DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49512#0042
IO TOMB TYPES OF DYNASTY I, FIRST PART (MENES TO ZET)
sunk in the ground (to two different levels). The other known private tombs of Dyn. I follow the
type presented by the three tombs both in superstructure and substructure, although with modifications.
The most plausible conclusion seems to be that the Naqadah tomb was the burial-place of Queen
Neith-hetep alone, and was not of the time of Menes but 10-20 years later in the reign of Narmer or
Zer. Its special form was of the norm for tombs other than king’s tombs during the period of Zer onwards.
This conclusion leads to an order in time of the known material which fits with the logical develop-
ment of the tomb and permits a more plausible explanation of the size and form of the Naqadah tomb.
It is to be noted that Sir Flinders Petrie in the Tombs of the Courtiers has identified another series
of monuments, the lower cemetery at Abydos, which he concludes corresponds to the Valley Temples of
the later royal tombs in the pyramids of Memphis. This is to my mind a very brilliant piece of recon-
struction. The monuments should therefore be superstructures only, without burial chambers. Petrie
found three great rectangles formed by small brick-lined graves, obviously made one at a time, which
surrounded each of the three monuments. Each of these rectangles is an ordinary cemetery growing
by accretion. The ground was hopelessly cut to pieces by later graves and by illicit excavations. The
only trace of the original nucleus monuments appears to have been the remains of a large c.b. mastaba
in the rectangle of Queen Merneith. West of this lay the remains of a great panelled mastaba around
which no graves were discovered. This mastaba measured 67-2 m. (N-S) by 27 m. (E-W), giving
a proportion of 1/2-4 and an area of 1,881 sq.m. The structure in the Merneith rectangle was a mastaba,
probably of the same type, but a trifle smaller in size. It is only reasonable to assume that the rectangles
of Zer and Zet had similar mastabas but considerably larger, for the rectangle of Zer measures 117 m.
by 70 m. inside the graves, and the Zet rectangle 110-5 m. by 64 m. would therefore reconstruct
the valley shrines of Zer, Zet, Merneith and one other as great dummy mastabas with panelled faces
(similar to the Naqadah mastaba). The great mastaba without a rectangle of graves lies west of the
Merneith mastaba and should thus be earlier than that shrine. Judging entirely by the position it might
be earlier than the shrine of Zer or between the time of Zet and that of Merneith. In the former case
it would be the valley shrine of Narmer before the funerary priests of Zer began the custom of making
their tombs around the valley shrine of their master. In case it be concluded that the fourth shrine is
later than that of Merneith, it is probably that of Wedymuw* and indicates that while Merneith, as in
the upper cemetery, followed the forms of Zer rather than those of Wedymuw, so in the valley cemetery
her funerary priests continued the custom of Zer and Zet, while the priests of Wedymuw discontinued
that practice. I must admit that I see no way at present of deciding the doubt except possibly by
a re-excavation of the whole valley site and the construction of a topographical map showing the
configuration of the ground.
By this reconstruction, on which I place reliance, we have for Zer, Zet, and Queen Merneith two
sets of funerary monuments—for each the actual burial-place in the upper cemetery and a dummy
mastaba in the lower cemetery. The substructures of the upper cemetery are fairly clear as to their
construction and use, but the superstructures are still to be determined. It must be assumed, however,
that each had its offering-place, the chief offering-place of the king’s ka, and was enclosed by a low
c.b. wall. The valley shrine or valley temple was a mastaba of the type with palace-facade panelling,
a palace-mastaba, which had no substructure but may have had magazines in the mass of the c.b. (like
* West of this unidentified shrine lies the so-called ‘fort’ of Khasekhemuwy, and immediately north of this, the
‘fort’ of Peribsen. It is possible that these two ‘forts’ were the valley shrines of Peribsen and Khasekhemuwy,
of a form differing from the other shrines. If this supposition be correct, then the shrines of Menes and Narmer,
if they were ever built, are to be sought north of the shrines of Zer and Zet, and the unknown shrine is probably
that of Wedymuw.
sunk in the ground (to two different levels). The other known private tombs of Dyn. I follow the
type presented by the three tombs both in superstructure and substructure, although with modifications.
The most plausible conclusion seems to be that the Naqadah tomb was the burial-place of Queen
Neith-hetep alone, and was not of the time of Menes but 10-20 years later in the reign of Narmer or
Zer. Its special form was of the norm for tombs other than king’s tombs during the period of Zer onwards.
This conclusion leads to an order in time of the known material which fits with the logical develop-
ment of the tomb and permits a more plausible explanation of the size and form of the Naqadah tomb.
It is to be noted that Sir Flinders Petrie in the Tombs of the Courtiers has identified another series
of monuments, the lower cemetery at Abydos, which he concludes corresponds to the Valley Temples of
the later royal tombs in the pyramids of Memphis. This is to my mind a very brilliant piece of recon-
struction. The monuments should therefore be superstructures only, without burial chambers. Petrie
found three great rectangles formed by small brick-lined graves, obviously made one at a time, which
surrounded each of the three monuments. Each of these rectangles is an ordinary cemetery growing
by accretion. The ground was hopelessly cut to pieces by later graves and by illicit excavations. The
only trace of the original nucleus monuments appears to have been the remains of a large c.b. mastaba
in the rectangle of Queen Merneith. West of this lay the remains of a great panelled mastaba around
which no graves were discovered. This mastaba measured 67-2 m. (N-S) by 27 m. (E-W), giving
a proportion of 1/2-4 and an area of 1,881 sq.m. The structure in the Merneith rectangle was a mastaba,
probably of the same type, but a trifle smaller in size. It is only reasonable to assume that the rectangles
of Zer and Zet had similar mastabas but considerably larger, for the rectangle of Zer measures 117 m.
by 70 m. inside the graves, and the Zet rectangle 110-5 m. by 64 m. would therefore reconstruct
the valley shrines of Zer, Zet, Merneith and one other as great dummy mastabas with panelled faces
(similar to the Naqadah mastaba). The great mastaba without a rectangle of graves lies west of the
Merneith mastaba and should thus be earlier than that shrine. Judging entirely by the position it might
be earlier than the shrine of Zer or between the time of Zet and that of Merneith. In the former case
it would be the valley shrine of Narmer before the funerary priests of Zer began the custom of making
their tombs around the valley shrine of their master. In case it be concluded that the fourth shrine is
later than that of Merneith, it is probably that of Wedymuw* and indicates that while Merneith, as in
the upper cemetery, followed the forms of Zer rather than those of Wedymuw, so in the valley cemetery
her funerary priests continued the custom of Zer and Zet, while the priests of Wedymuw discontinued
that practice. I must admit that I see no way at present of deciding the doubt except possibly by
a re-excavation of the whole valley site and the construction of a topographical map showing the
configuration of the ground.
By this reconstruction, on which I place reliance, we have for Zer, Zet, and Queen Merneith two
sets of funerary monuments—for each the actual burial-place in the upper cemetery and a dummy
mastaba in the lower cemetery. The substructures of the upper cemetery are fairly clear as to their
construction and use, but the superstructures are still to be determined. It must be assumed, however,
that each had its offering-place, the chief offering-place of the king’s ka, and was enclosed by a low
c.b. wall. The valley shrine or valley temple was a mastaba of the type with palace-facade panelling,
a palace-mastaba, which had no substructure but may have had magazines in the mass of the c.b. (like
* West of this unidentified shrine lies the so-called ‘fort’ of Khasekhemuwy, and immediately north of this, the
‘fort’ of Peribsen. It is possible that these two ‘forts’ were the valley shrines of Peribsen and Khasekhemuwy,
of a form differing from the other shrines. If this supposition be correct, then the shrines of Menes and Narmer,
if they were ever built, are to be sought north of the shrines of Zer and Zet, and the unknown shrine is probably
that of Wedymuw.