186

Daressy #: --

Owner: TT 276 Amunemopet

Reasons: Inscription and provenience

Transliteration: jmj-rA aXnwtj jmn-m-jpAt mAa-xrw xr Asjr

Translation: Chamberlain Amunemopet, justified before Osiris.

Date: T. III – A. II

Length: 24 cm on average (Fakhry 1937: [ASAE 37]: 35)

Colours: Red face and 4.1 digits of the stem (01-117 in Davies's notebook). The face is painted white over red slip (SK202-00-000).

Findspots:

• Unknown examples stored in the IFAO office at Qurnet Murai (01-117 in Davies's notebook and 04-035 in Macadam's Green file).

• One from below TT 252 (01-117 in Davies's notebook and 04-035 in Macadam's Green file).

• 72 from TT 276 and its vicinity (Gauthier 1919 [BIFAO 16]: 176–183).

• Unknown examples from the court of TT 276 (Fakhry 1937: [ASAE 37]: 35).

Remarks: 

• The ascribed owner is identical to that of # 60.

• Our cone is different with # 60 in the design. It also has only jmj-rA aXnwtj, but # 60 has Xrd n kAp as well as jmj-rA aXnwtj. This means that the makers of the two cones were most likely different. According to Saad, TT 276 did not yield any Xrd n kAp titles (Saad 2022: 18 and 21). Therefore, Amunemopet did not have Xrd n kAp at first and after he had made # 186, cut his tombs, and painted the wall decoration, he received the title and then made the second cone, # 60.

• However, considering the meaning of the title Xrd n kAp as 'child of the kap / page', it is unlikely that it was something bestowed upon a person only after reaching adulthood, as the position would have been attained already in childhood. Why, then, was the cone referring to Xrd n kAp created later? The following possibilities can be considered as answers to this question:
  1. The title Xrd n kAp might not be interpreted in its literal sense but as a title given to a person who achieved some accomplishments in adulthood. In this case, while the title Xrd n kAp could be significant enough to merit the creation of a new cone, it suggests that it was not valuable enough to warrant modifications to completed murals or the construction of a new tomb.
  2. The title Xrd n kAp could be interpreted literally, but it might only be formally used by someone who had accomplished certain achievements. In this case as well, while the title Xrd n kAp could be important enough to justify remaking a cone, it indicates that it was not valuable enough to require adjustments to completed murals or rebuilding a tomb.
  3. It is possible that the owners of cones # 186 and # 60 were not actually the same individual but only had similar names and titles. Initially, the owner of # 186 may have constructed TT 276, but later, the owner of # 60 might have reused that tomb.

• See also 05-013 in his DALEX file 1, and 06-040, 105, & 110 in his DALEX file 2.

Image Gallery