Imagining Henenu
Carlos Gracia Zamacona
Aerial view of Deir el-Bahari. Photograph by Patricia Mora Photography; copyright Middle Kingdom Theban Project.
T
 he Middle Kingdom Theban Project, begun in 2014
under the auspices of the Freie Universität Berlin, rep-
resents the resumption of the archaeological activities
in the Middle Kingdom necropolis of Deir el-Bahari and Asasif.
The site had previously been excavated under the auspices of
the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, initiated by Her-
bert Eustis Winlock in 1912 with survey activities followed by
excavations from 1921–1922 until 1928 (Arnold 1996: 59).
Winlock’s excavations had been preceded by Howard Carter’s
in 1910–1911 (Morales et al. 2016: 258). The current excava-
tions began in 2015, and have continued annually through 2018
(Morales et al. 2016, 2017, and 2018) under the auspices of the
Universidad de Alcalá (Madrid, Spain), with a fifth season
scheduled for October 2019.
During the fourth season of the excavations at Deir el-Bahari
(Luxor, Egypt) by the Universidad de Alcalá in April 2018, we
began epigraphic research of Theban tomb TT313 (= MMA510),
which was owned by Henenu, the steward of Mentuhotep II
(2051–2000 BCE). The epigraphic research focused not only on
the new finds uncovered in the Middle Kingdom Theban Proj-
ect’s third and fourth seasons, but also on the archival, museum,
and photographic material from the Metropolitan Museum of
Art, to reconstruct the textual and decorative program in the
tomb. In addition, we were able to access, for the first time, a stela
that has been in the Pushkin Museum in Moscow since 1911 fol-
lowing its purchase in Luxor in 1888–1889 (Chodžaš and Berlev
1982: 67), which was first attributed to Henenu by Rebecca Ru-
binshtein (1952).
This content downloaded from 139.082.096.033 on June 10,NEAR2019 EASTERN
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
The Owner of Theban Tomb 313 (TT 313)
and the Tomb’s Current State
The highest court officials of the beginning of the Eleventh
Dynasty were buried in Deir el-Bahari and Asasif, surrounding
Mentuhotep II’s burial complex, and their relevance was made
apparent through the spatial arrangement of their tombs, the
most important being the closest to the tomb and funerary tem-
ple of the king (fig. 1). One of them was Henenu, royal steward
(im.y-r-pr) of Mentuhotep II since the unification of Egypt (ca.
2030 BCE) to the end of his reign (ca. 2000 BCE). Henenu’s title
(fig. 2) may be an abbreviation for im.y-r-pr wr (Berlev 1960;
Grajetzki 2000: 79–115; Quirke 2004: 61; Grajetzki 2012: 71),
“great royal steward,” which was only held by one person at a
time (Russo 2010, 6; Grajetzki 2000, 79–80; F. Arnold 1991),
although our knowledge of the court organization during the
Middle Kingdom is still far from complete (Quirke 1990; Ges-
termann 1995; Grajetzki 2012: 67–69). Henenu also held non-
functional apparatus titles such as “Steward of the Horn, the
Hoof, the Feather, and the Scale” (im.y-r ab wHm.t Sw.t xA.t), an
allusion to the types of livestock under his charge. The name
Henenu (@nn.w; fig. 3) itself does not provide much informa-
tion. It was very frequent during the Middle Kingdom, mainly
for men (Ranke 1935, 1: 245). Its meaning is difficult to grasp
(“Juvenile,” “Blooming,” “Upright”) because of its polysemic root
Hn (Erman and Grapow 1926–1963, 3: 100–110). In addition
to this, Henenu is an endophoric name (that is, it refers to the
bearer or to his parent), and thus does not give any information
about the historical or religious context of the name bearer (Ver-
nus 1986: 127).
According to James P. Allen (1996: 18, fig. 3; see table 1 here),
the other three main officials contemporary to Henenu dur-
ing the long reign of Mentuhotep II were the vizier Bebi, later
ARCHAEOLOGY 82.2 (2019)  75
04:16:50 AM
followed by Dagi; the treasurer Kheti I, later followed The tomb has two parts. One extends from the entrance through a hori-
by Meketre (Desplancques 2006: 231–32); and the zontal corridor and a first hall, then descends to a second hall. The other
overseer of the sealers Khety II, later followed by Meru runs through another descending corridor turning some 30 degrees east-
(Grajetzki 2012: 169–74). The fact that Henenu shared ward and then northward again to the sarcophagus chamber. Perhaps ow-
his time in court with two officials for each one of the ing to changes in rank during his career, Henenu erected two pairs of wall
two other posts (vizier and overseer of the sealers) in- slab-stelae, one in front of the other: One pair was immediately after the
dicates his longevity in the position, which might ex- entrance; the other between niches 3 and 4 (see fig. 4). For the same reason,
plain the unusual structure and decoration program of
his tomb: this is, however, speculative given the cur-
rent poor state of the tomb.
Henenu’s long carrier as a high official might be
the reason why his tomb is unusually long, peculiar
in structure, and probably richly decorated, on a par
with that of Meketre, the owner of TT280, who was the
first steward under Amenemhat  I (1981–1952 BCE;
D. Arnold 1991: 1–26). The mortuary complex includ-
ed a lower chapel accessed from the valley causeway
that led to Mentuhotep II’s burial complex. From the
chapel and on the northern slope of the valley, a court-
yard runs up the slope with a final stepped part that
gives onto a platform. The platform leads to the moun-
tain cliff, where the tomb was excavated northwards
Figure 1. Aerial view of Deir el-Bahari with the king’s complex and the tombs of Dagi, Khety, and
(fig. 4; Echevarría et al. 2018).
Henenu marked. Photograph by Patricia Mora Photography; copyright Middle Kingdom Theban
Project.

Table 1. Probable high court officials under Mentuhotep II through Amenemhat I (ca. 2051–1952 BCE). Brown marks preunification times.
Data are collected from Allen 1996: 16 n. 17; 18, fig. 3; Russo 2010: 6; Grajetzki 2012: 71.

im.y-r xtm.t im.y-r pr TA.ty im.y-r xtm.yw

Dates Royal residence Regnal years Reigns
Treasurer Steward Visier Overseer of the sealers
2051–2041 Thebes 1–10
2040–2031 11–20
Mentuhotep II ? ? ? ?

2030–2021 21–30 ? ? ? ?
2020–2011 31–40 Khety I (TT311) Henenu (TT313) Bebi Khety II
Thebes
2010–2000 41–51 Meketre Dagi (TT103) Meru (TT240)
Mentuhotep II

2000–1988 1–12 Mentuhotep III Henu (TT312)?

(Wadi Hammamat 114)

1988–1981? 1–2 + 5? Mentuhotep IV Amenemhat
Buau / Mentuhotep?

1981–1971 1–10 Amenemhat I Intef Meketre (TT280) Ipi (TT315)

1970–1961 Memphis 11–20 Ipi? Karenen (Sq) ? Rahershefnakht?

Gemenenhat (Sq)
1960–1952 Lisht 21–30 Rehuerdjersen ? Antefiqer Sokarhotep?

76  NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 82.2This (2019)

content downloaded from 139.082.096.033 on June 10, 2019 04:16:50 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
 Figure 2. Henenu’s titles. Photographs by Patricia Mora Photography; courtesy Middle Kingdom Theban
Project (top left), and courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (top right and bottom).

Figure 3. Henenu’s name spellings. Photographs by Patricia Mora Photography / Middle Kingdom Theban
Project (bottom left), courtesy of Pushkin Museum, Moscow (top), and courtesy of Metropolitan Museum Figure 4. Henenu’s tomb plan TT313. Photograph by Morales et
of Art, New York (bottom center and right). al. 2016: 281, fig. 9.

the tomb’s length (40 m) is double the usual (20 m). In addition
to this, the seven shafts found may point to several burials. In the
same vein, some fragments apparently from different sarcophagi
might correspond to more than one owner.
The general state of the tomb is precarious (fig. 5), with in situ
decoration totally effaced and fragments dispersed throughout
the tomb and even in the courtyard, perhaps as a consequence of
the work of previous excavations. This circumstance forced our
epigraphic research to begin by narrowing down the tomb’s ar-
cheological areas and inscribed objects through a double strate-
gy—epigraphic and paleographic on one hand, iconographic on
the other—which included working with the fragments found
together with the archival data from the Metropolitan Museum
of Art excavations under the direction of Herbert E. Winlock,
almost a century ago (1947: 44–45, 67; Hayes 1949; Allen 1996;
Arnold 1996; Soliman 2009, 112–14).
A Database of the Epigraphic Finds
Under these circumstances, a simple database (fig. 6) was cre-
ated to gather all the written data from TT313 found during the
Middle Kingdom Theban Project third and fourth campaigns.
For each of the two hundred fragments collected so far, the data-
base gathered the following information:
• find number, image, and dimensions;
• archeological unit, and context;
• number of the possible document, its type (stela, sar-
cophagus, wall), material (limestone, etc.), and technique
(carved/raised relief, etc.);
• script (hieroglyphic, hieratic), layout (column, line), di-
rection (right-/leftwards), and peculiarities (retrograde
script, rubrics);
• text transcription (Manuel de Codage), transliteration,
and translation;
• bibliography; and
• remarks
The ultimate aim of the database is to determine how many
and which documents (in the broadest sense “objects with in-
scriptions”) were in the tomb. These may include the four
slab stelae, A–D (MMA photo nos. M7C 127, 131, 134 and
135; Winlock’s notebook: 140); hypothetical inscriptions and

This content downloaded from 139.082.096.033 on June 10,NEAR2019 EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 82.2 (2019)  77
04:16:50 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
representations in the corridor (not in Winlock’s
notebooks); the monumental entrance, both interior
and exterior (MMA photo no. M7C 133); and one
or two limestone ink-inscribed sarcophagi (MMA
photo nos. M7C 137 and 139–140), according to the
typescript notes by Winlock kept at the Metropolitan
Museum of Art (The Metropolitan Museum of Art
Theban Expedition ca. 1920–1939, 3: 140–57), Wil-
liam Hayes’s study on the so-called “stela A” (1949),
and Allen’s study on the high court officials of the
Eleventh Dynasty (1996).
The database has permitted us to initiate a paleo-
graphic study of the carved hieroglyphs to isolate
possible discrete documents or epigraphic areas by
using the stela I.1.a 5603 at the Pushkin Museum Figure 5. Current state of Henenu’s tomb. Photograph by Patricia Mora Photography / Middle Kingdom
in Moscow, which has been attributed to Henenu Theban Project.
(Rubinshtein 1952: 131; Chodžaš and Berlev 1982,
67–73 (no. 26); Hudáková 2017: 167), as a control.1
Because of the fragmentary state of the finds, this
study was limited to just three “index” signs, which
are among the most frequent, that is, the monolit-
erals m, n, and r. In the future, the study will adapt
in frequency and variety to the new finds. Currently,
the three signs occur in three types each, as in the
respective figures 7–9.
At this stage of the research, the results after com-
parison with the Pushkin stela are not firm enough
to ascertain which and how many epigraphic areas
there were in the tomb. Nevertheless, some informa-
tion of value is provided about the epigraphic hands
and techniques. In fact, the features in the owl’s face
(and perhaps other inner features) are made by a Figure 6. Henenu’s tomb epigraphy database. Photograph by Carlos Gracia Zamacona / Middle
Kingdom Theban Project.
hand different from those of the sign’s contour. This
technique would explain why the owls have a face/
inner features only in some areas (marked red in fig.
10), and not in others (marked green in fig. 10). This
still incipient research will include the study of sign
sizes and materials in the future to ascertain possible
epigraphic areas and documents.

What Stone Is This?

A Note on Philology and History
Notwithstanding these downsides, stela A, the
best known of the documents from TT313, provides
information about the tomb and its decoration. Only
one matter of interest will be discussed briefly here.
A possible mention of the tomb’s stone lining is to
be found in lines 12–13, “with fine stone of Elephan- Figure 7. The paleography of m. Photographs by Patricia Mora Photography / Middle Kingdom Theban
tine” (m inr an n Ab.w) (fig. 11; Hayes 1949: 46). The Project.
meaning of inr an, “fine or beautiful stone” is con-
tested (Montet 1957: 44–46; Harris 1961: 69–71) but
conventionally translated “limestone.” Recently, Ch. only ideologically, the stone coming actually from the Dababiya quarries,
Karlshausen and Th. de Putter (2017) have proposed 35 km south from Luxor (fig. 12),2 in what constitutes a case of continu-
that the expression m inr an in the Middle Kingdom ity with the Old Kingdom court in Memphis in order to legitimate the new
Theban necropolis meant “in stone from Tura” but Eleventh Dynasty. In such a case, the mention of Elephantine would be a

78  NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 82.2This (2019)

content downloaded from 139.082.096.033 on June 10, 2019 04:16:50 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Figure 8. The paleography of n. Photographs by Patricia Mora Photography / Middle Kingdom
Theban Project.
Figure 9. The paleography of r. Photographs by Patricia Mora Photography / Middle Kingdom
Theban Project.
Figure 10. The paleography of m on the Henenu’s stela (I.1.a 5603) at the Pushkin Museum:
Signs with face/inner features are marked red; signs without them are marked green.
Photograph courtesy of the Pushkin Museum, Moscow.
scribal error—or ours, because of the fragmentary state of the inscrip-
tion: The phonograms for Abw can be read but any possible ideogram or
determinative is lost.
This content downloaded from 139.082.096.033 on June 10,NEAR2019 EASTERN
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
Nevertheless, there is a rare possibility for lime-
stone to be found northwards near Assuan (Klemm
and Klemm 2008: 23; contra Lucas 1926: 10; Aston et
al. 2000: 40) or even in the very area of Assuan (Harris
1961: 69). A better alternative provenance for limestone
from the region would be the oasis of Kurkur (fig. 12),
a southern area on the route from Thebes to Elephan-
tine through the Western desert (Sallam et al. 2018). If
Mentuhotep II conquered the Elephantine area as John
C. Darnell (2004), and Gloria Rosati (2006: 16–17)
have proposed, this could have included control over a
limestone quarry. In this case, as a high court official,
Henenu, who guided expeditions perhaps to this very
area, as we read on his stela A (Hayes 1949: 46 and 48
n. g), could have chosen this limestone for his tomb’s
wall lining. In the same vein is the fact that Henenu, on
stela A again, is said to be “sealer of supplies from the
oasis” (xtm.ty (i).x.wt n.wt wHA.t), which might explain
his providing food to the southern nomes as we read on
stela A, line 4 (Hayes 1949: 46). That said, the informa-
tion provided by auto-laudatory texts like this one must
be viewed with caution. A good example of this kind
of auto-laudatory text using fine stone are the dedica-
tion texts of New Kingdom temples in which the local
construction stone used for lining the walls was said to
come from Tura, the finest quarry of limestone close
to Memphis, which was exploited by the all-powerful
kings of the Old Kingdom who built the Giza pyramids,
and which, because of its consistency and color, repre-
sented the ideal stone to construct “eternal” buildings
(Karlshausen 2018: 157).
Future Research
Future research must follow three main lines. First,
the study of the epigraphic finds by techniques such as
infrared and ultraviolet light may be of assistance, es-
pecially in helping to read some fragments of presum-
ably mortuary texts which are illegible at present. These
techniques are expected to be implemented during the
next working season in October 2019. Second, study of
new finds during future seasons, especially in the court-
yard, will certainly cast new light on the textual and
decorative program of the tomb. Third, the analysis of
new information from other sources, whether primary
or secondary, is of essence: This should include geologi-
cal and chemical analysis of the lining stone to its con-
textualization within the new interpretative studies; in-
depth study of the stela in the Pushkin Museum—sur-
prisingly not taken into account in the previous studies
on Henenu; and reanalysis of the archival material from
Winlock’s excavations such as those documenting mor-
tuary texts, for instance, Pyramid Text spell 222 on the
central fragment of MMA photo no. M7C 137. All the
information collected will help not only to picture the
ARCHAEOLOGY 82.2 (2019)  79
04:16:50 AM
tomb in its whole complexity but to flesh out Henenu
as a historical individual.

Notes
1.  http://www.arts-museum.ru/data/fonds/ancient_
east/1_1_a/0001_1000/4757_stela_henena/index.php?
lang=en [Accessed on 22/01/2019]
2. Dababiya is a Paleocene/Eocene Boundary Stratotype.
As a GSSP (Global Standard-stratotype Sections and Points
provide the means to stabilize chrono-stratigraphy) is at the
UNESCO heritage tentative list; see https://whc.unesco.org/
en/tentativelists/5389/ [Accessed on 28/01/2019].

References
Allen, James P. 1996. Some Theban Officials of the Early
Middle Kingdom. Pp. 1–26 in Studies in Honor of
William Kelly Simpson, ed. Peter der Manuelian Figure 11. Fragment from Henenu’s stela A (MMA 2000.103a). Photograph courtesy of the
and Rita E. Freed. Boston: Museum of Fine Arts. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
Arnold, Dorothea. 1991. Amenemhat I and the Early Twelfth
Dynasty at Thebes. Metropolitan Museum Journal
26: 5–48.
———. 1996. The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Work at
the Middle Kingdom sites of Thebes and Lisht. Pp.
56–77 in The American Discovery of Ancient Egypt:
Essays, ed. Nancy Thomas. Los Angeles: Los An-
geles County Museum of Art/American Research
Center in Egypt.
Arnold, Felix. 1991. The High Stewards of the Early Middle
Kingdom. Göttinger Miszellen 122: 7–14.
Aston, Barbara G., James A. Harrell, and Ian Shaw. 2000.
Stone. Pp. 5–77 in Ancient Egyptian Materials and
Technology, ed. Paul T. Nicholson and Ian Shaw.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berlev, Oleg D. 1960. The King’s House in the Middle King-
dom. Pp. 1–17 in XXV International Congress of
Orientalists: Papers Presented by the USSR Delega-
tion. Moscow: Oriental Literature.
Chodžaš, Svetlana I., and Oleg D. Berlev. 1982. The Egyptian
Reliefs and Stelae in the Pushkin Museum of Fine
Arts, Moscow. Moscow: Aurora.
Darnell, John C. 2004. The Route of Eleventh Dynasty Ex-
pansion into Nubia. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische
Sprache 131: 23–37.
Desplancques, Sophie. 2006. L’institution du trésor en Égypte
des origines à la fin du Moyen Empire. Paris: Presses
de l’Université Paris–Sorbonne.
Echevarría, Ernesto, Flavio Celis D’amico, Antonio Morales
Rondán, and Fernando da Casa Martín. 2018. The
Tomb of Henenu, Luxor, Egypt: Underground
Surveying. Pp. 642–50 in World Heritage and
Knowledge: Representation, Restoration, Redesign,
Resilience, ed. Carmine Gambardella. XVI In-
ternational Forum “Le Vie dei Mercanti.” Rome:
Gangemi. Figure 12. Map of Egypt with the places mentioned in the text.

80  NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 82.2This (2019)

content downloaded from 139.082.096.033 on June 10, 2019 04:16:50 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
Erman, Adolf, and Hermann Grapow, eds. 1926–1963. Wörterbuch der
ägyptischen Sprache I–VII. Leipzig: Hinrichs.
Gestermann, Louise. 1995. Review of Stephen Quirke, The Administra-
tion of Egypt in the Late Middle Kingdom (1990). Bibliotheca
Orientalis 52: 328–34.
Grajetzki, Wolfram. 2000. Die höchsten Beamten der ägyptischen
Zentralverwaltung zur Zeit des Mittleren Reiches. Berlin:
Achet.
———. 2012. Court Officials of the Egyptian Middle Kingdom. London:
Bristol Classical.
Harris, John R. 1961. Lexicographical Studies in Ancient Egyptian Min-
erals. Berlin: Akademie.
Hayes, William C. 1949. Career of the Great Steward Henenu under
Nebhepetre Mentuhotpe. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 35:
43–49.
Hudáková, Lubica. 2017. The Sunshade after the Old Kingdom: Fe-
male Attribute with Hathoric Connotation? Pp. 161–74 in
Perspectives of Research: Proceedings of the Seventh European
Conference of Egyptologists 2nd–7th June 2015, Zagreb, Croa-
tia, ed. Mladen Tomorad and Joanna Popielska-Grzybowska.
Archaeopress Egyptology 18. London: Archaeopress.
Karlshausen, Christina. 2018. L’ombre du dieu à la porte du temple:
Swt nTr comme image et matériel de culte. Pp. 157–80 in
Sur le chemin du Mouseion d’Alexandrie: Études offertes à
Marie-Cécile Bruwier, ed. Florence Doyen, René Preys, and
Arnaud Quertinmont. Montpellier: Équipe Nilotique et
Méditerranéenne.
Karlshausen, Christina, and Thierry de Putter. 2017. “To Build a Temple
in the Beautiful White Stone of Anu”: The Use of Tura Lime-
stone in Theban Architecture. Pp. 308–12 in Proceedings of the
XI International Congress of Egyptologists, Florence Egyptian
Museum, Florence, 23–30 August 2015, ed. Gloria Rosati and
Maria Cristina Guidotti. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Klemm, Rosemarie, and Dietrich Klemm. 2008. Stones and Quarries in
Ancient Egypt. London: British Museum.
Lucas, Alfred. 1926. Ancient Egyptian materials. London: Arnold.
Montet, Pierre. 1957. Géographie de l’Égypte ancienne I. Paris: Klinksieck.
Morales, Antonio J. et al. 2016. The Middle Kingdom Theban Project:
Preliminary Report on the Freie Universität Berlin Mission to
Deir el-Bahari, First and Second Seasons (2015–2016). Studi-
en zur Altägyptischen Kultur 45: 258–82, pl. 47–52.
———. 2017. The Middle Kingdom Theban Project: Preliminary Re-
port on the University of Alcalá Expedition to Deir el-Bahari,
Third Season (2017). Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 46:
153–190, pl. 12–19.
———. 2018. The Middle Kingdom Theban Project: Preliminary Re-
port on the University of Alcalá Expedition to Deir el-Bahari,
Fourth Season (2018). Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 47:
183–221, pls. 10–18.
Quirke, Stephen. 1990. The Administration of Egypt in the Late Middle
Kingdom: The Hieratic Documents. New Malden, UK: SIA.
———. 2004. Titles and Bureaux of Egypt 1850–1700 BC. London: Gold-
en House.
Ranke, Hermann. 1935. Die ägyptischen Personennamen I–III. Gluck-
stadt: Augustin.
Rosati, Gloria. 2006. L’Egitto nel medio regno. Pp. 15–62 in Storia d’Eu-
ropa e del Mediterraneo II, ed. Alessandro Barbero. Rome:
Salerno.
Rubinshtein Rebecca I. 1952. Dve stely XI dinastii iz GMII im. A.S.
Pushkina. Vestnik Drevneie Istorii 41: 126–33. [Russian]
Russo, Barbara. 2010. The Territory w and Related Titles during the Mid-
dle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period. London: Gold-
en House.
Sallam, Emad S. et al. 2018. The Geological Heritage of the Kurkur-Dun-
gul Area in Southern Egypt. Journal of African Earth Sciences
137: 103–15.
Soliman, Rasha. 2009. Old and Middle Kingdom Theban Tombs. London:
Golden House.
Vernus, Pascal. 1986. Le surnom au Moyen Empire. Rome: Pontificio Is-
tituto Biblico.
Winlock, Herbert. E. 1947. The Rise and Fall of the Middle Kingdom in
Thebes. New York: Macmillan.

Carlos Gracia Zamacona (PhD, Egyptology and linguistics, École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris) is a researcher for the project Reino
Medio Tebano (HAR2017–84505–P), and epigrapher for the Middle Kingdom Theban Project at Universidad de Alcalá, Madrid (http://
thebanproject.com/en/idi-project/) as well as a tutor in Egyptology at the University of Glasgow. His research focuses on ancient Egyptian
language and writing, and the Coffin Texts. He has been awarded a Seal of Excellence by the European Commission (2017), and research
fellowships at the Academia de España in Rome (1999–2000) and the Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale in Cairo (2010–2011).

This content downloaded from 139.082.096.033 on June 10,NEAR2019 EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 82.2 (2019)  81
04:16:50 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).