584

Daressy #: 267

Owner: ? (tomb undiscovered, perhaps at Khokhah or at Asasif)

Reasons: --

Transliteration: dwA nTr Drt (?) jmn-jr-dj=s mAa-xrw sAt-nswt nb tAwj kA-S-tA dj anx Dt (?), wbA Drt-nTr [...]

Translation: Worshiper of the god's hand (?), Amunirdies, a daughter of the king, lord of the Two Lands, Kashta given life forever (?). Cup-bearer, the god's hand (?)[...].

Date: 25 Dynasty (Kashta-Shabako?)

Length: 6.7 digits (Sold at the Collector Antiquities. [retrieved on July 31st, 2017]), 8.0 digits (KhM: 1709. Personal communication between Kento Zenihiro and Dr. Regina Hölzl, a staff of the museum. 10th Mar. 2008), 8.5 digits (Louvre: E 863 (N 707 47, CF 112, Clot bey C 16 nº220)).

Colours: White (KhM: 1709. Personal communication between Kento Zenihiro and Dr. Regina Hölzl, a staff of the museum. Mar. 2008).

Findspots:

• One from Dra Abul Naga (Penn Museum website).

• Five from near TT 208 and the Metropolitan's house (01-285 in Davies's notebook).

• Two (MMA: 15.10.48 and 15.10.49) from the court of the tomb 'MMA H 1'.

Remarks: 

• Graefe translates the owner's title as 'Truchseß der Gotteshand' (Graefe 1981: 176-178).

• Some of the funerary cones from the period subsequent to the New Kingdom appear to be shorter than those from the New Kingdom. For additional examples of shorter cones from the later period, # 3, # 483, # 598, and # 609. However, it is challenging to identify any discernible trends in length (cf. Length & Width).

• Is Louvre Museum's inv. no. E 33689 the mould for cones # 401 and # 584? If so, this would mean that # 584 and # 401 were created around the same time. However, because there is no trace of the rim of # 401 on the upper part of the actual cones of # 584 (for example, see MET: 15.10.49, Louvre: E 863 (N 707 47, CF 112, Clot bey C 16 nº220)), it suggests that the former was created slightly earlier than the latter. At the same time, it implies that he or she engraved # 584 in the corner of the mould. This means that, while creating the mould for # 584, he or she already had in mind the necessity of making another cone mould (for # 401) adjacent to the one for # 584, and thus wanted to leave room for it. However, all of these discussions are based on the assumption that this item was truly a mould used for making cones. I do not believe that this item was a mould created by the ancient Egyptians for making cones. For example, take another look at the actual cones of # 584, such as those in the Kunsthistorisches Museum (inv. no. 1709), the MET (15.10.49), and the Louvre (E 863 (N 707 47, CF 112, Clot bey C 16 nº220)). These cones have relatively large margins outside the stamped areas, and those margins protrude slightly more than the stamped sections. If this item were truly a cone mould and # 584 had been made using this mould, it would not protrude forward like this; rather, it would have been almost the same height as the stamped areas. Considering this, it is more likely that this 'mould' was not made to produce cones but was created based on cones # 401 and # 584. Furthermore, there is a possibility that this object is not from ancient times but rather a modern creation.

• See also 01-284 in Davies's notebook, 05-007 & 035 in Macadam's DALEX file 1, and 06-095 & 111 in his DALEX file 2.

Image Gallery