DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49512#0280
244 DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUPERSTRUCTURES OF PRIVATE TOMBS: DYN. I-III, AND SNEFERUW
niche or dummy door, and each of the two side faces of the outer recess bears a similar small niche.
It is difficult to understand what practical function these small dummy doorways could have had in
a great ceremonial doorway in a palace in which the king resided. The spaces between the great ka-
doors bore in every case three small compound niches or dummy doors. What place could these have
had in the residence of the king, or anybody else ? It seems to be necessary to conclude that this elaborate
series of doors, repeated continuously on all sides of the panelled mastabas, has no practical counter-
part in the palace or any other building used as a residence. It is possible, of course, that the walls of
the palace had received an ornamental panelling, since brick-work lends itself so readily to this type of
decoration. It is also possible that the outer wall (enclosing wall) may have been fortified, that is in
the form used for city and fort walls with rectangular or semicircular towers at intervals along the walls
(see the evidence afforded by hieroglyphics and the fort walls at Ikkur in Lower Nubia, Semna, &c.).
The enclosing wall of the Zoser complex is crenellated with rectangular towers, but the panelling of
its outer wall can hardly be used for a reconstruction of the older palace, because that wall encloses
a funerary monument. The fort walls with rectangular or rounded towers show no traces of ornamental
niche-work and such an ornamentation could only have served to weaken the wall. I must confess that
I can see no reproduction of the palace-facade or the palace itself in these panelled mastabas except
that the great ornamental door itself, the part represented on the back wall of the outer niche, may have
been derived from the form of the great ceremonial doorway of the palace. The panelling of these
funerary monuments is to be approached, I believe, from a different angle, considering the monuments
as funerary monuments, not as representations of a residence royal or private.
The grave was the abode of the ka, to whom offerings were made periodically. But the grave was
constructed primarily for the security of the burial and its equipment, and to provide a place for the
offerings. The utilization of the offerings by the ka required openings or doors, both in the super-
structure and the substructure, through which the ka could pass to make use of the food provided at
the grave-sides. Thus the essential part of the abode of the ka was the doorway or doorways between
the upper world and the grave, the Aa-doors. Our knowledge of the Egyptian conception of the after life
is still very vague. We know that the utensils and weapons and ornaments of daily life were originally
placed in the burial-chamber; that scenes of offerings and from life were carved or painted on the walls
of the offering-places of Dyn. IV-VI; that miniature houses with gardens were placed in the burial-
chambers of the Middle Kingdom, but we still have no exact knowledge of the details of the Egyptian
conception of the life after death. Certainly we look in vain for a tomb which in form and plan presents
a plausible reproduction of a living-house. Mr. Quibell has found in the underground chambers of
a few mastabas of Dyn. II apartments which seem to be designed as rooms for water-jars, for use as
latrines, and others as sleeping apartments. But the plan as a whole can hardly be claimed as reproducing
the plan of a residence. The external part of the known tombs fails even to hint at such reproduction.
The most elaborate of offering-places, the temples of the pyramids of Dyn. III-VI, are all planned to
satisfy functions quite different from those of an ordinary house—place for offerings, slaughter court,
magazines for the storage of funerary equipment and offering-services, and chambers for the protection
of the royal statues. That some of the offering-chapels contained lavatories in the outer rooms does not
affect the question, for these lavatories were obviously required by the funerary priests for purification.
The Aa-doors alone were representations of parts necessary and usual in residences. Naturally the
forms of the doors were reproduced from actual doorways used in houses, but it is quite beyond the
effect of this evidence to conclude that therefore the whole form of the mastaba was a reproduction of
the house type of the time in question.
niche or dummy door, and each of the two side faces of the outer recess bears a similar small niche.
It is difficult to understand what practical function these small dummy doorways could have had in
a great ceremonial doorway in a palace in which the king resided. The spaces between the great ka-
doors bore in every case three small compound niches or dummy doors. What place could these have
had in the residence of the king, or anybody else ? It seems to be necessary to conclude that this elaborate
series of doors, repeated continuously on all sides of the panelled mastabas, has no practical counter-
part in the palace or any other building used as a residence. It is possible, of course, that the walls of
the palace had received an ornamental panelling, since brick-work lends itself so readily to this type of
decoration. It is also possible that the outer wall (enclosing wall) may have been fortified, that is in
the form used for city and fort walls with rectangular or semicircular towers at intervals along the walls
(see the evidence afforded by hieroglyphics and the fort walls at Ikkur in Lower Nubia, Semna, &c.).
The enclosing wall of the Zoser complex is crenellated with rectangular towers, but the panelling of
its outer wall can hardly be used for a reconstruction of the older palace, because that wall encloses
a funerary monument. The fort walls with rectangular or rounded towers show no traces of ornamental
niche-work and such an ornamentation could only have served to weaken the wall. I must confess that
I can see no reproduction of the palace-facade or the palace itself in these panelled mastabas except
that the great ornamental door itself, the part represented on the back wall of the outer niche, may have
been derived from the form of the great ceremonial doorway of the palace. The panelling of these
funerary monuments is to be approached, I believe, from a different angle, considering the monuments
as funerary monuments, not as representations of a residence royal or private.
The grave was the abode of the ka, to whom offerings were made periodically. But the grave was
constructed primarily for the security of the burial and its equipment, and to provide a place for the
offerings. The utilization of the offerings by the ka required openings or doors, both in the super-
structure and the substructure, through which the ka could pass to make use of the food provided at
the grave-sides. Thus the essential part of the abode of the ka was the doorway or doorways between
the upper world and the grave, the Aa-doors. Our knowledge of the Egyptian conception of the after life
is still very vague. We know that the utensils and weapons and ornaments of daily life were originally
placed in the burial-chamber; that scenes of offerings and from life were carved or painted on the walls
of the offering-places of Dyn. IV-VI; that miniature houses with gardens were placed in the burial-
chambers of the Middle Kingdom, but we still have no exact knowledge of the details of the Egyptian
conception of the life after death. Certainly we look in vain for a tomb which in form and plan presents
a plausible reproduction of a living-house. Mr. Quibell has found in the underground chambers of
a few mastabas of Dyn. II apartments which seem to be designed as rooms for water-jars, for use as
latrines, and others as sleeping apartments. But the plan as a whole can hardly be claimed as reproducing
the plan of a residence. The external part of the known tombs fails even to hint at such reproduction.
The most elaborate of offering-places, the temples of the pyramids of Dyn. III-VI, are all planned to
satisfy functions quite different from those of an ordinary house—place for offerings, slaughter court,
magazines for the storage of funerary equipment and offering-services, and chambers for the protection
of the royal statues. That some of the offering-chapels contained lavatories in the outer rooms does not
affect the question, for these lavatories were obviously required by the funerary priests for purification.
The Aa-doors alone were representations of parts necessary and usual in residences. Naturally the
forms of the doors were reproduced from actual doorways used in houses, but it is quite beyond the
effect of this evidence to conclude that therefore the whole form of the mastaba was a reproduction of
the house type of the time in question.