The Stela of Tita

Department of Archaeology

and Ancient History

The Stela of Tita

Renewed Considerations on a late Middle Kingdom Stela at Museum

Gustavianum

Emmaline Trossvik

BA thesis 15 credits in Egyptology

Spring term 2020

Supervisor: Sami Uljas

Passed on 2020-06-15

Abstract

Trossvik, E. 2020. The Stela of Tita: Renewed Considerations on a late Middle Kingdom Stela at Museum Gustavianum.

Private funerary stelae are a vital bundle of material in Egyptological research that may reveal plenty of information in terms of e.g. social structures, religious practices and linguistics. This study examines one stela in particular (NM18) from Museum Gustavianum, Uppsala, that has not yet undergone a full analysis, nor been put into its proper context of the late Middle Kingdom. The present study aims to provide for such a contextualization by identifying and discussing certain features on the stela, such as iconography and orthographic elements. By thoroughly analyzing these elements and putting them in relation to analogous stelae, one may find as to what extent there are unique, conventional and/or modified features on NM18. The study shows that NM18 may be considered a significant object for research that involves late Middle Kingdom stelae. A qualitative approach is applied in order to thoroughly analyze the textual and iconographical content of the stela. Trossvik, E. 2020. Titas stele: En förnyad redogörelse för en stele från det sena Mellersta Riket från museum Gustavianum.

Privata gravstelar utgör ett essentiellt källmaterial inom egyptologisk forskning som kan avslöja stora mängder information gällande exempelvis sociala strukturer, religiös praxis och lingvistik. I denna studie undersöks en specifik stele (NM18) från Museum Gustavianum, Uppsala, som ännu inte genomgått en full analys eller blivit placerad i sin rätta kontext i det sena Mellersta Riket. Med studien ämnas att bidra med en sådan kontextualisering genom att identifiera och diskutera specifika drag på stelen, såsom ikonografi och ortografiska element. Med en grundlig analys av dessa element och genom att sätta dem i relation till jämförbara stelar, kan man utröna i vilken mån det finns unika, konventionella och/eller modifierade drag på NM18. Studien visar att NM18 kan anses vara ett betydelsefullt objekt i studier som involverar sena Mellersta Riket stelar. Ett kvalitativt tillvägagångssätt används för att ingående analysera det textuella och ikonografiska innehållet på stelen.

Keywords: Middle kingdom, stelae, iconography, Egyptian titles, Gustavianum

Acknowledgements

I wish to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Sofia Häggman for assisting me with tools and access to NM18 throughout the course of this study. I also wish to thank Eva-Lena Karlsson at Nationalmuseum in Stockholm for providing me with any historical information available on NM18.

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations…………………………………………………………………………5

Introduction…………………………………………….……………………………………..6

Purpose and questions.……………………………………...…………………..……....….7

About NM18…………………………………………...……………………………….…8

Delimitations…………………………………………..………………………………....11

Analyzing NM18…………………………………………...……………………………….13

Transcription and Translation………………………………………..…………………..13

Comments on the Text…………………………………………………..……………….16

The Titleholders on NM18 and their significance………………………..……...………17

What can be said about Tita?..……………………………………………..…………….20

Iconography and Principles of late Middle Kingdom Stelae……………...……………..21

NM18 in Context……..…...……………………………………………….……………….24

Juxtaposing NM18……..………………………………………………..……………….24

Summary…………………………………………………………………..……………..29

List of Plates…………………………………………………………………………………30

Final Discussion…..………………………………………………………………...……….38

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………40

5

List of Abbreviations

CAA Corpus Antiquitatum Aegyptiacarum

LE Late Egyptian

ME Middle Egyptian

MK Middle Kingdom

PN Personennamen

PNM Persons and Names of the Middle Kingdom

Q.C. Queen’s College

SIP Second Intermediate Period

6

Introduction

Funerary stelae are found throughout most of ancient Egyptian history, although it is by the Middle Kingdom that various distinct features begin to emerge on them. Evidently, societal change is reflected on the stelae; they are no longer reserved for the elite of the population as they had been in the previous era of the Old Kingdom.1 Instead, the stelae are now ‘popularized’ and made available to a wider sphere of society, although still mainly to those who were wealthy enough to afford them. Be that as it may, this development led to the abundance of stelae deriving from this period, with their many facets and shifting quality.2 The primary purpose of the funerary stelae was to commemorate the person or persons depicted on them, and being predominately made out of stone, the idea was that the stela and its motifs would stand the test of time and thus remain forever valid.3 The Egyptians valued their personal names to a great extent, as the long-term survival and uttering of a person’s name determined whether he or she would be immortalized. Having the names and titles of the owner, as well as his family, relatives and companions carved onto the stela thus served as a form of individual insurance for the soul in the afterlife.4 Many such MK stelae would be placed by the temple of the Underworld god Osiris at his cult center in Abydos, where many until today surviving stelae from this time are derived from. By placing the stelae in Abydene chapels, their owners also hoped to be eternally included in the festivals and rituals dedicated to Osiris, and so, having the stela act as a pragmatic substitute for their own physical presence.5

The object of this study belongs to this particular category of Abydene stelae, which is why a brief description of the socio-religious importance of Abydos will be given here.

Osiris himself is often referred to as nb AbDw, ‘Lord of Abydos’ in the offering formulae, although the original local deity was known as Khenti-amenti (xnt imnty) – ‘Foremost of the Westerners’, i.e. the protector of the deceased people in the west. Osiris is believed to have originated from the Delta, and he likely replaced Khenti-amenti by the end of the Old Kingdom.6 However, Khenti-amenti was not completely abandoned, but rather endured as an aspect, merged with Osiris. According to Osirian myth, the dismembered head of Osiris was buried near Abydos, which caused the location to become a sanctuary as well as a destination for pilgrimage, thus resulting in the large amount of cenotaphs, stelae and chapels in the area.7 It is argued that the First dynasty king, Djer, became an actual symbol of Osiris during the early Middle Kingdom, as his tomb was ‘rediscovered’ in Abydos during this time.8

Virtually every Egyptian wished to be cited and commemorated in the presence of Osiris, but not everyone had the opportunity to undertake a physical journey to Abydos. Officials could instead arrange the erection of stelae for them from afar.9 Another solution was to have the pilgrimage painted on the tomb walls, as is the case in several Theban tombs, but whether or not the journey had been conducted in reality often remains unknown. Howbeit, this does not

1 Yamamoto in Oppenheim et al. 2015, 33. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid., 34. 4 Ibid., 36; Lloyd in Allen et al. 1989, 119. 5 See e.g. Baines in Shafer 1991, 156–58; Leprohon 1978, 36. 6 Mekhitarian et al. 1998, 7. 7 Ibid. 8 Yamamoto in Oppenheim et al. 2015, 250. 9 See e.g. Leprohon 1978, 36.

7

seem to have mattered, neither to the tomb owner, nor Osiris.10 Another deity that frequently occurs on MK Abydene stelae (including the object of this

study) is the jackal Wepwawet (wp-wAwt) – ‘Opener of Ways’. His earliest appearances are attested to the Pre-dynastic period, and his role is strongly connected to the realm of the dead, where he would act as a guiding entity for the deceased. During the Middle Kingdom, he is often referred to as nb tA Dsr, ‘Lord of the Necropolis/Holy Land’, thus ascribing him the role of a warden, as well as a slayer of the enemies of Osiris.11

Abydos, which belonged to the eighth Upper Egyptian nome, was thus a vital religious site, as a temple had been constructed at the site, along with an enclosure as early as in the First dynasty. However, Osirian worship would not reach its heyday until the Middle Kingdom,12 and is worth noting that the devotion to Osiris during the Middle Kingdom did not induce ‘mass movement’. Even though thousands of stelae were indeed erected at Abydos, their number still does not equal a massive-scale pilgrimage.13

The late Middle Kingdom is characterized by an increasing bureaucratization of the Egyptian state, where a sophisticated hierarchy of administrative tasks evolved. These changes are apparent in e.g. the expanding quantity of administrative and political titles found in tombs, on stelae, papyri and so called scarab seals.14 Although this system seems to have functioned relatively smoothly for some time, the Egyptian society eventually had to face an era of fragmentation and decline of the exclusive authority of the king, known as the Second Intermediate Period.15 The 13th dynasty is occasionally considered the starting point of this period, since as many as fifty to sixty rulers are attested to this dynasty, during a period of about 150 years.16 The internal chronology of the SIP and its dynasties is yet another widely debated field that is neither possible nor relevant to discuss here, since there will be no attempts to draw parallels to certain rulers.

Finally, a few words should be said about the language of this period, i.e. Middle Egyptian. It was the formal language of the Middle Kingdom, and although it had evolved and changed quite radically by the New Kingdom, the Middle Egyptian way of writing and its literature remained essential even throughout later periods.17 This phase of the language may thus be considered the ‘classical’ Egyptian, and it would signify a sense of prestige, permanence, and even archaism.

Purpose and Questions

The present study intends to identify and contextualize certain features on the stela NM18 that either correspond to, contradict, or are deemed unique in terms of orthographic and iconographic criteria. Such criteria are found in numerous studies and have consequently been established for analogous funerary stelae. The purpose of this essay is not to re-evaluate or test the validity of the criteria, but rather have them provide a basis upon which new arguments can be developed. Nonetheless, an awareness of the shortcomings of these criteria and theories must be prevalent throughout the study.

By shedding some light on an object that evidently has not been given much attention for over 50 years, the thesis will serve as a complement to previous studies that are rather dated and limited, as well as a compatible case that may be placed in the wider context of late Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period private funerary stelae.

As of today, a thorough study of NM18 has not been conducted and published in English,

10 Mekhitarian et al. 1998, 7. 11 See e.g. Evans 2011, 104; Wegner 2007, 147. 12 Yamamoto in Oppenheim et al. 2015, 251–52. 13 Lichtheim 1988, 134. 14 Silverman et al. 2009, xii. On the relevance of MK and SIP administrative seals, see Martin 1971. 15 Ibid.; Marée 2010, xi. 16 Grajetzki 2006, 63. 17 See e.g. Silverman et al. 2009, xii.

8

which further motivates this study, and although not an end in itself, the results may also potentially prove significant for future studies in e.g. ancient Egyptian art, religion, or socio-political studies. As is the case with most historical and archaeological material, NM18 cannot (and should not) be considered a ‘closed case’, even after this study is completed. But by asking new questions to the material at hand, my ambition is to provide some answers that recognize this particular stela as a valuable scientific material, as well as a, although not rare, quite curious object. Additionally, the idea is to account for a genealogy of the owner of the stela, transliterations, translations, physical properties, an illustration and photographs in order to create a somewhat holistic perception of the stela. My view is thus that the lack of a comprehensive analysis and contextualization of NM18 further validates the execution of this study, as it would enhance the accessibility and understanding of the stela.

In order to fulfill the aforementioned purpose, a delimited set of questions are necessary to ask. Although the study will take into consideration various aspects of NM18, the actual questions posed are intended to function as tools for catching the essence of this stela and its context:

- Which are the primary orthographic, iconographic and other significant features that can be identified on NM18?

- How do these features correspond to conventional late Middle Kingdom Abydene funerary stelae?

About NM18

The object of this study is labeled NM18 or NMEg18 and formally belongs to the Nationalmuseum in Stockholm, although it has been deposited at the Egyptian Collection of the Victoriamuseum (modern day Museum Gustavianum) in Uppsala since 1921.18 The provenance of this specific object is largely undocumented, although Lieblein and Fåhræus mention several donators of ancient Egyptian artefacts to the Swedish nation during the first half of the 19th century. These included the Vice Consul in Alexandria, Giovanni Anastasi, the former Minister of the Ottoman Sublime Porte, N.G. Palin, and the Shipowner in Alexandria, Polack.19 However, since there are no official specifications on the various objects of the donations, it is difficult, if not impossible, to trace NM18 to a specific donor or collection. Auguste Mariette conducted major excavations in the Abydene area during the nineteenth century, where numerous stelae and other archaeological findings were recorded.20 NM18 is not included in his documentations, yet it is reasonable to assume that it too was discovered some time during these excavations, considering the content of the stela and the time during which it presumably arrived in Sweden. Moreover, Simpson argues that it is better to assign stelae from this time to Abydos, unless texts or other indications suggest otherwise.21

The stela is currently not on display, but located at the storage unit of Gustavianum.

Measurements:

W: 37.5 cm (top), 34.7 cm (bottom). H: 51 cm. D: 8.5 cm to 6 cm.

18 Written correspondence with Nationalmuseum curator Eva-Lena Karlsson, 2020-04-06. 19 Lieblein states that according to a Royal Letter from August 31st 1826, Anastasi donated i.a. twelve stelae, thus

it is possible that NM18 was included among these. Unfortunately, I have not been able to obtain a copy of this

letter. See Lieblein 1868, Förord; Fåhræus 1872, 104. 20 Simpson 1974, 5-6; See Mariette, Catalogue général des monuments d'Abydos découverts pendant les fouilles

de cette ville (1880) for detailed descriptions of the excavated objects. 21 Simpson 1974, 16.

9

NM18 is a traditional round-topped stela, crafted from limestone, and its state of preservation is relatively good, although the surface is somewhat eroded. Noticeable damage is mainly found at the top line of hieroglyphs and along the edges of the stela. The sunk relief images and hieroglyphs still contain traces of green and red pigments. A total of eight people are represented in two registers on the stela, with the owner sitting at the top left, slightly larger than the others, and accompanied by a loaded offering table in front of him. No details such as facial features or jewelry have been preserved, if they were ever there. Each person is holding a lotus flower and are portrayed in the motion of smelling it whilst kneeling, with the other hand lowered in front of them. The exception is the owner, who sits on a lion-footed chair. The females wear long wigs, while the males wear short wigs (or none). The owner and the woman beneath him are the only persons facing right, the other six face to the left. All seventeen columns of hieroglyphs remain more or less decipherable; eleven horizontal and six columns combining both horizontal and vertical lines. The artistic execution of NM18 is rather decent in that the columns are straight, the images proportional, and the hieroglyphs are symmetric and carefully inscribed. This becomes even more apparent when put in comparison to analogous stelae.22

22 See pp. 24–37.

Figure 1. Front of NM18.

Photograph by the author.

10

NM18 belongs to the category of stelae commonly referred to as funerary stelae. It differs slightly from autobiographic stelae in that it does not contain elements of self-appraisal, nor summaries of the owner’s life and memorable deeds.23

The stela has previously been dated to the late 12th or early 13th dynasty,24 and though I do not find it justified to challenge this estimation, the various methods for dating funerary stelae involve issues that will be heeded here briefly:

Criteria for dating stelae were suggested as early as 1939 by P.C. Smither. His study is in a sense ‘pioneer’, although it has been rather criticized ever since. Smither takes a qualitative approach to his material, i.e. Middle Kingdom, Second Intermediate Period and New Kingdom stelae. His focal point is the very common Htp-di-nsw formula found on these stelae, and how it changed over time. Consequently, he concludes that the writing of the formula can be used

23 See e.g. Lichtheim 1988, 1–2 on the origin and traits of Egyptian autobiographies. 24 Peterson 1968, 25; Lieblein 1868, 21; Franke 1984, 425.

Figure 2. Front of NM18

Illustration by the author.

11

as a criterion for dating stelae from these periods.25 A similar study was undertaken by Bennett in 1941, although he accounted only for the Middle Kingdom, but included several other variables such as the writing of the god Osiris’ name, the designation of the deceased, offering lists, and the various titles of Osiris.26 Kurt Pflüger published a qualitative article in 1947 where he emphasized five main points when studying Middle Kingdom stelae: Forms of stelae, Content (texts), Family, Position of the woman in society, and Ideal standard of life. Although, as he puts it himself, the results should be taken with a ‘grain of salt’,27 his study makes several fair points that correlate to what scholars know today in terms of e.g. MK society and craftsmanship.

Criticism towards dating criteria based on e.g. the Htp-di-nsw formula has been raised in several publications. Franke raises the issue of using statistical ‘one-dimensional, one-sided criteria’ when studying stelae, as the results will only depend on the database at hand and neglect the issues of regional variations and scribal errors. He also argues that when dating stelae, only stelae should be included in the study.28 Ilin-Tomich counters this argument, stating that besides stelae, it is reasonable to include monuments like offering-tables and statues, as these often were placed in the same chapels and crafted at the same workshops.29 Vernus recognizes similar criticism, stating that the quantitative study of Smither30 is only operational on a rather rough level, and its two major flaws are that it contains several exceptions to the results, and that Smither does not account for contemporary historical changes in relation to the writing of the Htp-di nsw formula.31

Publications that specifically discuss NM18 include Mogensen’s book from 1919. It is handwritten in French and contains a brief description of NM18, as well as drawings of the hieroglyphs.32 However, there are no translations provided and although there is no explicit purpose of the book, it seems to be to summarize the contemporary Egyptian stela-collection at Nationalmuseum in Stockholm. Furthermore, Mogensen claims that the collection is quite small and not of very great scientific importance,33 a statement of which I wish to actively distance myself from, as my study is intended to show how great the scientific value can be of just one object from the collection. Lieblein provided a catalogue over the aforementioned collection in 1868. In this rather dated book, he briefly describes the stela using contemporary Swedish units of measurements, and he provides an incomplete and rather ambiguous translation of it in Swedish.34 Finally, Peterson’s article from 1968 provides a black and white photo of NM18, a brief description of the stela as well as a translation in German, and a listing of transliterated personal names.35 Although appearing to contain a few errors, Peterson’s article is thus far the most comprehensive interpretation of NM18.

Delimitations

The selection of the object for this study is primarily based on the premises that previous research on it seemed insufficient or non-existing, its state of preservation, its legibility, and its comparability to similar objects. Hence, delimitations in terms of time period (late MK) and

25 Smither 1939, 34–37. 26 Bennett 1941, 77–82. 27 Pflüger 1947, 127. 28 Franke 2003, 56–57. Franke explicitly criticizes the dating criteria developed by Bennett (1941) and refined by

Satzinger (1997) as suffering from these drawbacks. However, Satzinger is seemingly aware of this as he points

out the Bennett-Satzinger-method as being a ‘donkey bridge’ rather than a ‘miracle cure’. Satzinger 1997, 186-87. 29 Ilin-Tomich 2011, 21–22. 30 See Smither 1939, 34–37. 31 Vernus in Quirke 1991, 141–42. 32 Mogensen 1919, 13–15. 33 Ibid., Avant-propos. 34 Lieblein 1868, 21. 35 Peterson 1968, 25–27.

12

geographic restrictions (Abydos) were secondary aspects that sorted themselves due to the selection of this specific stela, rather than another object. It should be stressed however, that NM18 does in fact contain a relatively rich amount of text and images, which could provide plenty of material for separate studies on e.g. iconography or linguistics. But since the ambition for this study is to take on a rather holistic view on the stela, such exhaustive studies on specific elements must be excluded here. Be that as it may, a few restrictions regarding the information found on NM18 must be made in order to stay within the frames of the current thesis-level:

Prosopography and biographic accounts are only relevant in order to say something about the owner of the stela, and so the other persons’ whereabouts will be excluded. However, a basal genealogy is provided for the purpose of clarification for the author as well as the reader. Although a semantic or philological approach could prove fruitful, any such comprehensive analyzes would range beyond the purpose of the essay. Finally, there will be no rhetorical analysis due to the nature of the stela and its absence of autobiographic elements.

13

Analyzing NM18

Transcription and Translation

(1)

Htp-di-nsw Wsir Htp-di Wp-wAwt nb An offering which the king gives and Osiris. An offering which Wepwawet gives, Lord

(2)

AbDw di=sn prt-xrw t Hnqt kA.w Apd.w Ss mnxt snTr mrHt of Abydos, that they may give an invocation offering of bread, beer, oxen, fowl, alabaster, clothing, incense, ointment

(3)

xt-nb nfr wab.t didi.t pt qmAt tA anx.t nTr im n kA n sS n xnt.y and all good and pure things that the sky gives and the earth creates, on which the god lives, for the ka of the Scribe of the Outer Palaceª

(4)

TitA36 mAa xrw ms n nb.t pr SHtp-ib37 mAa.t xrw Htp-di-nsw Wsir n kA n Tita the Justified, born of the Lady of the House,ᵇ Sehetep-ib the Justified. An offering that the king gives and Osiris for the ka of

36 A conclusive interpretation of the stela-owner’s name has not been made. Peterson renders the name as tt, Peterson 1968, 25-27; Franke writes t(i)t.w, Franke 1984, 425; Ranke provides several variations of transcriptions

and transliterations, although none is identical to that on NM18, see Ranke, PN I, 383 (20). The name is attested

on another stela (Rio de Janeiro, 630 [2422]) and translated by Kitchen as ‘Tita’, see Kitchen 1990 (I), 37. Hence,

the rendering titA will be deemed valid in the present study. 37 Ranke PN I, 318 (1).

Figure 3. Text as translated in numerical order

14

(5)

it=f Ddi38 mAa xrw ms n nb.t pr It39

his father Dedi the Justified, born of the Lady of the House It.

(6)

m(w)t=f SHtp-ib mAa.t xrw ms.t n nb.t pr Mrri40 mAa.t xrw

his mother Sehetep-ib the Justified, born of the Lady of the House, Mereri the Justified

(7)

Atw n wr ¢y41 mAa xrw

Chief Attendant,ᶜ Khy the Justified

(8)

sn=f Sbk-Htp42 mAa xrw ms n SHtp-ib mAa.t xrw

his brother Sebekhotep the Justified, born of Sehetep-ib the Justified

(9)

38 Ranke PN I, 402 (7). 39 Ranke PN I, 49, (7). 40 Ranke PN I, 162, (22). 41 Ranke PN I, 263, (6). 42 Ranke PN I, 205, (6).

15

sn=f Iw-snb43 mAa xrw ms n TA-ntt-n(i)44 mAa.t xrw

his brother Iwseneb the Justified, born of Ta-en-teteni the Justified

(10)

sn.t=f TitA ms.t n SHtp-ib mAa.t xrw

his sister Tita, born of Sehetep-ib the Justified

(11)

sn.t=f Nb-irw.t45 mAa.t xrw ms.t n SHtp-ib mAa.t xrw

his sister Neb-irut the Justified, born of Sehetep-ib the Justified

(12)

sn.t=f Nb.t46 mAa.t xrw sn.t=f Iiy47 mAa.t xrw sn.t=f @tp48 mAa.t xrw sn=f Wr-nb49 mAa xrw his sister Nebet the Justified, his sister Iiy the Justified, his sister Hetep the Justified, his brother Werneb the Justified

(13)

sn=f @pi50 mAa xrw sn=f SA-rn51 mAa xrw sn=f Nfr-xwt52 mAa xrw Xrd n kAp @r-m-(sA?)=f 53 his brother Hepi the Justified, his brother Saren the Justified, his brother Neferhut the Justified, the Child of the Inner Palaceᵈ Horem(sa?)ef

(14)

43 Ranke PN I, 15, (22). 44 Ranke PN I, 364, (9). 45 Ranke PN I, 183, (16). 46 Ranke PN I, 187, (17). 47 Ranke PN I, 7, (15). 48 Ranke PN I, 257, (22). 49 Ranke PN I, 81, (12). 50 Variation, see Ranke PN I, 237-38. 51 Ranke PN I, 283, (11). 52 Ranke PN I, 199, (11). 53 Attested in Ranke PN I, 248, (12), although not entirely recognizable on NM18.

16

Xrd n kAp Iy54 mAa xrw iHms Srw55 mAa xrw wdp.w Imn-m-HA.t56 imy-ty/wnmty (?) Snb=f 57 mAa xrw the Child of the Inner Palace Iy the Justified, the Attendantᵉ Seru the Justified, the Cupbearerᶠ Imenemhat, the Overseer(?)/wnmtyᵍ Senebef the Justified

(15)

af.ty Rn=f-snb58 mAa xrw sAw wDA @ri59 mAa xrw aA Tti60 mAa xrw aA Nbs61 mAa xrw the Brewerʰ Renefseneb the Justified, the Guard of the Storehouseⁱ Hori the Justified, the Elderᶨ Teti the Justified, the Elder Nebes the Justified

(16)

aA Iy62 mAa xrw aA SA-HtHr63 mAa xrw nf.w Sni-wr64 sA=f Sni-Sri65 mAa xrw the Elder Iy the justified, the Elder Sahathor the Justified, the Captain (of ship)ᵏ Seni-wer, his son Seni-sheri the Justified

(17)

iw nTr.w nTr.t imy.w AbDw r rdi.t TAw nDm n anx n smyt-tn n kA=sn The gods and goddesses in Abydos will give/blow pleasant winds of life to this Desert-necropolis for their souls.

Comments on the Text.

The Offering-formula found on the first to fourth lines of NM18 follows the traditional four-part pattern:66 The ‘kings-formula’ (Htp-di-nsw), the ‘god’s formula’ (Wsir and Wp-wAwt), the ‘request’ (di=sn) and the ‘recipient’ (n kA n sS n xnt.y TitA). The formula is then repeated on line four for all the recipients declared on lines five to sixteen, however without the offering requests. As mentioned previously, the meaning and orthography of the Offering-formula has been the subject for much debate. In the case of NM18, one may categorize its formulae to the ‘type A’ suggested by Smither,67 thus attesting the stela to the Middle Kingdom. However, there are no references to any kings on NM18, which further complicates a more precise dating. Be that as it may, it is always reasonable to examine as many variables as possible when conducting a qualitative study in order to provide a more substantial and valid argumentation. As such, a

54 Variation, see Ranke PN I, 7-8. 55 Ranke PN I, 317, (4). 56 Ranke PN I, 28, (8). 57 Ranke PN I, 314, (5). 58 Ranke PN I, 223, (17). 59 Ranke PN I, 251, (8). 60 Ranke PN I, 384, (4). 61 Variation (?) Ranke PN I, 193, (1). 62 Ranke PN I, 7, (17). 63 Ranke PN I, 283, (20). 64 Ranke PN I, 310, (14). 65 Ranke PN I, 310, (15). 66 As suggested by Franke 2003, 39. 67 ‘Type A’ is specified as having the di-sign written as the third word. Smither 1939, 34.

17

selection of orthographic elements (based on the comprehensive study of Ilin-Tomich)68 will be presented here and paralleled with NM18:

The writing of kA.w Apd.w as on NM18 (line 2) was common throughout the late Middle Kingdom, but seems to have risen significantly during the 13th dynasty, and even more by the Second Intermediate Period.69

The phrase anx.t nTr im (line 3) could be interpreted as traditional rather than an indicator of SIP stelae, which would have used the additional suffix pronoun =s or =sn, i.e. anx.t nTr im=sn/s.70

The designation of the recipient as n kA n sS n xnt.y TitA (lines 3-4) suggests a 13th dynasty origin. The epithet imAxy alone or added to n kA n is mainly found in the 12th dynasty as well as the Second Intermediate Period,71 however it is not found at all on NM18.

On the final line (line 17), a future construction may be found, introduced by the word iw. In Middle Egyptian, this would have marked an independent clause, followed by the future r sDm (here r rdi.t […]). However, in early Late Egyptian, the word iw is integrated as a marker of the future construction iw=f r sDm, instead of just marking independent clauses,72 hence the possible translation ‘The gods and goddesses in Abydos will give/blow pleasant winds of life […]. This would suggest that NM18 displays a fusion of standardized ME elements, as well as early Late Egyptian grammar. Albeit, whether this line is an authentic sample of aforementioned LE future construction is difficult to determine without examining additional cases.

In summary, there are indeed a number of features that should be heeded when attempting to place NM18 into a specific chronological context. Evidently, several orthographical indicators point towards a late MK origin, i.e. the 13th dynasty, or even Second Intermediate Period. But as mentioned in the introduction, these particular periods are elusive to scholars, partly due to the difficulties of establishing an internal chronology, and partly due to the lack of material that can be attested to the time of certain rulers. It should also be stressed that hieroglyphic writing was a deeply rooted tradition in a culture that allegedly valued esthetics and pragmatism equally,73 and so, one should be careful of drawing definite conclusions based on orthographic features alone. Nevertheless, studies like that of Ilin-Tomich show that it is reasonable to establish certain reference points that may act as guidelines when dating and contextualizing stelae and other objects.

The Titleholders on NM18 and their significance

(a) sS n xnt.y – ‘Scribe of the Outer Palace’74 This title is found only once on NM18 and belongs to the owner, Tita. His duties likely included the overseeing and recording of the movement of goods and meals that passed through from the outer to the inner palace. The title is mostly found with mid-13th dynasty sources.75 (b) nb.t pr – ‘Lady of the House(hold)’.76

68 Ilin-Tomich 2011. 69 Ibid., 24. 70 Ibid., 26. 71 Ibid. 72 Referred to as ‘Stage 4’ by Grossman & Polis 2014, 53. 73 See e.g. Vernus on the distinction between traditional and administrative writing. Vernus in Quirke 1991, 142–

43. 74 See Quirke 2004, 32-33; PNM, https://pnm.uni-mainz.de/1/title/152. Cf. Ward who renders the title ‘Scribe of

a Sanctuary’. Ward 1982, 163 (1414). Cf. Kitchen who translates it to ‘Scribe of the drinks cellar’, Kitchen 1990

(Vol. I), 35. Cf. Franke: ‘xnt ist kaum ein “sanctuary”, sondern ein “(Keller-)Magazin”’, Franke 1984, 111;

Peterson translated the title to ‘Chief Scribe’, Peterson 2013, 34. 75 Quirke 2004, 32–33. 76 PNM, https://pnm.uni-mainz.de/1/title/6.

18

According to Pflüger, this title was held by any female of the house,77 although when examining the stela further, his claim seems insufficient: It is found three times on NM18: Before Sehetep-ib (mother), It (paternal grandmother) and Mereri (maternal grandmother). This indicates that the title was held by the elder women of the household since the other women, like Tita’s sisters, do not hold it. Neither does the mother of Tita’s half-brother, Ta-en-teteni, suggesting she may have had a secondary position, or was not counted as part of the household at all. The title is only used introductory, as Seheteb-ib is mentioned on several occasions, but only with the title once. The specific duties of the nb.t pr are rather vague and the title does not imply a profession in itself. (c) Atw n wr – ‘Chief Attendant’.78 The title occurs once on NM18, held by the man Khy. He is positioned facing Tita directly, but no filiation nor family-relation to Tita is provided. This may suggest he had some other important relation to Tita and worked close to him, and thus was included on the stela as a favor.79 As the title suggests, Khy may have been Tita’s primary administrator, and in charge of subordinate attendants. (d) Xrd n kAp – ‘Child of the Inner Palace’80 Occurs twice on the stela, held by Horemef and Iy. There are no connections to Tita’s family for these two persons. The title itself is fairly common in MK context, although its meaning is not completely clear. Quirke states that the holders of the title have no defining role in palace rituals, nor are there signs of age differentiations. The titleholders likely grew up inside the palace, and in case they did not receive a new title or position later in life, it is possible that they just kept the designation ‘Child of the Inner Palace’.81 (e) iHms – ‘Attendant’82 The Attendant-title occurs once on NM18, held by the man Seru. His area of attendance is not specified, but the title is usually found at the lower level of officials. A plausible arrangement of titles within certain chambers, e.g. the ‘Chamber of beer’ is provided by Quirke, starting with the ‘Store overseer’, followed by the ‘Chamber keeper and cupbearer’, the ‘Cupbearer’, and the ‘Attendant’.83 Thus, it is likely that Seru belonged to a similar chamber and acted as an assistant to the other officials of the same chamber. (f) wdp.w – ‘Cupbearer’84 This title is held by the man Imenemhat, though it is not stated which chamber or area of responsibility he worked within. However, his tasks would have included bringing food from the preparation room to the place of eating,85 and similar to the Attendant Seru above, his rank was likely found within the middle to low levels of officials. (g) imy-ty (?) ‘Overseer’(?) or wnmty ‘Sustainer’(?) The title occurs once and belongs to Senebef. Its legibility on the stela is rather vague, and no equivalents to it are found in the literature.86 Nevertheless, a possible interpretation is that Senebef was an overseer (imy) of a function or chamber that remains unknown. Another possible rendering would be the title wnmty. Orthographically, the hitherto known writings of wnmty are not comparable to that on NM18,87 but it is reasonable to assume that the scribe

77 Pflüger 1947, 129. 78 Ward distinguishes between wartw and Atw, as the former being attached to one of the administrative districts of

Egypt or to a guild of workmen, and the latter being attached to an official or group of officials of some kind. Atw

thus reflects the idea of an ‘Administrator’. Ward 1982, 6. 79 A similar case is found on stela Berlin 1204. See Leprohon 1978, 33–34. 80 PNM, https://pnm.uni-mainz.de/1/title/319; Ward 1982, 143 (1229). Rendered ‘School Boy’ by Peterson 2013,

34. 81 Quirke 2004, 28–29. 82 Ward 1982, 67 (561). 83 Quirke 2004, 66. 84 Ward renders the title ‘Butler’, Ward 1982, 90 (755); PNM, https://pnm.uni-mainz.de/1/title/34. 85 Quirke 2004, 66. 86 Peterson defines imy-ty as an ‘unknown title’. Peterson 1968, 26, n 1. 87 For the writing of wnmty, see e.g. Lange and Schäfer (Vol. 3) 1902, 57; Ward 1982, 86 (715).

19

simply used the common imy-sign to write wnm, both of which appear to be mutually interchangeable. The title wnmty itself lacks a generic translation, but since the word wnm translates to verbs such as ‘eat’, ‘consume’, ‘feed’, etc. it would make sense to provide a translation that relates to such actions, i.e. ‘Feeder’,’Sustainer’ or the like. (h) af.ty – ‘Brewer’88 The Brewer Renefseneb occurs once on NM18, but there is no specification as to what sort of brew he produced (such as ‘Brewer of Beer’ or ‘Brewer of the Swy.t-drink’).89 (i) sAw wDA – ‘Guard of the Storehouse’90 The Guard-title is quite common in ancient Egyptian context, and most often attached to the object(s) of protection and supervision. Its occurrence on NM18 is ascribed to the man Hori, who evidently acted as a warden of a storage unit that likely contained grain of some sort. (j) aA – ‘Elder’91 This title occurs four times on NM18, held by Teti, Nebes, Iy and Sahathor. A definite interpretation of the title remains to be made, although a plausible perception is that it has the sense of an epithet rather than a title related to a certain profession. Fischer discusses the occurrence of aA in Old Kingdom contexts and suggests that it is indicative for someone who is ‘great in age’.92 Allegedly, Teti, Nebes, Iy and Sahathor were known to Tita as elderly men, likely retired from their former professions. (k) nf.w – ‘Captain’93 (of Ship) The final title to occur on NM18 is Captain, belonging to the man Seni-wer. There is no specification as to the kind of ship or transport he was captain of, as various ship-captain titles are known from the Middle Kingdom. Quirke suggests the ‘plain’ nfw-title relates to being captain over a single ship rather than two or more ships.94 Seni-wer is the only person on the stela outside Tita’s family with an attested filiation, i.e. his son Seni-sheri.

Additionally, some attention should be brought to the reoccurring epithet mAa xrw – ‘The Justified’ or ‘True of Voice’. It is not to be perceived as a title, but rather a concept or juridical state of being, directly related to the death cult and afterlife. The original meaning of the concept to be ‘true of voice’95 has been the subject of lengthy discussions with various interpretations, and a deeper delving into this debate must be excluded from this essay. Nevertheless, the rendering that mAa xrw was a parallel to the victorious Horus in the Osirian myth96 already at an early stage in ancient Egyptian culture, as suggested by Breasted, is commonly accepted. Yet, it is unknown when and how the epithet acquired its moral sense.97 The adjectival utilization of mAa xrw like that on NM18 is according to Anthes fairly straightforward; it is added to the name of every deceased person from the Middle Kingdom on.98 If this is accurate, it becomes rather obvious that out of the thirty-one people mentioned on NM18, twenty-six (including the owner) were already deceased at the time of its creation, whereas five were still alive. The epithet shows consistency on the stela as it distinguishes between male and female persons (mAa xrw or mAa.t xrw), and unlike her title, the mAa xrw-epithet is indeed repeated for the only person whose name appears more than once (Sehetep-ib). This may further illustrate the sense of a state of being, rather than a description of the person. Consequently, a valid

88 Ward 1982, 73 (595); Hannig 2006, 151 (5145); PNM, https://pnm.uni-mainz.de/1/title/69. 89 Ward 1982, 73 (596), (599). 90 See e.g. Hannig 2006, 709 (25830) and 248 (9048); Ward 1982, 146 (1255); Quirke 2004, 67. 91 Attested in this form on NM18 and a Louvre stela (C.17). See Boreux, 1931, p. 45–48 and pl. II; Fischer 1997,

11 (586a). 92 Fischer 1964, 27-28. 93 Ward 1982, 99 (826) reads ‘Sailor’; Hannig 2006, 431 (15490); Jones 1988, 77 (116) reads

‘sailor’,’skipper/captain of a boat’. 94 Quirke 2004, 59-60. 95 Anthes’ study thoroughly breaks down and evaluates the principles of mAa.t as well as the meaning of xrw. See

Anthes 1954. 96 See e.g. Anthes 1954, 21. 97 Breasted 1959, 34–35. 98 Anthes 1954, 21.

20

assumption would be that the workshop-personnel somehow received information regarding which persons should be designated as deceased, and which should not. One possibility would be that the stela-owner himself provided this information before he died. However, this method may have been rather inconvenient, since some of the people labeled as alive when handing over the information may have passed away shortly prior to or after the death of the stela-owner.

In summary, the titles and epithets on NM18 may indeed reveal some relevant aspects in terms of Tita’s close family and kinsmen. Although this is not primarily a prosopographical study, it is still possible to envision the contexts in which many of these people dwelled. For instance, Tita’s own title clearly implies that he worked within the royal palace administration, and several of the other titleholders may also be linked to the palace. This indicates that they were colleagues to some extent and likely friends of Tita, which probably motivated him to include them on the stela. Nevertheless, it is not possible to determine how close friends or colleagues they were, just that they likely were. While the inclusion of non-related people on the stela might be considered a personal favor, it is argued that some of them, like brewers and cupbearers, held a pragmatic function in the afterlife as well, since they could continue to offer their services to the stela owner after death.99 Finally, it is interesting to note that the only titleholders within Tita’s family are the nb.t pr (b) Sehetep-ib, It and Mereri. The remaining titleholders (c-k) reveal no affiliations to Tita.

What can be said about Tita?

His title makes it clear that Tita worked within the palace, however not necessarily close to the king, as the supposed duties of his title suggest that he attended to material services rather than personal services.100 No expressions of gratitude towards a certain king or official can be found, which may be explained by the contemporary political situation of the 13th dynasty, i.e. a continuous swap of rulers and high officials. Furthermore, Tita seems to have been the only member of his family to hold a professional title as neither his father nor any of his siblings are preceded by any title at all. There are no references to children or wives of Tita, which would have been more or less customary, perhaps suggesting that he died at a fairly young age.

From the stela itself, one may deduce a relatively straightforward genealogy of the owner. His name is only known from one other source; the stela of Resu from the Museu Nacional in Rio de Janeiro.101 This stela is of similar execution as NM18, thus most likely from an Abydene workshop. Tita’s name and title on Resu’s stela appear identical to those on NM18, which suggests that it is the same person. Even so, two major issues are found on Resu’s stela: The first is the maternal filiation provided for Tita, as it states that he and his brother are born of the Lady of the House, Mereri the Justified.102 There is no mention of Sehetep-ib, who undoubtedly was the mother of Tita and most of his siblings according to NM18. As for Mereri, she is indeed relevant on NM18 as well, but as the mother of Sehetep-ib, i.e. Tita’s grandmother. The discrepancy between Tita’s plausible mothers may thus be explained by a mix up or misunderstanding on the workshop’s behalf. I would argue that the affiliation on NM18 is accurate in this case; since it is dedicated to Tita by himself, it would be reasonable for him to make sure that the names of his mother and other family members were commemorated correctly. The stela of Resu is primarily dedicated to Resu and his family and as such, he was probably not as concerned with confirming the mother of a friend or colleague.

The second conundrum concerns a person who is referred to as Tita’s brother on Resu’s stela, and also named Tita. NM18 does not mention a brother named Tita, but a sister, who is

99 Yamamoto in Oppenheim et al. 2015, 35. 100 See e.g. Quirke 2004, 32–33. 101 Kitchen 1990 (Vol. I), 35; Vol. II, 11–12. Inv. 630 [2422]. The current state of this particular stela is unknown

due to the fire that largely destroyed the collection in 2018.

The man involved (Resu) is dated to the beginning of the 13th dynasty, see Franke 1984, 252. 102 Kitchen 1990 (Vol. II), 11.

21

Figure 5. Genealogy of Tita (red frame) based on NM18. Siblings without specified maternal or paternal affiliations are marked

with an asterisk.

Figure 4. Transcription of line 14 on the stela of Resu.*

also portrayed on the stela. A plausible explanation for this could simply be that the mason of Resu’s stela meant to write ‘sister’ and forgot to add a feminine indicative (.t). Another possibility is that Tita did have a brother named Tita who is not mentioned on NM18. A third option involves the interpretation of the entire line; The scribe Tita is not related to any of the other persons, and the brother Tita is the brother of Resu, and born of Mereri. However, Kitchen interpreted the genealogy of Resu’s stela as Tita I and Tita II being born of Mereri, along with three other men (Senib, Irer and Seni-nebi) mentioned below them.103 Interestingly enough, none of these men, nor Resu, are mentioned on NM18, as one would expect if they were indeed brothers or half-brothers.

Hence, the rendering that Tita “stands on his own” on Resu’s stela and is unrelated to all the other persons seems rather reasonable. Obviously, there is also the possibility that it is not at all the same Tita as on NM18, which in turn raises the dilemma of having two people of approximately the same time-period, with identical names and titles, who are not attested elsewhere but on these two very similar stelae.

Iconography and Principles of late Middle Kingdom Stelae

The time of the late Middle Kingdom is referred to by Pflüger as a ‘post-feudal’ era, in that its monuments (in this case stelae) show several features that could be interpreted as a kind of ‘democratization’ or even ‘revolution’ of the Egyptian middle class.104 One should always be cautious of such anachronistic conclusions, but the concepts of feudalism, post-feudalism, democratization and revolution are not entirely inapt in the ancient Egyptian context as they may illustrate certain societal patterns, innovations and/or transitions. However, they all involve a multitude of political and socio-economic parameters that are far from apparent in many cases, and hence, should not be carelessly adapted to certain contexts since they could prove quite misleading and even false. It is nonetheless relevant to consider these features in the light of the

103 Kitchen 1990 (Vol I), 35. 104 Pflüger does not provide any closer definitions of these terms and his utilization of them, but instead he refers

to Max Weber’s Economy and Society. See Pflüger 1947.

* After Kitchen 1990 (Vol. II), 11.

22

hitherto known attributes of NM18. Although Pflüger’s study is rather dated, his focus is on the presumed societal transformation during the second half of the 12th dynasty, and the outcome of such a transformation would likely be prevalent to some extent on a 13th dynasty stela.

A principal issue discussed is the change in which the persons are depicted on stelae during the late 12th dynasty. Simplicity, along with a perception of ‘puritanism’ is tangible in these stelae, in clear contrast with earlier detailed depictions of wealth and lavishness. Moreover, the persons portrayed on stelae are more uniform in size and posture.105 These characteristics are all present on NM18 and several other contemporary stelae, which will be discussed below. The persons on NM18, except Tita, are all portrayed with the same size, postures and traits, i.e. the lotus flower. Since the surface is rather corroded, there is no telling whether plausible luxurious perks such as jewelry and make-up have faded or were left out on purpose. Whether this is then to be interpreted as ‘puritan’ tendencies, temporary aesthetic vogue, or a combination of the two, remains undetermined. It is likely however, that the late MK size-uniformity on stelae of women and other persons is the result of an awareness of symmetry rather than radical societal changes.106

The final iconographic aspect to be considered here is the virtually standardized occurrence of deities on private funerary stelae, primarily Osiris and Wepwawet. Direct communication with the gods was in previous times reserved for the king alone, in his role as a divine protector. But by the late Middle Kingdom, even the most modest person who could afford a stela had the opportunity to link himself with the gods, as well as the king through the Htp-di-nsw formula.107 Although there are no images of Osiris or Wepwawet on NM18, they are both mentioned at the very top of the stela, thus linking Tita and the other persons directly to the ruling gods of the underworld. If anything, this phenomenon could be considered a societal upgrade in that it allowed for people of lesser rank to be commemorated and protected by the gods, which in turn has left us with a more diverse archaeological record.

However, it would probably prove rather far-fetched to conclude that NM18 is derived from, as Pflüger puts it, a time of ‘revolution’ and ‘post-feudalism’. There are indeed indicators of a contemporary change in the way funerary stelae were executed, but on the contrary, it would be unreasonable to assume that stela-manufacturers were static and unaffected by stylistic trends, geographic conditions, artistic skills, etc. These are all aspects that need to be considered along with iconographical studies, since they all co-existed, and it is often evident that e.g. images and texts were crafted to form a symbiotic meaning to an object or building.108

This does not mean that we positively can say that late MK societal change is not reflected on the stelae, because it most certainly is. My view is that in the case of NM18, it is rather difficult to deduce a sense of e.g. personal liberation or puritanism without projecting subjective conceptions that are not really there. The stela is indeed a product of its time and needs to be observed for what it is, i.e. a monument raised to commemorate a selection of people that we know very little about.

That said, when put in the wider context of comparable stelae, one may logically assume that the more data that point towards e.g. certain cultural circumstances, the more reasonable it is to acknowledge these circumstances on the stelae themselves, despite the multitude of alternative interpretations.109

Lichtheim proposes that stelae found in the Abydene area may be arranged into the following three categories: Stelae from tombs of the citizens in the Thinite nome, stelae erected by royal officials who came to Abydos or its vicinity on specified missions, and stelae erected by ‘pilgrims’, i.e. people who visited Abydos for the Osirian festival and/or to set up a memorial for themselves.110 NM18 does not hold any information regarding the purpose of its creation,

105 Pflüger 1947, 132–33. 106 See e.g. Yamamoto in Oppenheim et al. 2015, 35. 107 Teeter in Hartwig 2015. 108 See e.g. Woods in Hartwig 2015, 235. 109 See e.g. Verbovsek in Hartwig 2015, 142–50 on the many facets of perception of ancient Egyptian art. 110 Lichtheim 1988, 65.

23

and there are no other details on Tita’s whereabouts, save for his title. However, if Lichtheim’s categorization is accurate, one may yet assign NM18 to the third category: Tita’s title suggests that he was not an Abydene resident, but must have spent most of his life at the royal palace, which at the time would have been located in the capital Itj-tawy in the Fayoum region.111 Moreover, Tita does not mention missions of any sort, which would have been rather customary to memorize on a stela or cenotaph of this nature.112

Considering this, it is possible that Tita conducted a pilgrimage to Abydos some time during his lifetime to set up the stela in prospect (since he labels himself as deceased, i.e. mAa xrw, on it). This obviously raises the issue whether the mAa xrw-epithet really was reserved for deceased people only, or if it was a somewhat mundane designation that could be bestowed upon ‘righteous’ people in advance, since they knew they were going to pass away at some point in the future. If so, one would assume that any person who would commemorate themselves on a stela or other monument would add the mAa xrw after their name, and so, the issue still remains in that only some people hold the epithet, while others do not.

Another possibility is that Tita conducted a ‘pilgrimage-by-proxy’113 by having the stela produced locally and then shipped upstream to be set up in Abydos. Evidently, these two alternatives raise the question whether Tita was still alive at all when NM18 was produced, or if a third person had it produced and dedicated to him. The consistency in third person-constructions and absence of the first person ditto may support this assumption. It should be stressed however, that possessive and nominative pronouns seem to have been dependent on the content and genre of the text,114 and not necessarily the subject who had it dedicated to himself or herself. Moreover, the aspect of pragmatism could indeed have been substantial here; the purpose of the formulae on the stela was not for the owner himself to recite, but for the temple personnel and passers-by. As such, whether the texts were written in first or third person was likely unimportant for the reciter, as the power of the formulae would have come through anyway.115 This does nevertheless complicate assumptions regarding who actually was responsible for having the stela manufactured, and to what degree it was considered a personal monument.

While there are no explicit instructions as to why this particular116 stela was erected and no autobiographic elements on it, another major conundrum is the fact that there are no known copies of it, or other monuments (like statues and offering tables) that could be deduced to a certain offering-chapel belonging to Tita. The literature covered for this study does indeed contain a multitude of contemporary stelae and other objects, but I have thus far recognized only one stela that almost certainly can be assigned to the same artist as NM18; the stela of Resu (Rio 630 [2422]), which will be discussed in further detail below. Even so, the fact that these stelae likely derived from the same workshop does not necessarily reveal much about the people who purchased them. Despite this, one could argue that a clear-cut prosopographical study would likely prove fruitful in order to extract more information on the whereabouts of Tita and his companions.

111 See e.g. Baines & Malek 2000, 40. 112 Cf. Lichtheim 1988, 85–95 on cases of ‘officials on missions’-stelae. 113 See Lichtheim 1988, 122–24 for Nebipusenwosret’s ‘pilgrimage-by-proxy’. 114 See Bickel in Nyord 2019, 29, on the shifts between first, second and third person in Coffin Texts. 115 See Willems in Nyord 2019, 242, on the inconsistency of first, second and third person in funerary contexts. 116 The renderings aHa.w-pn (‘this stela/cenotaph’) or abA-pn (‘this memorial/tombstone’) may provide some

indicators as to why a specific stela was erected. However, any such information is missing on NM18. See e.g.

Lichtheim 1988, 103, 123 for selected examples.

24

NM18 in Context

Juxtaposing NM18

This section of the thesis is dedicated to a selection of eight stelae that can be paralleled to NM18 in various ways. The main objective is to describe similar or distinct features of these stelae that appear when contrasted with NM18. As illustrated above, the amount of data and hypotheses that can be extracted from one single stela is rather vast, but such information may yet be considered somewhat hollow when presented on its own. Additionally, it is not reasonable to attempt to contextualize an object or its content without any sort of reference points. That is also why the following stelae are described here; to act as objects of reference and comparison when juxtaposed with NM18, in order to say something about its contemporary conditions.

The parameters that will be taken into consideration are orthographic elements, iconography, quality of execution, presumed dating and provenience. Due to the limited frame of this thesis, there will be no thorough analysis of the textual content of the stelae, only that which is necessary in order to identify resemblances or even anomalies as compared to NM18. The selection of stelae is thus based on their physical appearance (analogy with NM18) as well as their plausible Abydene provenience and contemporality, i.e. late 12th, but mainly 13th dynasty. Stelae that show excessive inconsistency or abnormal features have been excluded in order to retain a somewhat straightforward contextualization. Furthermore, there will be no attempt at linking the stelae and NM18 to specific workshops or artists, as such an endeavor would require a different approach than is conducted here. Photographs of the stelae are all found in the list of plates starting on page 30, and their attributes are presented according to the following template:

Dating (Dynasty).

Provenience (presumed geographic origin).

Orthography and textual features (mainly of the Htp-di-nsw formula).

Iconographic elements (images and traits of persons and/or gods).

General quality/execution.

Associations with NM18 (main characteristics that correspond or differ).

The template is arranged in this manner to provide for uniform descriptions of the stelae and to pinpoint the most significant features for myself and for the reader, without delving too far from their correspondence to NM18. Noteworthy elements described are encircled on the plates.

Stela of Resu (Plate I)

Dating: 12th/13th dynasty.117 Provenience: Probably Abydos.118 Orthography and textual features: The Htp-di-nsw formula appears identical to that on NM18, save for the exclusion of the phrase didi.t pt qmAt tA (‘the sky gives and the earth creates’). Osiris and/or Wepwawet are referred to as ‘Lord of Abydos’.

117 Kitchen 1990 (Vol. I), 35. 118 Ibid.

25

Iconographic elements: Five people are portrayed on the stela in two registers, the owner seated to the top left with an offering table in front of him. A woman is facing him while kneeling, and three men are kneeling in the register below. Each person is smelling a lotus flower, but no other traits or facial features can be identified. General quality/execution: The stela is slightly damaged and eroded, but its execution appears symmetrical with proportional images and straight columns. Associations with NM18: This stela resembles NM18 to the extent that it is reasonable to assume they were created by the same artist. The fact that Tita’s name and title appear on it supports this assumption, although Resu is not mentioned on NM18. Iconographically and palaeographically, it seems as if a more or less fixed template would have been used when crafting these two stelae (and probably others), that only left room for alterations of names and titles.

ÄS 3884 (Plate II)

Dating: Late 12th dynasty (?)119 Provenience: Abydos.120 Orthography and textual features: The lunette is covered by the Htp-di-nsw formula, in four horizontal lines. The formula is dedicated by Osiris and Anubis, and there is no mentioning of Abydos. The request/subjunctive construction in the formula is written di=f, and not di=sn, even though it refers to more than one god. Iconographic elements: A total of six persons are depicted in two registers, two female and four male. The owner sits on a chair at the top left with an offering table, his wife standing behind him while clasping his shoulder. Three persons are portrayed kneeling while smelling a lotus flower, one is standing and facing the owner. The face of the owner is damaged, but it appears as if he may have held a lotus as well. Each person wears a collar-necklace and the wig styles range from short to medium and long. General quality/execution: The stela is somewhat eroded, but the execution is fairly symmetric, with straight lines. Associations with NM18: The offering formula is almost identical in this case, save for the reference to Anubis instead of Wepwawet, and the di=f/sn error. Iconographically, the traits of the persons are quite similar to NM18, i.e. the smelling of the lotus. The offering table is of similar layout, as is the symmetry and spacing of the images and hieroglyphs. ÄS 180 (Plate III) Dating: 13th or 17th dynasty.121 Provenience: Abydos.122 Orthography and textual features: The Htp-di-nsw formula appears horizontally on the first line in its, as of the time, ‘standardized’ form. The name of Abydos is written in one of its many variations, without the town-determinative. Iconographic elements: A mirrored depiction of Wepwawet is found at the lunette. A total of 26 people are portrayed, 14 male and twelve female, with the owner seated at the top left register with one wife seated behind him and another wife beneath. Several of the persons hold a lotus flower, but there is no consistency in smelling it. Six persons are seated on a chair, while the remaining ones are kneeling, and the males appear a lot darker than the females. The females have long wigs, while the male appear with a mixture of long and short wigs. A few persons, including the owner, wear a collar-necklace. Images of offerings are found with the people seated on chairs.

119 Hein & Satzinger 1993, 145. 120 Ibid. 121 Hein & Satzinger 1993, 103. 122 Ibid.

26

General quality/execution: The state of preservation is good, but the artistic quality is partially awkward in terms of oblique lines and the planning of space for hieroglyphs and images (see specified areas on plate). Associations with NM18: The Htp-di-nsw formula on this stela is similar to that on NM18, save for the absence of Osiris and addition of nTr.w -nb AbDw ‘all gods of Abydos’. The nb imAxw-epithet (’lord of dignity’) appears on this stela, as opposed to NM18. A prominent iconographic difference are the distinct facial features and clothing-patterns, as well as the inconsistency in the objects held by the persons. Finally, the symmetry differs from NM18 in terms of the niche-sizes and lines.

ÄS 86 (Plate IV)

Dating: Late 12th to 13th dynasty.123 Provenience: Abydos.124 Orthography and textual features: The offering formula appears standardized in two horizontal lines, referring to Osiris, ‘Lord of Abydos’. No title precedes the name of the owner, but he is referred to anx (n niwt?)125 i.e. ‘Citizen’. Iconographic elements: The lunette is decorated with two mirrored wedjat-eyes. Nine people are portrayed in three registers, including a child of unknown name and gender. Three are male and five female, and they are all wearing a collar-necklace. The owner and his sister are facing each other over an offering table while smelling a lotus, and the other persons are portrayed in the ‘clasping-chest’-motion. The owner’s wife sits beneath the sister, in the second register. The stela is framed by a decorative ribbon. General quality/execution: Apart from some shallow damage, the stela is in fairly good condition and most of the facial features are preserved. Two vertical lines of damaged scripts appear behind the owner and his wife. The portraits appear relatively symmetrical, although not entirely proportional. Associations with NM18: This stela contrasts NM18 mainly in terms of its decorative elements and the general absence of titles preceding the personal names (one wab-priest is apparent). One may thus assume that these particular people simply did not hold any professional titles, although such a conclusion would require further investigation.

7589 (Plate V)

Dating: Late 13th or 17th dynasty.126 Provenience: Abydos (?)127 Orthography and textual features: The Htp-di-nsw formula appears vertically, referring to Osiris alone, but does not mention Abydos. Iconographic elements: There are nine people on the stela, depicted in three registers with the owner seated on a chair at the top left. The lunette is decorated with a pair of wedjat-eyes. There are no offering tables or other traits such as flowers or decorative elements like jewelry. General quality/execution: The state of preservation is rather worn, but the stela does in fact appear a bit mediocre in its execution. The columns are quite asymmetrical, as are the hieroglyphs and images. The hieroglyphs on the top-right and mid-right seem even more out of proportion, as if they were added on different occasions, perhaps by different people. Additionally, the man seated to the top-right appears as ‘sketchy’ or unfinished. Associations with NM18: This stela does include titles as well as the imAxw (‘revered’)-epithet. The general execution of the stela appears somewhat sloppy when contrasted to NM18 in that

123 Ibid., 1. 124 Ibid. 125 Ibid. 126 Stefanović & Satzinger 2019, 106. 127 Ibid.

27

it seems to have been crafted in stages, without consulting a certain draft or template.

7296 (Plate VI)

Dating: Mid 13th dynasty.128 Provenience: Abydos (?)129 Orthography and textual features: The Htp-di-nsw formula here includes the synthesized epithet Khenti-amenti for Osiris, referring to him as ‘Lord of Abydos’, and his name is written with the litter determinative. The other deity present in the formula is Min-Harnakht, as well as the Ennead of Abydos. The dSrt-symbol is utilized as a phonogram for n in n kA n, and the di-sign is written without the outstretched arm. A line of text is added on the left edge of the stela, outside the marked area. Iconographic elements: Three persons are depicted in the lower register; the owner seated to the left, a man standing facing him, and a woman kneeling behind them. It appears as if the woman is holding a flower, although her hand is not in the motion of gripping it. The lunette is decorated with a pair of eyes and a Snw-symbol at the centre. To the left the word wAD (‘green eye-paint’) is written, and to the right, the word ms(dmt) (‘black eye-paint’).130 General quality/execution: The stela is in fairly good condition. However, the execution of the hieroglyphs appears partially awkward and unplanned as e.g. the column on the left edge likely was supposed to be added to the main text. The depictions of the owner and the standing man look disproportionate and their hands seem out of place, although this could be an illusion due to damage. Associations with NM18: A major difference between NM18 and this stela is the lack of images of the people mentioned in the text. NM18 displays a number of images, linked to the names written, whereas this stela mostly mentions names of people that are not portrayed. But as mentioned above, this occurs as a matter of style rather than pragmatism, since the recital of peoples’ names was the vital part, not that they were portrayed with images.

7288 (Plate VII)

Dating: Late 13th dynasty.131 Provenience: Abydos.132 Orthography and textual features: Osiris, Wepwawet and the Ennead of Abydos are all present in the offering formula. Osiris is referred to as ‘Lord of Djedu’ and ‘Lord of Abydos’, Wepwawet as ‘Lord of the Holy Land/Necropolis’. Like on the previous stela, the di-sign is simplified, and the dSrt-crown is used as an n-phonogram. Palaeographically, the Sms-sign stands out with its combination of the jackal head and walking legs:

Iconographic elements: The lunette is decorated with two mirrored Wepwawet-images, with an ankh-symbol between them. The right Wepwawet is captioned as the ‘northern’, lying on a shrine, and the left is captioned ‘southern’, standing on two uraeus-snakes. Seven people are found on the stela, four women and three men, with the owner seated to the top left. The woman at the top-right is smelling a jar of ointment, and the other persons are smelling either a lotus flower or a lotus bud. A detailed offering table is found in front of the owner, flanked by two tables with a lotus lying on top of them. All seven people wear a collar-necklace and the owner wears a waist-high, calf-length skirt. The women wear long wigs, three of them with braids at the end. General quality/execution: The stela is in excellent condition, and its execution shows a high

128 Stefanović & Satzinger 2019, 64. 129 Ibid. 130 See Stefanović & Satzinger 2019, 64, for the interpretation of the symbols. 131 Stefanović & Satzinger 2019, 55. 132 Ibid.

28

level of craftsmanship. Much attention has been paid to details such as facial features and the offering items. The columns are straight and proportional to the text, and the surface of the stela appears polished and smooth. Associations with NM18: On NM18, the sentence where the gods of Abydos may ‘give/blow pleasant breath/winds of life to […] for their souls’ is found at the very last line of the stela. As discussed on page 16, it is introduced by the auxiliary iw, as if it was a request that is independent from the offering-formula at the beginning of the stela. On 7288 it is found as a part of the requests of favors in the Htp-di-nsw, without the auxiliary and the ‘allative’133 element. Whether this shows an anomaly or a shift in the formula-syntax is a discussion that ranges beyond this essay. It is also plausible that this may once again prove to be a matter of preference and layout, since there was no room for supplementary requests at the end of this stela. Another aberration as opposed to NM18 is the utilization of the title nb.t pr, i.e. ‘Lady of the House’: It seems to be reserved for elder women on NM18, whereas on 7288, it is preceding the names of two of the owners three daughters, thus suggesting the title could be held be both younger and elder women, but not necessarily every woman in the household.

Oxford Q.C. 1111 (Plate VIII)

Dating: Late 12th dynasty (?)134 Provenience: Likely Abydos Orthography and textual features: This stela is dedicated to two people, and the Htp-di-nsw formula therefore appears twice, referring to Osiris as ‘Lord of Abydos’ and Wepwawet, ‘Lord of the Holy Land/Necropolis’ (upper left side). On the upper right side, Osiris is designated with the aspect Khenti-amenti and ‘Lord of Abydos’, and this formula also involves Min-Harnakht. Like on stela 7288 above, the right hand formula here includes the request to ‘give/blow sweet breath of life for the spirit […]’ as a part of the initial formula. The name and title of the owner’s son is written partly above him, beneath his arms, and to the left of the offering table (mid-upper register), suggesting the hieroglyphs were added after the images, where they would fit. Iconographic elements: Two wedjat-eyes decorate the lunette, flanked by vessels and water symbols and with a Snw-symbol between them. A total of eleven people are depicted, of which two are the owners seated at the top right and top left. Except for the owners, one man is seated on a chair, one is standing and the remaining people are kneeling. The owners hold a lotus, and the standing man is offering incense to one of them. Offering tables are placed in front of the owners, and except for the standing man and one woman, all persons wear a collar-necklace. The five women wear long wigs, three men wear short or no wigs, and three wear medium-long wigs. General quality/execution: The stela is in a good state of preservation and its execution is rather decent. Attention is heeded to details and some facial features can still be distinguished. The images appear proportional, and save for one of the owners son’s name, the columns and text appear well planned and synchronized. Associations with NM18: A noteworthy curiosity on this stela is that it is dedicated to two people, both with their separate offering formulae. NM18 is primarily dedicated to Tita, and there seems to be a hierarchy of importance for the other people as they appear in a certain order, starting with his parents, siblings, etc. On this stela, the two owners appear equally important, but the third man depicted seated on a chair likely held a slightly higher rank than the remaining people portrayed. Whether this was by request of the owners of the stela or the man himself remains unknown.

133 See Grossman & Polis 2014, 46, on the allative (iw=f r sDm) construction. 134 Smither & Dakin 1939, 159.

29

Summary

From the selection of stelae presented here, it has become apparent that a great diversity existed in the execution of them, even when narrowing the scope to the time of the late 12th and 13th dynasty, and applying the geographic restriction of Abydos (although it is plausible that some stelae were manufactured elsewhere and brought as a finished product to Abydos). With such an evident variety in religious elements, iconography, artistic skill and orthography, it becomes increasingly difficult to draw any conclusions regarding these aspects. Or perhaps the conclusion is that there did not exist much consistency or standardization for stelae of this nature. After all, it is a culture with a remarkably pragmatic mindset that is being discussed here, and their philosophy shines through every now and then. In e.g. the stela 7296 above, the ‘forgotten’ line of text was added on the edge of the stela, likely because the power of the word surmounted the effort and cost to start over and create a new stela.

Considering this, it becomes apparent that NM18 is derived from this particular context of pragmatism and artisan diversity, and Tita and the other people were all part of that context that likely influenced much of their everyday (and after)life.

A valid criticism against this kind of comparison would be that a quantitative approach with an extensive amount of reference points (i.e. stelae) likely would have resulted in a more solid amount of data to draw conclusions from. However, such an approach would have neglected the diversity and descriptive aspects which, as illustrated above, are ever present.

It is thus fair to say that NM18 does correspond to contemporary stelae on many levels. But it is equally fair to say that NM18 could be recognized as a unique object and not just a ‘face in the crowd’, at least not in this kind of study. My attempt at gathering a fairly coherent collection of stelae and putting them in relation to NM18 thus turns out to contain a multitude of aberrations and peculiarities. However, my view is not that this a shortcoming, but rather it goes to show that most stelae are worth examining thoroughly.

30

List of Plates

Plate I No. 6, Museu Nacional – Universidade Federal de Rio de Janeiro, inv. 630 [2422].

Courtesy of Museum Nacional – U.F.R.J. (in Catalogue of the Egyptian Collection in the National Museum, Rio

de Janeiro (Vol. II), 1988, p. 12).

31

Plate II

ÄS 3884, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna.

Courtesy of Irmgard Hein and Helmut Satzinger (in CAA, Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, Ägyptisch-

Orientalische Sammlung, Lieferung 7, 1993, p. 148).

32

Plate III




33

Plate IV




34

Plate V

Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung, inv. 7589.

Courtesy of SMB Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung (in CAA, Ägyptisches Museum und

Papyrussammlung, Fascicle 1, 2019, p. 109).

35

Plate VI




36

Plate VII




37

Plate VIII

Oxford Q.C. 1111.

Courtesy of Paul C. Smither and Alec N. Dakin (in JEA Vol. 25, No. 2 (Dec., 1939), plate XX).

38

Final Discussion

The purpose of this study was to provide for a comprehensive analysis as well as a

contextualization of the stela NM18. When reviewing the questions asked initially, one may

first of all conclude that there is a fairly large amount of information to be extracted from the

stela, ranging from grammatical syntax to prosopography, as well as social and religious

structures of the people involved on it. When examining this information further and putting it

in relation to stelae of the same nature and origin, it is evident that NM18 contains elements

that may be deemed (so far) unique, but also more or less conventional in terms of layout and

textual content.

It is of course essential to keep in mind that archaeological material such as NM18 never

contain a final explanation or solution for the questions we ask them, but are rather to be viewed

as indicators of certain interpretations or perspectives. It is then up to scholars to argue for or

against these interpretations by examining and utilizing additional archaeological and textual

evidence, and eventually raising new questions. Moreover, the material is constantly subject to

preservation bias which, in the case of NM18, leaves us with the opportunity of one day finding

additional material that support or disclaim our assumptions, or, (and perhaps more likely) the

realization that such material is forever lost. Abydos in particular has undergone major

destruction and plundering over the centuries,135 which in turn has resulted in a tangible lack of

provenience and context-documentation of the material that likely originate therefrom. Stelae

such as NM18, that belong to this category of largely undocumented material, thus make up an

even more perplexing primary source. The shortage of external information on the stela, i.e.

provenience and excavation-documents, means that we must rely on whatever internal

information the stela can provide: This study has shown that there are indeed several textual

and religious references on NM18 that can be deduced to Abydos and the late Middle Kingdom.

It does not mention a specific ruler, but it does mention Osiris and Abydos, and by juxtaposing

the stela to analogous stelae, one may create ‘new’ external indicators that support these

assumptions. Internal analysis and historical/societal context are thus key aspects when

attempting to say something about this particular stela, and it is thus reasonable to conclude that

NM18 does indeed originate from Abydos and the late 12th or 13th dynasty.

Furthermore, this study has inevitably opened up for additional questions and viewpoints

throughout its course, of which the most crucial were the following:

- An unknown title (imy-ty/wnmty) that so far has no known palaeographic equivalent.

- The plausible rendering of line 17 as the early LE future construction iw=f r sDm, which

may suggest a ‘hybrid’ element in the language of this time.

- The ambiguous utilization of mAa xrw as either a prospective epithet or a designation for a

deceased, righteous person.

- The actual relationship or kinship between Tita and Resu, who likely knew each other well

and ordered a stela from the same artist/workshop. This issue correlates to the other people

commemorated on NM18 and their individual whereabouts.

- The significance of the female designation nb.t pr and the inconsistency in which women

were entitled to it.

135 See e.g. Lichtheim 1988, 65.

39

These are all topics that of course require further studies in order to progress with each specific

issue.

Speculations should always be heeded with caution, although there are a few noteworthy

enigmas found when examining NM18. One concerns the absence of a wife of Tita, and what

potential designation and depiction she would have been commemorated with, if she existed.

Had she been portrayed facing Tita rather than standing next to, or behind him, it would further

support the claim of NM18 being a late MK stela rather than one from an earlier time.

The other is whether titleholders were indeed as influential as they would have us believe,

as there are cases of people without any significant titles (see ÄS 86 on page 25) who could still

commemorate themselves and their families on stelae. It is fair to assume that hierarchies were

present amongst the titleholders, but whether the titles were a means for separating

‘commoners’ from higher classes remains debatable.

Finally, my conclusive view is that NM18 makes for a valuable scientific object that

distinguishes itself on several levels, as seen throughout this study. And when taking internal

as well as external material into consideration, one recognizes this value in the amount of

information that can be extracted from it, as well as the new trails that may be revealed within

this information.

40

Bibliography

Allen, J., J. Assmann, A. Lloyd, R. Ritner & D. Silverman. 1989. Religion and Philosophy in Ancient Egypt. New Haven.

Anthes, R. 1954. ‘The original meaning of mʿ ḫrw’ (sic), Journal of Near Eastern Studies 13:1, 21–51.

Baines, J. & J. Malek. 2000. Cultural Atlas of Ancient Egypt. New York.

Bennett, C. J. J. 1941. ‘Growth of the Htp-D'i-Nsw (sic) formula in the Middle Kingdom’, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 27, 77–82.

Boreux, C. M. 1931. ‘Les pseudo-stèles C.16, C.17 et C.18 du Musée Louvre (avec 3 planches)’, Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 30, 45-48.

Breasted, J. 1959. Development of Religion and Thought in Ancient Egypt. New York.

Evans, L. 2011. ‘The shedshed of Wepwawet: An artistic and behavioural interpretation’, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 97, 103–15.

Fischer, H. 1964. ‘A group of Sixth Dynasty titles relating to Ptah and Sokar’, Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 3, 25–29.

Fischer, H. G. 1997. Egyptian Titles of the Middle Kingdom. A Supplement to Wm. Ward’s Index. New York.

Franke, D. 1984. Personendaten aus dem Mittleren Reich (20.–16. Jahrhundert v. Chr.): Dossiers 1–796, in Ägyptologische Abhandlungen 41. Wiesbaden.

Franke, D. 2003. ‘The Middle Kingdom offering formulas: A challenge’, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 89, 39–57.

Fåhræus, E. 1872. Administratif och statistisk handbok. Såsom bihang till Sveriges Statskalender. Stockholm.

Grajetzki, W. 2006. The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt. London.

Grossman, E. & S. Polis. ‘On the pragmatics of subjectification: The grammaticalization of verbless allative futures (with a case study in Ancient Egyptian)’, Acta Linguistica Hafniensia: International Journal of Linguistics, 46:1, 25–63.

Hannig, R. 2006. Ägyptisches Wörterbuch. Mittleres Reich und Zweite Zwischenzeit. Mainz.

Hartwig, M. 2015. A Companion to Ancient Egyptian Art. Chichester.

Hein, I. & H. Satzinger. 1997. Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, Ägyptisch-Orientalische Sammlung. Stelen des Mittleren Reiches II einschliesslich der 1. und 2. Zwischenzeit; Corpus Antiquitatum Aegyptiacarum 7.

Ilin-Tomich, A. ‘Changes in the Htp-dj-nsw formula in the late Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period’, Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 138:1, 20-34.

Jones, D. 1988. A Glossary of Ancient Egyptian Nautical Titles and Terms. London.

Kitchen, K. 1990. Catálogo da Colecão do Egito Antigo existente no Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro: Catalogue of the Egyptian Collection in the National Museum, Rio de Janeiro, (Vol. I & II). Warminster.

41

Lange, H. & H. Schäfer. 1902. Grab- und Denksteine des Mittleren Reichs im Museum von Kairo, Vol. 3. Berlin.

Leprohon, R. 1978. ‘The personnel of the Middle Kingdom funerary stelae’, Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 15, 33–38.

Lichtheim, M. 1988. Ancient Egyptian Autobiographies Chiefly of the Middle Kingdom: A Study and an Anthology, in Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 84. Freiburg.

Lieblein, J. 1868. Katalog öfver egyptiska fornlemningar. Nationalmuseum. Stockholm.

Marée, M. 2010. The Second Intermediate Period (Thirteenth-Seventeenth dynasties): Current Research, Future Prospects. Leuven.

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

Martin, G. 1971. Egyptian Administrative and Private-Name Seals of the Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period. Oxford.

Mekhitarian, A., M. Kunnen, R. Wulleman. 1998. Abydos: Sacred Precinct of Osiris: Domaine sacré d'Osiris: Heilig domein van Osiris. Knokke.

Mogensen, M. 1919. Stèles égyptiennes au Musée National de Stockholm. Copenhagen.

Nyord, R. 2019. Concepts in Middle Kingdom funerary culture: Proceedings of the Lady Wallis Budge Anniversary Symposium Held at Christ's College, Cambridge, 22 January 2016. Leiden.

Oppenheim, A., Dorothea Arnold, Dieter Arnold & K. Yamamoto. 2015. Ancient Egypt Transformed: The Middle Kingdom. New York.

Peterson, B. 1968. ‘Ägyptische Privatstelen aus dem Mittleren Reich. Neun Denkmäler in schwedischem Besitz’, Orientalia Suecana 17, 11-27.

Peterson, B. 2013. Budskap från Egyptens forntid. Stockholm.

Pflüger, K. 1947. ‘The private funerary stelae of the Middle Kingdom and their importance for the study of ancient Egyptian history’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 67:s, 127–135.

Quirke, S. 1991. Middle Kingdom Studies. New Malden.

— 2004. Titles and Bureaux of Egypt 1850–1700 BC. London.

Ranke, H. 1935. Die ägyptischen Personennamen. (Vol. 1). Glückstadt.

Satzinger, H. 1997. ‘Beobachtungen zur Opferformel: Theorie und Praxis’, Lingua Aegyptia 5, 177–188.

Shafer, B. 1991. Religion in Ancient Egypt. London.

Silverman, D., W. Simpson, J. Wegener. 2009. Archaism and Innovation: Studies in the Culture of Middle Kingdom Egypt. New Haven.

Simpson, W. 1974. The Terrace of the Great God at Abydos: The Offering Chapels of Dynasties 12 and 13. New Haven.

Smither, P. 1939. ‘The writing of ḥtp-d'i-nsw (sic) in the Middle and New Kingdoms’, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 25, 34–37.

Smither, P. & A. Dakin. 1939. ‘Stelae in the Queen's College, Oxford’, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 25, 157–65.

Stefanović, D. & H. Satzinger. 2019. Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin; Corpus Antiquitatum Aegyptiacarum. London.

Ward, W. 1982. Index of Egyptian Administrative and Religious Titles of the Middle Kingdom.

42

Beirut.

Wegner, M. 2007. ‘Wepwawet in context: A reconsideration of the jackal deity and its role in the spatial organization of the north Abydos landscape’, Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 43, 139–50.

Websites:

Persons and Names of the Middle Kingdom: https://pnm.uni-mainz.de/1/info (Accessed 12 May 2020).

The Stela of Tita

Documents

Transcript of The Stela of Tita