260
Daressy #: 133
Owner: Bengy (tomb undiscovered, perhaps at Dra Abul Naga)
Reasons: --
Transliteration: jmj-rA pr n Hnwt-m-pt bngy mAa-xrw
Translation: Steward of Henutempet, Bengy justified.
Date: --
Length: --
Colours: --
Findspots:
Unknown examples from the southern Dra Abul Naga (Northampton etc. 1908: 4, Pls. 2, 25. Exact location unknown. cf. Delgado 2005 [BAEDE 15]: 92).
Three from Dra Abul Naga (Heyler 1959 [Kêmi 15]: 87 n. 2).
Three from near M.I.D.A.N.05 at Dra Abul Naga (Betrò 2013).
Two from the tomb -390- area (Beabesh 2017: 69-70).
Remarks:
According to Betrò, the tomb of Bengay is likely located in the central-northern section of Dra Abul Naga north (Betrò 2013).
Certain seal impressions were embossed on circular surfaces (e.g., BM: EA 62771) while others found on more rectangular ones (e.g., PeM: LDUCE-UC37677, an image is on the museum's website).
It may be the case that the terms jmj-rA pr and aA n pr have comparable meanings and ranks, suggesting the possibility that the owners of both # 260 and # 527 were identical. If this were true, Henutempet could have been 'the noble of Mitanni' (refer # 527 and van Dijk 1997: 33–34).
According to Helck, this text must be read as 'jmj-rA pr n Hnwt tAwj' (Helck 1959: 371 – 372). Nevertheless, 'Henutempet' had been employed as a feminine name from the Old Kingdom to the New Kingdom (Ranke 1935 [PN 1]: 243, Zusätze und Berichtungen Pl. XX VI). However, the credibility of Helck's assertion, who did not witness the cone himself but insisted on reading it as 'jmj-rA pr n Hnwt tAwj', is questionable since Heyler, who examined the cone at the Musée des Arts décoratifs in Strasbourg, did not propose a different reading apart from 'Hnwt-m-pt' (Heyler 1959 [Kêmi 15]:89). In fact, the coffin of a woman named Henutempet, spelled identically to the text on this cone, was discovered in the Deir el-Bahri royal cache (TT 320). This finding led van Dijk to propose that Bengy served as a steward to a woman related to the royal family of the 18th Dynasty (van Dijk 1997: 35). On the contrary, Betrò contends that our Henutempet was not identical to the one discovered in the royal cache but was a different Mitanni princess (Betrò 2013).
See also 01-156 in Davies's notebook, 05-041 in Macadam's DALEX file 1, and 06-049 in his DALEX file 2.