep III was found at Jericho while those of Sobekhotep IV have been
found at Wadi Tumilat and a tomb at Tell el-Maskhuta.1572 Seals of king Neferhotep I
have also been discovered at Tell el-Ajjul and Fassuta.1573 Private Dynasty XIII seals,
dating primarily to the reigns of Neferhotep I and Sobekhotep IV, have been found at Tell
el Ajjul, Lachish, Jericho, Megiddo, and Byblos.1574 Named officials include treasurers
1 CHZ
such as Sonbi (Neferhotep I) and Senebsumai (Sobekhotep IV).
Seals also reveal that
people with military titles and priests were also in the region at this time.
Trading relations with Asiatic peoples are most apparent at Byblos while Avaris
in the Delta may have served as a gateway to trade beyond.1576 Relations with Byblos
continued well into Dynasty XIII as there is evidence that Neferhotep I had substantial
1 CHH
contact with this land.
The exact nature of the relationship between the kings of
Egypt and those of Byblos is not perfectly clear, but the princes of the latter openly used
the Egyptian title htty-c, "governor" upon Egyptian-style scarab seals already in Dynasty
XII, while later rulers used traditional kingship titles in their seals and monuments.
1571
See the list in R.A. Giveon, "The XIII Dynasty in Asia," Rd'E 30 (1978), pp. 163-167. Note that some
of these "royal" seals appear not to bear the names of kings, being decorative or commemorative of deities
instead. Decorative seals have also been incorrectly assigned to Dynasty XIII kings (Hornung and
Staehelin, Skarabaen und andere Siegelamulette, pp. 217, no. 133, PI. 212).
1572
Dever, "A Rejoinder to Manfred Bietak," p. 76; Weinstein, "Chronology of Tell el-Dab'a," p. 87.
1573
1574
Klengel, Syria, 3000 to 300 B. C: A Handbook of Political History (Berlin, 1992), p. 79; Ryholt,
Political Situation, p. 85.
1575
Franke, Personendaten, pp. 374, Doss. 634; 391, Doss. 667.
1576
Bietak, "Zum Konigsreich," p. 60; Klengel, Syria, pp. 45, 79; S.T. Smith, "Model for Imperialism," p.
155.
1577
Bietak, "Overview," p. 54; Hallo and Simpson, Ancient Near East, p. 249; Kemp, "Social History," pp.
145-146; Save-Soderbergh, Agypten undNubien, p. 119. W.A. Ward, "Egypt and the East Mediterranean
in the Early Second Millennium B.C.," Orientalia 30 (1961), p. 135. For the chronological correlation
between the rulers of Egypt, Byblos, and Mesopotamia, see W.M.F. Albright and T.O. Lambdin,
"Synchronism," pp. 9-18; Kitchen, "Byblos," pp. 39-54.
1578
472
The last Dynasty XIII king, whose name appears at Byblos, is Ibiaw.1579
One prince, named Inten (contemporary with Sekhemresewadjtawy Sobekhotep
III, Khasekhemre Neferhotep I, and Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV), commissioned an
offering prayer to the Egyptian god Re-Horakhty, in which the cartouche of Neferhotep I
appears.1580 Inten also possessed a seal, which had the same back type as those in Egypt
between the reigns of Sobekhotep III and Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV.
Relationships
with other Asiatic lands, some being quite distant, have also been claimed for areas where
statues of Dynasty XIII kings have been found. However, it is likely, that these statues
were taken from their temples and monuments by the Hyksos king Khayan and given or
traded to these Asiatic lands.1582 Nonetheless, hints at some direct Late Middle Kingdom
contact with western Asia still remains, including the use of the title mayor (htty-c) by
Kumidi in the Beqaa valley in Lebanon.1583 Also, some Dynasty XIII kings were still
able to obtain lapis lazuli, indicating that some sort of indirect trade relationship existed
between Egypt and the source of this material in modern Afghanistan.1584 Once Dynasty
XIV began, relations with these areas were lost until the New Kingdom.
1579

Redford, Egypt, Canaan andlsreal, p. 97; Stock, 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens, p. 59; Grimal, History,
p. 184; Weill, "Complements," p. 25; M. Dunand, Fouilles de Byblos (Paris, 1926-1932), p. 198.
1580
1581
This type includes schematically hatched legs, a single line denoting the prothorax from the elytra; two
lines denoting the elytra, and one line forming the bottom of the elytra. Another seal, belonging to Ka-in,
also displayed these features (minus a scroll border), placing it into the same period. Meanwhile, he moves
Ilima-yapi (?) to Dynasty XII based on the components of his seal (Martin, Egyptian Administrative and
Private-Name Seals, pp. 25-26, nos. 261-263; "A Late Middle Kingdom Prince of Byblos," in P. Der
Manuelian, ed., Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, 2 (Boston, 1996), pp. 595-598). For a study of
the development and chronology of the physical features of scarabs seals, see O'Connor, "Chronology."
1582
Bietak, "Hyksos," (1999), p. 378.
1583
1584
473
IV. Phase 3
Very little is known about the kings and officials of phase 3. These rulers appear
to have had little economic power, and their tombs remain unknown. They also lacked
much of the status of traditional Egyptian kingship and eventually lost much of the
territory of the state except the region around the capital at Itjatawy.
IV.A. Legitimacy
The means of succession and legitimacy for the phase 3 kings is unknown. There
is currently no evidence that can be used to address these issues.
IV.B. Internal Conditions

The problems encountered during phase 3 were not necessarily the result of the
incompetence of the kings of this period. Instead, the'reactions of the rulers to the
conditions of the previous phases had weakened kingship considerably. When the
relatively long reign of Merneferre Ay ended, some amount of political chaos may have
ensued. Most of the kings of this period likely had short reigns. After Merkawre
Sobekhotep VII, these kings are only known through the Turin King-List.
IV.C. Foreign Affairs and Territorial Extent

There is no evidence that the kings from phase 3 were active outside of Egypt. It
is likely that the eastern Delta was lost with the formation of Dynasty XIV shortly after
the death of Merneferre Ay. Meanwhile, the kings, Merhotepre through Merkawre
Sobekhotep VII are known through the Offering-List and other monuments at Karnak.
474
Thus, after the reign of the latter king, it is likely that Dynasty XVI seceded from the
Dynasty XIII rulers, leaving them with the area around Itjatawy and possibly some
section of Middle Egypt.
It should be noted that the remaining kings of Dynasty XIII were able to survive
for at least a few decades along side Dynasties XIV and XVI. 'However, when the
Dynasty XV kings began to raid the Memphite region, the Dynasty XIII kings folded. At
this point, Dynasties XVII and XV began a war which would eventually result in the
emergence of the New Kingdom and a return to a strong Egyptian state.
At some point after the reign of Merneferre Ay, the forts in Nubia were been
abandoned.1585 Interestingly, when the Egyptian state pulled out of Nubia, some
residents of the forts remained behind, identifying themselves more with that region than
their homeland. Eventually, these Egyptians pledged their loyalty to the Kushite
kings.1586 The Egyptianized Nubians remained under the Kushites until the war with
Kamose recovered these areas for Egypt in the late Second Intermediate Period.1587
Many of these structures were destroyed and burned, but it appears that this occurred well
1585
Bietak, "Overview," p. 54; Murnane, "Overview," p. 701; Quirke, "Second Intermediate Period," p.
263; "State Administration," in D.B. Redford, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 1, (Oxford, 2001)
p. 16; S.T. Smith, Askut in Nubia, pp. 78-79, 81-90, 107-136; "Model for Imperialism," p. 156.
1586 O'Connor, Ancient Nubia: Egypt's Rival in Africa (Philadelphia, 1993), p . 3 9 ; Bietak, "Overview," p p .
54-55; Bourriau, "Relations," p . 130; Lacovara, "Egypt a n d N u b i a during the Second Intermediate Period,"
in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological
Perspectives (Philadelphia, 1997), p .
72; H . S . Smith, Buhen, p . 7 9 ; S.T. Smith, Askut in Nubia, p p . 51-53 , 69, 80; "State a n d Empire in the
Middle a n d N e w K i n g d o m s , " in J. Lustig, ed., Anthropology
and Egyptology. M o n o g r a p h s in
Mediterranean Archaeolog y 8. Sheffield, England, 1997, p . 7 6 ; "Model for Imperialism," p . 155; Williams,
"Problems," p p . 6 2 6, 6 3 1 , 634-635. O'Connor believes that the administrators at the N u b i a n forts
eventually b e c a m e Egyptian kinglets before being absorbed into K u s h. (O'Connor, "Hyksos Period," p .
48).
1587
Bourriau, "Second Intermediate Period," p. 207; S.T. Smith, "State and Empire," pp. 72, 74, 74, 82.
475
after Dynasty XIII,1588 suggesting that they may have fallen victim to the struggles
between the Egyptians and the Nubians in late Dynasty XVII/early Dynasty XVIII.
As implied above, once the Egyptians abandoned or lost Lower Nubia, Kushite
kings, with their capital at Kerma, moved in. These kings, when they were buried, had
Egyptian material within their tombs, including royal statuary just outside their burial
chambers.1589 These statues originated from forts at Lower Nubia as well as from Egypt
itself. Though some scholars such as O'Connor and Trigger have suggested that the
appearance of these items were possibly the result of trade, it is also likely that Nubian
raids into Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period provided for such objects from
temples.
V. Conclusions
In the past, scholars believed that the kings of Dynasty XIII were unable to handle
the problems, resulting from the demise of the political and economic power of the king
and the arrival of the Second Intermediate Period. However, it is now clear that there
were many factors that contributed to this situation. As Franke states:
(Dynasty XIII) is no longer viewed as a period of decline, but as a period that had
to accommodate many problems: more than a single royal family, foreign
intrusions, cultural diversity, a large bureaucratic apparatus, and growing, martial
and military influence.1590
B. Williams, "Nubian Forts," in K. A. Bard, e<, Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt
(New York, 1999), p. 578.
1589
For examples of Egyptian royal statuary found at Kerma, see Reisner, Excavations at Kerma, IV-V, pp.
29-33.
1590
Franke, "Middle Kingdom," p. 399. See also Franke, "Zur Chronologie," p. 247; Grajetzki, Middle
Kingdom, 74-75.
476
In the discussion of the phases above, the circumstances surrounding each part of
Dynasty XIII were outlined. Here, the objective is to create a model that reflects the
nature of the factors that led to the demise of Dynasty XIII (Fig. 7.1). This particular
model is intended to serve as the basis for further research into how the king and the elite
reacted to difficult situations and how these decisions may have eventually led to further
Fragmentation/Loss of Territory
Private Egyptian families

with political power
Egyptianized Foreigners
with political power
t
Foreign
Incursion
Loss in the Power

of Kingship
Increasing Economic Power

of Asiatics and Nubians
t
Economic Problems
t
Irregular Nile Levels
Figure. 7.1. Model of the factors leading to the demise of Dynasty XIII. Note that
the horizontal relationships do not necessarily indicate contemporaneous events.
problems. Though, at this time, many facets of this time period remain unknown, and
477
other models are possible; this diagram represents the best current understanding of the
end of the Late Middle Kingdom.
Here, the initial problem was an onset of fluctuating inundations as indicated
through the Nile records and geologic evidence. Such instability would have resulted in
increasingly harsh economic problems. These difficult financial issues are visible in the
small size and low frequency of royal Dynasty XIII monuments, as well as in the lack of
private, rock-cut tombs. Initially, the kings of this period reacted to this problem by
emphasizing their relationships to their Dynasty XI and XII predecessor(s) by using the
names Mentuhotep and Amenemhet as part of their nomens. Their Horus and Nebty
names also tie them to these rulers. Though the Dynasty XIII kings decreased their
expenditures for monuments, at least some of them continued to construct pyramids,
though small, with a substructure similar to that of Amenemhet III at Hawara. These
monuments are significantly more elaborate than those of private individuals at this time.
Another problem for the kings of the Late Middle Kingdom was the ability of
foreigners to immerse themselves into the economic and administrative system of Egypt,
especially in the Eastern Delta. Here, an important port (Avaris) for both land and seabased trade was increasingly left to the authority of Egyptianized Asiatics, who still had
considerable cultural connections to the Near East. In essence, the king eventually lost
control of this important trade center, increasing his economic hardship. In the end, this
group also became an independent state (Dynasty XIV).
At the same time that Asiatics gained control in the Delta, some Egyptian families
began to acquire considerable power through links to the office of vizier, as well as
marriages to princesses. It would appear that the kings of phase 2 of Dynasty XIII
478
consciously granted more power to influential local families in order to stabilize the state.
However, this decision eventually resulted in the loss of Upper Egypt, with the creation
of Dynasty XVI at Thebes.
The final portion of the diagram illustrates the progression of the kings' loss of
power in relationship to foreign lands. In both Asia and Nubia, economic conditions may
have caused Dynasty XIII kings to pull back their support of outposts and forts. Thus,
power voids in these areas allowed for new and local groups to prosper from direct trade,
resulting yet again in further economic hardships for Egypt. As the power of the Asiatics
and Nubians grew, they began to invade Egypt itself. Thus, the Hyksos took over the
Dynasty XIV state at Avaris while the Kushites increasingly pressured the Theban kings
(Dynasties XVI/XVII).
In sum, the economic crisis caused by abnormal annual Nile floods resulted in
internal and external problems for Egyptian rulers. In the end, kingship became so weak
that the state split into separate polities. Eventually, Dynasty XIII succumbed to the
Hyksos, and Middle Kingdom culture came to an end.
479
Appendix I: King Lists

1. Ryholt's List of Dynasty XIII Kings 1591
Nomen:
1. Sobekhotep I
2. Sonbef
3.
4. AmenemhetV
5. Qemau
6. Siharnedjheritef
7. Jewefni
8. Ameiiemhet VI
9. Nebnun
10. (H) Sewesekhtawy
11.
12.
13. Sobekhotep II
14. Renisonb
15. Horl
16. (H) Khabaw
17. (H) Djedkheperew
18. Seb
19. Kay
20. Amenemhet VII
21. Wegaf
22. Khendjer
23. Imyremeshaw
24.AntefV
25. Seth
26. Sobekhotep III
27. Neferhotep I
28. Sihathor
29. Sobekhotep IV
30. Sobekhotep V
31. Sobekhotep VI
32. Ibiaw
33. Aya
34. Ini
35. Sewadjtew
36. Ined
37. Hori II
38. Sobekhotep VII
39.
40.
vears
length
1803-1800
c. 3
1800-1797
c. 3.5
c. 1 ,
1796
c.3
1796-1783
1793-1791
est. 2
est. 3
1791-1788
est. 0
1788
1788-1785
est. 3
1785-1783
est. 2
est. 2
1783-1781
1781
est. 0.5
1780
est. 0.5
1780-1777
est. 3
4mth
1777
1777-1775
est. 1.5
1755-1772
est. 3
est. 2
1722-1770
1770
est. 0
1770-1769
est. 1
est. 3
1769-1766
1766-1764
2.25
4.25
1764-1759
1759
(part of 10)
(part of 10)
1749
(part of 10)
1749-1742
4.25
1742-1731
11.25
0
1733
1732-1720
c. 12
1720-1717
est. 3
1717-1712
4.75
1712-1701
10.75
23.75
1701-1677
1677-1675
2.25
1675-1672
3.25
1672-1669
3
1669-1664
5
1664-1663
2.25
1663
Prenomen
Sekhemrekhutawy
Sekhemkare
Nerikare
Sekhemkare
Hotepibre
Sankhibre
Semenkare
Sehtepibre
Sewadjkare
Nedjemibre
Khaankhre
Awibre
Sekhemrekhutawy
kare(?)
Sedjefkare
Khutawyre
Woserkare
Semenkhkare
Sehetepkare
Meribre
Sekhemresewadj tawy
Khasekhemre
Menwadjre
Khaneferre
Merhotepre
Khahotepre
Wahibre
Mernerfere
Merhotepre
Sankhenre
Mersekhemre
Sewadjkare
Merkawre
41.
42.
43.
44.
480
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50. Monthhotep V
51.
52. Ibi
53. Hor (..?)
54.
55. Sankhptahi
56.
57.
Unplaced1592:
a. Ini
b. Neferhotep II
c. Sonbmijew
d. [ ]s
e.
Abvdos:1593
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12. [
]
13. [
]
14.1
]
15. [...]hebre(?)
16. [...Jwebenre
Unplaced:1594
a. Wepwawemsaf
b. Pantjeny
c. Snaaib
Mer[...]re
Merkheperre
Merkare
Sewedjare
[...Jmosre
[...jmaatre
[...Jwebenre
Se[...]kare
SeTieqenre
[
]re
Se[...]enre
1649
Mershepsesre
Mersekhemre
Sewahenre
Sekhaenre
Hotepkare
Woser[...]re
Woser[...]re
[...]hebre
2
2
4
3-4
3-4
S ekhemreneferkhaw
Sekhemrekhutawy
Menkhawre

1594
481
2. Franke's List of Kings ,1595

Prenomen:
Nomen:
Wegaf
1. Chutowire
2. Sechemkare
Amenemhetsenbef
(Chutowi)
3. (Sechemre)
4. Amenemhetre (V)
5. Sehetepibre
6. Iuefeni
Amenemhet VI
7. Seanchibre
Nebnun
8. Semenkare
9. (Se)hetepibre
Harendotef
10. Sewadjkare
ll.Nedjemibre
12. Chaianchre
Sobekhotep(re) I
13. Rensenb
Hor
14. Auibre
Amenemhet VII
15. Sedjefakare
16. Sechemre Chutowi Sobekhotep II
17. Userkare
Chendjer
18. Semenechkare
Emramescha
AnteflV
19. Sehetepkare
20
ibre
Seth
21. Sechemre Sedwadjtowi Sobekhotep III
22. Chaisechemre
Neferhotep I
Sahathor
23. Menwadjre
24. Chaineferre
Sobekhotep IV
25. Chaihetepre
Sobekhotep V
26. Wachibre
Iauib
27. Merineferre
Aja
28. Merihetepre Ani (Sobekhotep VI ?)
29. Seanchenre
Sewadjtu
30. Merisechemre Ined Neferhotep II
31. Sewadjkare
Hori
32. Merikaure
Sobekhotep VII
33.
34.
numbers 33-36
35.
36.
37. Djedneferre(?)
Dedumose
38
Maatre
Ibi
39
ubenre
40. S c . k a r e
numbers 38-47
41. (? Sewachenre)
(Senebmiu)
42.
43.
**
44. (Sechaienre)
45. ...r..re (?=Merischepsesre) (Ini?)
**
(Nerukare?)
46. Mericheperre
47. Merikare
1595
Krauss
Barta
1804-1802
1759-1757
1802-1797
1757-1752
1752-1746
1797-1791
1746-1743
1791-1788
1743-1742
1788-1787
ca. 1741
ca. 1786
ca. 1740
ca. 1785
ca. 1784
ca. 1739
ca. 1738
ca. 1783
ca. 1737
ca. 1782
ca. 1736
ca. 1781
ca. 1735
ca. 1780
ca. 1733
ca. 1778
ca. 1732
ca. 1777
1731-1724
1776-1769
1724-1718
1769-1763
1718-1712
1763-1757
ca. 171 lea. 1756?
ca. 1710 ca. 1755 ?
ca. 1709 ca. 1754?
1708-1705
1753-1750
1705-1694
1750-1739
ca. 1694
ca. 1739
1694-1685
1739-1730
1685-1680
1730-1725
1680-1670
1725-1715
1669-1656
1714-1701
1656-1654
1701-1699
1654-1651
1699-1696
1651-1648
1696-1693
ca. 1647
ca. 1692
1646-1644
1691-1689
ca. 1640
**
**
**
**
from 1640
**
**
**
length
2y3m24d
(4-5y?)
(6y)
3-4y
1+xy
?
?
?y?m4d
?y?m3d
?y?m6d
?
?y?ml2d
0y4m
?y?m7d
ca. 7y
(5-6y?)
(ca. 5-6y)
3y2m
ny
?m3d
(8-9y)
4y8m29d
10y8m28d
13y (?)
2y2m9d
3y2m
3ylm
l?y?m8d
2y?m4d
ca. 1685
ca. 1640
ca. 1685 ?
?
?
from 1685
**
**
Franke, "Zur Chronologie," pp. 267-269.
482
7
?
48. (?Seneferibre)
(Sesostris IV?)
49. (?Sechemre Seanchtowi Neferhotep III ?)
50. (?Sechemre Seusertowi Sobekhotep VIII?)
numbers 48-50
ca. 1630
ca. 1675
**
(1+xy)
(1+x y)
(4+x y)
3. Von Beckerath's List 1596

years
Prenomen and Nomen

1. Chutowire Wegaf
2. Sechemkare Amenemhetsonbef
3. Sechemkare-chutowi (Pentini?)
4. Sechemkare Amenemhet V
5. Sehetepibre= Sehetepibre A...?
6. Efni
7. Seanchibre Amenemhet VI (Son of Anjotef/ Uncle of Ameni)
8. Semenkare
9. Sehetepibre=Hetepibre Harendherjotef (Son of Qemau)
10. Sewadjkare
11. Nedjemibre
A. Abai
B. Ameni Qemau
C. Chuioqre
12. Chaanchre Sebekhotpe I
13. Ranisonbe
14. Awibre Hor I
15. Sedjefakare Amenemhet VII (son of Kai)
16. Sechemre-chutowi Sebekhotpe II (son of Amenemhet)
17. Userkare (and Niramaat ?) Chendjer
18. Semenchkare Emramescha
19. ....kare Anjotef IV
20. ...ibreSeth(=Eoqn?)
21. Sechemre-sewadjtowi Sebekhotpe III
22. Chasechemre Neferhotep I
23. (Chakare?) Sihathor
24. Chaneferre Sebekhotpe IV
25. Chahetepre Sebekhotpe V
26. Wahibre Ibijae
27. Merneferre Ay
28. Merhetepre Sebekhotpe VI
29. Seanchenre Sewadjtu
30. Mersechemre Ined (=Neferhotep II ?)
31. Sewadjkare Hori
32. Merkawre Sebekhotpe VII
F. Seneferibre Senwosret IV
G. Meranchre Mentehotpe V
H. Djedanchre Mentemsaf
I. Djedhetepre Dedumose (I.?)
37.. Dejdneferre Dedumose (II?)
5
1785-1783
1783-1787
1775-1774
1775-1774
1774-
-1764
1764-
-1744
1744-1741
1741-1730
1730
1730-1720
1720-1715
1715-1704
1704-1690
1690-1688
1688-1683
von Beckerath, Untersuchungen, pp. 222-223; "Zwischenzeit, Zweite," pp. 1445-1446. For a similar list
with variations at the end where the Turin King-List is least preserved, see J. von Beckerath, Chronologie
despharaonischen Agypten, Milnchner Agyptologische Studien 46 (Mainz, 1997); Handbuch, pp. 284-285.
483
38
maatre Ibi
39. ...Ubenre Hor II
40. Sc.kare
41. ...enre (=Sewahenre Senebmiu)
J. Sechemre-seanchtowi Ijchernofret (=Neferhotep III)
K. Sechemre-sewesertowi Sebekhotpre VIII
44
enre (=Sechaenre?)
45. Mer...re (=Merschepesre)
46. Mercheperre
47. Merkare
L. Usermont (= 40, 44, 46, Or 47)
M. Menchaure Senaib
N. Sechemre-neferchau Upwaweremsaf
484
Appendix II: Measurements from Late Middle Kingdom Tombs

The purpose of this appendix is to provide researchers with a means of comparing
the Dynasty XIII royal tombs. Since the excavators rarely supply the actual
measurements of architectural features, estimates taken from plans have been italicized.
Note that the estimates for the subsidiary pyramid of Khendjer are likely to be more
inaccurate than the others since the scale of the detailed plan of this area had to be
extrapolated based on measurements from the plan of the complex (though these numbers
were compared to the plan with scale found in Janosi). All measurements are in meters.
1. Pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara

pyramid
Length
101.75
width
101.75
height
58.01
enclosure
pyramid bricks
house bricks
mortuary temple
384.96
0.45
0.375
157.89
0.225
0.18
0.13
0.125
north chapel
substructure pit
staircase 1
axis 24.42
0.96
1.79
short corridor 1
chamber
portcullis 1 stone
portcullis 1 room
Change in level
short corridor 2
southwest turning
chamber
south corridor
door niche within
south corridor
south corridor
continued
1.52
1.70
2.64
1.55
1.81
2.67
0.85
3.77/3.72
1.78
2.27
0.74
2.18
1.82
1.88
0.53
1.08
0.99
0.85
0.98
1.93
485
Notes
102-105 per side; angle at
4845 '3 with variation up to
5225'
labyrinth, measurements
uncertain
uncertain measurements
only around sarcophagus
chamber
width at base; ramp of 0.24
per side; slope of 19 37.5'
uneven chamber
from right; closed
up
sockets for a single wooden

door in southwest corner
south corridor, slope
26.44
0.97
1.83
short corridor 3
southeast turning
chamber
portcullis 2
1.73
3.59
0.79
2.25
2.28
3.45
1.59
0.76
change in level
east corridor
2.42
0.97
east corridor, slope
11.28
0.9-7
1.81-
short corridor 4
northeast turning
chamber
portcullis 3
northern corridor
Antechamber
1.63
4.22
2.29
1.59
2.18
3.51
8.54
7.85
1.55
0.90
2.28
1.12
1.84
2.32
passage to
sarcophagus
sarcophagus
chamber base
interior
sarcophagus
chamber lid southern
fixed
sarcophagus
chamber lid middle
fixed
sarcophagus
chamber lid south
mobile
sarcophagus exterior
1.82
0.92
6.79
2.39
2.35
2.69
1.23
1.41
sarcophagus interior
2.25
0.79
1.06
length is horizontal; slopes

downward
Northern and eastern sides of
room filled with masonry
from left; open
Above previous floor
flat, 0.41 at start with lower
roof
length is horizontal
measurement; across
downward slope 11.44 for
decrease of 1.93
Some masonry within corridor
Partly filled with masonry
from right; open
0.44 with lower roof
northern area filled with
masonry
in floor of antechamber; filled
with masonry
1.22
1.22
1.22
486
foot is an addition 0.23 with a

height of 0.39; facade
decoration
2. Pyramid Complex of Woserkare Khendjer (minus the subsidiary pyramid)

pyramid
Length
52.5
width
52.5
Height
37.49
pyramidion
pyramid bricks
1.40
0.42
1.40
0.21
1.30
0.11
encasement trench
inner enclosure
outer enclosure
55.00
77.00x78.00
122.65x125.90
6.00-7.00
3.00
2.60
mortuary temple
temple courtyard
north chapel
substructure pit
staircase 1 (room)
staircase 1
26.25
25.00
8.00
13.00
5.00
6.00
27.50
15.00
6.38
13.00
0.90
0.90
11.00
1.20
3.30
short corridor 1
portcullis 1 stone
portcullis 1 receiving
niche
portcullis 1 room
1.00
2.90
1.95
0.90
1.90
0.40-0.50
1.25
1.90
1.75
0.90
1.10
change in level
short corridor 2
staircase 2 (room)
staircase 2
0.50
13.50
14.5
0.90
0.90
0.90
1.50
1.25
1.60
5.29
short, flat corridor 3
1.80
0.90
wooden door niche
0.50
1.10
portcullis 2 stone
niche
portcullis 2 room
2.90
1.80
1.75
0.40
7.75
1.50
0.90
1.10
change in level
long corridor 1
6.75
0.90
1.20
1.50-1.75
turning room 1
2.25
2.25
2.20
long corridor 2
11.00
1.00
1.00
antechamber
9.90
2.25
2.00
corridor to burial
3.75
1.00
1.25
487
Notes
Angle at 55 (excavator's
estimated length used and
height correct)
Angle at 55-56
with a 0.02 variable in
each
Stone
Mudbrick
within temple
platform 0.56 high
entrance in west
14 steps (length across
steps)
From the right; open
measurements when stone

in final position; height at
lowest point

steps)
includes wooden door
niche; height variable
height variable; width of
hallway plus 2 niches
from left; open
measurements when stone

in final position; height at
lowest point
for the last m of length,
height is 1.25
next passage hidden
beneath the floor
antechamber above
ceiling at end
corridor to burial chamber
and western hydraulic
tunnel hidden in floor
chamber
eastern access tunnel
2.75
0.80
0.90
entrance hidden in floor
western access tunnel

1
room at end of tunnel
1
2
sarcophagus base
exterior
above niches
coffin niche
canopic niche
sarcophagus lid fixed
2.50
0.80
of long corridor 2
from antechamber
2.00
1.50
tunnel 2 in ceiling
2.75
0.80
0.90
tunnel to burial chamber
4.50
2.25
>2.50
3.50
1.25
1.00
2.40
0.75
2.25
0.80
0.75
3.00
1.00
0.70
1.50
sarcophagus lid
mobile
sarcophagus
chamber
2.25
3.00
1.50
3.25
3.10
5.20/3.70
lid supports
1.20
0.40
1.00
488
measurement does not

account for arching on
interior
lid closed
height from top of base to
apex/from top of lid to
apex
Granite
3. Subsidiary Pyramid of Woserkare Khendjer

pyramid
staircase (room)
staircase
Length
25.5
6.70
7.70
width
25.5
0.90
0.90
height
1.70
3.75
short corridor 1
portcullis 1 stone
portcullis 1 room
1.40
2.70
1.2-5
0.90
1.40
0.90
1.75
1.70
0.90
portcullis 1 niche
change in level
short corridor 2
portcullis 2 stone
portcullis 2 room
portcullis 2 niche
change in level
short corridor 3
antechamber
corridor to northern
burial chamber
sarcophagus 1 base
sarcophagus 1
interior
sarcophagus 1 lid
lid supports 1
canopic box 1
canopic box 1
interior
corridor to southern
burial chamber
1.45
1.30
2.80
1.40
1.45
1.30
2.20
0.90
0.55
0.90
1.60
0.90
0.55
0.90
2.10
0.80
1.20
1.20
1.60
1.10
1.20
1.25
1.25
1.25
2.80
2.25
1.75
0.90
1.50
1.00
Northern sarcophagus
2.80
1.20
0.60
1.75
0.25
1.20
0.60
0.35
1.40
Open
5 pillars
3.00
0.80
1.00
at lower level from

antechamber; 0.8 of
corridor beyond
antechamber
3.00
2.25
1.75
0.85
1.50
1.00
3.00
1.25
0.60
1.75
0.25
1.25
0.60
0.50
1.05
1.00
0.60
1.10
1.10
0.25
sarcophagus 2 base
sarcophagus 2
interior
sarcophagus 2 lid
lid supports 2
canopic box 2
canopic box 2
interior
canopic box 2 lid
489
Notes
Entrance in east
steps), 33
from the left; closed
measurements with stone
in place
from the right; closed
up from previous level
6 pillars
4. The Southern Pyramid at South Sakkara
123.50
width
91.00
0.21-0.23
5.50
0.65
staircase 1 (entrance)
short corridor 1
portcullis 1 stone
niche
portcullis 1 room
16.50
2.00
3.40
1.00
0.80
0.80
2.00
2.10
1.70
1.80
1.50
1.50
1.70
change in level
short corridor 2
turning room 1
long corridor 1
turning room 2
change in level
staircase 2
long corridor 2
antechamber to
galleries
gallery 1 passage a
gallery 1 passage b
gallery 1
gallery 2 passage a
gallery 2 passage b
gallery 2, staircase
room
staircase 3
2.00
3.60
12.00
3.70
1.00
1.00
9.50
5.60
0.80
2.00
0.80
2.00
0.80
0.80
2.20
1.80
1.80
2.50
1.90
2.50
1.30
1.90
2.60
0.50
1.00
15.10
0.50
1.00
4.70
0.80
1.10
1.80
0.80
1.10
2.10
1.70
3.50
0.8
2.00
short corridor 3
gallery 2, 2nd room
staircase 4
short corridor 4
portcullis 2 stone
niche
portcullis 2 room
2.40
8.60
0.70
2.00
3.30
1.00
0.80
2.10
0.80
0.80
2.00
2.00
1.20
2.00
2.00
1.50
1.50
7.70
change in level
short corridor 5
portcullis 3 stone
niche
portcullis 3 room
change in level
short passage 5
2.00
0.80
3.30
2.00
1.00
2.20
2.00
1.80
1.50
1.50
1.50
0.80
1.70
1.80
1.70/1.90
pyramid
pyramid bricks
encasement trench
Enclosure
Length
91.00
0.44
490
height
Notes
Preserved to a height of 3 m
0.12-0.13
1.80
Mudbrick sinusoidal wall;
preserved to a height of 2 m
in one area
44 steps
from the right; open
measurements if portcullis
were in place
above previous floor
down; beneath turning room

5 steps; below turning room
13 steps beneath previous

room
Beneath previous room

from the left; closed
height from top of base to

apex/from top of lid to apex
from the right, open
1.70
4.30
4.20
1.90
6.20
2.30
0.80
1.00/1.20/
1.00/1.30
6.00
0.70
0.70
0.80
2.80
0.70
0.80
1.50
1.30
1.30
1.40
4.20
0.80
0.50
1.80/1.20/
1.00/1.00
1.90
7.30
1.50
1.90
7.30
1.50
2.50
7.30
1.50
6.30
7.30
7.20
granite lid supports
2.20
0.70
2.00
limestone supports
long corridor 3
sarcophagus 2
chamber
sarcophagus 2 base
coffin 2 niche
canopic 2 niche
sarcophagus 2 lid
sarcophagus chamber
0.70
4.40
3.50
0.70
0.70
1.80
1.40
1.30
1.80
3.50
2.30
0.60
3.50
3.50
1.80
0.70
0.60
1.80
1.80
2.30
0.80
0.70
0.40/0.50
2.2
2.40
0.40
0.60
0.70
1.70
2.00
2.60
1.80
1.40
antechamber 1
northern access tunnel
southern access tunnel
small corridor 5
sarcophagus 1 base
coffin 1 niche
canopic 1 niche
sarcophagus 1 interior
above and beside
niches
sarcophagus 1 lid fixed
1
sarcophagus 1 lid fixed
2
sarcophagus 1 lid
mobile
sarcophagus 1
chamber
portcullis 4
niche
antechamber 2
491
8.20 wider for 0.70
height from top pf

sarcophagus base to apex of
roof
one on each side of the
sarcophagus (2 total)
4 total
height of middle/ends
height from top of
sarcophagus base to apex of
roof
from the left; open
5. Pyramid of Ameny Qemau

pyramid
Length
52.4
width
52.4
Height
encasement trench
57.55-57.65
5.85-6.50
north chapel
substructure pit
ramp
entrance corridor
short corridor 1
portcullis 1 stone
3.00+
24.35
1.80+
2.90
8.00+
3.60-2200
0.90
1.30
1.30
portcullis 1 room
change in level
short corridor 2
portcullis 2 stone
niche
portcullis 2 room
1.83
1.60
2.15
0.50
2.20
1.00+
1.60
1.81
1.30+
1.30?
1.10+
1.40
1.30
1.40
change in level
short corridor 3
turning room 1
staircase 1
short corridor 4
turning chamber 2
staircase 2
short corridor 5
3.60
2.00
1.74
2.14
0.90
0.90
1.35
1.20?
1.04+
1.45
1.75
antechamber
portcullis 3
portcullis 3 niche
sarcophagus
chamber
coffin niche
canopic niche
sarcophagus lid
3.25
2.60
0.40
4.50
2.20
0.80
0.86-0.88
2.18
2.20+
2.60
2.50+
2.35
0.66
4.50
0.89
0.63
2.18
1.07
0.59
0.60
492
Notes
Could also be up to 57.5
on each side.
The interior lines were
44.20 to 45.30 m.
slopes downward
drops from above from a
shaft
Up
closed from the south
only the floor was

preserved
poorly
poorly
poorly
poorly
preserved
preserved
preserved
preserved
6 steps; down
Quartzite roof block 0.75
m thick
closed from the west
4.88 in length from the
back of the portcullis
the lid was broken off at

the northern end;
measurement based upon
reconstruction
6. North Mazghuna
pyramid
causeway
staircase 1 (entrance)
Length
116.43
4.56
width
43.74
0.96
height
1.90-1.93
turning platform
staircase 2
2.61
11.28
2.60
0.97-0.98
1.90-1.94
short corridor 1
door niche in corridor
portcullis 1 stone
portcullis niche
niche
portcullis 1 room
change in level
short corridor 2
1.41
1.04
4.50?
2.97?
0.64
1.02-1.14
0.10
2.01
2.13
2.16
1.98
1.98
1.79
2.16
1.97
1.58
1.61
0.96
3.80
1.64
1.40-1.59
turning room 1
short corridor 3
portcullis 2 stone
portcullis niche
portcullis 2 room
change in level
short corridor 3
turning room 2
staircase 3
2.38-2.41
1.47
2.96
2.97
0.76
1.76
1.59
4.93
1.90
2.95
0.97
1.69
1.94
2.16
1.52
0.98
2:51
0.86
2.37-2.38
2.11
1.79
2.30
3.75
1.43
1.36-1.47
2.13
0.89
long corridor
turning chamber 3
short corridor 4
antechamber
portcullis 3
portcullis 3 niche
niche
sarcophagus
coffin niche
canopic niche
sarcophagus lid
sarcophagus chamber
short corridor 5
chamber
8.33
3.30
2.06
4.41
3.21
3.37
0.51
0.97-0.99
2.69
0.97
2.67
0.61
0.66
0.89
1.69-1.70
2.38
1.59
2.46
2.62
2.98
4.75
2.38-2.39
0.68
2.63
0.94-0.96
0.66-0.67
2.60
1.83
1.17-1.18
0.76-0.77
0.77
2.67
3.40
0.70
4.69-4.70
0.66
2.14-2.16
4.23
4.51
1.17
1.48-1.49
493
Notes
10 steps, 0.53x0.43x0.09
with 0.22 wide ramp; 27
down 0.16
ramp for 3.78, 31 steps at
0.53x0.38x0.09 with ramps
of 0.22, end ramp for 1.06;
1330'
closed from the north
Up
slopes downward 0.19;
quartzite block ceiling
slopes downward
24, 5 steps at
0.41x0.41x0.16, ramps at
0.22
7. South Mazghuna
length
55.40
0.46
55.40/55.67
77.72/76.40/
76.61/76.63
3.71
0.30/0.32
12.74
width
55.67
0.23
5.13
1.05
Height
0.16$. 17
6.22
0.09/0.11
entrance staircase
0.30/0.31/
0.34/0.38
4.88
0.15/0.16/
0.15/0.20
0.90
0.10/0.11/
0.11/0.09
short corridor 1
portcullis 1 stone
portcullis 1 room
0.83
2.63
1.40
0.90
1.49
1.14
1.45
change in level
staircase 2
2.79
0.93
1.19
short corridor 2
portcullis 2 stone
portcullis 2 room
unpreserved corridor
0.84
2.65
1.40
2.03
0.90
1.59
1.14
0.90
1.45
unpreserved room
long corridor 1
10.16
10.29
3.05
1.07-1.09
1.41-1.63
antechamber
9.00-9.04
2.11-2.15
1.62-1.66
corridor to burial
chamber
2.09
1.06
0.85
eastern access tunnel
3.44
0.70-0.74
0.91-0.92

1
2
sarcophagus base
exterior
above niches
coffin niche
canopic niche
sarcophagus lid fixed
sarcophagus lid
3.65
0.80-0.86
1.08-1.10
change in level up, 2

uneven steps
change in level down 1.04
roof 0.14-0.19 higher for
4.13
change in level up 0.89
with 3 uneven places
steps
3 steps down, 2 cut in
(0.32x0.34x0.13) and 1
placed
4.00 from north of eastern
corridor; 0.56 into
passage
entrance-0.86xO.85xO.91
3.15
0.76
0.92-0.96
entrance-0.76-0.80
2.13
3.34
1.16
0.43-0.44
2.40-2.43
0.73
2.23
2.59
0.90-0.92
0.72
2.11
2.01
1.04-1.06
0.70-0.71
1.40
0.99-1.51
pyramid
pyramid bricks
encasement trench
enclosure
enclosure entrance
enclosure bricks
chapel
chapel bricks
494
0.13
0.99
1.52+
Notes
100 cubits
mudbrick, sinusoidal wall,

crest to crest 3.71
Blocked
continues an additional
4.20 to the west for 1.66
descent 2230'; steps 0.11

by 0.37; ramps 0.25/0.28
drop of 0.13 from steps
granite ramp 2.54 by 0.74;
415'
Up
descent 18"; 8 steps; 0.39
by 0.11; ramps 0.27
drop of 0.13 from steps
base 0.13 lower than
mobile
sarcophagus
chamber
lid supports
4.09
2.88
4.15
0.89
0.34
0.95/1.05
495
pavement
1.08 above sarcophagus
lid
Appendix III: Charts Showing the Level Changes Representing the

Twelve Hours of the Night
The substructures of Late Middle Kingdom royal mortuary corpus may provide an
architectural model of the idea of the twelve hours of the night in the netherworld through
six sections divided by changes in level. This method of representing the underworld
began in the reign of Amenemhet III in Dynasty XII. At times, judgments must be made
concerning how to count the hours, and other combinations are possible. However, here,
the entrance staircases are counted as "hours" while others represent transitions between
sections. For each monument, the divisions are shown schematically (not to scale) in a
diagram with numbers while the changes in level are shown using letters. See Chapter 5,
Section IV.
I
c '
E
1
iI
1 i
2/B
iC
N
1.
2.
3.
4.
Staircase (down)
Corridor
Corridor (slopes down)
Corridor (slopes up)
5. Antechamber
A.
B.
C.
D.
Portcullis (up/closed)
Wooden door
Portcullis (up/open)
E. Floor passage (down)
6. Sarcophagus (used)
1. The Pyramid of Amenemhet III at Hawara.
496
k
N
#
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Entrance stairway (down)

Entrance stairway (down)
Corridor (downward slope)
Corridor
Antechamber
Sarcophagus (unused)
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Floor passage (down)
Ceiling passage (up)
2. The Pyramid of Khendjer at South Sakkara.
D
i
i
-> B
N
1. Entrance stairway (down)
A. Portcullis (up/closed)
2. Entrance stairway (down)
B. Portcullis (up/open)
3.
4.
5.
6.
C. Floor passage with steps (down)

D. Ceiling passage with steps (up)
E. Floor passage (down)
Corridor
Corridor
Antechamber
Sarcophagus (used)
3 . The Pyramid at South Mazghuna.

497
>
N
C2B
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Corridor
Corridor
Corridor
Corridor
Antechamber
Sarcophagus (used)
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Staircase (down)
Staircase (down)
Portcullis (closed)
4. The Pyramid of Ameny Qemau.
N
C 3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Shaft base
Corridor
Corridor
Corridors
Corridor
Sarcophagus (used)
A 1
A
A. Threshold
B. Portcullis (up)
C. Floor Passage (down)
D. Portcullis (down)
5. Mastaba S9 at South Abydos (Option 1).
498
->c
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
B 2 A
Corridor
Corridor
Corridor
A. Portcullis (up/closed)
Corridor
B. Floor Passage (down)
Corridor
C. Portcullis (down/closed)
Sarcophagus (used)
6. Mastaba S9 at South Abydos (Option 2).
4 C
5
i
i
1
E
I ' I
D?
i
i
B
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Shaft base
Corridor
Stairs (down)/corridor
Corridors
Antechamber
Sarcophagus
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
A
Threshold
Portcullis (up)
Floor passage? (down?)
7. The Tomb Model from Dahshur.
499
4 C
+
1.
2.
3.
4.
Shaft base
Corridor
Stairs (down)/corridor
Corridor
A. Threshold
B. Floor passage (down)
C. Portcullis (up/closed)
8. S10 at South Abydos.
4/C
3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
2 A
Staircase (down)
Corridor
Corridor
Antechamber
Corridor
Sarcophagus
A. Portcullis (up)
B. Portcullis (up)
C. Floor Passage (downsouth only)
9. The Subsidiary Pyramid of Khendjer at South Sakkara.
500
2 A
D
<-
C
1. Staircases (down)
2. Corridors
3. Corridors
4. Corridors
5. Antechamber
6. Sarcophagus (unused)
A.
B.
C.
D.
Staircase (down)
Portcullis (open)
10. The Pyramid at North Mazghuna (Option 1).
V
->
B
<r
1-6. Corridors
A-F. Corners
11. The Pyramid at North Mazghuna (Option 2).
501
k
N
4
2 A
L
1. Staircase (down)
2. Corridor
3. Corridor
4. Corridors
5. Corridor
6. Sarcophagus
N
A.
B.
C.
D.
Portcullis (up)
Staircase (down)
Portcullis (up)
Portcullis (up)
12. The "Unfinished" Pyramid (Option 1).
k
N
1-5. Corridors
6. Sarcophagus
A D
" - Corners
502
I
7
2 A
F 6 E 5D
T
1. Staircase (down)
2. Corridors
3. Corridors
4. Corridor
5. Corridor
6. Corridor
7. Corridor
8. Sarcophagus
N
A. Portcullis (up)
B. Staircase (down)
C. Staircase (down)
D. Staircase (down)
E. Portcullis (up)
F. Portcullis (up)
503
Bibliography
Adam, S.
"Report on the Excavations of the Department of Antiquities at Ezbet Rushdi."
ASAE 56 (1959), pp. 207-226.
Albright, W.M.F. and Lambdin, T.O.
"An Indirect Synchronism Between Egypt and Mesopotamia, cir. 1730 BC."
A ^ Q K 99 (1945), pp. 9-18.
Alderson, A.D.
The Structure of the Ottoman Dynasty. Oxford, 1956.
Aldred, C.
Middle Kingdom Art in Ancient Egypt. London, 1969.
Egyptian Art in the Days of the Pharaohs 3100-320 BC. New York, 1980.
Alexanian, N., Schiestl, R., and Seidlmayer, S.J.
"The Necropolis of Dahshur Excavations Report Spring 2006." ASAE
(forthcoming).
Allen, J.P.
Genesis in Egypt. New Haven, 1988.
"The Cosmology of the Pyramid Texts." in W.K. Simpson, ed., Religion and
Philosophy in Ancient Egypt. Yale Egyptological Studies 3. New Haven,
1989, pp. 1-28.
"Re'wer's Incident." in A.B. Lloyd, ed., Studies in Pharaonic Religion and Society
in Honor of J. Gwyn Griffiths. Occasional Publications 8. London, 1992,
pp. 14-20.
"Reading a Pyramid," in C. Berger et al., Hommages a Jean Leclant I: Etudes
Pharaoniques.
Bibliotheque d'Etude 106/1. 1994, pp. 5-28.
"Coffin Texts from Lisht." in H. Willems, ed., The World of the Coffin Texts.
Leiden, 1996, pp. 1-15.
"The Turin Kinglist," in D. Ben-Tor, "Seals and Kings." BASOR 315 (1999), pp.
48-53.
"Pyramid Texts." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt. Oxford, 2001, pp. 95-97.
Middle Egyptian. New York, 2000.
"The Second Intermediate Period in the Turin Kinglist." Paper Presented at the
British Museum Egyptological Colloquium: The Second Intermediate
Period (13th-17th Dynasties), Current Research, Future Prospects, 14
July-16 July, 2004.
Allen, S.J.
"Queens' Ware: Royal Funerary Pottery in the Middle Kingdom." in C. J. Eyre,
Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Egyptologists.
Leuven, 1998, pp. 39-48.
Allen, T.G.
The Egyptian Book of the Dead Documents in the Oriental Institute Museum at
the University of Chicago. Chicago, 1960.
504
The Book of the Dead or Going Forth by Day, Chicago, 1974.

Amelineau, E.
Le tombeau d'Osiris. Paris, 1899.
"Le Tombeau d'Osiris: Reponse a l'Article de M. Loret." Sphinx 5 (1902), pp.
234-246.
Anonymous
"Instructions Donnes par TAcademie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres en sa
Seange du Vendredi 7 Octobre 1859 a Auguste Mariette sur les
Principales Recherches a Executer en Egypte dans l'lnteret de l'Histoire et
de rArcheologie.'M&42 (1901), pp. 112-125.
Anthes, R.
"The Original Meaning of m3c hrw." JNES 13 (1954), pp. 21-51, 191-192.
"Die Berichte des Neferhotep und des Ichernofret xiber das Osirisfest in Abydos."
Festschrift zum 150 Jdrigen des Berliner Aryptischen Museums.
Mitteilungen aus der Agyptischen Sammlung 8. Berlin, 1974, pp. 15-49.
Arkell, A.J.
History of the Sudan to AD 1821. London, 1961.
Arnold, Di.
"Vom Pyramidenbezirk zum 'Haus fur Millionen Jahre." MDAIK 34 (1978), pp. 18.
"Dahschur Dritter Grabungsbericht." MDAIK36 (1980), pp. 15-21.
Der Pyramidenbezirk des Konigs Amenemhet III. in Dahschur. Band I: Die
Pyramide. Archaologische Veroffentlichungen. Deutsches
Archaologisches Institut Abteilung Kairo 53. Mainz, 1987.
The Pyramid of Senwosret I. The South Cemeteries of Lisht 1. New York, 1988.
Building in Egypt: Pharaonic Stone Masonry. New York, 1991.
"Zur Zerstorungsgeschichte der Pyramiden." MDAIK47 (1991), pp. 21-27.
"Royal Cult Complexes of the Old and Middle Kingdoms." in B.E. Shafer, ed.,
Temples of Ancient Egypt. Ithaca, NY, 1997, pp. 31-85.
"Tombs: Royal Tombs." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of
Ancient Egypt. 3. New York, 2001, pp. 425-433.
The Pyramid Complex of Senwosret III at Dahshur Architectural Studies. The
Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition XXVI. New York,
2002.
"Pyramids of the Middle Kingdom." in Z. Hawass, ed., Pyramids:
Treasures Mysteries and New Discoveries in Egypt. Vercelli, Italy, 2003,
pp. 342-363.
The Encyclopedia ofAncient Egyptian Architecture. Princeton, 2003.
Arnold, Di. and Arnold, Do.
Der Tempel Qasr el-Sagha. Archaologische Veroffentlichungen 27. Mainz am
Rhein, 1979.
Arnold, Di. and Stadelmann, R.
"Dahschur. Erster Grabungsbericht." MDAIK 31 (1975), pp. 169-174.
"Dahschur: Zweiter Grabungsbericht." MDAIK 33 (1977), pp. 15-20.
505
Arnold, Do.
"Zur Keramik aus dem Taltempel der Pyramide Amenemhets III. in Dahschur,"
MDAIK 33 (1977), pp. 21-26.
"Keramikbearbeitung in Dahschur 1976-1981." MDAIK 38 (1982), pp. 25-65.
"Pottery," in The Pyramid of Senwosret I. The South Cemeteries of Lisht 1. New
York, 1988, pp. 106-146.
"Amenemhet I and the Early Twelfth Dynasty at Thebes," MM/26, (1991), pp. 548.
Arnold, F.
The Control Notes and Team Marks. The South Cemeteries of Lisht 2. New York,
1990.
"Settlement Remains at Lisht-North." in M. Bietak, ed., Haus undPalast im Alten
Agypten. Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Senkschriften der
Gesamtakademie 14. Vienna, 1996, pp. 13-23.
Assmann, J.
"Das Grab mit gewundenem Absteig zum Typenwandel des Privat-Felsgrabes im
Neuen Reich." MDAIK 40 (1984), pp. 277-290.
Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. London,
1997.
The Mind of Egypt: History and Meaning in the Time of the Pharaohs. New York,
2002.
Assmann, J. and Blumenthal, E. (eds.)
Literatur und Politih im pharaonischen und ptolemaischen Agytpen. Bibliotheque
d'Etude 127. Cairo, 1999.
Aston, B.G., Harrell, J.A., and Shaw, I.
"Stone." in P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, eds., Ancient Egyptian Materials and
Technology. Cambridge, 2000, pp. 5-77.
Aufrere, S.
"Le roi Aouibre Hor. Essai înterpretation du materiel decouvert par Jaques de
Morgan a Dahchour (1894)." BIFAO 101 (2001), pp. 1-41.
Ayrton, E.R., Currelly, C.T., and Weigall, A.E.P.
Abydos, Part III. London, 1904.
Badawy, A.
"Preliminary Report on the Excavations by the University of California at Askut
(First Season, October 1962-January 1963)." Kush 12 (1964), pp. 47-53.
Baer, K.
Rank and Title in the Old Kingdom. The Structure of the Egyptian Administration
in the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties. Chicago, 1960.
Baines, J.
"The Inundation Stela of Sebekhotpe VIII." AcOr 36 (1974), pp. 39-54.
"The Sebekhotpe VIII Inundation Stela: An Additional Fragment." AcOr 37
(1976), pp. 11-20.
"Interpreting Sinuhe." JEA 68 (1982), pp. 31-44.
"Egyptian Twins." Or 54 (1985), pp. 461-482.
"Practical Religion and Piety." JEA 73 (1987), pp. 79-98.
506
"Ancient Egyptian Concepts and Uses of the Past: 3rd and 2nd Millenium BC
Evidence." in R. Layton, ed., Who Needs the Past: Indigenous Values and
Archaeology. One World Archaeology 5. London, 1989, pp. 131-149.
"Kingship, Definition of Culture, and Legitimation." in D. O'Connor and D.P.
Silverman, eds., Ancient Egyptian Kingship. New York, 1995, pp. 3-47.
"Origins of Egyptian Kingship." in D. O'Connor and D.P. Silverman, eds.,
Ancient Egyptian Kingship. New York, 1995, pp. 95-156.
"Research on Egyptian Literature: Background, Definitions, Prospects." in Z.
Hawass, ed., Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty^-first Century:
Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists Cairo,
2000. 3. New York, 2003, pp. 1-26.
"Modeling Sources, Processes, and Locations of Early Mortuary Texts," in S.
Bickel and B. Mathieu, D'un Monde a VAutre. Textes des Pyramides et
Textes des Sarcophages. Cairo, 2004, pp. 22-41.
Visual and Written Culture in Ancient Egypt. Oxford, 2007.
Baines, J. and Eyre, C.J.
"Four Notes on Literacy." GM61 (1983), pp. 65-96.
Bares, L.
"Note to the Thirteenth Dynasty at Abusir." VA 4 (1988), pp. 117-120.
Barfield, T.J.
The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China. Oxford, 1989.
Barnarvi, E.
"Mythes et Realite Historique: Le Cas de la Loi Salique." Histoire, Economie et
Societe 3 (1984), pp. 323-337.
Barta, W.
Aufbau undBedeutung der Altdgyptischen Operformel. Gliickstadt, 1968.
Untersuchungen zur Gottlichkeit des regierenden Konigs. Ritus und
Sakralkonigtum in Altdgypten nach Zeugnissen der Fruhzeit und des Alten
Reiches. Miinchner Agyptologische Studien herausgegeben von Hans
Wolfgang Miiller 32. Miinchen-Berlin, 1975.
Bell, B.
"Climate and the History of Egypt: The Middle Kingdom." AJA 79 (1975), pp.
223-269.
Bell, L.
"Luxor Temple and the Cult of the Royal Ka." JNES 44 (1985), pp. 251-294.
"The New Kingdom 'Divine' Temple: The Example of Luxor." in B.E. Schafer,
ed., Temples of Ancient Egypt. Ithaca, 1997, pp. 127-184.
Bellion, M.
Catalogue des Manuscrits Hieroglyphiques et Hieratiques et des Dessins, sur
Papyrus, Cuir ou Tissu, Publies ou Signales. Paris, 1987.
Bennett, C.
"Growth of the Htp-d'i-Nsw Formula in the Middle Kingdom." JEA 27 (1941),
pp. 77-82.
"The Writing of htp-di-nsw." JEA 27 (1941), p. 157.
507
"Motifs and Phrases on Funerary Stelae of the Later Middle Kingdom." JEA 44
(1958), pp. 120-121.
"The First Three Sekhemre Kings of the Seventeenth Dynasty." GM143 (1994),
pp. 21-28.
"Thutmosis I and Ahmes-Sapair." GM 141 (1994), pp. 35-37.
"The Structure of the Seventeenth Dynasty." GM 149 (1995), pp. 25-32.
"The King's Daughter Reditenes." GM 151 (1996), pp. 19-22.
"King Qemau: A Reconsideration." GM 159 (1997), pp. 11-17.
"A'Genealogical Chronology of the Seventeenth Dynasty." JARCE 39 (2002), pp.
123-155.
Ben-Tor, D.
"The Historical Implications of Middle Kingdom Scarabs Found in Palestine
Bearing Private Names and Titles of Officials." BASOR 294 (1994), pp. 722.
"Seals and Kings." BASOR 315 (1999), pp. 47-74.
Berlev, O.D.
"Zamecanija k papirusu Bulak 18." Drevnij Mir (1962), pp. 50-62.
"Les Pretendus 'Citadins' au Moyen Empire." RdE 23 (1971), pp. 23-48.
"A Contemporary of King Sewah-en-Re'." JEA 60 (1974), pp. 106-113.
"Review of Egyptian Stelae, Reliefs, and Paintings from the Petrie Collection,
Part II. in R.M. Stewart." Bibliotheca Orientalis 38 (1981), pp. 318-321.
"The Eleventh Dynasty in the Dynastic History of Egypt." in D.W. Young, ed.,
Studies Presented to Hans Jakob Polotsky. East Glouster, MA, 1981, pp.
361-377.
"The Date of the 'Eloquent Peasant'." in J. Osing and G. Dreyer, eds., Form und
Mass. Wiesbaden, 1987, pp. 78-83.
"Bureaucrats." in S. Donadoni, ed., The Egyptians. Chicago, 1997, pp. 87-119.
Berman, L.
"Amenemhet I." dissertation, Yale University, 1985.
Bianchi, R.
"Scarabs." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 3.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 179-180.
Bietak, M.
"Avaris and Piramesse, Archaeological Exploration in the Eastern Nile Delta."
Proceedings of the British Academy. 65. London, 1979, pp. 225-290.
"Problems of Middle Bronze Age Chronology. New Evidence from Egypt." AJA
88 (1984), pp. 471-485.
"Zum Konigsreich des aA-zH-Ra Nehesi." SAK 11 (1984), pp. 59-75.
"Der Friedhof in einem Palastgarten aus der Zeit des spaten mittleren Reiches und
andere Forschungsergebnisse aus dem ostlichen Nildelta Tell el-Dab'a
1984-1987." A&L 2 (1991), pp. 47-109.
"Canaanites in the Eastern Nile Delta." in A.F. Rainey, ed., Egypt, Isreal, Sinai.
Tel Aviv, 1987, pp. 41-56.
508
"Egypt and Canaan During the Middle Bronze Age." BASOR 281 (1991), pp. 2772.
"Connections Between Egypt and the Minoan World: New Results from Tell elDab's/Avaris." in V. Davies and L. Schofield, eds., Egypt, the Aegean and
the LevantÎnterconnections in the Second Millennium BC. London, 1995,
pp. 19-28.
Avaris, The Capital of the HyksosRecent Excavations at Tell el-Dab'a. The
Raymond and Beverly Sackler Foundation Distinguished Lecture in
Egyptology 1. London, 1996.
"Zum Raumprogramm agyptischer Wohnhauser des Mittleren und des Neuen
Reiches." in M. Bietak, ed., Haus undPalast im Alten Agypten.
Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Senkschriften der
Gesamtakademie 14. Vienna, 1996.
"The Center of Hyksos Rule: Avaris (Tell el Dab'a)." in E.D. Oren, ed., The
Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives. Philadelphia,
1997, pp. 87-139.
"Hyksos." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt.
New York, 1999, pp. 377-379.
"Second Intermediate Period, Overview." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Archaeology of Ancient Egypt. New York, 1999, pp. 54-56.
"Tell ed-Dab'a, Second Intermediate Period." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of
the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt. New York, 1999, pp. 778-782.
"Dab'a, Tell Ed-." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt. 1. Oxford, 2001, pp. 351-354.
"Hyksos." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 2.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 136-143.
Bietak, M., et al.
"Neue Grabungsergebnisse aus Tell el-Dab'a und 'Ezbet Helmi im Qstlichen
Nildelta (1989-1991." A&L 4 (1994), pp. 9-80.
Bisson de la Roque, F.
Fouilles de Medamoud 1928. FIFAO 6. Cairo, 1929.
Bisson de la Roque, F. and Clere, J.J.
Blackman, A.M.
The Story of King Kheops and the Magicians: Transcribedfrom Papyrus Westcar,
Berlin Papyrus 3033. Reading, England, 1988.
Bleeker, C.J.
Egyptian Festivals: Enactments of Religious Renewal. Studies in the History of
Religions 13. Leiden, 1967.
Blumenthal, .
"Die 'Gottesvater' des AltenundMittlerenReiches." ZAS 114 (1987),pp. 10-35.
Bonheme, M.-A.
"Kingship." in K.S.B. Ryholt, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 2.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 238-245.
509
Bonheme, M.-A. and Forgeau, A.

Pharaon: Les Secrets du Pouvoir. Paris, 1988.
Boochs, W.
"Der ehebrechersche Sohn." GM114 (1990), pp. 43-45.
Borchardt, L.
"Ein Rechnungsbuch des koniglichen Hofes aus dem Ende des mittleren
Reiches." ZAS 28 (1890), pp. 65-103.
Das Grabdenkmal des Konigs Neuserre. Leipzig, 1907.
Das Grabdenkmal des Konigs S'AAHu-rea. Wissenschaftliche Veroffentlichung
der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 14. Leipzig, 1910.
Die Mittel zur Zeitlichen Festlegung von Punkten der Agyptischen Geschichte und
Ihre Anwendung. Quellen und Forschungen zur Zeitbestimmung der
Agyptischen Geschichte 2. Cairo, 1935.
Bourriau, J.D.
"Nubians in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period: An Interpretation
Based on the Egyptian Ceramic Evidence." in Do. Arnold, ed., Studien zur
altdgyptischen Keramik. Mainz an Rhein, 1981, pp. 25-41.
Umm el Ga'ab. Pottery from the Nile Valley before the Arab Conquest.
Cambridge, 1981.
Pharaohs and Mortals. Cambridge, 1988.
"Patterns of Change in Burial Customs during the Middle Kingdom." in S.
Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies. Whitstable, 1991, pp. 3-20.
"Relations between Egypt and Kerma during the Middle and New Kingdoms." in
W.V. Davies, ed., Egypt and Africa. London, 1991, pp. 129-144.
"The Dolphin Vase from Lisht." in P. Der Manuelian, ed., Studies in Honor of
William Kelly Simpson. 1. Boston, 1996, pp. 101-116.
"Beyond Avaris: The Second Intermediate Period in Egypt Outside the Eastern
Delta." in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological
Perspectives. Philadelphia, 1997, pp. 159-182.
"The Second Intermediate Period (c. 1650-1550)." in I. Shaw, ed., The Oxford
History of Ancient Egypt. New York, 2000, pp. 184-217.
Bourriau, J., Nicholson, P.T., and Rose, P.
"Pottery." in P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, eds., Ancient Egyptian Materials and
Technology. Cambridge, 2000, pp. 121-147.
Breastead, J.H.
Ancient Records of Egypt: The First through the Seventeenth Dynasties. I.
Urbana, 2001.
Bresciani, E.
"Un Edificia di Kha-Anekh-Ra Sobek-Hotep ad Abido." EVO 2 (1979), pp. 1-20.
Le Stele Egiziane del Museo Civico Archealogico di Bologna. Bologna, 1985.
Brovarski, E.
"Abydos in the Old Kingdom and First Intermediate Period, Part II," in D.
Silverman, ed., For His Ka, Chicago, 1994, pp. 15-39.
"A Second Style in Egyptian Relief of the Old Kingdom." in S. Thompson and P.
Der Manuelian, eds., Egypt and Beyond, Providence, 2008, pp. 49-89.
510
"False Doors and History: The First Intermediate Period and Middle Kingdom."
in J. Wegner and D. Silverman, eds., Archaism and Innovation: Studies in
the Culture of Middle Kingdom Egypt, Yale Egyptological Studies vol. 8,
New Haven and Boston, 2009.
Brunner, H.
"Die Lehre vom Konigserbe im friihen Mittleren Reich." in O. Firchow, ed.,
Agyptologische Studien. Berlin, 1955, pp. 4-11.
"Der "Gottesvater" als Erzieher des Kronprinzen." ZAS 86 (1961), pp. 90-100.
Die Geburt des Gottkonigs. Wiesbaden, 1964.
Budge, E.A.W. (ed.)
The Egyptian Sudan, Its History and Monuments. 1. London, 1907.
Hieroglyphic Texts from Egyptian Stelae &c, in the British Museum. 2. London,
1912.
Hieroglyphic Texts from Egyptian Stelae &c, in the British Museum. IV. London,
1913.
Burkard, G.
'"Als Gott erschienen spricht er' Die Lehre des Amenemhet als postumes
Vermachtnis," in J. Assmann and E. Blumenthal, Literature undPolitik,
(Cairo, 1999), pp. 153-165
Butzer, K.W.
Early Hydraulic Civilization in Egypt: A Study in Cultural Ecology. Chicago,
1976.
"Long-term Nile Flood Variation and Political Discontinuities in Pharaonic
Egypt." in J.D. Clarke and S.A. Brandt, eds., From Hunters to Farmers.
Berkeley, 1984, pp. 102-112.
"Environmental Change in the Near East and Human Impact on the Land." in J.M.
Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. 1. Peabody, MA, 1995,
pp. 123-151.
"Nile, Flood History." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of
Ancient Egypt. New York, 1999, pp. 568-570.
Callender, V.G.
"Materials for the Reign of Sebekneferu." Proceedings of the Seventh
International Congress of Egyptologists. Leuven, 1998, pp. 227-236.
"The Middle Kingdom Renaissance (c.2055-1650 BC)." in I. Shaw, ed., The
Oxford History of Ancient Egypt. Oxford University Press, 2000, pp. 148183.
Carnarvon, G.H. and Howard, C.
Five Years' Explorations at Thebes. A Record of Work Done 1907-1911. London,
1912.
Castel, G. and Soukiassian, G.
"Depot de Steles dans le Sanctuaire du Novel Empire au Gebel Zeit." BIFAO 85
(1985), pp. 285-293.
511
Chassinat, E.
"A Propos d'une Tete en Gres Rouge du roi Didoufri (IVe Dynastie) Conserve au
Mussee du Louvre." Monumnets et Memoires Publies par VAcademie des
Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 25 (1921-1922), pp. 53-75.
Claessen, H.J.M.
"The Balance of Power in Primitive States." in S.L. Seaton and H. Claessen, eds.,
Political Anthropology: The State of the Art. New York, 1979, pp. 183195.
Clarke, S. and Engelbach, R.
Ancient Egyptian Construction and Architecture (Ancient Egyptian Masonry: the
Building Craft). New York, 1990.
Clayton, P.A.
Chronicles of the Pharaohs. New York, 1994.
Clere, J.J.
"La Stele de Sankhptah, Chambellan su Roi Rahotep." JEA 68 (1982), pp. 60-68.
Commission and d'Egypte, d.s.e.a.
Description de VEgypte, ou, Recueil de observations et des recherches qui ont ete
faites en Egypte pendant I'expedition de Varmee francaise, publiepar les
ordres de Sa Majeste I'empereur Napoleon le Grand. V. Paris, 1809.
Cron, R.L. and Johnson, G.B.
"De Morgan at Dahshur: Excavations in the 12th Dynasty Pyramids, 1894-'95
Part Two." KMT 6 (1995), pp. 48-66.
Cruz-Uribe, E.
"The Fall of the Middle Kingdom." VA 3 (1987), pp. 107-112.
"A Model for the Political Structure of Ancient Egypt." in D.P. Silverman, ed.,
For His Ka: Essays Offered in Memory of Klaus Baer. SAOC 55.
Chicago, 1994, pp. 45-53.
D'Auria, S.; Lacovara, P.; and Roehrig, C.
Mummies and Magic. Boston, 1988.
Daressy, G.
Catalogue General des Antiquites Egytiennes du Musee du Caire: Textes et
Dessins Magiques. Cairo, 1903.
Dautzenberg, N.
"Plazierungsvorschlage zu zwei Konigen der 13. Dynastie." GM127 (1992), pp.
17-19.
"Die Wahl des Konigsnamens in der Hyksoszeit. Das Entstehen einer eigenen
Tradition, Beztige zu den thebanischen Herrschern und
Schlussfolgerungen fur die Chronologic" GM159 (1997), pp. 43-51.
David, A.R.
Religious Ritual at Abydos. Guildford, 1973.
The Pyramid Builders of Ancient Egypt. London, 1996.
Davies, N.
The Aztecs: a History. London, 1973.
Davies, W.V.
A Royal Statue Reattributed. London, 1981.
512
"The Origin of the Blue Crown." JEA 68 (1982), pp. 69-76.

"A Statue of the 'King's Son, Sahathor', from Thebes." in H. Guksch and D. Polz,
eds., Stationen Betrdge zur Kulturgeschichte Agyptens. Mainz, 1998, pp.
177-179.
"The Dynastic Tombs at Hierakonpolis: The Lower Group and the Artist
Sedjemnetjeru." in W.V. Davies, ed., Colour and Painting in Ancient
Egypt. London, 2001, pp. 113-125.
"Sobeknakht of Elkab and the coming of Kush." Egyptian Archaeology 23 (2003),
pp. 3-6.
"Sobeknakht's Hidden Treasure." British Museum Magazine 46 (2003), pp. 18-19.
"El-Kab and Kerma: The Tomb of Sobeknakht." Paper Presented at the British
Museum Colloquium: The Second Intermediate Period (13th-17th
Dynasties), Current Research, Future Prospects, 14 July-16 July, 2004.
Davis, E.N.
"A Storm During the Reign of Ahmose." in D.A. Hardy and A.C. Renfrew, eds.,
Thera and the Aegean World III. 3. London, 1990, pp. 232-235.
de Buck
The Egyptian Coffin Texts VII. Chicago, 1961.
de Meulenaere, H.
"La statue d'un contemporain de Sobekhotep IV." BIFAO 69 (1971), pp. 61-64,
PI. X-XII.
de Morgan, J.
Fouilles a Dahchour Mars-Juin 1894. Vienna, 1895.
Carte de la Necropole Memphite. Cairo, 1897.
Fouilles a Dahchour en 1894-1895. Vienna, 1903.
Debono, F.
"Expedition archeologique royale au Desert Oriental Keft-Kosseir." ASAE 51
(1951), pp. 59-91.
Delange, E.
Musee du Louvre: Statues Egyptiennes du Moyen Empire. Paris, 1987.
Delia, R.
"A New Look at Some Old Dates: A Re-Examination of the Twelfth Dynasty
Double Dated Inscriptions." BES 1 (1979), pp. 15-28.
"A Study of the Reign of Senwosret III." dissertation. Columbia University, 1980.
"Doubts about Double Dates and Coregencies." BES 4 (1982), pp. 55-69.
Dever, W.G.
"'Hyksos', Egyptian Destruction, and the End of the Palestinian Middle Bronze
Age." Levant 22 (1990), pp. 75-79.
"Tell el-Dab'a and Levantine Middle Bronze Age Chronology: A Rejoinder to
Manfred Bietak." BASOR 281 (1991), pp. 73-79.
"The Chronology of Palestine in the Second Millennium B.C.E." BASOR 288
(1992), pp. 1-25.
"The Chronology of Syria-Palestine in the Second Millennium B.C." A&L 3
(1992), pp. 39-51.
513
"Settlement Patterns and Chronology of Palestine in the Middle Bronze Age." in

E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New historical and Archaeological
Perspectives. Philadelphia, 1997, pp. 285-301.
Dewachter, M.
"Le Roi Sahathor et la famille de Neferhotep I." Rd'E 28 (1976), pp. 66-73.
"Le Roi Sahathor-Complements." Rd'E 35 (1984), pp. 195-199.
Dodson, A.
"The Tombs of the Kings of the Thirteenth Dynasty in the Memphite Necropolis."
ZAS 114 (1987), pp. 36-45.
"Two Thirteenth Dynasty Pyramids at Abusir?" VA 3 (1987), pp. 321-322.
"The Tombs of the Queens of the Middle Kingdom." ZAS 115 (1988), pp. 123136.
"On the Internal Chronology of the Seventeenth Dynasty." GM120 (1991), pp.
33-38.
"From Dahshur to Dra Abu el Naga: The Decline & Fall of the Royal Pyramid."
KMT 5 (1994), pp. 25-39.
The Canopic Equipment of the Kings of Egypt. New York, 1994.
Monarchs of the Nile. London, 1995.
"The Strange Affair of Dr Muses, Or the Discovery of the Pyramid of AmenyQemau." KMTS (1997), pp. 60-63.
After the Pyramids. The Valley of the Kings and Beyond. London, 2000.
"Canopic Jars and Chests." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of
Ancient Egypt. I. New York, 2001, pp. 231-235.
Doxey, D.M.
Egyptian Non-Royal Epithets in the Middle Kingdom. Boston, 1997.
Dreyer, G.
"Abydos, Umm el-Qa'ab." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of
Ancient Egypt. New York, 1999, pp. 106-114.
Drioton, E. and Vandier, J.
L'Egypte. Paris, 1975.
Dunand, M.
Fouilles deByblos, Paris, 1926-1932.
Dunham, D. and Janssen, J.
Semna Kumma. Second Cataract Forts I. Boston, 1960.
Dunham, D. and Macadam, M.F.L.
"Names and Relationships of the Royal Family of Napata." JEA 35 (1949), pp.
139-149.
Eaton-Krauss, M.
"Middle Kingdom Coregencies and the Turin Canon." Journal of the Society for
the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 12 (1982), pp. 17-20.
Edwards, I.E.S.
The Pyramids of Egypt. Harmondsworth, 1961.
"Abu Roash," in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient
Egypt (New York, 1999), pp. 82-83.
514
Eigner, D.
Die Monumentalen Grabbauten der Spdtzeit in der Thebanischen Nekropole.
Vienna, 1984.
"A Palace of the Early 13th Dynasty at Tell el-Dab'a." in M. Bietak, ed., Haus und
Palast in alten Agypten. Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften
Senkschriften der Gesamtakademie 14. Vienna, 1996, pp. 73-80.
el-Sayed, R.
"Quelques precisions sur l'histoire de la province d'Edfou a la 2e Period
Intermediate." BIFAO 79 (1979), pp. 167-207.
Engelbach, R.
"Two Steles of the Late Middle Kingdom from Tell Edfu." ASAE 23 (1923), pp.
183-186.
Erman, A.
"Miscellen." ZAS33 (1895), pp. 142-144.
Erman, A. and Grapow, H.
Worterbuch der dgyptischen Sprache. Leipzig, 1926-1950.
Ertman, E.L.
"The Cap-Crown of Nefertiti: Its Function and Probable Origin." JARCE 13
(1976), pp. 63-67.
Eyre, C.J.
"The Semna Stelae: Quotation, Genre, and Functions or Literature." in S.I. Groll,
ed., Studies in Egyptology Presented to Miriam Lichtheim. Jerusalem,
1990, pp. 134-165.
Fairman, H.W.
"The Kingship Rituals of Egypt." in S.H. Hooke, ed., Myth, Ritual, and Kingship.
Oxford, 1958, pp. 74-104.
Fakhry, A.
The Pyramids. Chicago, 1961.
Farag, N. and Iskander, Z.
The Discovery of Neferwptah. Cairo, 1971.
Farina, G.
// Papiro dei re Restaurato. Rome, 1938.
Fathy, A.M.
"Identical Familial Terms in Egyptian and Arabic: A Sociolinguistic Approach."
in Z. Hawass, ed., Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century:
2000. 3. New York, 2003, pp. 183-190.
Faulkner, R.O.
The Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead. Austin, 1972.
Federn, W.
"The 'Transformations' in the Coffin Texts. A New Approach." JNES 19 (1960),
pp. 241-257.
Fiore-Marochetti, E.
"On the Design, Symbolism and Painting of Some Xllth Dynasty Tomb
Superstructures." GM144 (1995), pp. 43-52.
515
"Inscribed Blocks from Tomb Chapels at Hawara." JEA 86 (2000), pp. 43-50.
Firchow, O.
"Studien zu den Pyramidenanlagen der 12. Dynastie." dissertation. Georg-AugustUniversitat, 1942.
Fischer, H.G.
"Archaeological Aspects of Epigraphy and Palaeography." in R. Caminos and
H.G. Fischer, Ancient Egyptian Epigraphy and Palaeography. New York,
1975.
Varia: Egyptian Studies I. New York, 1976.
"Hieroglyphen." LA. II. 1977, pp. 1189-1199.
"Notes on Sticks and Staves," MMJ13 (1978), pp. 5-32.
Egyptian Titles of the Middle Kingdom: A Supplement to Wm. Ward's Index. New
York, 1985.
Foster, A.
"The Conclusion to the Testament of Ammenemes, King of Egypt." JEA 67,
1981, pp. 36-47.
"Instructions of Amenemhet." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of
Ancient Egypt. 2. Oxford, 2001, pp. 171.
Franke, D.
"Altagyptische Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen im Mittleren Reich." dissertation.
Universitat Hamburg, 1983.
Personendaten aus dem Mittleren Reich. Weisbaden, 1984.
"Probleme der Arbeit mit altagyptischen Titeln des Mittleren Reiches." GM 83
(1984), pp. 103-124.
"An Important Family from Abydos of the Seventeenth Dynasty." JEA 71 (1985),
pp. 175-176.
"Zur Chronologie des Mittleren Reiches. Teil II: Die sogenannte "Zweite
Zwischenzeit" Altagyptens." Orientalia 57 (1988), pp. 245-274.
"Erste und Zweite Zwischenzeit - Ein Vergleich." ZAS 117 (1990), pp. 119-129.
"Review of Ward, Essays on Feminine Titles of the Middle Kingdom and Related
Subjects." JEA 76 (1990), pp. 228-232.
"The Career of Khnumhotep III of Beni Hasan and the So-Called 'Decline of the
Nomarchs'." in S. Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies. Whitstable, 1991,
pp. 51-67.
Das Heiligtium des Heqaib auf Elephantine, Geschichte eines Provinzheiligglim
im Mittleren Reich. Studien zur Archaologie und Geschichte Altagyptens
9. Heidelberg, 1994.
"The Middle Kingdom in Egypt." in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient
Near East. 2. Peabody, MA, 1995, pp. 735-748.
"Kleiner Man (nds)was bist Du?" GM 167 (1998), pp. 33-48.
"Graffiti." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 1.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 39-41.
"Kinship." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 2. Oxford,
2001, pp. 245-248.
516
"Middle Kingdom." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient

Egypt. 2. Oxford, 2001, pp. 390-393.
Frankfort, H.
Kingship and the Gods: A Study of Ancient Near Eastern Religion as the
Integration of Society and Nature. Chicago, 1948.
Frankfort, H. and Pendlebury, J.D.S.
The City ofAkhenaten II. Egyptian Exploration Society Memoir 40. London,
1933.
Freed, R.E.
"Representation and Style of Dated Private Stelae of Dynasty XII." dissertation.
New York University, 1976.
Fried, M.H.
The Evolution of Political Society. New York, 1967.
"The State, the Chicken, and the Egg; or What Came First?" in R. Cohen and E.R.
Service, eds., Origins of the State: The Anthropology of Political
Evolution. Philadelphia, 1978, pp. 35-47.
Friedman, F.
Gifts of the Nile: Ancient Egyptian Faience. New York, 1998.
Gabolde
"Nerkare a-t-il Existe?" BIFAO 90 (1990), pp. 213-222.
Gabra, S.
Chez les Derniers Adorateurs du Trismegiste. La Necropole d'Hermopolis Touna el Gebel. Cairo, 1971.
Gailey, C.W.
"Culture Wars: Resistance to State Formation." in T.C. Patterson and C.W.
Gailey, eds., Power Relations and State Formation. Washington, D.C.,
1987, pp. 35-56.
Gardiner, A.
"The Defeat of the Hyksos by Kamose: The Carnarvon Tablet, No. I." JEA 3
(1916), pp. 95-110.
"Davies' Copy of the Great Speos Artemidos Inscription." JEA 32 (1946), pp. 4356.
Ancient Egyptian Onomastica. Oxford, 1947.
"The First King Menthotpe of the Eleventh Dynasty." MDAIK 14 (1956), pp. 4251.
The Royal Canon of Turin. Oxford, 1959.
Egypt of the Pharaohs. New York, 1961.
Garstang, J.
El Arabah. London, 1901.
Gauthier, H.
LeLivre desRois d'Egypte II. MIFAO 18. Cairo, 1912.
Gestermann, L.
"Der politische und kulturelle Wandel unter Sesostris III.-Ein Entwurf." in L.
Gestermann and S. Hotabi, eds., Per aspera as astra. Kassel, 1995, pp. 3150.
517
"Konigliche Vorstellungen zu Grab und Jenseits im Mittleren Reich, Teil II." in

R. Gundlach and W, Seipel, eds., Dasfruhe dgyptische Konigtum.
Wiesbaden, 1999, pp. 97-110.
Gillam, R.N.
"Sobekneferu." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt.
3. Oxford, 2001, pp. 301.
Giveon, R.A.
"Hyksos Scarabs with Names of Kings and Officials from Canaan." CdE 49
(1974), pp. 222-231.
"The XIII Dynasty in Asia." Rd'E 30 (1978), pp. 163-167.
"The Hyksos in the South." in M. Gorg, ed., Fontes atque Pontes: Eine Festgabe
fur Hellmut Brunner. Wiesbaden, 1983, pp. 155-161.
"The Impact of Egypt on Canaan in the Middle Bronze Age." in A.F. Rainey, ed.,
Egypt, Israel, Sinai: Archaeological and Historical Relationships in the
Biblical Period. Jerusalem, 1987.
Gnirs, A.M.
"Die Agyptische Autobiographic" in A. Loprieno, ed., Ancient Egyptian
Literature. New York, 1994, pp. 191-241.
Goedicke, H.
"The Origin of the Royal Administration." LEgyptologie en 1979: Axes
Prioritaires de Recherches. 2. Paris, 1982, pp. 123-130.
The Quarrel ofApophis and Seqenenre. San Antonio, 1986.
"The Chronology of the Thera/Santorin Explosion." A&L 3 (1992), pp. 57-62.
"Thoughts about the Papyrus Westcar." ZAS 11 (1993), pp. 23-36.
"Zoser's Funerary Monument. 2. The 'Heb-sed court'," BACE 8 (1997), pp. 33-48.
Goody, J.
"Circulating Succession Among the Gonja." in J. Goody, ed., Succession to High
Office. Cambridge Papers in Social Anthropology 4. Cambridge, 1966, pp.
142-176.
Graefe, E.
"Die Vermeintliche Unteragyptische Herkunft des Ibi, Obermajordomus der
"Nitokris." SAK 1 (1974), pp. 203, n. 215.
Grajetzki, W.
"Der Schatzmeister Amenhotep und eine weitere Datierungshilfe fur Denkmaler
des Mittleren Reiches." BSEG 19 (1995), pp. 5-11.
Die Hochsten Beamten der Agyptischen Zentralverwaltung zur Zeit des Mittleren
Reiches. Berlin, 2000.
Two Treasurers of the Late Middle Kingdom. BAR International Series 1007.
Oxford, 2001.
"Zwei Pyramiden der 13. Dynastie bei Mazghuna und die ungeklarte Frage des
Besttattungsortes von Amenemhet IV. und Sobeknofru." Sokar 5 (2002),
pp. 23-27.
Burial Customs in Ancient Egypt: Life in Death for Rich and Poor. London, 2003.
The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt. London, 2006.
518
"Multiple Burials in Ancient Egypt to the End of the Middle Kingdom." in W.

Grajetzki, ed., Life and Afterlife during the Middle Kingdom and Second
Intermediate Period. London, 2007, pp. 16-34.
Greenberg, G.
"Manetho Rehabilitated-A New Analysis of His Second Intermediate Period."
DE 25 (1993), pp. 21-29.
Griffith, F.L.
"The Account Papyrus no. 18 of Boulaq." ZAS 29 (1891), pp. 102-116.
The Petrie Papyri: Hieratic Papyri from Kahun and Gurob. London, 1898.
Grimal, N.
A History of Ancient Egypt. Cambridge, 1992.
"Coregence et Association au Trone: l'Enseignement d'Amenemhat Ier." BIFAO
95 (1995), pp. 273-280.
Gundlach, R.
"Grundgegebenheiten der nationalen und internationalen Situation des
agyptischen
Reiches: Ein Krisenmodell." In R. Gundlach and A. Klug, eds., Das
agyptische Konigrum im Spannungsfeld zwischen Innen- und
AuBenpolitik im 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Wiesbaden, 2004, pp. 73-91.
Habachi, L.
"Notes on the Altar of Sekhemre'-sewadjtowe Sebkhotpe from Sehel." JEA 37
(1951), pp. 17-19.
"Khanta'na-Qantir: Importance." ASAE 52 (1954), pp. 443-559.
"God's Fathers and the Role They Played in the History of the First Intermediate
Period." ASAE 55 (1958), pp. 167-190.
"Review of Untersuchengen zur politischen geschichte der Zweiten Zwischenzeit
in Agypten." Cd'E 85 (1968), pp. 78-82.
The Second Stela ofKamose. Gliickstadt, 1972.
"A High Inundation in the Temple of Amenre at Karnak in the Thirteenth
Dynasty." SAK 1 (1974), pp. 207-214.
"The So-Called Hyksos Monuments Reconsidered." SAK 6 (1979), pp. 79-92.
"A Score of Important Officials Serving the Neferhotep Family as Revealed from
Three Objects in the Heqaib Sanctuary." Serapis 6 (1980), pp. 47-56.
"New Light on the Neferhotep I Family, as Revealed by Their Inscriptions in the
Cataract Area." in W.K. Simpson and W.M. Davis, eds., Studies in
Ancient Egypt, Aegean, and the Sudan: Essays in Honor ofDows Dunham
on the Occasion of his 90th Birthday, June 1, 1980. Boston, 1981, pp. 7781.
"The Family of the Vizier Ibi' and His Place among the Viziers of the Thirteenth
Dynasty." SAK 11 (1984), pp. 113-126.
"Nagib Farag- Zaky Iskander, The Discovery of Neferuptah." Studies on the
Middle Kingdom. Studia Aegyptiaca 10. Budapest, 1987, pp. 199-200.
"New Light on the Vizier Iymeru, Son of the Controller of the Hall, Iymeru."
Studies on the Middle Kingdom. Studia Aegyptiaca 10. Budapest, 1987,
pp. 261-278.
519
Haeny, G.
"New Kingdom 'Mortuary Temples' and 'Mansions of Millions of Years.'" in
B.E. Schafer, ed., Temples of Ancient Egypt. Ithaca, NY, 1997, pp. 127184.
Hallo, W.W. and Simpson, W.K.
The Ancient Near East: A History. New York, 1971.
Hankey, J.
A Passion for Egypt: A Biography of Arthur Weigall. New York, 2001.
Hannig, R.
Grofies Handworterbuch, Mainz, 1995.
Agyptisches Worterbuch I. Mainz, 2003.
Hari, R.
"Un Reine Enigmatique: Nebon-Hotepti." BSEG 4 (1980), pp. 45-48.
Harris, J. and Wente, E.
An X-Ray Atlas of the Royal Mumies, Chicago, 1980.
Hassan, A.
Stocke und Stabe im Pharaonischen Agypten, Berlin, 1976.
Harvey, S.
"Monuments of Ahmose at Abydos." Egyptian Archaeology 4 (1991), pp. 3-5.
"The Cults of King Ahmose at Abydos." dissertation. University of Pennsylvania,
1998.
Hawass, Z.
"The Funerary Establishments of Khufu, Khafra and Menkaura during the Old
Kingdom." dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, 1987.
Hidden Treasures of the Egyptian Museum. Cairo, 2002.
Hayes, W.C.
"Horemkha'uef of Nekhen and His Trip to IT-Towe." JEA 33 (1947), pp. 3-11.
"Notes on the Government of Egypt in the Late Middle Kingdom." JNES 12
(1953), pp. 31-39.
The Scepter of Egypt. I. New York, 1953.
A Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom in the Brooklyn Museum. Brooklyn, 1955.
"Egypt: From the Death of Ammenemes III to Seqenenre II." in I.E.S. Edwards,
et al., eds., Cambridge Ancient History. II (1). Cambridge, 1973, pp. 4276.
Helck, W.
"Die Herkunft des Abydenischen Osirisrituals." Archiv Orientdlni 20 (1952), pp.
72-85.
Untersuchungen zu Manetho und den dgyptischen Konigslisten. Untersuchungen
zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Agyptischen Konigslisten. Berlin,
1956.
Zur Verwaltung des Mittleren und Neuen Reichs. Register. Zum 60. Geburtstag
des Verfassers zusammen gestellt von den Mitarbeitern der
Agyptologischen Abteilung an der Universitdt Hamburg. Leiden, 1958.
Geschichte des alten Agypten. Handbuch der Orientalistik I. Leiden, 1968.
"Review of von Beckerath, Untersuchungen zur politischen Geschichte der
520
zweiten Zwischenzeit in Agypten." AFO 22 (1968/1969), pp. 93-97.

Die Beziehungen Agyptens zu Vorderasien im 3 und 2 Jahrtausend v. chr. 2.
verbesserte Auflage. Agyptologische Abhandlungen 5. Wiesbaden, 1971.
Historische-Biographische Text der 2. Zwischenzeit undNeue Texte der 18.
Dynastie. KAT. Weisbaden, 1975.
"Anmerkungen zum Turiner Konigspapyrus." SAK 19 (1992), pp. 151-216.
Hintze, F.
"Preliminary Note on the Epigraphic Expedition to Sudanese Nubia." Kush 13
(1965), pp. 13-16.
The Lost World of Elam. London, 1972.
Hoffmeier, J.K.
"Reconsidering Egypt's Part in the Termination of the Middle Bronze Age in
Palestein."Zevaw/21 (1989), pp. 181-191.
"Some Thoughts on Weilliam G. Dever's "'Hyksos', Egyptian Destructions, and
the End of the Palestinian Middle Bronze Age." Levant 22 (1990), pp. 8387.
"James Weinstein's 'Egypt and the middle Bronze IIC/Late Bronze IA Transition':
A Rejoinder." Levant 23 (1991), pp. 117-122.
"The Coffins of the Middle Kingdom: The Residence and the Regions." in S.
Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies. Whitstable, 1991, pp. 69-83.
Holden, D.
The House ofSaud. New York, 1981.
Holladay, J.S.
"The Eastern Nile Delta During the Hyksos and Pre-Hyksos Periods: Toward a
Systemic/Socioeconmic Understanding." in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos:
New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives. Philadelphia, 1997, pp.
183-252.
Holscher, U.
Da Hohe Tor von Medinet Habu. Leipzig, 1910.
The Temples of the Eighteenth Dynasty. Chicago, 1939.
Holzl, C.
"Hawara." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt.
New York, 1999, pp. 365-366.
"Mazghuna." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient
Egypt. New York, 1999, pp. 474-475.
"Saqqara, Pyramids of the 13th Dynasty." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Hornung, E.
Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt: the One and the Many. Ithaca, NY, 1982.
Texte zum Amduat I. Geneve, 1987.
The Valley of the Kings: Horizon of Eternity. New York, 1990.
"Ancient Egyptian Religious Iconography." in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of
the Ancient Near East. 3. Peabody, MA, 1995, pp. 1711-1730.
"The Pharaoh." in S. Donadoni, ed., The Egyptians. Chicago, 1997, pp. 283-314.
521
History of Ancient Egypt. Edinburgh, 1999.

Hornung, E. and Staehelin, E.
Skarabden und andere Siegelamulette aus Easier Sammlungen. Agyptische
Denkmaler in der Schweiz I. Mainz am Rhein, 1967.
Ikram, S. and Dodson, A.
The Mummy in Ancient Egypt. London, 1998.
Janosi, P.
Die Pyramidenanlagen der Koniginnen. Untersuchungen zu einem Grabtyp des
Alten und Mittleren Reiches. Vienna, 1995.
Jansen-Winkeln, K.
"Das Attentat auf Amenemhet I. und die erste Agyptische Koregentschaft. SAK
18 (1991), pp. 241-264.
"Zu den Koregenzen der 12. Dynastie," SAK 24 (1997), pp. 115-135.
Janssen, J.M.A. and Pestman, P.W.
"Burial and Inheritance in the Community of the Necropolis Workmen at
Thebes." Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 11
(1968), pp. 137-170.
Jeffries, D.G., Malek, J., and Smith, H.S.
"Memphis 1985." JEA 73 (1987), pp. 11-20.
Jequier, G.
Manuel d'Archeologie Egyptienne. Paris, 1924.
"Rapport Preliminaire sur les Fouilles Executees en 1928-1929 dans la Partie
Meridionale de la Necropole Memphite." ASAE 29 (1929), pp. 150-161.
Fouilles a Saqqarah: Deux Pyramides du Moyen Empire. Edition
Photographique de I'Edition Originale-Impreimerie de I'IFAOC 193,
1933. Cairo, 1986.
Johnson, J.H.
"The Demotic Chronicle as a Statement of a Theory of Kingship." JSSEA 13
(1983), pp. 61-72.
Junker, H. and Delaporte, L.
Die Volker des Antiken Orients. Freiburg, 1933.
Kadish, G.E.
"Historiography." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt. 1. Oxford, 2001, pp. 108-111.
Kakosy, L.
"Egypt in Ancient Greek and Roman Thought." in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations
of the Ancient Near East. 1. Peabody, MA, 1995, pp. 3-14.
Kamal, A.
"Rapport sur le necropole dArabe-el-Borg." ASAE 3 (1902), pp. 80-84.
Kamrin, J.
The Cosmos ofKhnumhotep II at Beni Hasan. London, 1999.
522
Kaplony, P.
"Konigstitulatur." LA. 3. 1979, pp. 641-661.
Kaplony-Heckel, U.
Agyptische Hanschriften I. Weisbaden, 1971.
Kemp, B.J.
"Abydos." LA. I. Weisbaden, 1975, pp. 28-42.
"Abydos." in T.G.H. James, ed., Excavating in Egypt: The Egypt Exploration
Society 1882-1982. Chicago, 1982, pp. 71-88.
"Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period c. 2686-1552."
in B.G. Trigger, et al., eds., Ancient Egypt: A Social History. Cambridge,
1983, pp. 71-182.
Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization. London, 1989.
"Soil (Including Mud-Brick Architecture)." in P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, eds.,
Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology. Cambridge, 2000, pp. 78103.
Kendall, T.
"Games." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 2.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 1-3.
Kitchen, K.A.
"Byblos, Egypt, and Mari in the Early Second Millennium B.C." Orientalia 36
(1967), pp. 39-54.
"The Basics of Egyptian Chronology in Relation to the Bronze Age." in P.
Astrom, ed., High, Middle or Low?: Acts of an International Colloquium
on Absolute Chronology Held at the University of Gothenburg, 20th-22nd
August, 1987.1. Gothenburg, 1987, pp. 37-55.
Catalogue of the Egyptian Collection in the National Museum, Rio de Janeiro. 1
and 2. Warminster, 1988.
"Non-Egyptians Recorded on Middle Kingdom Stelae in Rio de Janeiro." in S.
Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies. New Maiden, 1991, pp. 87-90.
"The Historical Chronology of Ancient Egypt. A Current Assessment." Acta
Archaeologica 67 (1996), pp. 1-13.
"King Lists." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 2.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 234-238.
Klemm, R. and Klemm, D.D.
Steine undSteinbruche im Alten Agypten. London, 1993.
Klengel, H.
Syria, 3000 to 300 B. C: A Handbook of Political History. Berlin, 1992.
Knapp, A.B.
The History and Culture of Ancient Western Asia and Egypt. Belmont, CA, 1988.
Lacau, P.
"Suppressions et modifications de signes dans les textes funeraires." ZAS 51
(1913), pp. 1-64.
523
Lacovara, P.
"Egypt and Nubia during the Second Intermediate Period." in E.D. Oren, ed., The
Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives. Philadelphia,
1997, pp. 69-86.
Landsberger, B.
"Assyrische Konigsliste und dunkles Zeitalter," JCS 8 (1954), pp. 31-73, 106-133.
Landua-McCormack, D.
Evidence for Dynasty XIII Royal Mortuary Activity at South Abydos. Paper
' presented at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Research Center in
Egypt. Baltimore, Maryland, 2002.
Lapp, G.
"Der Sarg des JmnJ mit Einem Spruchgut am Ubergang von Sargtexten zum
Totenbuch." SAK 13 (1986), pp. 135-147.
Typologie der Sdrge und Sargkammern von der 6. bis 13. Dynastie. Heidelberg,
1993.
Leahy, A.
"The Osiris 'Bed' Reconsidered." Orientalia 46 (1977), pp. 424-434.
"A Stela of the Second Intermediate Period." GM44 (1981), pp. 23-30.
"A Protective Measure at Abydos in the Thirteenth Dynasty." JEA 75 (1989), pp.
41-60.
"Ethnic Diversity in Ancient Egypt." in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the
Ancient Near East. 1. Peabody, MA, 1995, pp. 225-234.
Leclant, J.
"Fouilles et travaeux en Egypte, 1955-1957." Orientalia 27 (1958), pp. 75-101.
"Fouilles et traveaux en Egypte et au Sudan, 1962-1963." Orientalia 33 (1964),
pp. 337-404.
Legrain, G.
"Notes d'inspection. XLIX. Le Roi Ougaf et la plaquette Rubensohn." ASAE 8
(1907), pp. 248-252.
Lehner, M.
The Complete Pyramids. London, 1997.
Lenormant, C , et al.
"Instructions Donnees par l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres en sa
Seance du Vendredi 7 Octobre 1859 a Auguste Mariette sur les
Principales Recherches a Executer en Egypte dans L'Interet de L'Histoire
et de l'Archeologie." ASAE 2 (1901), pp. 112-125.
Leprohon, R.J.
"Some Remarks on the "Administrative Department" (wart) of the Late Middle
Kingdom." JSSEA 10 (1979-1980), pp. 161-171.
"The Reign of Amenemhet III." dissertation. University of Toronto, 1980.
"Royal Ideology and State Administration in Pharaonic Egypt." in J.M. Sasson,
ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. I. Peabody, MA, 1995, pp.
273-287.
"A Late Middle Kingdom Stela in a Private Collection." in P. Der Manuelian, ed.,
Studies Simpson. 2. Boston, 1996, pp. 523-531.
524
"Middle Kingdom, Overview." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the

Lepsius, C.R.
Denkmdler aits Aegypten und Aethiopien. I. Leipzig, 1897.
Denkmdler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien, Blatt. I. Berlin, 1897.
Denkmaler. III. Leipzig, 1900.
Denkmdler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien. IV. Leipzig, 1901.
Lesko, L.H.
Index of the Spells on Egyptian Middle Kingdom Coffins and Related Documents.
Berkley, 1979.
"The Texts on Egyptian Middle Kingdom Coffins." in L'Egyptologie en 19791,
Paris, 1982, pp. 39-43.
"Ancient Egyptian Cosmogonies and Cosmology." in B. Schafer, ed., Religion in
Ancient Egypt. Ithaca, 1991, pp. 88-122.
"Textual Sources, Middle Kingdom." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Lichtheim, M.
Ancient Egyptian Literature. 1. Berkeley, 1973.
Ancient Egyptian Literature. 2. Berkeley, 1976.
Ancient Egyptian Autobiographies Chiefly of the Middle Kingdom. Frieburg,
1988.
"Didactic Literature." in A. Loprieno, ed., Ancient Egyptian Literature. New
York, 1996, pp. 243-262.
Lilyquist, C.
"A Note on the Date of Senebtisi and Other Middle Kingdom Groups." Serapis 5
(1979), pp. 27-28.
"Granulation and Glass: Chronological and Stylistic Investigations at Selected
Sites, ca. 2500-1400 B.C.E." BASOR 290 (1993), pp. 29-94.
Lloyd, A.B.
"Manetho." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt.
New York, 1999, pp. 464-465.
Lohwasser, A.
"Queenship in Kush: Status, Role and Ideology of Royal Women." JARCE 38
(2001), pp. 61-76.
Loprieno, A.
"Slaves." in S. Donadoni, ed., The Egyptians. Chicago, 1997, pp. 185-219.
"Nhsf'dev Sudltinder"?" in H. Guksch and D. Polz, eds., Stationen Betrdgezur
Kulturgeschichte Agyptens. Mainz, 1998, pp. 211-217.
Loret, V.
"Le tombeau d'Osiris." Sphinx 5 (1902), pp. 34-52.
"Un dernier mot a propos du tombeau d'Osiris." Sphinx 5 (1902), pp. 247-248.
Lorton, D.
"Towards a Constitutional Approach to Ancient Egyptian Kingship." JAOS 99
(1979), pp. 460-465.
"Terms of Coregency in the Middle Kingdom." VA 2 (1986), pp. 113-120.
525
"Legal and Social Institutions of Pharaonic Egypt." in J.M. Sasson, ed.,

Civilizations of the Ancient Near East I. Peabody, MA, 1995, pp. 345362.
Luft, U.
Das Archiv von Illahun. Briefe 1, Berlin, 1992.
Luscher, B.
Untersuchungen zu agyptischen Kanopenkasten. Hildeshceimer Agyptologische
Beitrage 31. Hildesheim, 1990.
Lustig, J.
'
"Ideologies of Social Relations in Middle Kingdom Egypt: Gender, Kinship,
Ancestors." dissertation. Temple University, 1993.
Macadam, M.F.L.
"Gleanings from the Bankes MSS." JEA 32 (1946), pp. 57-64.
The Temples ofKawa I. The Inscriptions. London, 1949.
"A Royal Family of the Thirteenth Dynasty." JEA 37 (1951), pp. 20-28.
Mace, A.C. and Winlock, H.E.
The Tomb of Senebtisi at Lisht. New York, 1916.
Malaise, M.
"Les monuments prives du Moyen Empire, leur classement, un corpus, une
histoire des institutions," in W.F. Reineke, ed., Acts. First International
Congress of Egyptology (Cairo, 1979), pp. 449-452.
Malek, J.
"The Original Version of the Royal Canon of Turin." JEA 68 (1982), pp. 93-106.
Maragioglio, V. and Rinaldi, C.
"Note sulla Piramide di Ameny Aamu." Orientalia 37 (1968), pp. 325-338.
L'Architettura Delle Piramidi Menfite. 7. Rapallo, 1970.
Mariette, A.
Les Papyrus Egyptiens du Musee de Boulaq. II. Paris, 1872.
Karnak, Etude topographie et archeologique. Leipzig, 1875.
Catalogue General des Monuments d'Abydos. Paris, 1880.
Description desfouilles d'Abydos. II. Paris, 1880.
Abydos. II. New York, 1998.
Martin, G.T.
Egyptian Administrative and Private-Name Seals Principally of the Middle
Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period. Oxford, 1971.
"A Late Middle Kingdom Prince of Byblos." in P. Der
Manuelian, ed., Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson. 2. Boston,
1996, pp. 595-599.
Martin-Pardey, E.
"Administrative Bureaucracy." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Maspero, M.G.
"Sur le Pyramidion d'Amenemhait III a Dahchour." ASAE 3 (1902), pp. 206-208.
Guide to the Cairo Museum. Cairo, 1910.
526
McCormack, D.
"The Significance of Royal Funerary Architecture in the Study of 13th Dynasty
Kingship." in V. Davies, ed., The Second Intermediate Period (ISth-1 7th
Dynasties), Current Research, Future Prospects. London, Forthcoming.
Mey, P., Castel, G., and Goyon, J.P.
"Installations Rupestres du Moyen et du Nouvel Empire au Gebel Zeit (pres de
Ras Deb) sur la Mer Rouge." MDAIK36 (1980), pp. 299-318.
Mioso, F.T.
- A Reading Book of Second Intermediate Period Texts. The Society for the Study
of Egyptian Antiquities Publications 9. Toronto, 1981.
Montet, P.
"Le Roi Ougaf a Medamoud." Rd'E 8 (1951), pp. 163-170.
La Necropole Royale de Tanis. III. Paris, 1960.
Morris, E.
The Architecture of Imperialism. Boston, 2005.
Muhammad, D.M.A.-Q.
"Recent Finds." ASAE 59 (1966), pp. 143-155.
Mumford, G.D.
"Syria-Palestine." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt. 3. Oxford, 2001, pp. 335-343.
Murnane, W.J.
Ancient Egyptian Coregencies. SAOC 40. Chicago, 1977.
"In Defense of the Middle Kingdom Double Dates." BES 3 (1981), pp. 73-82.
"The History of Ancient Egypt: An Overview." in J.M. Sasson, ed., Civilizations
of the Ancient Near East. II. Peabody, MA, 1995, pp. 691-717.
"Coregency." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 1.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 307-311.
"Response to D.B. Redford (The Writing of the History of Ancient Egypt)." in Z.
Hawass, ed., Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century:
2000. 2. New York, 2003, pp. 15-18.
Naville, E.
Das Aegyptische Todtenbuch der XVIII. bis XX. Dynastie. Berlin, 1886.
Temple ofDeir el Bahari, Part II. London, 1896.
Temple ofDeir el Bahari, Part III. London, 1896.
Newberry, P.E.
Beni Hasan. Archaeological Survey of Egypt 1. London, 1893.
"Extract From My Notes IV." Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology
23 (1901), pp. 218-224.
Egyptian Scarabs. Mineola, New York, 2002.
Nibbi, A.
"A Half Pyramidion." GM56 (1982), pp. 57-64.
Nicholson, P.T. and Peltenburg, E.
"Egyptian Faience." in P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw, eds., Ancient Egyptian
Materials and Technology. New York, 2000, pp. 177-194.
527
Nims, C.F.
"Some Notes on the Family of Mereruka." JAOS 58 (1938), pp. 638-647.
Nordstrom, H.-A. and Bourriau, J.
"Ceramic Technology: Clays and Fabrics." in Do. Arnold and J. Bourriau, eds.,
An Introduction to Ancient Egyptian Pottery. Mainz, 1993.
Obsomer, C.
"dlfprt-hnvQt la Filiation ms(t).n/ir(t).n comme Criteres de Datation dans les
Textes du Moyen Empire." in C. Cannuyer and J.-M. Kruchten, eds.,
Individu, societe et spiritualite dans I'Egyptepharaonique et copte.
Melanges egyptologiques au Professeur Aristide Theodorides. Bruxelles,
1993, pp. 163-200.
"La Date de Nesou-Montou (Louvre CI)." Rd'E 44 (1993), pp. 103-140.
Sesostris Ier: Etude Chronologique et Historique du Regne. Connaissance de
I'Egypte Ancienne 5. Bruxelles, 1995.
"Sinouhe l'Egyptian et les Raisons de son Exil." Le Museon 112 (1999), pp. 207271.
O'Connor, D.
"Political Systems and Archaeological Data in Egypt: 2600-1780 B.C." World
Archaeology 6 (1974), pp. 15-38.
"The 'Cenotaphs' of the Middle Kingdom at Abydos." Melanges Gamal Eddin
Mokhtar. 1985, pp. 161-178.
"The Chronology of Scarabs of the Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate
Period." JSSEA 15 (1985), pp. 1-41.
"The Status of Early Egyptian Temples: An Alternative Theory," in B. Adams and
R. Friedman, eds., The Followers ofHorus. Studies Dedicated to Michael
Hoffman, 1992, Oxford, pp. 83-98.
Ancient Nubia: Egypt's Rival in Africa. Philadelphia, 1993.
"The Social and Economic Organization of Ancient Egyptian Temples." in J.M.
Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. I. Peabody, MA, 1995,
pp. 319-329.
"Ancient Egypt: Egyptological and Anthropological Perspectives." Anthropology
and Egyptology. Monographs in Mediterranean Archaeology 8. Sheffield,
England, 1997, pp. 13-24.
"The Hyksos Period in Egypt." in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New Historical
and Archaeological Perspectives, Philadelphia, 1997, pp. 45-67.
"Abydos, North, ka Chapels and Cenotaphs." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of
the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt. London, 1999, pp. 100-103.
"Society and Individual in Early Egypt." in J.E. Richards and M. Van Buren, eds.,
Order, Legitimacy, and Wealth in Ancient States. Cambridge, 2000, pp.
21-35.
O'Connor, D. and Patch, D.C.
"Egypt's Sacred Sands: Exploring the Tombs and Temples of Ancient Abydos."
Archaeology 54 (2001), pp. 42-49.
528
O'Connor, D. and Silverman, D.P.

"Introduction." in D. O'Connor and D.P. Silverman, eds., Ancient Egyptian
Kingship. Probleme der Agyptologie 9. New York, 1995, pp. XVI-XXVII.
Oren, E.D.
"The Hyksos EnigmaIntroductory Overview." in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos:
New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives. Philadelphia, 1997, pp.
xix-xxvi.
Papazian, H.
"Domain of Pharaoh: The Structure and Components of the Economy of Old
Kingdom Egypt." dissertation, University of Chicago, 2005.
Pardey, E.
"Provincial Administration." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of
Ancient Egypt. 1. Oxford, 2001, pp. 16-20.
Parkinson, R.
"The Dream and the Knot. Contextualizing Middle Kingdom Literature." in G.
Moers, ed., Definitely: Egyptian Literature. Lingua Aegyptia 2. Gottingen,
1999, pp. 63-82.
"Papyrus Westcar." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt. 3. Oxford, 2001, pp. 24-25.
"Sinuhe." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 3.
Oxford, 2001, p. 292.
Poetry and Culture in Middle Kingdom Egypt. New York, 2002.
Parkinson, R. and Quirke, S.
"The Coffin of Prince Herunefer and the Early History of the Book of the Dead."
Studies in Pharaonic Religion and Society for Gwyn Griffiths. 1992, pp.
36-51.
Peden, A.J.
The Graffiti of Pharaonic Egypt. Scope and Roles of Informal Writings (c. 3100332 B.C.). Probleme der Agyptologie 17. Boston, 2001.
Peet, T.E.
The Cemeteries ofAbydos, Part II1911-1912. Memoirs of the Egypt Exploration
Fund 34. London, 1914.
Petrie, W.M.F.
Hawara, Biahmu, and Arsinoe. London, 1889.
Kahun, Gurob, and Hawara. London, 1890.
Illahun, Kahun and Gurob. London, 1891.
A History of Ancient Egypt. I. London, 1894.
Abydos I. Egypt Exploration Fund 22. London, 1902.
Abydos II. Egypt Exploration Fund 24. London, 1903.
Petrie, W.M.F., Brunton, G., and Murray, M.A.
Lahun II. London, 1923.
Petrie, W.M.F. and Quibell
Nagada andBallas. I. London, 1896.
Petrie, W.M.F., Wainwright, G.A., and Mackay, E.
The Labyrinth Gerzeh and Mazghuneh. London, 1912.
529
Piccione, P.
"The Historical Development of the Game of Senet and its Significance for
Egyptians Religion." dissertation, University of Chicago, 1990.
Polz, D.
"Theben und Avaris. Zur "Vertreibung" der Hyksos." in H. Guksch and D. Polz,
eds., Stationen Betrdge zur Kulturgeschichte Agyptens. Mainz, 1998, pp.
219-231.
"Seventeenth Dynasty." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of
"Die Hyksos-Blocke aus Gebelen: zur Prasenz der Hyksos in Oberagypten." in E.
Czerny, et al., eds., Timelines: Studies in Honour of Manfred Bietak. 1.
Dudley, MA, 2006, pp. 239-247.
Der Beginn des Neuen Reiches. Berlin, 2007.
Polz, D. and Seiler, A.
Die Pyramidenanlage des Konigs Nub-Cheper-Re Intefin Dra' Abu el-Naga.
Deutsches Archaologisches Institut Abteilung Cairo 24. Mainz, 2003.
Porter, B. and Moss, R.L.B.
Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs, and
Paintings. III. Oxford, 1931.
Paintings. IV. Oxford, 1934.
Paintings. Ill (2). Oxford, 1981.
Posener, G.
Litterature et Politique dans TEgypte de la Xlle Dynastie. Bibliotheque de l'Ecole
des Hautes Etudes 307. Paris, 1956.
"Les Asiatiques en Egypte sous les Xlle et XHIe Dynasties (a Propos d'un Livre
Recent)." Syria 34 (1957), pp. 145-163.
De la Divinite du Pharaon. Cahiers de la Societe Asiatique 15. Paris, 1960.
Postel, L.
Protocole des Souverains Egyptiens et Dogme Monarchique au Debut du Moyen
Empire. Turnhout, 2004.
Quirke, S.
"An Investigation into Problems of Thirteenth Dynasty Kingship with Special
Reference to Papyrus Bulaq 18." dissertation. Christ's College, 1986.
"The Regular Titles of the Late Middle Kingdom." Rd'E 37 (1986), pp. 107-130.
"Review of P. Vermis Le Surnom au Moyen Empire." DE 8 (1987), pp. 107-110.
The Administration of Egypt in the Late Middle Kingdom. Whitstable, 1990.
Who Were the Pharaohs. Mineola, New York, 1990.
"Royal Power in the 13th Dynasty." in S. Quirke, ed., Middle Kingdom Studies.
Whitstable, 1991, pp. 123-139.
Ancient Egyptian Religion. New York, 1992.
"Narrative Literature." in A. Loprieno, ed., Ancient Egyptian Literature. New
York, 1995, pp. 263-276.
530
"Horn, Feather and Scale, and Ships: On Titles in the Middle Kingdom." in P. Der
Manuelian, ed., Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson. 2. Boston,
1996, pp.665-677.
"Gods in the Temple of the King: Anubis at Lahun." in S. Quirke, ed., The
Temple in Ancient Egypt. London, 1997, pp. 24-48.
"Visible and Invisible: the King in the Administrative Papyri of the Late Middle
Kingdom." in R. Gundlach and W. Seipel, eds., Dasfruhe dgyptische
Konigtum. Wiesbaden, 1999, pp. 63-71.
"Administrative Texts." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of
"Second Intermediate Period." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of
"State Administration." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt. 1. Oxford, 2001, pp. 12-16.
"Thirteenth Dynasty." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt. 3. Oxford, 2001, pp. 394-398.
"Judgment of the Dead." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Essential Guide to
Egyptian Mythology. New York, 2002, pp. 173-177.
The UCL Lahun Papyri: Religious, Literary, Legal, Mathematical and Medical
(Oxford, 2004).
Titles and Bureau of Egypt 1850-1700 BC. London, 2004.
"In the Name of the King: On Late Middle Kingdom Cylinders." in E. Czerny, et
al., eds., Timelines: Studies in Honour of Manfred Bietak. 1. Dudley, MA,
2006, pp. 263-274.
'"Book of the Dead Chapter 178': a Late Middle Kingdom Compilation or
Excerpts?," in S. Grallert and W. Grajetzki, ed., Life and Afterlife in
Ancient Egypt during the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate
Period. London, 2007, pp. 100-122.
Randall-Maclver, D. and Mace, A.C.
ElAmrah and Abydos I. London, 1902.
Ranke, H.
Die Agyptischen Personennamen. II. New York, 1952.
Redford, D.B.
History and Chronology of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt: Seven Studies.
Toronto, 1967.
"The Hyksos Invasion in History and Tradition." Orientalia 39 (1970), pp. 1-51.
"The Historiography of Ancient Egypt." in K. Weeks, ed., Egyptology and the
Social Sciences. Cairo, 1979, pp. 3-19.
"Interim Report on the Excavations at East Karnak (1979 and 1980 Seasons)."
JSSEA 11 (1981), pp. 243-262.
Akhenaten, Heretic King. Princeton, 1984.
Pharaonic King-lists, Annals and Day-Books. SSEA 4. Mississauga, 1986.
Egypt, Canaan and Isreal. Princeton, 1992.
531
"The Concept of Kingship During the Eighteenth Dynasty." in D. O'Connor and

D.P. Silverman, eds., Ancient Egyptian Kingship. New York, 1995, pp.
157-184.
"Textual Sources for the Hyksos Period." in E.D. Oren, ed., The Hyksos: New
Historical and Archaeological Perspectives. Philadelphia, 1997, pp. 1-44.
"The Writing of the History of Ancient Egypt." in Z. Hawass, ed., Egyptology at
the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: Proceedings of the Eighth
International Congress of Egyptologists Cairo, 2000. 2. New York, 2003,
pp. 1-11.
Reisner, G.A.
Excavations atKerma, IV-V. Howard African Studies 6. Cambridge, Mass., 1923.
"Clay Sealings of Dynasty XIII from Uronarti Fort," Kush 3 (1955), pp. 26-69
Canopies. Catalogue General des Antiquites Egyptiennes du Musee du Caire 103.
Cairo, 1967.
Revez, J.
"Medamud." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient
Richards, J.E.
"Mortuary Variability and Social Differentiation in Middle Kingdom Egypt."
dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, 1992.
"Abydos, Middle Kingdom Cemetery." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the
"Modified Order, Responsive Legitimacy, Redistributed Wealth: Egypt, 22601650 BC." in J.E. Richards and M. Van Buren, eds., Order, Legitimacy,
and Wealth in Ancient States. Cambridge, 2000, pp. 36-45.
Ricke, H.
Das Sonnenheiligtum des Konigs Userkafl. Beitrage zur agyptischen
Bauforschung und Altertumskunde herausgegeben von Herbert Ricke 7.
Gottingen, 1965.
Robins, G.
"The Relationships Specified by Egyptian Kinship Terms of the Middle and New
Kingdoms." Cd'E 54 (1979), pp. 197-217.
"A Critical Examination of the Theory that the Right to the Throne of Ancient
Egypt Passed through the Female Line in the 18th Dynasty." GM62
(1983), pp. 67-77.
"Problems in Interpreting Egyptian Art." DE 17 (1990), pp. 45-58.
"Legitimation." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt.
2. Oxford, 2001, pp. 286-289.
Egyptian Statues. Buckinghamshire, 2001.
"Queens." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 3.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 105-109.
Roccati, A.
"Turiner Konigspapyrus." in W. Helck and E. Otto, eds., LA. VI. Wiesbaden,
1986, pp. 809-810.
532
Romer, J.
Valley of the Kings. New York, 1981.
Rosati, G.
"Note e proposte per la satazione delle stele del Medio Regno." Oriens Antiqvvs
19 (1980), pp. 269-278.
Rossi, C.
"Note on the Pyramidion Found at Dahshur." JEA 85 (1999), pp. 219-222.
RoMer-Kohler, U.
"Konigliche Vorstellungen zu Grab und Jenseits im Mittleren Reich, Teil I: Ein,
Gottesbegrabnis' des Mittleren Reiches in koniglichem Kontext: Amduat,
4. und 5. Stunde." in R. Gundlach and W, Seipel, eds., Dasfruhe
agyptische Konigtum. Wiesbaden, 1999, pp. 73-96.
Rousseau, J.
Mastabas etpyramides d'Egypte. Paris, 1994.
Rowe, A.
"A Short Report on Excavations of the Institute of Archaeology, Liverpool at
Athribis (Tell Atrib)." ASAE 38 (1938), pp. 523-532.
Russman, E.
"A Second Style in Egyptian Art of the Old Kingdom." MDAIK5X (1995), pp.
269-279.
"A Historical Overview of Egyptian Art," in E. Russmann, ed., Eternal Egypt,
Los Angeles, 2001, pp. 16-27.
"Aspects of Egyptian Art." in E. Russmann, ed., Eternal Egypt,
Los Angeles, 2001, pp. 28-45.
"Bust of a King," in E. Russmann, ed., Eternal Egypt. Los Angeles, 2001, p. 111.
"Ptahemsaf," in E. Russmann, ed., Eternal Egypt. Los Angeles, 2001, pp. 114117.
Ryholt, K.S.B.
"A Reconsideration of Some Royal Names of the Thirteenth Dynasty." GM119
(1990), pp. 101-113.
"A Bead of King Ranisonb and a Note on King Qemau." GM 156 (1997), pp. 95100.
The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period c. 18001550 B.C. Copenhagen, 1997.
"Hotepibre, a Supposed Asiatic King in Egypt with Relations to Ebla." BASOR
311 (1998), pp. 1-6.
"The Turin Kinglist." A&L 14 (2004), pp. 135-155.
"The Turin King-List or So-Called Turin Canon (TO) as a Source for
Chronology." in E. Hornung, R. Krauss, and D. Warburton, eds., Ancient
Egyptian Chronology. Boston, 2006, pp. 26-32.
"The Date of Kings Sheshi and Yaqubhar and the Rise of the Fourteenth
Dynasty." in V. Davies, ed., The Second Intermediate Period (13th-17th
Dynasties), Current Research, Future Prospects. London, Forthcoming.
533
Sambin, C.
"Medamud." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 2. Oxford,
2001, pp. 351-353.
Save-Soderbergh, T.
Agypten undNubien: Ein Beitragzur Geschichte altagyptischer Aussenpolitik.
Lund, 1941.
"The Hyksos Rule in Egypt." JEA 37 (1951), pp. 53-71.
Schafer, B.E.
"Temples, Priests, and Rituals: an Overview." in B.E. Schafer, ed., Temples of
Ancient Egypt. Ithaca, 1997, pp. 1-30.
Scheie, L. and Freidel, D.
A Forest of Kings. New York, 1990.
Schenkel, W.
Fruhmitteldgyptischen Studien. Bonn, 1962.
Schiestl, R.
"Neues zur Residenznekropole der 13. Dynastie: Survey in DahschurNord/Sakkara-Siid und Dahschur-Sud." SOKAR 13 (2006), pp. 46-52.
Schmitz, B.
Untersuchungen zum Titel s}-niswt Konigssohn'. Habelts Dissertationsdrucke.
Reihe Agyptologie 2. Bonn, 1976.
Schneider, T.
Lexikon der Pharaonen. Zurich, 1994.
"Uberlegungen zur Chronologie der Thebanischen Konige in der Zweiten
Zwischenzeit." in E. Czerny, et al., eds., Timelines: Studies in Honour of
ManfredBietak. 1. Dudley, MA, 2006, pp. 299-305.
Schulz, R.
Die Entwicklung und Bedeutung des kuboiden Statuentypus I-II. Hildesheim,
1992.
Seidelmayer, S.J.
"Stadt und Tempel von Elephantine 15/16 Grabungsbericht, IX Ausgewahlte
Einzelfunde." MDAIKAA (1988), pp. 135-182.
"Town and State in Early Old Kingdom: A View from Elephantine." in A.J.
Spencer, ed., Aspects of Early Egypt. London, 1996, pp. 108-127.
"The First Intermediate Period." in I. Shaw, ed., The Oxford History of Ancient
Egypt. Oxford, 2000, pp. 118-147.
Service, E.R.
"Classical and Modem Theories of the Origins of Government." in R. Cohen and
E.R. Service, eds., Origins of the State: The Anthropology of Political
Evolution. Philadelphia, 1978, pp. 21-34.
Sethe, K.
Urkunden der 18. Dynastie/bearb. und ubersetzt von Kurt Sethe. IV. Leipzig,
1914.
Dramatische Textezu altaegyptischen Mysterienspielen. Leipzig, 1928.
Urkunden des Alten Reiches I Leipzig, 1933
534
Seyfried, K.J.
"Bemerkungen zur Erweiterung der unterirdischen Anlagen einiger Graber des
Neuen Reiches in Theben-Versuch einer Deutung." ASAE 71 (1987), pp.
229-249.
Silverman, D.P.
"The ChamberlainNJ-SWHW,J." Seraph 3 (1975-1976), pp. 35-41.
Interrogative Constructions with JN and JN/JW in Old and Middle Egyptian.
Malibu, 1980.
"Deities and Divinity in Ancient Egypt." in B.E. Schafer, ed., Religion in Ancient
Egypt: Gods, Myths, and Personal Practice. Ithaca, 1991.
"The Nature of Egyptian Kingship." in D. O'Connor and D.P. Silverman, eds.,
Ancient Egyptian Kingship. New York, 1995.
"Coffin Texts from Bersheh, Kom el Hisn, and Mendes." The World of the Coffin
Texts: Proceedings of the Symposium Held on the Occasion of the 100th
Birthday ofAdriaan de Buck Leiden, December 17-19, 1992. Leiden,
1996, pp. 129-141.
"Middle Kingdom Tombs in the Teti Pyramid Cemetery." in M. Barta and J.
Krejci, eds., Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2000. Praha, 2000, pp. 259282.
"The Tombs of the Nobles in the Middle Kingdom," in Z. Hawass, ed., Pyramids.
Treasures Mysteries and New Discoveries in Egypt, Vercelli, Italy, 2003,
pp. 364-381.
"A Reference to Warfare at Dendereh, Prior to the Unification of Egypt in the
Eleventh Dynasty." in Egypt and Beyond. Essays Presented to Leonard H.
Lesko. S. Thompson and P. der Manuelian, eds., Providence, 2008, pp.
319-331.
"Royal Head with White Crown," in Z. Hawass, ed., Tutankhamun. The Golden
King and the Great Pharaohs, Washington, 2008, p. 90.
"Unity and Power. The Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period, in Z.
Hawass, Tutankhamun. The Golden King and the Great Pharaohs.
Washington, 2008, pp. 35-45.
"Non-Royal Burials in the Teti Pyramid Cemetery and the Early Twelfth
Dynasty." in J. Wegner and D. Silverman, eds., Archaism and Innovation:
Studies in the Culture of Middle Kingdom Egypt, Yale Egyptological
Studies vol. 8, New Haven and Boston, 2009.
"Epithet zSR' in the Old through Middle Kingdom." forthcoming.
Simpson, W.K.
"New Light on the God Reshef." JAOS 73 (1953), pp. 86-89.
"The Single-Dated Monuments of Sesostris I: An Aspect of the Institution of
Coregency in the Twelfth Dynasty." JNES 15 (1956), pp. 214-219.
"Sobkemhet," A Vizier of Sesostris III." JEA 43 (1957), pp. 26-29.
Papyrus Reisner. I. Boston, 1963.
"Studies in the Twelfth Egyptian Dynasty, I-II." JARCE 2 (1963), pp. 53-63.
535
Accounts of the Dockyard Workshop at This in the Reign ofSesostris I.

Papyrus Reisnerll. Transcription and Commentary. Papyrus Reisner II.
Boston, 1965.
"The Dynasty XIII Stela from the Wadi Hammamat." MDAIK 25 (1969), pp. 154158.
The Literature of Ancient Egypt. New Haven, 1973.
The Terrace of the Great God at Abydos: The Offering Chapels of Dynasties 12
and 13. Publications of the Pennsylvania-Yale Expedition to Egypt 5. New
Haven and Philadelphia, 1974.
"Egyptian Sculpture and Two-Dimensional Representation as Propaganda." JEA
68 (1982), pp. 266-271.
"Senebtisi" LA 5 (1984), p. 848.
"Belles Lettres and Propaganda." in A. Loprieno, ed., Ancient Egyptian
Literature. New York, 1996, pp. 435-443.
"Twelfth Dynasty." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient
Egypt. 3. Oxford, 2001, pp. 453-457.
"Response to J. Baines (Research on Egyptian Literature)." in Z. Hawass, ed.,
Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: Proceedings of the
Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists Cairo, 2000. 3. New York,
2003, pp. 45-47.
Sliwa, J.
"Z Badan Nad Osadnichtwem Okresy Sredniego Pahstwa III Okresu
Przejsciowego W Qasr el-Sagha. TZW. Mur Sinusoidalny." Meander 40
(1985), pp. 176-183.
"Qasr el-Sagha." Fontes Archaeologici Posnanienses 36 (1987-1988), pp. 189216.
Smith, H.S.
The Fortress ofBuhenl: The Inscriptions. Excavation Memoir 48. London, 1976.
Smith, H.S. and Smith, A.
"A Reconsideration of the Kamose Texts." ZAS 103 (1976), pp. 48-76.
Smith, S.T.
"Administration at the Egyptian Middle Kingdom Frontier: Sealings from
Uronarti and Askut." in T.G. Palaima, ed., Aegean Seals, Sealing and
Administration. Aegaeum 5. Liege, 1990, pp. 197-219.
"A Model for Egyptian Imperialism in Nubia." GM122 (1991), pp. 77-102.
"Askut and the Role of the Second Cataract Forts." JARCE 28 (1991), pp. 107132.
Askut in Nubia: The Economics and Ideology of Egyptian Imperialism in the
Second Millennium B.C. New York, 1995.
"State and Empire in the Middle and New Kingdoms." in J. Lustig, ed.,
Anthropology and Egyptology. Monographs in Mediterranean
Archaeology 8. Sheffield, England, 1997, pp. 66-89.
"People." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 3.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 27-33.
536
Smith, W.S.
The Art and Architecture of Ancient Egypt. New Haven, 1981.
Smither, P.C.
"The Writing of the htp-d'i-nsw'm. the Middle and New Kingdoms." JEA 25
(1939), pp. 34-37.
"The Semna Dispatches." JEA 31 (1945), pp. 3-10.
Spalinger, A.
"The Concept of Monarchy During the Saite EpochAn Essay of Synthesis."
Orientalia 47 (1978), pp. 12-36.
"Remarks on the Family of Queen h c.s-nbwand the Problem of Kingship in
Dynasty XIII." Rd'E 32 (1980), pp. 95-116.
"Foods in P. Bulaq 18." SAK 13 (1986), pp. 207-247.
"Review of The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate
Period, c. 1800-1550 B.C." JNES 60 (2001), pp. 296-300.
Spanel, D.
"Beni Hasan." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt.
1. Oxford, 2001, pp. 175-177.
Spencer, A.J.
Brick Architecture in Ancient Egypt. Warminster, 1979.
Stadelmann, R.
Die Agyptischen Pyramiden. Kulturgeschichte der Antiken Welt 30. Mainz
Rhein, 1985.
"Palaces." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 3.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 13-17.
Stadelmann, R. and Alexanian, N.
"Die Friedhofe des Alten und Mittleren Reiches in Dahschur. Bericht iiber die im
Fruhjahr 1997 durch das Deutsche Archaologische Institut Kairo
durchgefiihrte Felderkundung in Dahschur." MDAIK 54 (1998), pp. 293317.
Stewart, H.M.
Egyptian Shahtis. Shire Egyptology 23. Buckinghamshire, 1995.
Stock, H.
Studien zur Geschichte und Archdologie der 13. bis 17. Dynastie Agyptens. New
York, 1942.
Suys, E.
La Sagesse d'Ani. Analecta Orientalia 11. Rome, 1935.
Swain, S.
"Pottery, Early Dynastic to Second Intermediate Period." in K.A. Bard, ed.,
Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt. New York, 1999, pp.
626-628.
Swelim, N.
The Brick Pyramid at Abu Rawash Number "I" by Lepsius: A Preliminary Study.
Alexandria, 1986.
537
"Pyramid Research from the Archaic to the Second Intermediate Period: Lists,
Catalogues and Objectives." Hommages a Jean Leclant I: Etudes
Pharaoniques. Bibliotheque d'Etude 106/1. 1994, pp. 337-349.
Swelim, N. and Dodson, A.
"On the Pyramid of Ameny-Qemau and its Canopic Equipment." MDAIK 54
(1998), pp. 319-334.
Szafranski, Z.E.
"Limestone Relief Fragments from Tell el-Dab'a." Proceedings of the Seventh
International Congress of Egyptologists. Leuven, 1998, pp. 1119-1124.
te Velde, H.
"Theology, Priests, and Worship in Ancient Egypt." in J.M. Sasson, ed.,
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. 3. Peabody, MA, 1995, pp. 17311749.
Teeter, E.
"Kingship." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt.
New York, 1999, pp. 411-414.
Theriault, C.
"The Instruction ofAmenemhet as Propaganda" JARCE 30 (1993), pp. 151-160.
Thompson, L.G., et al.
"Kilimanjaro Ice Core Records: Evidence of Holocene Climate Change in
Tropical Africa." Science 298 (2002), pp. 589-593.
Tobin, V.A.
Theological Principles of Egyptian Religion. New York, 1989.
Torok, L.
"On the Foundations of Kingship Ideology in the Empire of Kush." in S. Wenig,
ed., Studien zum antiken Sudan. Akten der 7. Internationalen Tagungfur
meroitistishe Forschungen vom 14. bis 19 September 1992 in Gosen/bei
Berlin. Meroitica 15. Berlin, 1999, pp. 273-287.
Trigger, B.G.
Nubia Under the Pharaohs. London, 1976.
Troy,L.
Patterns ofQueenship in Ancient Egyptian Myth and History. Uppsala Studies in
Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern Civilizations 14. Boreas, 1986.
Tufnell, O.
Studies on Scarab Seals. II. Warminster, 1984.
Tylor, J.J.
Wall Drawings and Monuments ofElKab: The Tomb ofSobeknekht. 2. London,
1896.
Uphill, E.P.
Pharaoh's Gateway to Eternity. New York, 2000.
"The Question of Pharaonic Co-Regency." DE 49 (2001), pp. 81-94.
Uytterhoeven, I. and Blom-Boer, I.
"New Light on the Egyptian Labyrinth: Evidence from a Survey at Hawara." JEA
88 (2002), pp. 109-120.
538
Valloggia, M.
"Amenmhet IV et sa Coregence avec Amenemhet III." Rd'E 21 (1969), pp. 107133.
"Le Complexe Funeraire de Radjedef a Abou Roasch: Etat de la Question et
Perspectives de Recherches," BSFE 130 (1994), 5-17.
van Buren, M. and Richards, J.E.
"Introduction: Ideology, Wealth, and the Comparative Study of "Civilizations"."
in J.E. Richards and M. Van Buren, eds., Order, Legitimacy, and Wealth
in Ancient States. Cambridge, 2000, pp. 3-12.
van den Boorn, G.P.F.
"On the Date of the 'Duties of the Vizier'." Orientalia 51 (1982), pp. 369-381.
The Duties of the Vizier. New York, 1988.
van Dijk, J.
"Myth and Mythmaking in Ancient Egypt," in J. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the
Ancient Near East 3, (Peabody, MA, 1995), pp. 1697-1709.
van Seters, J.
The Hyksos: A New Investigation. New Haven, 1966.
Vandersleyen, C.
Les Guerres d'Amosis. Brussels, 1971.
Vandier, J.
Manuel d'Archeologie Egyptienne: Les Grandes Epoques. II, part 2. Paris, 1955.
Vercoutter, J.
"Semna South Fort and the Records of Nile Levels at Kumma." Kush 14 (1966),
pp.125-164.
Mirgissa. I. Paris, 1970.
"Le Roi Ougaf et la XHIe Dynastie sur la lime Cataracte." RdE 27 (1975), pp.
222-234.
"Les Barrages Pharaoniques. Leur Raison d'Etre." Les Problemes Institutionnels
de I'Eau. Bibliotheque d'Etude 110. Cairo, 1994, pp. 315-326.
"Les Inscriptions Rupestres de Semna et Kumma. Une Mise au Point," SAK 21
(1994), pp. 321-324.
Vernadsky, G and M. Karpovich
A History of Russia. II. New Haven, 1945.
Verner, M.
"Excavations at Abusir: Season 1978/1979-Preliminary Report." ZAS 107 (1980),
pp.158-169.
"Pyramid." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 3.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 87-95.
The Pyramids: The Mystery, Culture, and Science of Egypt's Great Monuments.
New York, 2001.
Verner, M. and Hasek, V.
"Die Anwendung goephysicalischer Methoden bei der archaologischen Forschung
in Abusir." ZAS 108 (1981), pp. 68-84.
539
Vernus, P.
"Noms Propres Juxtaposes au Moyen Empire." Rd'E 23 (1971), pp. 193-199.
"Le Pretre-Ritualiste hr-mni, Redacteur de la Stele de hr-mhcw." Hommages a
Frangois Daumas. Montpellier, 1986, pp. 588-592.
Le Surnom au Moyen Empire Procedes dExpression et Structures de la Double
Identite du Debut de la Xlle Dynastie a la Fin de la XVIIe Dynastie.
Rome, 1986.
"La Stele du Pharaon Mntw-htpik Karnak: un Nouveau Temoignage sur la
Situation Politique et Militaire au Debut de la D.P.I." Rd'E 40 (1989), pp.
140-161
"A propos de la stele du pharaon Mntw-htpia. Karnak." Rd'E 41 (1990), p. 221.
"Sur les Graphies de la Formule "L'Offrande Que Donne le Roi" au Moyen
Empire et a la Deuxieme Periode Intermediare." in S. Quirke, ed., Middle
Kingdom Studies. Whitstable, 1991, pp. 141-152.
von Beckerath, J.
"Notes on the Viziers 'Ankhu and 'Iymeru in the Thirteenth Egyptian Dynasty."
JNES 17 (1958), pp. 263-268.
"Die Konige mit dem Thronnamen shm-rchw-tiwi." ZAS 84 (1959), pp. 81-85.
Untersuchungen zurpolitischen Geschichte der zweiten Zwischenzeit in Agypten.
AF 23. New York, 1964.
"Zwischenzeit, Zweite." LA. VI. 1986, pp. 1442-1448.
Chronologie des pharaonischen Agypten. Miinchner Agyptologische Studien 46.
Mainz, 1997.
Handbuch der Agyptischesn Konigsnamen. Mainz, 1999.
"Theban Seventeenth Dynasty." in E. Teeter and J.A. Larson, eds., Gold of
Praise. Studies Wente. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 58.
Chicago, 1999, pp. 21-25.
von Bissing, F.W.
Das Re-Heiligtum des Konigs Ne-user-Re I. Berlin, 1905.
Warburton, D.
State and Economy in Ancient Egypt: Fiscal Vocabulary of the New Kingdom.
Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 151. Freiburg, 1997.
"Officials." inD.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 2.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 576-583.
Ward, W.A.
"Comparative Studies in Egyptian and Ugaritic." JNES 20 (1961), pp. 31-40.
"Egypt and the East Mediterranean in the Early Second Millennium B.C."
Orientalia 30 (1961), pp. 22-45, 129-155.
Index of Egyptian Administrative and Religious Titles of the Middle Kingdom.
Beirut, 1982.
Essays on Feminine Titles of the Middle Kingdom and Related Subjects. Beirut,
1986.
"Non-Royal Women and their Occupations in the Middle Kingdom." in B. Lesko,
ed., Women's Earliest Records from Ancient Egypt and Western Asia.
Atlanta, 1989.
540
"Foreigners Living in the Village." in L.H. Lesko, ed., Pharaoh's Workers: The
Villagers ofDeir el Medina. Ithaca, 1994, pp. 61-85.
Wegner, J.
"South Abydos: Burial Place of the Third Senwosret? Old and New Evidence at
the Abydene Complex of Senwosret III." KMT 6 (1995), pp. 58-71.
"The Mortuary Complex of Senwosret III: A Study of Middle Kingdom State
Activity and the Cult of Osiris at Abydos." dissertation. University of
Pennsylvania, 1996.
"The Nature and Chronology of the Senwosret III-Amenemhet III Regnal
Succession: Some Considerations Based on New Evidence from the
Mortuary Temple of Senwosret III at Abydos." JNES 55 (1996), pp. 249279.
"Excavations at the Town of "Enduring-is-the-throne-of-Khaaure-Maa-Kheru-inAbydos." A Preliminary Report on the 1994 and 1997 Seasons." JARCE
35 (1998), pp. 1-44.
"A Middle Kingdom Town at South Abydos." Egyptian Archaeology 17 (2000),
pp. 8-10.
"The Organization of the Temple NFR-KA of Senwosret III at Abydos." A&L 10
(2000), pp. 83-125.
"Abydos." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 1.
Oxford, 2001, pp. 7-12.
"Cenotaphs." in D.B. Redford, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. 1.
Oxford, 2001.
"Institutions and Officials at South Abydos: An Overview of the Sigillographic
Evidence." CRIPEL 22 (2001), pp. 77-108.
"Seat of Eternity." Archaeology 54 (2001), pp. 56-60.
"Social and Historical Implications of Sealings of the King's Daughter Reniseneb
and other Women at the Town of Wah-Sut." in M. Bietak and E. Czerny,
eds., Scarabs of the Second Millennium BCfrom Egypt, Nubia, Crete and
the Levant: Chronological and Historical Implications. Vienna, 2001, pp.
221-240.
"The Town of Wah-Sut at South Abydos: 1999 Excavations." MDAIK51 (2001),
pp. 281-308.
"Beneath the Mountain-of-Anubis: Ancient Egypt's First Hidden Royal Tomb."
Expedition 48 (2006), pp. 15-22.
"Echoes of Power: The Mayor's House of Ancient Wah-Sut." Expedition 48
(2006), pp. 31-36.
"The Archaeology of South Abydos." Expedition 48 (2006), pp. 6-10.
The Mortuary Temple ofSenwsoretlll. Publication of the Pennsylvania-YaleInstitute of Fine Arts Expedition to Egypt 8. New Haven, 2007.
"The Tomb of Senwosret III at Abydos and Considerations on the Emergence of
the Royal Amduat Tomb." in J. Wegner and D. Silverman, eds., Archaism
and Innovation: Studies in the Culture of Middle Kingdom Egypt, Yale
Egyptological Studies vol. 8, New Haven and Boston, 2009.
541
Wegner, J. and Abu el-Yazid, M.

"The Mountain-of-Anubis: Necropolis Seal of the Senwosret III Tomb Enclosure
at Abydos." in E. Czerny and A. Schwab, eds., Timelines: Studies in
Honour of Manfred Bietak. 1. Dudley, MA, 2006, pp. 419-435.
Weigall, A.E.P.
"Tomb and Cemetery of Senusert III." in E.R. Ayrton, C.T. Currelly and A.E.P.
Weigall, eds., Abydos, Part III. London, 1904, pp. 11-21.
Guide to the Antiquities of Upper Egypt. New York, 1910.
A History of the Pharaohs. 2. New York, 1927.
Weill, R.
La Fin du Moyen Empire Egyptien. Paris, 1918.
"Les Successeurs de la Xlle Dynasty a Medamoud." REA 2 (1929), pp. 144-171.
"Complements pour "La Fin du Moyen Empire Egyptien"." BIFAO 32 (1932), pp.
7-52.
Weinstein, J.
"Foundation Deposits in Ancient Egypt." Dissertation. University of
Pennsylvania, 1973.
"Egyptian Relations with Palestine in the Middle Kingdom." BASOR 217 (1975),
pp. 1-16.
"Egypt and the Middle Bronze IIC/Late Bronze IA Transition in Palestine."
Levant 23 (1991), pp. 105-111.
"The Chronology of Palestein in the Early Second Millenium B.C." BASOR 288
(1992), pp. 27-46.
"Reflections on the Chronology of Tell el-Dab'a." in V. Davies and L. Schofield,
eds., Egypt, the Aegean and the Levant. London, 1995, pp. 84-90.
Wild, H.
"A Bas-Relief of Sekhemre-Sewadjtawe." JEA 37 (1951), pp. 12-16.
Wildung, D.
Die Rolle dgypticher Konige I. Berlin, 1969.
Egyptian Saints. Deification in Pharaonic Egypt. New York, 1977.
"Ein Wurfelhocker des Generals Nes-Month." MDAIK 37 (1981), pp. 503-507
Wilkinson, T.G.
The Fragments of the Hieratic Papyrus at Turin, containing the names of
Egyptian Kings, with the Hieratic Inscription at the back. London, 1851.
Willems, H.
Chests of Life. A Study of the Typology and Conceptual Development of Middle
Kingdom Standard Class Coffins. Leiden, 1988.
Williams, B.
"Archaeology and Historical Problems of the Second Intermediate Period."
dissertation. University of Chicago, 1975.
"The Date of Senebtisi at Lisht and the Chronology of Major Groups and Deposits
of the Middle Kingdom." Serapis 3 (1975-1976), pp. 41-59.
"Nubian Forts." in K.A. Bard, ed., Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient
542
Wilson, J.A.
The Culture of Ancient Egypt. Chicago, 1956.
Winlock, H.E.
"The Tombs of the Kings of the Seventeenth Dynasty at Thebes." JEA 10 (1924),
pp. 217-277.
Excavations at Deir el-Bahari 1911-1931. New York, 1942.
The Rise and Fall of the Middle Kingdom in Thebes. New York, 1947.
Zabkar, L. and Zabkar, J.
"Semna South: A Preliminary Report on the 1966-68 Excavations of the
University of Chicago Oriental Institute Expedition to Sudanese Nubia"
J ^ C 19 (1982), pp. 7-50.
543
Index
166, 170, 173, 180, 181, 189, 196,

202, 208,215, 225, 235, 241, 242,
249, 250, 251, 252, 254, 259, 263,
266, 276,277,285, 286,293, 299,
314,331,337,355,358,360,362, *
363, 364, 365, 368, 369, 373, 375,
376, 378, 380, 382, 384, 387, 389,
392, 393, 396, 400, 403, 404, 447,
451, 452, 458, 460, 461, 478, 485, 496
Amenemhet III (Nymaatre), 2, 11, 12,
13,14,15,17,18,19,20,21,65,68,
70, 74, 97, 110, 114, 120, 124, 125,
126, 129, 134, 145, 152, 154, 155,
156, 157, 158, 159, 161, 162, 165,
166, 170, 173, 180, 181, 189, 196,
202, 208,215,225, 235,241, 242,
249, 250, 251, 252, 254, 259, 263,
266,276,285,286,293,299,314,
331, 337, 355, 358, 360, 362, 363,
364, 365, 373, 375, 376, 378, 382,
384, 387, 389, 392, 393, 396, 400,
403, 404, 447, 451, 458, 460, 461,
478, 485, 496
Amenemhet IV (Maakherure), 11, 20,
22,65,68,115,125,152, 166,173,
225, 240, 277, 286, 299, 368, 369,
404, 446, 447, 451, 456, 458, 460
Amenemhet VIII (Sankhibre Ameny
Intef), 71, 119, 216, 369, 431, 445,
457
Ameny Qemau, 2, 64, 69, 70, 71, 73,
110,115,119,208,211,213,215,
216, 217, 225, 226, 244, 249, 253,
260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 267, 276,
278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 293,
309, 310, 351, 368, 369, 370, 371,
373, 376, 396, 397, 402, 431, 436,
441, 445, 457, 492
Ankhu, 66, 79, 80, 81, 84, 130, 131,
132, 134, 135, 136, 138, 139, 189,
417,419
Abu Ghurob, 270, 271, 272

Abu Roash, 270
Abydos, 2, 3, 17, 21, 23, 29, 35, 38, 39,
40, 50, 51, 76, 77, 79, 82, 83, 91, 103,
107,109,111,112,120,125,130,
136,137, 155, 156, 160, 164, 168,
193, 235, 240, 256, 290, 292, 295,
296, 297, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303,
304, 305, 306, 307, 309, 310, 311,
312,313,314,315,317,318,319,
325, 332, 337, 338, 340, 341, 342,
351, 352, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361,
362, 363, 364, 365, 367, 375, 388,
389, 392, 394, 396, 400, 401, 402,
403, 407, 409, 412, 417, 420, 422,
427, 435, 438, 439, 448, 449, 466, 481
Africanus, 31, 61
Ahmose, 22, 23, 29, 36, 59, 361, 403,
405, 406, 407, 417
Amenemhet I (Sehotepibre), 2, 10, 11,
12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18,19,20,21,22,
65, 68, 70, 74, 97, 104, 108, 110, 114,
120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126,
128, 129, 134, 145, 152, 154, 155,
156, 157, 158, 159, 161, 162, 165,
166, 170, 173, 180, 181, 189, 196,
202, 208, 215, 225, 235, 240, 241,
242, 249, 250, 251, 252, 254, 259,
263, 266, 276, 277, 284, 285, 286,
292, 293, 299, 314, 319, 331, 337,
355, 358, 360, 362, 363, 364, 365,
368, 369, 373, 375, 376, 378, 380,
382, 383, 384, 387, 389, 392, 393,
396, 397, 400, 403, 404, 430, 441,
446, 447, 451, 452, 456, 458, 460,
461,465,466,478,485,496
Amenemhet II (Nubkaure), 2, 11, 12,
13,14, 15, 17, 18, 19,20,21,65,68,
70, 74, 97, 110, 114, 120, 124, 125,
126, 129, 134, 145, 152, 154, 155,
156, 157, 158, 159, 161, 162, 165,
544
Apepi, 25, 29, 30, 58, 59, 60, 66,403

Athribis, 289
Avaris (Tell el-Dab'a), 6, 24, 25, 26,
27, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 39, 40, 56, 57,
59, 60, 102, 286, 287, 346, 364, 401,
403, 404, 409, 465, 466, 467, 471,
472, 478, 479
Awibre Hor, 2, 55, 66, 74, 75, 76, 115,
125, 174, 215, 223, 241, 242, 244,
249, 250, 251, 254, 265, 266, 276,
292, 299, 309, 351, 355, 364, 369,
370, 371, 376, 378, 380, 381, 384,
386, 393, 409, 443, 444, 445, 450,
451,483
Ay (Merneferre), 9, 17, 18, 24, 37, 47,
48, 50, 91, 92, 95, 97, 119, 257, 287,
288, 291, 293, 363, 372, 376, 399,
403, 404, 410, 425, 426, 427, 437,
438, 445, 450, 454, 456, 469, 471,
474, 475, 483
Aymeru, 48, 49, 84, 89, 131, 136, 138,
139, 361, 417, 419, 426, 432, 438
Beni Hasan, 11, 13, 14, 15, 70, 392
Bersha, 13, 15,388
circulating succession, 141, 142, 143,
144,145,146,147,148,150,439,
452, 454
coregency, 20, 75, 87, 119, 120, 121,
122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 249
DAS 16, 279, 280, 368, 396
DAS 17, 280, 369, 370, 396
DAS 2, 278, 279, 280, 368, 369, 370,
396, 397
DAS 46, 282
DAS 53, 284
Dedumose, 27, 50, 58, 60, 66, 471, 482,
483
divine birth (divine marriage), 2, 100,
101,102,103,104,149,453,468
Djehuty (Sekhemresementawy), 47,
48,51,426
double name, 23, 64, 67, 70, 71, 74, 77,
89, 95, 98, 110, 115, 126, 139, 249,
428, 429, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435,
436, 458
Dra Abu el-Naga, 34, 45, 81, 372, 406,

408
Edfu, 32, 38, 58, 425
El Kab, 38, 41, 42, 43, 45, 48, 60, 139,
406, 425, 426
elective kingship, 128, 129
Elephantine, 15, 35, 57, 68, 88, 126,
139,270,290,361,405,422
El-Lahun, 65, 68, 154, 285
Ezbet Rushdi, 288, 465, 466
filiation, 23, 64, 71, 72, 74, 77, 98, 139,
143, 144,411,428,429,431,432,
433, 434, 436, 437, 438, 439, 441,
442, 443, 444, 447, 448, 458
Gebelein, 29, 30, 35, 38, 58
Hatshepsut, 28, 45, 59, 101
Hawara, 2, 17, 18, 21, 154, 155, 156,
157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163,
164, 165, 166, 167, 173, 178, 180,
196, 202, 215, 219, 225, 235, 238,
239, 251, 252, 256, 259, 260, 263,
265, 266, 285, 286, 293, 310, 331,
355, 360, 364, 373, 374, 375, 377,
385, 389, 390, 392, 396, 399, 400,
478, 485
Horemkhauef, 2,41, 42,43, 49, 439
Hori (Sewadjkare), 93, 443, 444, 445,
483
Horus, 59, 64, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73,
74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 82, 85, 86, 88,
90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 100, 113, 114,
116, 119, 122, 125, 149,189,206,
247,295,450,451,478
Hyksos, 1, 6, 17, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29,
30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39,
40, 41, 44, 49, 50, 51, 52, 56, 57, 58,
59, 60, 62, 72, 88, 94, 96, 97, 102,
122, 128, 129, 134, 135, 148, 191,
287, 288, 359, 364, 394, 401, 402,
403, 404, 405, 407, 408, 409, 416,
456, 463, 464, 465, 466, 473, 475, 479
Ibiaw (Wahibre), 47, 91, 363, 415, 416,
420, 425, 426, 427
Manetho, 7, 21,25,26, 27, 28, 32, 35,

44, 53, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 88, 122
Mazghuna (North), 217, 218, 224, 225,
239, 240, 260, 263, 264, 267, 281,
292, 369, 370, 374, 375, 376, 389, 493
Mazghuna (South), 2, 225, 226, 227,
235, 238, 239, 240, 260, 262, 264,
265, 282, 300, 321, 324, 327, 328,
331, 357, 360, 365, 369, 370, 371,
374,375,396,401,402,494
Memphis, 10, 27, 32, 41, 44, 51, 56, 58,
59,60,94, 112,273,404,449
Mentuhotep (Queen), 45, 47
Mentuhotep (Sankhenre), 41
mutilated hieroglyphs, 164, 246, 309,
351,380,383,384
Nebiriau (Sewadjenre), 48, 76, 363,
450
Nedjemibre, 73, 74, 445, 457, 467, 480,
482, 483
Neferhotep I (Khasekhemre), 38, 57,
64, 74, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 91, 96, 102,
103,104, 109, 118, 120, 127,134,
146, 207, 284, 293, 319, 361, 362,
363, 369, 372, 384, 415, 421, 422,
438, 441, 448, 450, 456, 457, 463,
470, 471, 472, 473, 480, 481, 482,
483, 484
Neferuptah, 162, 164, 165, 215, 246,
247, 355, 377, 384
Nefrusobek (Sobekkare), 11, 20, 21,
23, 39, 65, 114, 124, 152, 166, 225,
239, 286, 287, 299, 369, 446, 451,
452, 456, 460
Nehesy, 24, 25, 37, 72
Nerikare, 68, 69, 70, 97, 437, 457, 460,
480
nomarch, 14, 15
Nubheteptikhered, 378, 380, 381, 382,
383,384
Osiris, 76, 107, 109, 113, 114, 116, 149,
155, 292, 295, 296, 297, 318, 363,
365, 387, 392, 394, 407, 409
Papyrus Bulaq 18, 7, 80, 95, 130, 135,
136, 137, 139, 189, 205, 391, 399, 419
Imyremeshaw (Semenkhkare), 80, 81,

82, 91, 131, 136, 140, 205, 372, 403,
404, 414, 432, 445, 457, 480
Ined (Mersekhemre), 93, 436, 443
Intef (Sehotepkare), 81, 82, 131, 205,
431,442,443,445
Itjatawy, 2, 10, 13, 23, 34, 37, 41, 42,
43, 44, 45, 49, 56, 94, 97, 269, 284,
299, 397, 424, 474, 475
Iwefni, 71, 119
Kamose, 26, 28, 30, 35, 36, 48, 58, 59,
66, 164, 405, 424, 475
Karnak King-List, 87, 463
Kay (Sedjefakare Amenemhet), 76, 81,
126,369,431,456
Kebsi, 47, 48, 49
Keminebu, 380, 383, 384
Khayan, 25, 29, 30, 59, 60, 473
Khendjer (Woserkare), 2, 58, 66, 67,
69,76,78,79,80,81, 110,130, 131,
135, 136, 139, 166, 167, 168, 172,
173,174,175,180,181,182,183,
185, 186, 188, 189, 190, 191, 194,
196, 197, 198, 199, 201, 203, 205,
206, 207, 210, 225, 230, 231, 240,
241, 242, 257, 258, 260, 261, 262,
264, 265, 268, 273, 274, 278, 279,
281,288,292,293,314,319,361,
369, 370, 371, 376, 385, 390, 396,
398, 400, 402, 409, 414, 431, 445,
451,457,480,485,487,489
Khenmet, 380, 381, 382, 383, 384
Khnumhotep III, 11, 13, 14, 15
Kom el-Hisn, 290, 372, 394
Lepsius I, 270
Lepsius LIV, 277, 368
Lepsius LIX, 281
Lepsius LV, 278
Lepsius XLV, 191,274
Lepsius XVI, 272,273
Lepsius XXVIII, 271, 272, 273
Lisht, 10, 56, 86, 164, 174, 247, 284,
293, 337, 346, 377, 381, 385, 393,
396, 397
546
pyramidion, 96,167, 170,173, 182,

196,206,210,287,288,289,291,
372, 376, 399, 403, 404, 409, 487
Qau el-Kebir, 15
Reniseneb (Amenemhet), 67, 74, 83,
425, 431, 435, 441, 443, 445, 452, 457
S10, 256, 299, 300, 301, 305, 306, 309,
312,313,314,317,318,321,334,
341, 342, 351, 358, 359, 360, 361,
362, 365, 375, 396, 402
S9, 193, 235, 240, 245, 299, 300, 301,
302, 304, 305, 306, 307, 309, 310,
311,312,313,314,315,317,318,
320, 321, 323, 324, 326, 328, 329,
331, 332, 333, 334, 337, 338, 339,
340, 341, 342, 343, 346, 350, 351,
352, 353, 354, 355, 357, 358, 359,
360, 361, 362, 364, 365, 375, 388,
389, 390, 396, 399, 402, 403
Saharnedjeritef (Hotepibre Qemau),
39, 71, 115, 119, 225, 279, 280, 287,
369, 370, 373, 431, 434, 442, 443,
445, 448, 458, 466
Sahathor, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 102, 103,
117,118,119,126,127,146,285,
384,415,443,445,457,482
SAK S 3, 273
SAK S 7, 274
Sakkara King-List, 21
Salitis, 27, 60
Sedjemnetjeru, 7, 42
selective kingship, 134, 150
Senebef (Sekhemkare Amenemhet),
67, 68, 70, 119, 369, 431, 435, 436,
439, 441, 443, 445, 450, 451, 452, 460
Senebtisi, 85, 247, 377, 380, 381, 383,
384
Senwosret I (Kheperkare), 3, 9, 10, 11,
12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,70,76,
83,97,106,110,111,113,120,121,
123, 124, 125, 133, 137, 154, 155,
156,160,168,170,173,250,251,
276, 285, 297, 299, 308, 318, 319,
323, 324, 334, 337, 338, 339, 341,
342, 346, 357, 359, 360, 361, 362,
363, 365, 375, 384, 387, 389, 392,

393, 396, 403,404,412, 420,427,
429, 430, 448, 450, 451, 452, 462,
466, 483
Senwosret II (Khakheperre), 3,9,10,
11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,76,
83,97,106,110,111,120,124,125,
133, 154, 155, 156, 160, 168, 170,
173, 250, 251, 276, 285, 297, 299,
308, 318, 319, 323, 324, 334, 337,
339, 341, 342, 357, 359, 360, 361,
362, 365, 375, 387, 389, 392, 393,
396, 403, 404, 412, 420, 427, 448,
450,451,452,462,466
Senwosret III (Khakhaure), 3, 9, 10,
11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,76,
83,97,106,110,111,120,124,125,
133, 155, 156, 160, 168, 170, 173,
250, 251, 276, 297, 299, 308, 318,
319, 323, 324, 334, 337, 339, 341,
342, 357, 359, 360, 361, 362, 365,
375, 389, 392, 393, 396, 403, 404,
412, 420, 427, 448, 451, 452, 462, 466
Seth (Meribre), 82, 131, 445
Sewadjkare, 73, 74, 93, 443, 444, 445,
448, 457, 480, 482, 483
Sewadjtew (Sankhenre), 93, 445, 457,
480
Sheshi, 23, 24, 30, 76
sinusoidal wall, 171, 187, 193, 195,
209, 228, 231, 240, 257, 258, 274,
302, 317, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328,
333, 365, 393, 400, 401, 490, 494
Sobekhotep I (Sekhemrekhutawy
Amenemhet), 48, 57, 58, 64, 65, 66,
67, 69, 73, 78, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85,
86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 95, 96, 97,
102,103,104,106,111,115,118,
119,126,127,130,131,135,136,
139, 146, 158, 207, 225, 276, 292,
293, 299, 361, 363, 369, 370, 372,
383, 384, 404, 405, 412, 415, 420,
422, 424, 425, 427, 431, 432, 435,
437, 438, 441, 443, 444, 445, 447,
547
450, 451, 454, 456, 457, 460, 469,

470,471,473,480,482
Sobekhotep II (Khaankhre), 48, 58,
66,69,73,78,81,82,83,84,85,86,
90,95,103,104,106,115,130,131,
135,136,139,225,293,299,361,
363, 369, 370, 372, 404,415, 425,
431, 437, 438, 443, 444, 445, 450,
451, 454, 457, 469, 470, 471, 473,
480, 482
Sobekhotep III
(Sekhemresewadjtawy), 48, 58, 66,
69, 78, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 90, 95,
103,104,106,115,130,131,135,
136, 139, 293, 361, 363, 369, 372,
404,415, 425,437, 438, 443, 444,
445, 450, 451, 454, 457, 469, 470,
471,473,480,482
Sobekhotep IV (Khaneferre), 57, 58,
66, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 96,
102, 103, 104, 111, 118, 127, 131,
136, 139, 146, 158, 207, 276, 292,
293, 361, 363, 383, 384, 404, 405,
412, 415, 420, 422, 424, 425, 427,
432, 438, 441, 443, 445, 447, 450,
451, 457, 470, 471, 473, 480, 482
Sobekhotep V (Khahotepre), 48, 50,
51, 89, 90, 92, 93, 106, 110, 119, 146,
363, 425, 436, 437, 441, 443, 445,
446, 450, 457, 458, 474, 480, 482, 483
Sobekhotep VI (Merhotepre Ini), 48,
50,51,92,93,106,110,425,436,
441, 443, 445, 450, 457, 458, 474,
480, 482, 483
Sobekhotep VII (Merkawre), 50, 51,
93, 443, 445, 457, 474, 480, 482, 483
Sobeknakht, 7, 36, 42, 43, 45, 47, 48,
49, 406
Speos Arteraidos, 28
Stele Juridique, 44, 45, 47, 49, 92
Tanis, 66, 75, 403, 404
Tao II (Sekenenre), 36
Thebes, 11,12, 22, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34,
35, 36, 38, 40, 42, 43, 44, 50, 54, 55,
58, 60, 62, 69, 88, 97, 114, 132, 291,
359, 361, 372, 388, 394, 406,416,

424,425,449,464,471,479
tomb model, 154, 254, 256, 260, 261,
265,314,365,375
treasurer, 30, 86, 89, 94, 359, 363, 383,
411, 417, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424
Turin King-List, 1, 7, 21, 22, 25, 26,
27, 34, 37, 40, 43, 44, 50, 52, 53, 54,
55, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69,
70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 78, 80, 82,
85, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95,
97, 98, 110, 126, 127, 135, 140, 189,
216, 248, 250, 251, 368, 371, 373,
435, 436, 444, 446, 456, 474, 483
Tutimaios, 27, 58
Unfinished Pyramid, 274, 360, 389
vizier, 12, 13, 14, 30, 47, 48, 49, 68, 80,
81, 83, 89, 91, 92, 93, 108, 124, 130,
131, 132, 135, 136, 137,138,139,
144,189,190,360,361,411,413,
415, 416, 418, 419, 420, 422, 423,
425, 426, 432, 438, 454, 456, 478
WakhaH, 13, 15
waret, 13,417
Wegaf (Khutawyre), 64, 66, 67, 78, 82,
97, 126, 205, 206, 318, 363, 369, 414,
416, 431, 445, 447, 456, 457, 480,
482, 483
wsf, 52, 63, 66, 68, 70, 76, 77, 97
wsht, 3, 138, 155, 386, 387, 392, 393,
i 406,409,410,418,419,432,468

Dynasty Xiii Kingship in Ancient

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Dynasty Xiii Kingship in Ancient

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

DYNASTY XIII KINGSHIP IN ANCIENT EGYPT:

A STUDY OF POLITICAL POWER AND ADMINISTRATION THROUGH AN

Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania

raduate Group Chairperson

UMI Number: 3346149

For Jim and Hayden

DYNASTY XIII KINGSHIP IN ANCIENT EGYPT:

Chapter 1 -Issues of Chronology

Chapter 3 - The Late Middle Kingdom Royal Funerary Monument Corpus

Chapter 4 - The Late Middle Kingdom Royal Tombs at South Abydos

Pyramid Complex of Woserkare Khendjer

8. The sinusoidal wall of S9

9. The remains of the cult structure of S9

13. The second foundation deposit

II. The Place of Dynasty XIII in Ancient Egyptian History

of archaeological, architectural, artistic, and textual evidence, resulting in the

II.A. The Defining Characteristics of the Late Middle Kingdom

Khakhaure Senwosret III

Table 1.1. The Kings of Dynasty XII.

As part of his reforms, Senwosret III is thought to have reorganized the

The "head of the south" refers to the entity in Thebes,

shift from localized to centralized, state power during Dynasty XII.

Franke, "The Career of Khnumhotep III," pp. 56-65.

Thus, the eventual eradication of the nomarchs

Callender, "Renaissance," p. 175; Spanel, "Beni Hasan," pp. 176-177.

Grajetzki, Two Treasurers, p. 51.

II.A.2. Continuity in Royal Tombs and Developments in Religion

See Chapter 5, Section IV.

II.A.3. Art Styles

II.B. The Separation of Dynasties XII and XIII

the Late Middle Kingdom/Second Intermediate Period,

and record Ahmose (Dynasty

XVIII) as the king who ruled directly after Amenemhet IV.

The reasons for this division are unclear, as

III.A. Dynasties of the Second Intermediate Period

III.A.2. Dynasty XV: The Hyksos

Redford, "The Hyksos," p. 21.

III.A.3. Dynasty XVI

Grimal, History, p. 186; Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 148-150.

He rejects the identification of

However, he does note that the lack of

Hallo and Simpson, Ancient Near East, pp. 172-178.

administrative system involved here.

Ryholt, Political Situation, p. 54.

III.A.4. Dynasty XVII

However, there is currently no evidence that there was a direct

III.B. Theories Concerning the Chronology of the Second Intermediate Period

Davies, "Sobeknakht of Elkab," p. 6; "Sobeknakht's Hidden Treasure." British Museum Magazine 46

III.B.l. Traditional Theories

of monarchs, Dynasty XVIII, ruled the entire country.

III.B.2. Extensive Fragmentation

III.B.3. Ryholt's Chronology

III.B.4. Theories Concerning an Overlap between Dynasties XIII and XVII

Ryholt, Political Situation, pp. 132-133, 140.

"king within Thebes,"

This epithet may imply the existence of more than one

Hayes, "Egypt: From the Death," p. 53.

IILB.4.b. Bennett's Theory

-start of Dynasty XVII3. 1650

Sekhemresementawy Sobekmose (C/gov. El-Kab)

Kebsi (A/gov. El-Kab)

end of Dynasty XIII5. 16201611

Sobeknakht II (C/gov. El-Kab)

Table 1.2. The generational correlations as defined by Bennett. Group A is that