193
Daressy #: --
Owner: -286- Aabau (Nedjem)
Reasons: Inscription and provenience
Transliteration: jmj-rA Snaw n aA-xpr-[n]-ra mAa-xrw aA-bAw
Translation: Overseer of the workshops of Thutmose II justified, Aabau.
Date: Hat. – T. III
Length: --
Colours: Red face and 2.3 digits of the stem (01-110 in Davies's notebook).
Findspots:
One from below TT 40 (01-110 in Davies's notebook and 04-049 in Macadam's Green file).
One from below TT 276 (01-110 in Davies's notebook and 04-049 in Macadam's Green file).
Davies bought one out of eight examples offered for sale, apparently from 'Alliot's cache at Qurnet Murai (= perhaps the one described in Alliot 1932 [BIFAO 32] ?)', one of which was marked in ink '854' (01-110 in Davies's notebook and 04-049 in Macadam's Green file).
34 from near TT 276 (Gauthier 1919 [BIFAO 16]: 183–184).
Remarks:
The ascribed owner is identical to that of # 232 and # 361 because the design of the inscription is similar to both, the name and the title of the owner are the same. However, Vivó thinks that the owner of # 361 is different from those of the other cones since it was never found in the area of the tomb -286- and the king's name is not Thutmose II but Thutmose I (personal communication between Kento Zenihiro and him. 10 Nov. 2012).
# 361 makes reference to Thutmose I, while # 193 and # 232 mention Thutmose II, indicating that # 361 was created first. The other two cones have different handwriting, indicating that they were created by different individuals, and therefore were not created simultaneously. However, it is not clear which is the second and which is the third.
Gauthier, who discovered 34 examples of cone # 193 and 52 examples of cone # 232, deliverately distinguished 'Aabau' from 'Nedjem'. This makes it difficult to assume that he made a translation error with regard to these two names, which are very similar in appearance.
Scholars are divided on how to read these two names (cf. Gabolde 1995 [SAGA 12]: 163).
Drower and Myers purchased both # 193 and # 232 (Drower and Myers 1940: Texts p. 101, Plates Pl. CVII), which probably indicating that an antique dealer had acquired a variety of different cones around the site of -286- and later sold them at Armant later.
The fact that another cone of Nedjem (# 35) has been found near -286- suggests a problem to be investigated in the future.
Davies pointed out the possibility that both # 193 and # 232 were forgeries (01-110 in Davies's notebook).
Macadam suggested to read the king's name not as aA-xpr-n-ra (Thutmose II) but as aA-xpr-kA-ra (Thutmose I. 04-049 in Macadam's Green file, 05-032 in his DALEX file 1, and 06-087 & 109 in his DALEX file 2. See also # 232).
See also 05-031 in Macadam's DALEX file 1 and 06-106 in his DALEX file 2.