The Overseer of Upper Egypt in Egypt's Old Kingdom (2009) Volume 1 PDF

THE OVERSEER OF UPPER EGYPT IN
EGYPT’S OLD KINGDOM
A prosopographical study of the title-holders

and a re-examination of the position within the Old Kingdom bureaucracy.
Volume I: Text
Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the

requirements of the degree of
Bachelor of Honours in Ancient History by
Thérèse Clarke FCA (Ireland), CA (Australia).
Department of Ancient History, Faculty of Arts

Macquarie University
16 October 2009
“Myth and history are close kin inasmuch as both explain how things got to be the
way they are by telling some sort of story. But our common parlance reckons myth
to be false while history is, or aspires to be, true. Accordingly, a historian who
rejects someone else’s conclusions calls them mythical, while claiming that his own
views are true. But what seems true to one historian will seem false to another, so
one historian’s truth becomes another’s myth, even at the moment of utterance.”
William H. McNeill
Opening Words – Part One
Mythistory and Other Essays, 1985.
2 of 189
DECLARATION
I, Thérèse Clarke, certify that the work in this thesis entitled “The Overseer of Upper
Egypt: A prosopographical study of the title-holders and a re-examination of the
position within the Old Kingdom bureaucracy” has not previously been submitted for a
degree nor has it been submitted as part of the requirements for a degree to any other
university or institution other than Macquarie University.
I also certify that the thesis is an original piece of research and that it has been written by me.
Any help and assistance that I have received in my research work and the preparation of the
thesis itself have been appropriately acknowledged.
In addition, I certify that all information sources and literature used are indicated in the thesis.
45% of this thesis was submitted in draft form to my supervisor, Professor Naguib Kanawati.
Date: 16 October 2009
Signature:
Thérèse Clarke FCA (Ireland), CA (Australia)
3 of 189
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS & DEDICATION
This study is dedicated to my husband and best friend, Victor Clarke. Without Victor’s love
and support, none of this would have been possible. I was encouraged to leave the world of
financial services behind and re-engage with the ancient world, to feel it was worthwhile and
important, not only to me but to him.
There have been others who have been important in this journey: My mother – Mary
Morrissey who is unstinting in her love and support, whom I admire immensely. My sisters
Colette, and Clare – without your thoughtfulness, this would have been all so much harder.
You have both been engaged in your own lives, but never forgot to say something right when
you knew I needed it. Dawn and Barbara in Denver, thanks for your emails and the times
we’ve been able to talk, your support means a great deal to me.
My friends at Macquarie University have been incredibly important as people to bounce ideas
off, to talk to when things got tough and to have coffee with. Rob Perssön, you are an
amazing friend, incredibly kind and understanding. Thanks for always being there when I
needed someone to bounce ideas off or to talk about whatever was to hand. I do not know
how I would have made it through Honours without your friendship and support. Claire
Hainey thanks for the hugs and kind words. Amber Hood, Beverley Miles, Todd Gillen, Clare
Rowan and everyone in Tele’s Angels – you are all wonderful and always willing to help. Beth
Thompson thanks for being a shoulder to cry on. Ronika Power thanks for being a mentor to
me and for being willing to drop everything if I needed it. Dr Alexandra Woods thanks for
being a friend, a mentor and latterly a great teacher. You have always been willing to help and
talk – something I have always appreciated, even if I don’t say anything. Kathy & Bob Parker,
you have been wonderful friends – always ready to listen and provide a kind word. For
inspiration, I need only think of Dr Camilla Di Biase-Dyson.
4 of 189
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS & DEDICATION
Dr Susanne Binder thanks for your wise words, and the same thanks are due to Dr Linda
Evans. Associate Professors E. Christiana Köhler & Boyo Ockinga, thank you for the
opportunity to learn from you. Professor Marnie Hughes-Warrington (now of Monash)
thanks for your teaching at Macquarie and for encouraging me to find my own voice. I cannot
imagine how I would write history if I hadn’t had the benefit of your teaching, support and
encouragement. Professor Kanawati, what can I say that hasn’t been said of you? You have
inspired and encouraged – all the while allowing me to find my way to narrate history. You
have never stopped encouraging me to find the answers in myself and in Egypt. Thanks for
taking me to excavate in Saqqara, it was a time I will truly never forget and was immensely
privileged to be part of your team.
Writing and research are very challenging experiences. What everyone above has in common
is their willingness to support me in this journey, whether I was in a good mood or a bad one,
whether my allergies were getting me down or not and especially when I am regularly victim to
them. I value their friendship and guidance in ways that I cannot express in this short note but
I hope I have given some indication of my appreciation of their support. This dedication
started with and will end with my husband and best friend. Just in case you don’t know it,
Victor….I love you very much. Thanks so much for being part of this adventure!
Thérèse Clarke
Pyrmont, 16 October 2009
5 of 189
Volume I TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS & DEDICATION 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS 6
FIGURES, PLATES, TABLES & MAPS 8
ABBREVIATIONS/CONVENTIONS 10
i Abbreviations 10
ii Grammatical Conventions used in translation and transliteration 11
iii Chronology 12
1. PRELIMINARIES 14
1.1 PURPOSE 14
1.2 PREVIOUS SCHOLARSHIP 15
1.3 CD ROM CONTENTS 19
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY 20
2.1 INTRODUCTION 20
2.2 REFERENCING/BIBLIOGRAPHY/DATING FOR TITLE-HOLDERS 20
2.3 INFORMATION ON TITLE-HOLDERS 22

3. THE TITLE: OVERSEER OF UPPER EGYPT 122
3.1 HISTORICAL REVIEW 123
3.1.1 Inception of the role 123
3.1.2 The imy-rA 5maw in Dynasty V 124
3.1.3 The administrative divisions of Upper Egypt 125
3.1.4 Responsibilities of the imy-rA 5maw. 126
3.1.5 The imy-rA 5maw in Dynasty VI 130
3.1.6 The imy-rA 5maw after Dynasty VI 133
3.2 THE imy-rA 5maw WITHIN THE BUREAUCRACY 134
3.3 SUMMARY 135
4. ANALYSIS 137
4.1 EPIGRAPHIC EVIDENCE 137
4.2 FAMILIAL CONSIDERATIONS 143
4.3 LINKS TO THE KING/RESIDENCE 148
4.3.1 Titles implying trust and confidence of the King 149
4.4 RANKING/HONORIFIC TITLES 153
4.5 RELIGIOUS TITLES 155
4.6 EPITHETS SUGGESTING TIME IN THE CAPITAL 156
4.7 INTERACTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND RELIGIOUS TITLES 156
4.8 TITLES RELATED TO THE GOVERNMENT OF UPPER EGYPT 157
4.9 ELEVATION TO THE RANK OF VIZIER 160
4.10 SUMMARY 163
6 of 189
Volume I TABLE OF CONTENTS
5. CONCLUSIONS 164
BIBLIOGRAPHY 174
CD ROM LOCATED INSIDE BACK COVER OF VOLUME I
VOLUME II: MAPS AND APPENDICES
7 of 189
FIGURES, PLATES, TABLES & MAPS
FIGURES
FIGURE 1 The False Door of ab-iHw [09] showing both versions of his title as Overseer
of Upper Egypt: Fischer, (1968: 204, Figure 40).
FIGURE 2 CG1578. Stela of 2wy [41] from Abydos with his wife, the female Vizier,
Nbt. Fischer, (2000: 37, Figure 27).
PLATES
PLATE 1 False Door of the King’s Son and Overseer of Upper Egypt, Wnis-anX
[12]. Field Museum Negative A111074c.
http://www.fieldmuseum.org/tut/popups/IAE8. Website viewed 18
August 2009.
PLATE 2 The Vizier and Overseer of Upper Egypt, Ra-Spss [35]. Lepsius, C.R.,
(1897-1913), Denkmäler aus Äegypten und Äethiopien, 12 BD, (Leipzig): LD
(Plates) II: 61b.
PLATE 3 Overseer of Upper Egypt, KAi-Hp 7ti [53] wooden statue at the British
Museum, EA29594.
http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/search_the_collection_database
/search_object_details.aspx?objectid=125469&partid=1&IdNum=29594&
orig=%2fresearch%2fsearch_the_collection_database%2fmuseum_no__pr
ovenance_search.aspx. Website viewed 26 August 2009.
8 of 189
FIGURES, PLATES, TABLES & MAPS
TABLES
CHAPTER 4
TABLE 4.1 Overseer of Upper Egypt and title variants
TABLE 4.2 Distribution of imy-rA 5maw title variants by Dynasty
TABLE 4.3 Overseer of Upper Egyptian Grain
TABLE 4.4 Holders of Hry-sStA titles
TABLE 4.5 Frequency of principal honorific titles
TABLE 4.6 Government of Upper Egypt
TABLE 4.7(A) Elevation to Vizier – Dynasties V – IX
TABLE 4.7(B) Elevation to Vizier – Dynasty VI in detail
TABLE 4.8 Functional titles important in elevation to Vizier from the rank of imy-rA
5maw
CHAPTER 5
TABLE 5.1 Chronological listing of the known Overseers of Upper Egypt, including all
known title variants
9 of 189
ABBREVIATIONS & CONVENTIONS
i. Abbreviations
The author/date system has been adopted in this study with the following exceptions which
are referenced using traditional citation conventions:
CG/JE Catalogue Général des Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire/Journal d’Entrée,
Cairo Museum. Publication authors are identified in the Bibliography.
Generally, the title of the publication identifies the holdings documented in
the publication which are numbered CG XXXXX or JE XXXXX.
LD Lepsius, C.R., (1897-1913), Denkmäler aus Äegypten und Äethiopien, 12 BD,
(Leipzig). Volumes are referred to as LD (Text or Plates) and then the volume
number.
LMP van Walsem, R., (2008), Mastabase: The Leiden Mastaba Project, (Leuven).
Möller Möeller, G, (1909-1936), Hieratische Palaographie: die ägyptische Buchschrift in ihrer
Entwicklung von der fünften Dynastie bis zur römischen Kaiserzeit, 4 volumes, (Leipzig
& Osnabrück).
PM Porter, B., & R.L. Moss (assisted by E.W. Burney) (Ed. J. Málek), (1927-
2007), Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, 8 volumes,
(Oxford).
PN Ranke, H., (1935-1976), Die Ägyptischen Personennamen, 3 volumes, (Gluckstadt,
Hamburg & Locust Valley, NY).
Urk I Sethe, K., (1933), Urkunden des Alten Reiches, (Leipzig).
Wb Erman, A. & H. Grapow, (1971), Wörterbuch der aegyptischen Sprache im Auftrage
der deutschen Akademien, 7 volumes, (Berlin).
10 of 189
ii. Grammatical Conventions used in translation and transliteration
The following conventions apply:1
. Separates stem from grammatical ending, where used by translator.
( ) Not written in hieroglyphs but added for clarification.
{ } Editor believes there is an error in the text.
< > Brackets added.
[ ] Damaged text in original form, brackets added.
Transliteration convention adopted is that of Middle Egyptian. The transliteration generally does
not use z, as is seen in many Old Kingdom translations unless Gardiner sign O34 is used,
where it is also possible to substitute an s.2
Personal names in this thesis can be translated from the original Egyptian. This has not been
done. Instead, names have been transliterated and an anglicised version of the name may be
provided.
1. Ockinga, (2005: §13).

2. Ockinga, (2005: §5). Also, Allen, (2001: 15) in relation to word processing/computer fonts.
11 of 189
iii. Chronology
The chronology adopted in this paper is taken from the Ancient Egyptian Chronology.3 This study
adopts the position that the Old Kingdom can be defined as the period from Dynasty III
through Dynasty VIII. The chronology for the period relevant to this study only has been
included. It is also true that the dating of certain title-holders in Dynasties VIII/IX is in places
uncertain and open to debate, so this study also includes consideration of known title-holders
from Dynasty IX.
ID#
Dynasty/King (Dynasty/ Dating
Sequence Number)
Five (V) ca. 2435-2306BCE+25
Userkaf V.1 2435-2429BCE+25
Sahure‘ V.2 2428-2416BCE+25
Neferirkare‘ Kaki V.3 2415-2405BCE+25
Ra‘neferf/Neferefr e‘ V.4 2404 BCE+25
Shepseskare‘ Izi V.5 2403 BCE+25
Neuserre‘ Ini V.6 2402-2374BCE+25
Menkauhor V.7 2373-2366 BCE+25
Djedkare‘ Izezi V.8 2365-2322 BCE+25
Wenis V.9 2321-2306 BCE+25
3. Hornung et al.: (2006, Appendix VI.2).

12 of 189
ID#
Dynasty/King (Dynasty/ Dating
Sequence Number)
Six (VI) ca. 2305-2118BCE+25
Teti VI.1 2305-2279BCE+25
Userkare‘ VI.2 ?-?BCE+25
Pepy I Meryre‘ VI.3 2276-2228BCE+25
Nemtyemzaef Merenre‘ VI.4 2227-2217BCE+25
Pepy II Neferkare‘ VI.5 2216-2153BCE+25
(VI.5E) (Years 1-20)
(VI.5M) (Years 21-40)
(VI.5L) (Years 41-63)
Nemtyemzaef (Merenre) II VI.6 2152BCE+25
Eight (VIII) ca. 2150-2118BCE+25
Neferkaure‘ VIII.1 2126-2113BCE+25
Neferkauhor VIII.2 2122-2120BCE+25
Neferirkare‘ VIII.3 2119-2118BCE+25
First Intermediate Period ca. 2118-1980BCE+25
(Heracleopolitan) Dynasties Nine & Ten ca. 2118-1980BCE+25
Used as explained above
E Early in reign for Pepy II, but also used
M Middle of reign by scholars and the author
L Late part of reign as relative dating option.
13 of 189
1. PRELIMINARIES
The Preliminaries chapter deals with the purpose of this study and considers previous
scholarship relevant to the current study. Many scholars have written on the elite officials of
the Old Kingdom, but this study seeks to discuss only one title: that of the Overseer of Upper
Egypt or imy-rA 5maw. The position of imy-rA 5maw, was at the peak of its influence, third in
rank of importance only to the King and the Vizier.
1.1 PURPOSE
If the present study is to contribute to the study of Old Kingdom administration, an attempt
had to be made to identify all the known holders of the title imy-rA 5maw, hence the decision
to include a prosopography as a key component of the study. Information about the decisions
made in the construction of the prosopography is provided at chapter 2. In the past, the
holders of this title have been written about in the context of the wider bureaucracy, as for
example has been the case in the work of Kanawati and Strudwick.4 No single study has been
devoted to this title, hence the current study.
This study considers the role of the imy-rA 5maw within the Old Kingdom bureaucracy and
examines some important aspects of the titles held by the various imyw-rA 5m’w in an effort
to understand better the roles that these people played in the official aspects of administering
Upper Egypt. Upper Egypt has provided a rich source of information related to
administration but Lower Egypt has not surrendered a similar quality of evidence, hence the
title studied in this paper deals only with Upper Egypt and does not deal with the
administration of Lower Egypt during the Old Kingdom. One would suspect that there must
have been some administration answerable to the Residence but we simply do not have extant
evidence with which to work. We know that there was an Overseer of Lower Egypt during the
Middle Kingdom. Grajetzki suggests that this role was created during Dynasty II when the
4. Kanawati, (1977: passim) & (1980a: passim). Strudwick, (1985: passim).

14 of 189
1. PRELIMINARIES
Kings resided at Thebes.5 These officials appear to have had limited responsibilities: they
mainly appear in inscriptions found in Sinai.6
What this study attempts to achieve is a reconsideration of the role by returning to primary
sources, the royal decrees, the tomb inscriptions and other archaeological evidence that will
allow an attempt to reconstruct the extent of the role’s responsibilities and the way that it
changed over time. Nevertheless, as Janssen has previously commented, the study of
economic history in Ancient Egypt remains in its infancy – there is much work still to be
done, but the paucity of evidence makes progress difficult.7 Progress has been made in the
study of later periods but much remains to be accomplished in relation to the Old Kingdom.
This study must be read in that context.
1.2 PREVIOUS SCHOLARSHIP
My introductory comments noted that many scholars have written on the Old Kingdom
administration and some have studied the most important titles in detail. It is not possible to
write any form of narrative history without first considering the research undertaken to date
by those scholars and to build upon that work with regard to this single group of titles. I say
group because the title imy-rA 5maw had several variants.8 This summary of scholarship to
date largely progresses chronologically with reference to the publication date(s) of various
works by scholars.
Kees described the administration of Upper Egypt and the chronology of Pepy II’s Viziers in
1932 and 1940.9 Both works remain valuable today. Helck wrote his seminal work on the titles
5. Grajetzki, (2009: 109-110).

6. Grajetzki, (2009: 110).
7. Janssen, (1979: 505).
8. Chapter 3, Table 1.
9. Kees, (1932: passim) and Kees (1940: passim).
15 of 189
1. PRELIMINARIES
of officials in 1954.10 This work presented the titles held by members of the elite using a
structure that largely reflected the way in which the administration functioned, the various
lines of government. Baer was the first to attempt a systematic understanding of titles and the
manner in which they functioned in terms of bureaucratic ranking. His Rank and Title in the Old
Kingdom: the Structure of the Egyptian Administration in the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties provides a
continuing framework for dating titles and sequences in the Old Kingdom.11 Baer developed a
framework for understanding the way that titles were recorded by their holders. That
framework continues to be used with amendment for ranking titles. Since Baer, Jones has
published an important corpus of titles and epithets in the Old Kingdom that is indispensible
in using the methodology developed by Baer.12 On the subject of the administration of Upper
Egypt, Baer wrote only brief comments on the division of Upper Egypt into separate
administrative units.13
Martin-Pardey has written what many regard as the seminal work on provincial administration
in Upper Egypt: Untersuchungen zur ägyptischen Provinzialvervaltung bis zum Ends des Alten Reiches
(1976). As the title suggests, the study focuses on provincial administration with a particular
focus on Upper Egypt.14 Apart from the scholarship of Kanawati discussed below, this is the
only specialist work on Upper Egyptian administration. The office of imy-rA 5maw is dealt
with within the analysis of Upper Egyptian administration.15
Kanawati has published two important works relevant to this study. The first, The Egyptian
Administration in the Old Kingdom (1977), attempts to frame a statistically based methodology for
determining the extent of personal wealth controlled by elite individuals. The major gap in the
10. Helck, (1954: passim).

11. Baer, (1960, reprint 1973: passim).
12. Jones, (2000: 2 Volumes, passim).
13. Baer, (1960, reprint 1973: 281).
14. Martin-Pardey, (1976: 109-201).
15. Martin-Pardey, (1976: 152-170).
16 of 189
1. PRELIMINARIES
1977 study was the lack of historical narrative surrounding the statistical information. This was
remedied in Governmental Reforms in Old Kingdom Egypt (1980a). Here Kanawati focuses on
changes in the administration through the history of the Old Kingdom. He does this through
analysis of extant inscriptional and archaeological data available on elite officials from both the
Residence and the nomes during the Old Kingdom. There is a particular focus on Upper
Egypt in the study due to the sheer weight of available evidence.
Kanawati, in conjunction with Ann McFarlane, has also published a study on the provincial
administration of Akhmim in Dynasty VI.16 The authors place the nome within the larger
context of Upper Egypt and provide an updated perspective on its administration in the later
Old Kingdom. This publication builds on the research undertaken for the publications
discussed above and on the excavation results at from various Australian Centre for
Egyptology excavations in Upper Egypt.17
Strudwick published a significant study of high titles in the Old Kingdom in 1985 entitled The
Administration of Egypt in the Old Kingdom. It dealt with all the major titles of the elite Old
Kingdom bureaucracy other than the imy-rA 5maw. The title is mentioned in discussion of the
titularies that were held by those promoted to the rank of Vizier but there is no specific
discussion of Upper Egypt or the title alone.
Several other authors have written indirectly about this area, such as Roth who published on
phyles in the Old Kingdom.18 This has particular relevance to priesthoods held by elite officials
in that royal mortuary cults were organised using the phyle system.19 The phyle system was
16. Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: passim).

17. A full listing of excavation reports for all excavation sites is available at
http://www.egyptology.mq.edu.au/egyptology/publications/ (viewed 5 October 2009).
18. Roth, (1991: passim).
19. Roth, (1991: 77-87).
17 of 189
1. PRELIMINARIES
used to manage, in many respects, links to the central government, and as a mechanism of
patronage and control.20 Dendera in the Third Millennium B.C., down to the Theban Domination of
Upper Egypt (1968), by Fischer provides an analysis of provincial administration in Dendera
throughout the Old Kingdom. Fischer also analyses nome interactions with the remainder of
Upper Egypt.21 As noted by Kanawati & McFarlane, one cannot consider the nome without
dealing with relationships to the remainder of Upper Egypt.22
More recently, Andrassy has published her study of the Old Kingdom administration which is
chronologically focused and also provides a review of some key titles, but has limited focus on
Upper Egypt or provincial administration in general.23 Andrassy discusses the institutions of
government rather than titles.24 Baud’s survey of the royal family and its relationships in the
Old Kingdom is also important in reinforcing the close-knit relationships between the royal
family and high officials. As can be seen from several family trees included at Volume II,
Appendix II to this study, close relationships were maintained between the royal family and
the elite. This served to protect the interests of both parties but also had serious consequences
as the imy-rA 5maw and Vizier Rawr discovered in Dynasty VI.25 McFarlane published her
study on the importance of the God Min in 1995.26 This has particular relevance to Upper
Egypt in that the cult centre for Min was based at Coptos and reminds readers of the
importance of the interaction of the royal and elite family relationships along with the links
between the priestly and secular worlds.
20. Roth, (1987: 120

21. Fischer, (1968: vii).
22. Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: viii).
23. Andrassy (2008: 105-112) on provincial administration.
24. Andrassy, (2008: 17-104).
25. See Rawr [34] in the prosopgraphy. Various theories have been proposed as to why his name was erased in
his tomb, including a suggestion that he was the father of the Queen that Wni [11] investigated in the reign
of Pepy I. See Kanawati, (2003b: Case Study #36) for a suggestion that Rawr [34] may be the Vizier whose
name was erased from the Dahshur Decree.
26. McFarlane, (1995: Passim) covers the period to the end of the Old Kingdom.
18 of 189
1. PRELIMINARIES
The scholarship outlined above has included some focus on the position of the imy-rA 5maw
but time has passed since the publications particularly by Martin-Pardey and Kanawati who
have published the most detailed studies on the governance of Upper Egypt. In the meantime,
Kanawati has undertaken a substantial programme of excavations in Upper Egypt, the
evidence from which is incorporated into this study with the aim of providing an up to date
perspective on the role and its position within the Old Kingdom bureaucracy.
1.3 CD ROM CONTENTS
The CD ROM which is held inside the back cover includes a PDF copy of this document
together with an EXCEL workbook including the detailed tables of titularies for all the known
imyw-rA 5maw. The contents of the Excel workbook have also been provided in PDF and are
included at Volume II, Appendix V.
19 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Table 5.1, chapter 5 comprises a chronological summary of the holders of the title of imy-rA
5maw and its variants through out the period of Egypt’s Old Kingdom. The prosopography
below provides the data used to construct that listing. The following points are noteworthy:
– The listing is constructed in Egyptian alphabetic sequence.
– A reference number is assigned to each title-holder and this is used throughout the
study where that person’s name arises. The reference number is in the form [xx].
– Names are given first in transliteration and then anglicized. Generally the
transliterated name is used throughout this study.
– Dating has been standardised to that used in the chronology at iii above. A
standardised chronological conversion table is provided at Volume II, Appendix I
between the different chronologies used by scholars and the chronology adopted in
this study.
– U.E. and roman numerals are used to designate nomes rather than a full spelling of
nome names where this is relevant in titularies.
2.2 REFERENCING/BIBLIOGRAPHY/DATING FOR TITLE-HOLDERS
A prosopography’s raison d’etre is to establish the evidence available for an individual and to
assist with dating that individual. Therefore, the information provided about each individual
includes dating information from scholars who have studied elite individuals from the Old
Kingdom and developed dating mechanisms for those individuals. The work of these scholars
is well recognised in their development of standardised dating criteria. The scholars’ relevant
publications are detailed below. Additional dating information available is adduced from
publications such as excavation reports. Additionally scholars undertake studies that may be
more limited in scope than the scholarship that forms the main dating criteria, which may
20 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
better contribute to our understanding of the reasons for dating an individual. Again, the
outcome from such scholarship is included for consideration.
The dating criteria discussed above are explained below.
Consensus Date: Date selected by author of this study based on consideration of the
data below. Consensus dating is disclosed by reference to the ID#
applied to Kings in various dynasties as noted at iii, above and any
other material matters noted for readers’ attention.
Kanawati ID & Date: References and dating from various publications by Naguib
Kanawati:
- (1977), The Egyptian Administration in the Old Kingdom,
(Warminster).
- (1980a), Governmental Reforms in Old Kingdom Egypt, (Warminster).
- Excavation Report and other publication dating by Kanawati separately
disclosed under ‘Other Date’.
Harpur ID & Date: Reference and dating from Yvonne Harpur, (1987), Decoration in the
Tombs of the Old Kingdom: Studies in Orientation and Scene Content,
(London & New York).
Baer ID & Date: Reference and dating from Klaus Baer, (1960, reprint 1973), Rank
and Title in the Old Kingdom: The Structure of the Egyptian Administration
in the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties, (Chicago).
Strudwick ID & Date Reference and dating from Nigel Strudwick, (1985), The
Administration of Egypt in the Old Kingdom: The Highest Titles and Their
Holders, (London).
21 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
LMP ID & Date: Reference and consensus dating from René van Walsem, (2008),
Mastabase: The Leiden Mastaba Project, (Leuven). The Mastabase
consensus date is van Walsem’s view of the most likely date based
on consensus between at least three dates out of Kanawati /
Cherpion / Harpur / PM / Other dating.
Cherpion Date: Dating by Nadine Cherpion, (1989), Mastabas et Hypogées d’Ancien
Empire: Le Problème de la Datation, (Brussels).
PM Date: Dating from Bertha Porter, & Rosalind. Moss (assisted by E.W.
Burney) (Ed. J. Málek), (1927-2007), Topographical Bibliography of
Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, 8 volumes, (Oxford).
Other Date: Dates for holders not included in any of the publications above.
Includes information from excavation reports and other
publications.
The entry for an individual also includes important titles and epithets that they received during
their career. This information is used in analysis in chapter 4 of this study. The references
included in the entry for each individual represent the evidence gathered about each
individual. They are recorded in author/date format. Readers can find full details of the entry
in the bibliography at the conclusion of this study.
2.3 INFORMATION ON TITLE-HOLDERS
The prosopographical entries for each title-holder follow overleaf.
22 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[01] Axt-Htp/Akhethotep
Location: D64, west of the Step Pyramid, Saqqara
PM: III2: 599-600 PN: –
Consensus Date: V.8-V.9
King: V1, V.2, V.6, V.8.27
Kanawati ID: 007 Kanawati Date: V.9M.28
Harpur ID: 338 Harpur Date: V.8L-V.9E.
Baer ID: 013 Baer Date: V.9L.
Strudwick ID: 002 Strudwick Date: V.9E.
LMP ID: 062A LMP Date: V.8-V.9.
PM Date: V.8-V.9. Cherpion Date: V.8.29
Other Date: - Davies, (1901b: 21): V.8.
- Helck, (1954: 138): V.8.
- Jacquet-Gordon, (1962: 386): V.8L.
- Smith (1946, reissue 1978: 191) VM+.
- Willougby-Winlaw, (2007: 296): V.8L-V.9E
- Woods, (2007: V2, #016): V8.L-V.9E.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; tAty sAb TAty; imy-rA sS answ; imy-rA prwy-HD; imy-rA
Epithets: gs-pr; Hm-nTr MAat; iwn knmwt; mdw rHyt; Xry-tp nsw; sAb aD-mr;
smr-waty; wr mD 5maw.
References: Davies (1901b: passim).
Hassan, (1975b: passim)
Helck, (1954: TBA).
Jacquet-Gordon, (1962: 386-90 (25S5)).
Kanawati, (1980a: 16).
Kanawati, (2003b: 55).
Kees, (1932: 87).
27. Davies, (1901a:12 & Plates VI; IX; X; XIII; XV; XVIII; XX; XXVIII & XXIX). Jacquet-Gordon, (1962:
387-390 & 392-4).
28. Kanawati, (1980a: 16).
29. Cherpion, (1989: 133), discusses the fact that certain dating criteria persist beyond V.8 (Isesi) into Dynasty
VI. It is noteworthy that Cherpion includes the additional commentary on tombs from Dynasty V, not VI.
23 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kees, (1933: 581).
Mariette, (1889: 359).30
Reisner, (1936: 408).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 191-2, 201, 246-8, 306, 360).
Willoughby-Winlaw, (2007: #3. V1, 294-6; V2, Figure IV.168).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #016).
30. Mariette, (1889: 359), D64 refers only to Ptahhotep.

24 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[02] Ibi/Ibi
Location: Tomb #S8, Deir el-Gebrawi/ U.E. 8 & 12.
PM: IV: 243-4. PN: I, 20.10
Consensus Date: VI.4-VI.5E.
King: VI.3, VI.4, VI.5.
Kanawati ID: 019 Kanawati Date: VI.5.
Harpur ID: 643 Harpur Date: VI.4E.
Baer ID: 032 Baer Date: VI.5E.
Strudwick ID: – Strudwick Date: VI.5E-M.31
LMP ID: – LMP Date: –
PM Date: VI. Cherpion Date: VI.5.
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 98): VI.5E.
- Davies, (1902: V1: 30): VI.4-VI.5E.
- Kanawati, (2007: 19-22): VI.4.
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 299): VI.4-VI.5E.
- Kees, (1932: 94): VI.5.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #022): VI.4-VI.5E.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA 5maw mAa; imy-ib n nsw m st.f nbt; imy-is; imy-
Epithets: rA wp(w)t; imy-rA wp(w)t Htp(w)t-nTr m prwy; imy-rA prwy-HD; imy-
rA sS; imy-rA Snwty; imy-xt Hm(w) nTr Mn-anx Nfr-ka-Ra; iry-pat; aA
8wAw; aD-mr 1r-sbAw-xnty-pt; wr m iAt.f smsw m saH.f; mniw Nxn;
ny mrwt; HAty-a; HAty-a mAa; Hwty-aAt; Hry-sStA; Hry-tp aA U.E.8 &12;
Hry-tp Nxb; HqA Hwt; HqA Hwt mAa; HqA Hwt Mn-anx-Nfr-Ka-Ra; xrp
iAt nbt nTrt; xrp ibttyw 1r; xrp imyw nTrw; xrp nsty; xrp Hwwt Nt;
xrp Sndt nbt; xtmty-bity; xtmty-bity mAa; Xry-Hbt; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp;
Xry-tp nsw; sS mDAt-nTr; smr-waty; smr-waty mAa; smsw snwt; sHd
Hm-nTr Mn anx-Nfr-KA-Ra.
31. Strudwick, (1985: 253) at Table 20 dates Ibi, relying on Davies (1902: V1).
25 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
References: Brovarski, (2006: 94, 98).
Davies, (1902: V1: 8-23, Plates II-XXI & XXIII)
Kanawati, (1980a: 18-n9, 38-n19, 47-50, 52, 55, 57-n29, 58-n41, 60-n74,
64-6, 68, 70-4, 77, 81-n19, 83,-n61 67 74, 84-n97, 79-90, 92, 94, 97, 100-
n3 18, 102-n60, 116-7, 138, 142).
Kanawati, (2007: 11-73 & Plates 2-37, 41-58 & 67-75).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 66, 69, 75, 84-6, 108, 110-4, 116, 118,
124, 131, 139, 140-n846, 169, 250, 263-n1685, 273-4, 281).
Kees, (1932: 94).
McFarlane, (1995: n1708).
Martin-Pardey, (1976:45-n4, 117-n5, 118-9, 134-n3, 135-n4, 136, 138,
139, 144, 147, 166-n1, 210).
Roccati, (1982: 225-6, §§212-5).
Wilson, (1944: 208).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #022).
Urk I: I142-5.
Proposed Family Tree at Volume II, Appendix II/C
26 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[03] Inw-Mnw/Inumin
Location: Teti Cemetery Saqqara.
PM: – PN: I, 151.1632
Consensus Date: VI.3E.
King: VI.3.
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: VI.1L-VI.3E.33
Harpur ID: – Harpur Date: –
Baer ID: – Baer Date: –
Strudwick ID: – Strudwick Date: –
PM Date: – Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 79): VI.3M.34
- Kanawati, (2003a: 66-70): VI.1L-VI.3E.
- Kanawati, (2003b: 49-50): VI.3.
- Kanawati, (2006): VI.3E.35
- Woods, (2007: V2, #025): VI.1L-VI.3E.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-ib n nsw (m st.f nbt); imy-rA iswy n Xkr(w) nsw;
Epithets: imy-rA aw; imy-rA wabty; imy-rA prwy HD; [imy-rA Hwt-wrt];36 imy-rA
Snwty; imy-rA gswy-pr; iry-pat; aD-mr 8p; HAty-a; Hry-sStA n pr-dwAt;
Hry-sStA n nsw m swt.f nbt; xtmty-bity; Xry-Hbt; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; sS
mDAt-nTr; sm; smr-waty; sHD hm-nTr Mn-nfr-Ppy; tATy sAb TAty.
32. Ranke also suggests mnw-inw. PN II, 41 also suggests ini-wi-mnw. See also PNII, 360 (151.16) variations.
33. Kanawati, (2003a: 70).
34. Brovarski, (2006: 79): Mid-Pepy I ‘at the latest’.
35. Kanawati, (2006: 14).
36. Kanawati, (2006: 11), notes that the title does not survive in complete form in the tomb.
27 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
References: Brovarski, (2006: 79-80).
Kanawati, N., (2000: 25, 31).
Kanawati, (2003a: Case Study #17).
Kanawati, (2003b: 49-50).
Kanawati, (2006: passim).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #025).
Family Tree at at Volume II: Appendix II/C
28 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[04] ISTi 7Ti/ Isheti Theti

Location: Saqqara, West of Step Pyramid.
PM: III2: 609-610 PN: I, 47.11;
I, 395.24.
Consensus Date: VI.5L.
King: VI.3; VI.5.
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: –
Harpur ID: 367 Harpur Date: VI.5 – VIII.
LMP ID: 200 LMP Date: –
PM Date: VI.5L. Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: –Strudwick, (1985: 61-n3): VI.5.
Selected Titles & imy-rA spAwt 6A-mHw; smr-w’ty; HqA Hwt Mn-nfr Ppy; HqA Hwt Mn-
Epithets: nfr Mry-Ra; xnty-S Mn-anx-Nfr-kA-Ra; Xry-Hbt.
References: Droiton & Lauer, (1958: 207-27, 251 & Plates I – XX). 37
Strudwick, (1985: 61-n3).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
JE 88575.38
JE 88576.39
JE 88577.40
JE 88578.41
JE 88579.42
JE 88580.43
37. Droiton & Lauer report on the tomb finds and plans but do not provde a date for the tomb in their
commentary.
38. Droiton & Lauer, (1958: 215-n2).
39. Droiton & Lauer, (1958: 215-n2).
40. Droiton & Lauer, (1958: 215-n2, 218 & Plate XIV).
41. Droiton & Lauer, (1958: 215-n2, 218-9 & Plate XV).
42. Droiton & Lauer, (1958: 215-n2, 216 & Plate XI).
43. Droiton & Lauer, (1958: 216-7 & Plate XII).
29 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
JE 88580.44
JE 88581.
JE 88582.45
44. Droiton & Lauer, (1958: 216-7 & Plate XII).

45. Droiton & Lauer, (1958: 216 & Plate XI).
30 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[05] Idi/Idi46
Location: Abydos / U.E.8
PM: – PN: I, 53.22/3
Consensus Date: VI.5E-M(?).
King: –
Baer ID: 73A Baer Date: Dynasty VI.
Other Date: - Brovarski, (1994a: 36): VI.547
- Brovarski, (2006): Late Old Kingdom.
- Fischer, (1962), Old Kingdom.48
- Kanawati, (2003b: 56): VI.4-VI.5.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; iry-pat; imy-rA niwt mr; tAty sAb TAty mAa; imy-rA sS
Epithets: nsw; imy-rA Snwty; imy-rA Swy; HAty-a; Hry-tp Nxb.
References: Brovarski, (1994a: 34-6, 38-9).
Brovarski, (1994b: 108, 111)
Brovarski, (2006: 96).
Fischer, (1962: 65-8 & Plate 18 – Figure 4)
Kanawati, (1980a: 64, 75-6, 78-80, 85-n113, 86-n142, 89, 90, 93, 102-
n51, 146-n61).
46. I suggest that this title-holder is the son of Nbt and 2wy [41] of Abydos and thus is related to the Dynasty
VI Royal Family. First to combine the office of Southern Vizier and Overseer of Upper Egypt.
47. Brovarski, (1994: 36 & 39), suggests that CG 1457 and CG 1575 may belong to two separate individuals,
both Viziers (his suggestion) dated towards the end of Dynasty VI. The basis for his suggestion is that the
writing of the name of Idi is different on both objects. Brovarski suggests that CG 1457 sylistically and
paleographically belongs to VI.5M-L (Pepy II). The Brovarski comments are linked to his dating of Wni’s
son to the second half of the reign of VI.5. See also Fischer, (1962:65-8) who notes the possibility of the
objects belonging to two separate high-ranking officials.
48. Not specifically dated by Fischer, but the commentary is suggestive of an Old Kingdom date.
31 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 118, 121, 224, 253, 267 & 271).
Kees, (1932: 92-3)
Kees, (1940:39-47).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum:
CG 1457.
CG 1575.
CG1577.
Proposed Family Tree at at Volume II, Appendix II/C
32 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[06] Idi/Idi
Location: Coptos/Kom el-Koffar49 / U.E.5
PM: PN: I, 53.25
Consensus Date: VIII.2
King: VIII.2.
Baer ID: 60250 Baer Date: VIII.
Other Date: - Mostafa, (1987: 171): VIII.2.
- Schenkel, (1965: 19): VIII.
- Strudwick, (2005): VIII.
- Kanawati, (1982a: 69): VIII.
- Kees, (1932: 111-2): Heracleopolitan.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw U.E.1-7, imy-rA niwt mr; imy-rA Hm-nTr; iry-pat; HAty-a;
Epithets: it nTr; mry-nTr; smA Mnw; sDAwty bity; sDt nsw; tAty sAb TAty
References: Fischer, (1968: 65-8).
Goedicke, (1967: 172-194; 214-5; Abb. 18-22 & 28)
Hayes, (1946: 16-8 & Plate V).
Kanawati, (1980a: 69-70, 76, 96, 112, 114, 124-n53 & n61, 127-n100).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 134, 154, 166-8, 176, 178, 257, 260, 283,
286-8).
Kees, (1932: 111-4).
McFarlane, (1995: # 012).
Martin-Pardey, (1976:163, 221, 227-9).
49. Tomb of his father 5mAi [48].

50. Decrees of Neferkauhor from Koptos.
33 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Mostafa, (1984-5: 422-3, 425-6).
Mostafa, (1987: 169-184).
Schenkel, (1965: 19-23).
Strudwick, (2005: 117, 121-3). Texts 31, 35-9.
Urk I: I299-306.
Weill, (1912: 59-67; Plates 4, 12 & 12)
Museum Collections: 51
Metropolitan Museum, NY
MMA 14.7.11.52
MMA 14.7.12.53
Cairo Museum
JE 43053.54
JE 41894.55
51. Strudwick, (2005: 121-2, Text 36), present location of decree is unknown.
52. Coptos Decree O.
53. Coptos Decrees P & Q.
54. Coptos Decree I.
55. Coptos Decree R.
34 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[07] Idw I/Idw I

Location: Dendera/U.E.6
PM: V: 111. PN: I, 54.10
Consensus Date: VI.5E-M.
King: VI.3, VI.5.
Kanawati ID: 050 Kanawati Date: VI.5E-M.
Harpur ID: 677 Harpur Date: VI.3-4E.
PM Date: VI Cherpion Date: VI.5.
Other Date: - Fischer, (1968: 95): VI.5M.56
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 74 & 298): VI.4-VI.5E.57
- Petrie, (1898: 8): VI.5.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #031):VI.4-VI.5E.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA 5maw n bw mAa ;HAty-a; sDAwty bity; HqA Hwt;
Epithets: smr-waty; Hry-tp aA U.E.6; Hry-tp aA n spAt; Spss nsw; smr pr; sAb aD-
mr; wr mD 5maw; HqA Hwt Mn-anx Nfr-kA-Ra; HqA Hwt Mn-nfr Mry-
Ra.
References: Fischer, (1968:93-101, 115, 117-8, Figure 16 & Plate V).
Kanawati, (1980a: 47-8, 56-7, 66, 74, 78, 100-n3, 103-n74, 142).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 74-5, 114-6, 118, 120, 142, 259-n1649,
262-4).
Kees, (1932: 96).
Martin-Pardey, (1976:138-9, 166-n2, 169).
56. Fischer (1968: 94) reads the dating of Idw I to the mid-reign of Pepy II mainly on titulary considerations
after utilising Baer’s development of title sequences. This is after considering archaeological evidence which
dates the tomb to the reign of Pepy II. Fischer felt that the tituary fitted more comfortably with Baer’s VI E
(years 35-55 of Pepy II).
57. Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 74) note that Idw I does not hold a titulary datable to the second half of the
reign of Pepy II (VI.5), but in fact fits into Baer, (1960, reprint 1973)’s Period VI C (Merenre to Pepi II year
15).
35 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Petrie, (1898: 8-10, 17, 19, 45-6, 63-5. Plates V-VI).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 219).
Strudwick, (2005: 347). Text 250.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #31)
Museum Collections:
University Museum, Philadelphia
29-66-594.58
58. Fischer (1968: 93 & Plate V).

36 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[08] Idw 4nny/ Idw Shenay

Location: Qasr el-Sayyad/U.E.7
PM: V: 119-121. PN: I, 54.1159
Consensus Date: VI.5M.
King: VI.3, VI.4, VI.5. 60
Kanawati ID: 053 Kanawati Date: VI.5L.
Harpur ID: 678 Harpur Date: VI.5L.
Baer ID: 083 Baer Date: VI.5E or VI.5L.
PM Date: VI.5. Cherpion Date: VI.5.
Other Date: - Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 298): VI.5E-M.
- Kees, (1932: 96): VI.5.
- Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 219): VI.
- Strudwick, (2005: 188): VI.5.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #032):VI.5E-M.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw61; HAty-a; sHD Hm-nTr Mn-anx Nfr-kA-Ra; sHD Hm-nTr Mn-
Epithets: anx Mry-Ra; sHD Hm-nTr Mn-anx Mr-n-Ra; sDAwty bity; HqA Hwt; smr-
waty; imy-rA xnty-S pr-aA; Hry-tp aA U.E. 7.
References: Kanawati, (1980a: 95).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 92, 117, 119, 133, 143, 239-n1487, 263-
n1681).
Kees, (1932: 95-6).
LD (Text): 177-8 / LD (Plates) II: 113g, 114a&b.
Montet, (1936: 102-3, 108, 110-125).
Mostafa, (1987: 173).
59. PN I, 54.11: Idw.

60. Priesthoods of pyramids of Kings provide a terminus antequem. In this case, dating cannot be before
VI.5/Pepy II.
61. Designated as Overseer of Upper Egypt in his father, 7Awty’s [55] tomb, but not his own.
37 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 219).
Strudwick, (2005: 188-9). Text 105.
Urk I: I115-7.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #32).
38 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[09] ab-iHw/Ab-ihuw62
Location: Dendera/ U.E. 6
PM: – PN: –
Consensus Date: IX.
King: –
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: IX63
Other Date: - Brovarski, (1982: 308-9): IX.
- Fischer, (1968: 204): IX.
- Peck, (1958: 87-n2): VIII.64
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA 5maw mAa; iry-pat; HAty-a; sDAwty bity; smr-
Epithets: waty; Hry-tp aA U.E. 8/6/7.65
References: Brovarski, (1982: 308-9).66
Fischer, (1968: 185-8, 195-9, 203-5 Figure 40 & Plate XXIV).
Kanawati, (1980a: 18-n9, 116-9, 121-2, 125-n89, 126-n92).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 96-n506, 118, 152-5, 157, 159, 166, 169-
170, 286, 288-9).
62. Brovarski, (1982: 309), suggests that ab-iHw was not the (un-named) Overseer of Upper Egypt overthrown by
anxty-fy. See Vandier, (1950: 186-7), but rather that an un-named nomarch whose False Dorr was found by
Petrie (1902: Plate LIV), at Abydos may in fact be anxty-fy’s victim. The problem with Brovarski’s
identification of the potential victim, is that the person is a nomarch, but not an Overseer of Upper Egypt.
63. Kanawati, (1982a: 18-n9), but also identifies the likelihood of linkage to the Heracleopolitan Dynasty.
64. Peck, (1958: 87-n2) states that she is not sure of the order of succession and therefore does not propose
anything other than a general dating to Dynasty VIII. Whilst acknowledging Fischer for drawing her
attention to the False Door – JE 38551.
65. See note below on Brovarski and the order of ab-iHw’s titulary and the particular order of the nomes listed.
66. Brovarski, (1982: 309), suggests that ab-iHw was Overseer of Upper Egypt in Abydos. This suggestion is based
on the order of his titulary. Kanawati (1980a: 116), emphasises the religious perspective in relation to the
naming of nomes in the titulary. In common with Fischer (1968: 202), Brovarski feels that the nome
sequence in his titulary is important from an administrative, not just a religious perspective. It should be
noted that Brovarski (1982: 316-n119), largely relies on Fischer (1968) as the basis for his views. I do not
have a view on this matter but draw it to the readers’ attention.
39 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
McFarlane, (1995: 361-n1934).
Peck, (1958: 87-n2).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
JE 38551.67
Figure 1
The False Door of ab-iHw
[09] showing both versions
of his title as Overseer of Upper
Egypt.
67. Fischer, (1968: Figure 40), illustrated above in Figure 1.

40 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[10] Wiw Iyw/Wiu Iyu68

Location: Tomb # 19, Sheikh Said/ U.E. 15
PM: IV: 189-190. PN: I, 76.1
King: –
PM Date: Old Kingdom. Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 101): VI.4-VI.5E.69
- Kees, (1932: 98): VI.5.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #36): VI.4-VI.5E.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; HAty-a; sDAwty bity; HqA Hwt; smr-waty; Xry-Hbt; Xry-tp
Epithets: nsw; Hry-tp aA U.E. 15.
References: Brovarski, (2006: 101).
Davies, (1901c: 27-9, Plates 21-24).
Kanawati, (1980a: 74, 89, 95, 98, 125-n89, 145-nn46 & 52).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 73-4, 78-9, 118-9, 122-3, 279).
Kees, (1932: 98).
LD (Text): 122-3 / LD (Plates) II: 113a, c, d, e.
Martin-Pardey, (1976:112-n1, 134-n3, 167).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #36).
68. Son of Mrw-Bbi [25].

69. Brovarski, (2006: 101), relies on Harpur’s dating.
41 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[11] Wni Iwn 299I/Weni the Elder

Location: Abydos
PM: V: 72. PN: I, 79.9
Consensus Date: VI.4.70
King: VI.3, VI.4.
PM Date: VI.1/VI.3/VI.4 Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: Brovarski, (1994a: 37 & 2006: 94): VI.4
Richards, (2002: 94): VI.4.
Selected Titles & [HAty-a] imy-rA 5maw xnt m Abw mHt m Mdnit;71 imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA
Epithets: 5maw mAa72; HAty-a; iry-pat; imy-is; sAw Nxn; Xry-tp Nxb; smr-waty;
smsw n DbAt; sHD Hm-nTr n niwt.f;73 sAb iry-Nxn74; imy-rA xnty-S pr-
aA; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; sS mDAt nTr; sDAwty bity; Xry-tp nsw; xrp SnDwt
(nbt); HkA Hwt; tATy sAb TAty.
References: Brovarski, (1994a: 22-4, 31, 33-4, 37).
Brovarski, (1994b: 103, 106, 113-5).
Brovarski, (2006: 94, 100, 112).
Dixon, (1958: 44-n1).
El-Khadragy, (2002a: 61-7; Plates 1-2; Figures 1-3).
Fischer, (1976: 81-5).
Goedicke, (1955: 181, 183).
70. According to Wni’s biography, he was promoted to the role of Overseer by Merenre.
71. Urk I: I105.
72. El-Khadragy, (2002: Figure 2). Confirmed with copy of biography in this article.
73. Baud, (1999: 293), identifies this as the pyramid town of Pepy I.
74. According to various translations of Wni’s biography, the title is described as ‘mouth of Nekhen’, but more
usually is read as iry-Nxn. On this see Fischer, (1996: 43-45).
42 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Goedicke, (1967: 66 & Abb. 5)75
Kanawati, (1980a: 10, 28-30, 32-3, 40-n58 61, 41-n83, 45, 48, 50, 53-6,
57-n11, 59-n54, 60-n80, 63-5, 70-1, 77, 86-n124, 97, 139, 146-n62).
Kanawati, (2000: 30).
Kanawati, (2003a: 4, 16, 19-20, 83, 151, 155, 170-3, 175, 180-1, 185).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 47, 93-n488, 118, 206, 222, 239-n1487,
263, 270).
Kees, (1932: 89-92, 94, 100)
Lichtheim, (2006: 18-22).
Mariette, (1880: #522; #529; #533)
Martin-Pardey, (1976:45-n4, 84. 109, 116, 118, 125, 127, 132, 134-n3,
135-n4, 136-n1, 145, 148, 154, 156, 170-1, 185, 187, 195, 198-n1, 200).
Richards, (2002:75-102).
Roccati, (1982: 187-197, §§177-188).
Simpson, (2003: 402-7).
Strudwick, (2005: 103-5). Text 20.76
Strudwick, (2005: 352-7). Text 256.
Weill, (1912: 43-53).77
Urk I: I98-110.
Urk I: I209-213.78
75. Goedicke (1967: 66): Dashur Decree.

76. Dahshur Decree (PM III2: 876). Strudwick, (2005, 103) notes that the erasure of some names in the decree
may be linked to the harem conspiracy. See also, Kanawati, (2003a: 4) and Wni’s own biography where he
mentions the King’s trust in him was such that even as a relatively junior judge, he heard the case alone.
One can speculate why the Vizier did not hear the case – perhaps due to involvement in the conspiracy.
77. Weill on the Dahshur decree.
78. Dahshur Decree.
43 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum79
CG 175.
CG 1309.
CG 1310.
CG 1435.
CG 1574.
CG 1670.
CG 1643.
Abydos
Discoveries at Tomb:
Second False Door.80
Statue of Weni as a boy.81
79. Richards, (2002: Figure 3) illustrates photographic evidence of all the pieces listed below.
80. Richards, (2002, Figure 15). Described by Richards as finely executed, of white limestone and ‘clearly the
product of a royal workshop’.
81. Richards, (2002, Figure 20).
44 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[12] Wnis-anx/Wenisankh
Location: Saqqara – close to pyramid of his father: V.8 (Wenis).
PM: III2: 616-7. PN: I, 63.8.82
Consensus Date: V.9.
King: V.9.
Kanawati ID: 073 Kanawati Date: V.9 L.
Harpur ID: 378 Harpur Date: –
Baer ID: 112 Baer Date: V.9-VI.1.
LMP ID: 016 LMP Date: V.9.
PM Date: V.9. Cherpion Date: V.9.
Other Date: - Baud, (1999: #32): V.9.
- Brovarski, (2006: 77): V.9.
- Schweitzer, (1948: 263): V.9.
- Willoughby-Winlaw, (2007: 315): V.9.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; Hm-nTr MAat (?); Xry-tp nsw; sA nsw.
Epithets:
References: Aufrère, (1982: 61).
Munro, (1993: 21).
Saad, (1941: 687).
Quibell, (1909: 14).83
Schweitzer, (1948: 263).
Willoughby-Winlaw, (2007: #22. V1, 314-5; V2, Figure IV.197 (I & II)).
Museum Collections:
Field Museum, Chicago
A 24448. 84
Projected Family Tree at at Volume II, Appendix II/B
82. PN reading is anX-Wnis.

83. Blocks now part of the Field Museum, Chicago holding A 24448. Wnis-anx not specifically named in
publication on 1907-1908 excavations. See PM III2: 616.
84. Brovarski (2006: 77-n39), notes that the chapel and False Door remain unpublished.
45 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Plate 1:
False Door of the King’s Son and Overseer
of Upper Egypt, Wnis-anX[12].
Field Museum, Chicago A24448.
46 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[13] Wnis-anx/Wenisankh
Location: TT413, Khokha, Thebean Necropolis.
PM: I2: 627 PN: I, 63.8.85
Consensus Date: VI.3-VI.5(?).
King: V.9.
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: VI.5M-L.
Harpur ID: 682 Harpur Date: VI.7.
Baer ID: 112A Baer Date: V.9M-VI.1M.
PM Date: VI. Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Davies, (1918: 23): VIE.
- Kees, (1932: 89): VI.3.
- Saleh, (1977: 17): VL/VIE.86
- Smith (1946, reissue 1978: 226): VI.
- Winlock (1943: 250 & 1947: 3): VI.
Selected Titles & Xry-tp nsw; imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA Snwty; Hry-tp aA n spat.
Epithets:
References: Aufrère, (1982: 61).87
Davies, (1918: 23 & Figure 34).
Kanawati, (1980a: 68 &91).
Kees, (1932: 89).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 153– n1, 166– n2).
Saleh, (1977: 12-17; Color plates Aa; Ab & Af; Figures 3-11 & Plates 2-
6(1)).
85. PN reading is anX-Wnis.

86. Saleh, (1977: 17) notes that names made from compounding of King’s names tend to be given to people
born during or very shortly after the relevant King’s reign.
87. Aufrère, (1982: 30), notes that in the case of non-royal personages, the use of a King’s cartouche in a name
should not be taken as conclusive proof of dating. Kanawati, (1980a: 136), discusses this issue in relation to
Wnis-anx.
47 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Winlock, (1943: 250 & Plate XXXIII).
Winlock, (1947: 3 & Plate 1).
Museum Collections:
Metropolitan Museum of Art:
MMA 22.3.325.88
88. MMA 22.3.325 fragment shows title of Overseer of Upper Egypt.

48 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[14] Wsr/Weser
Location: Khozam/U.E. 5
PM: PN: I, 85.6
Consensus Date: IXE.
King: –
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: IXE89
Other Date: - Borchardt, (1964: 123-4): MK.
- Fischer, (1964: 40-3): VIII / FIP.90
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; it nTr; mry nTr; iry-pat; HAty-a; imy-rA Hm-nTr; sA nsw
Epithets: smsw n Xt.f91; imy-rA xAswt; Hry-tp aA n 1rwy.
References: Fischer, (1964: 40-7, 62-4, Plates XIII & XVI).
Kanawati, (1980a: 115).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 154, 167-8, 260, 286-8).
McFarlane, (1995: A-2, 318, 338-9, 341 & 348).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 179, 208, 221-3, 227).
Mostafa, (1984-5: 422)
Mostafa, (1987: 180).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
CG 1442.
89. Kanawati, (1980a: 115).

90. Fischer, (1964: 40-3) talks of the possible parentage options for Wsr and suggests that he was indeed royal,
but as to dynastic parentage, does not offer substantive conclusions as there is little evidence to proceed on.
Fischer also discusses possible dating options: Dynasties 8/thereafter.
91. Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 167). Son of Neferkauhor by a lesser Queen? Also Fischer, (1964: 40-7).
Kanawati (1992: 167) suggests Wsr was a contemporary of 5mAi [48].
49 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[15] WDAy/Wajay
Location: Abydos (?)
PM: – PN: –92
Consensus Date: VI.5E(?)93
King: –
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: VI.5M(?)94
Other Date: Borchardt, (1964: 70): Old - MK.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw mAa.
Epithets:
Mariette, (1880: #537).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum:
CG 1591.
92. PN I, 88.14: WDA is found in the tomb of Mereruka. Not the form of this individual’s name but the closest
linkage.
93. Dating suggested on the basis of the spread of the usage of MAa as an addition to Overseeer of Upper Egypt
titulary in the early part of the reign of Pepy II.
94. Kanawati (1980a: 64) notes that his dating to mid-Pepy II is questionable. There is no evidence either way.
50 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[16] Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-kA 1ny /Pepyankhheryib Neferka-heny

Location: Tomb #D2, Meir / U.E 9-1595
PM: IV: 254-5 PN: I, 63.23.
King: VI.5.
Kanawati ID: 88 Kanawati Date: VI.5L.
Harpur ID: 650 Harpur Date: VIL-VIII96
Baer ID: 133 Baer Date: VI.5M.
Strudwick ID: – Strudwick Date: VI.5M-L.97
Other Date: - Blackman, (1924: 18-9): VI.5.98
- Brovarski, (2006: 83): VI.5.
- El-Khouli & Kanawati, (1989: 26): VI.5M
- Kees, (1932: 101): VI.5.
- Roccati, (1982: 234), Dynasty VIL.
- Strudwick, (2005: 368): VI.5M.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #42): VI.4-VI.5E.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5ma(w) m spAwt Hrywt-ib; imy-rA 5ma(w) n bw mAa99; iry-pat;
Epithets: HAty-a; smr-waty; Hry-tp Nxb; imy-rA sS a nsw; sDAwty bity; Hry-sStA n
pr-dwAt; imy-rA Snwty; imy-rA gs-pr; imy-rA Hm-nTr; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp;
sm; tAty sAb TAty.
95. Jones (2000: 249), Title #901.

96. Harpur, (1987: 280, # 650): VI.7.
97. Strudwick, (1985: 201), Table 12.
98. Blackman (1924: 18-9), notes that Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-kA 2ny’s name tells us he was born under Pepy II
and lived to be a centerarian.
99. Blackman, (1924: Plates VI, 1 & XV).
51 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
References: Blackman, (1924: passim).
El-Khouli & Kanawati, (1989: 11-26).
Kanawati, (1980a: 67, 71, 77, 93-4, 96, 98-9, 102-n51, 112, 137, 140,
142, 144-n32, 145-n46).
Kanawati, (1989b: 75-80).
Kanawati, (2003b: 56, Figure 10).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 65-n326, 77, 105, 111, 115, 118-122, 124,
133-5, 143-5, 171, 202, 214-n1294, 224, 243, 256,-n1617, 261-2, 267-
n1712, 276-8).
Kees, (1932: 101).
Kees, (1933: 594).
McFarlane, (1995: 284, 286-n1556).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 104, 121, 124-5, 142-n2(a), 154, 184-5).
Roccati, (1982: 234-6, §§222-3).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 220-1, 354).
Strudwick, (2005: 368-371 & 411), Texts 270 & 311.
Urk I: I221-4.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #42).
52 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[17] Ppy-anx 1ny-km/Pepyankh Heni-Km (the black)100

Location: Tomb #A2, Meir / U.E. 14
PM: IV: 247-9. PN: I, 63.23.
King:
Harpur ID: 649 Harpur Date: VI.4-5.
Baer ID: 134 Baer Date: VI.5L.
Strudwick ID: – Strudwick Date: VI.5L.101
PM Date: VI.5. Cherpion Date: VI.3/VI.5(?)
Other Date: - Blackman, (1914: 6): VI.4.
- Brovarski, (2006: 104): VI.5.
- El-Khouli & Kanawati, (1989: 26): VI.5L.
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 300): VI.5L.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #041): VI.5L.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA 5maw mAa; imy-rA Xnw; HAty-a; sDAwty bity;
Epithets: smr-waty; Xry-Hbt; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; sm; xrp SnDt nbt; imy-rA Hm-nTr;
tAty sAb TAty.
References: Blackman & Apted, (1953a: 16-56 & Plates XV-XLIII & LV-LXV).
Brovarski, (2006: 104, 116-7).
Kanawati, (1977: 91).
Kanawati, (1980a: 50, 89, 98, 100-n11, 135-6, 138, 142, 145-n46).
Kanawati, (1989b: 75-80).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 76, 105, 111-n606, 118, 133, 136-7, 139,
144-5, 172, 214-n1294, 271, 274, 276-8).
100. Son of Ny-anx-Ppy 4bk-Htp 1pi-Km [30].

101. Strudwick, (1985: 303), Table 28.
53 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kees, (1932: 91)
Martin-Pardey, (1976:117-n5, 122-5, 154-n7).
O’Connor: (1996: 621-632).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 220-1, 244, 247, 299).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #041).
54 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[18] Ppy-anx 2wy/Pepyankh Khuy

Location: Kom el-Ahmar Sawaris /U.E 18
PM: IV: 125-6. PN: I, 63.23 &
I, 265.26.102
Consensus Date: VI.3+
King: VI.3
Other Date: - Brinks et al (1984: 79): Old Kingdom.
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 301): VIE-M.
- Smolenski, (1907: 149): VI.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #043): VI.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; HAty-a; smr-waty; sDAwty bity; HqA Hwt; Hry-tp nsw; sS
Epithets: answ; imy-rA wpt103; imy-rA xnty-S pr-aA; xnty-S Mn-nfr Mry-Ra; sm;
Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; xrp Sndt nbt.
References: Brinks et al (1984: 75, 79).
Broderick & Morton, (1899: 26-33).
Fischer, (1968: 66).
Kanawati, (1980a: 52-3, 60-n74, 66-7, 83-n74, 84-n97, 92).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 80-1).
Smolenski, (1907: 149-153).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #043).
102. PN I, 63.23 = Ppy-anx; PN I, 265.26 = 2wy.

103. Kanawati, (1980: 52) notes that holding the title of Overseer of Upper Egypt and imy-rA wpt is unusual but
comparable with Ibi [02] of Deir el-Gebrawi. On this basis, Kanawati surmises a similar dating for both
title-holders. The consensus dating above is conservative and not in disagreement with Kanawati.
55 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[19] Ppy-nxt/Pepynakht
Location: Abydos/ U.E 8.
PM: PN: –
Consensus Date: VI.5.
King: –
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 99): VI.5M-L.
- Simpson, (1995: 5): VI.
Selected Titles & [iry-pat HAty-]-a; imy-rA 5maw mAa; smr-waty, imy-rA Hm-nTr104; tAty
Epithets: sAb TAty; imy-rA niwt; imy-rA kAt nbt nsw105; imy-rA wabty; imy-rA sS a
nsw; xtmty bity; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; sm; xrp Sndt nbt.
References: Brovarski, (1994b: 114-5).
Brovarski, (2006: 99, 115-6).
Kanawati, (1980a: 89-90, 93, 102-n51).
Kees, (1932: 92-3).
Simpson, (1995: 5-7, Figure 4: OK 1, Plates 2-3).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum: 106
JE 91218.
CG 1573.
104. Simpson (1995: 5 and Figure 4).

105. Kanawati (1980a: 89), notes that at this point, with the transfer of the title to the Vizier resident in Abydos,
the title disappears from titularies of Viziers in Memphis.
106. Simpson (1995: 7), notes that JE 91218 (door-jamb) and CG 1573 (False Door) differ in style somewhat but
may belong to the same piece.
56 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[20] Ppy-snb/Pepyseneb
Location: Abydos/ U.E 8
PM: – PN: I, 131.17.107
Consensus Date: VI.5M(?)
King: –
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: VI.5M(?)108
Other Date: –
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; hAty-a.
Epithets:
Mariette, (1880: #530 & #543).
107. PN I, 131.17: noted as Middle Kingdom.

108. Kanawati (1980a: 64) notes that his dating to mid-Pepy II is questionable. We simply have no evidence
either way.
57 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[21] Pr-Sna-y or 5nay/Pershenay or Shenay

Location: Tomb N.V. Saqqara, Vicinity of Pyramid of Pepi II.
PM: III2: 678. PN: I, 134.14
King: –
Baer ID: 493B Baer Date: VI.5M-L.
Strudwick ID: 133 Strudwick Date: VI.5M.
LMP ID: 194 LMP Date: –
PM Date: VI.5. Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Jequier, (1929, reprint 1983: 107-9): VI.
- Kees, (1940: 50-1): VI.5M+.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; tAty sAb TAty; sDAwty bity; smr-waty; Xry-Hbt; HAty-a;
Epithets: iry-pat.
References: Jequier, (1929, reprint 1983: 107-9 & Figure 122).
Jequier, (1938: Plates 59, 73).
Kanawati, (1980a: 79, 86-n138 & n141 &n142).
Kees, (1932: 93). 109
Kees, (1933: 594). 110
Kees, (1940: 50-1).111
109. Reference is to Pri, but that was the partial rendition of Pr-Sna-y or 5nay’s name.
110. As above.
111. As above.
58 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[22] Pth-Htp 7fi/Ptahhotep II

Location: D64, west of the Step Pyramid, Saqqara. Part of the
Ptahhotep/Akhethotep complex.
PM: III2: 600-4. PN: I, 141.5
Consensus Date: V.9M.
King: V.6, V.7, V.8.
Harpur ID: 400 Harpur Date: V.9M-L.
Baer ID: 161 Baer Date: V.9L.
Strudwick ID: 050 Strudwick Date: V.9L.112
LMP ID: 062B LMP Date: V.8-V.9.
PM Date: V.8-V.9. Cherpion Date: V.8.
Other Date: - Davies, (1901a: 6): V.8.
- Jacquet-Gordon, (1962: 398): Dynasty VL-Dynasty VIE.
- Paget, Pirie & Griffith, (1898: 33 ) V.8.
- Smith (1946, reissue 1978: 192) V.8+.
- Willoughby-Winlaw, (2007: 321): V.9M-L.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; tAty sAb TAty; imy-rA Hwt wrt; imy-rA niwt mn-swt-Ny-
Epithets: wsr-Ra; imy-rA niwt nfr-9d-kA-Ra; imy-rA niwt nTr-swt-Mn-kAw-Hr;
Hm-nTr MAat; imy-rA gs-pr; iwn knmwt; mdw rxyt; xrp wr mD Smaw;
sAb aD-mr; wD-mdw; wD-mdw n Hry-wdb; Xry-tp nsw; sHD wab mn-
swt-Ny-wsr-Ra; sHD Hm-nTr nfr-9d-kA-Ra; sHD Hm-nTr nTry-swt-Mn-
kAw-Hr; hry-sStA wDt-mdw [S]tAt n nsw; hry-sStA n wDt-mdw nbt nt
nsw; xrp wsxt; xrp sS iry sprw.
112. Strudwick, (1985: 88). It is possible that Pth-Htp 7fi could have become imy-rA 5maw earlier in Wenis’
reign. Strudwick suggests that he would likely have held most of his titles before promotion to the vizierate
on the death of his father, Axt-Htp [01].
59 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
References: Davies, (1901a: passim).
Harpur & Scremin, (2008).
Hassan, (1975b: 63-84)
Jacquet-Gordon, (1962: 398-402 (28S5-6)).
Kees, (1933: 581-2).
Paget, Pirie, & Griffith (1898: 26-34 & Plates XXI-XLI).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 179, 191-3, 201, 292-3, 306, 323, 354, 360).
Strudwick, (2005: 212-3). Text 126.
Strudwick, (2005: 418-9). Text 319B.
Urk I: I188-9.
Willoughby-Winlaw, (2007: #38. V1, 319-321).
Wilson, (1944: 208-9 & Plate XIII).
60 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[23] PtH-Spss/Ptahshepses Junior II

Location: Abusir. Close to mastaba of his father, the Vizier Ptahshepses.
PM: – PN: I, 326.11113
Consensus Date: V.8.
King: –
114
Other Date: Bárta, (2000: 57): V.8.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; Xry-Hbt; HAty-a; smr-waty; iry nfr-HAt.115
Epithets:
References: Bárta, (2000: 57 & 66).
Bárta, (2005: 108; 113; 114 & Figure 4).
Borchardt, (1907: 71).116
Verner, (1977: 45; 102-3; Plates 24/5 & Photos 38-40 & 90-97).117
Family Tree at at Volume II, Appendix II/A
113. PN reading is Spss-PtH.

114. Bárta, (2000: 53) notes that the tomb chapel type (Reisner Type 7) did not appear until the reign of
Neuserre. This was the case at Abusir but at Giza, this type appeared after the reign of Neuserre. See
Reisner, (1942: 185 & 260-272), for a discussion of this chapel type.
115. Barta (2000: 57 & 59). Borchardt (1907: 71). Verner (1977: 65, Inscription #69 & 1977: 76, Inscription
#94).
116. Name of Ptahshepses in the mortuary temple of Neuserre is not complete and only titles are smr-waty and
iry nfr-HAT. Bárta, (2000: n55) suggests that this reference is not to his father but to his service under
Neuserre.
117. Verner (1977: 102), PtH-Spss/Ptahshepses Junior II replaced Khafini in being described as the eldest born
son. All references to Khafini carefully erased in his father’s mastaba. Son of Ptahshepses and his wife
Princess Khamerernebty – daughter of Neuserre – hence rise to prominence in father’s tomb.
61 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[24] Mry-Ra-nfr QAr/Meryranefer Qar

Location: Tomb # M10 Edfu/U.E. 2
PM: V: 200-1. PN: I, 161.2118
Kanawati ID: 120 Kanawati Date: VI.5E.119
Baer ID: 187 Baer Date: VI.4.
Strudwick ID: 135 Strudwick Date: VI.4.
PM Date: VI.4. Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Brovarski, (1994a: 38): VI.5M.
- Brovarski, (2006: 109): VI.5E.
- El-Khadragy, (2002b: 228): VI.5.
- Roccati, (1982: 177): VI.
- Simpson, (2003: 412): End of Old Kingdom.
- Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 227): VIL.
- Strudwick, (2005: 342): Dynasty VIM.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA Smaw120; HAty-a; smr-waty; xry-Hbt; Hry-sStA n
Epithets: pr-dwAt; Hry-tp aA U.E.2; imy-rA wpt nbt nt nsw; wr mD Smaw; sAb aD
mr; Xry-tp nsw; sDAwty bity; imy-rA Hm-nTr; Hry-sStA n mDt nb innt m
rA-aA gAw m xAswt rs(yw)t; imAxw xr PtH-rsi-inb.f.
118. PN I, 161.2: Mry-Ra-nfr.

119. Kanawati (1980a: 46) notes that Mry-Ra-nfr QAr received his first promotions under Merenre, but became
Overseer of Upper Egypt under VI.5 Pepy II. I have added the annotation of ‘E’ to Kanawati’s dating on
the basis that the career of Mry-Ra-nfr QAr was already advanced under Merenre.
120. Overseer of Upper Egyptian Grain. Promotion under Merenre.
62 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
References: Brovarski, (1994a: 37-8).
Brovarski, (2006: 92, 97, 108-9).
Daressy, (1917: 130-140).121
El-Khadragy, (2002b: 203-228 & Tafeln 4-10).
Fischer, (1968: 19, 58, 60, 70-1, 74-n305 & 307, 75-6, 84, 87-n2, 89-n11,
94, 96-n431, 99, 110-1 (Figure 20b), 138, 151, 165, 171, 219-VII(8)).
Kanawati, (1980a: 4, 29-31, 33, 38-n19, 41-n81, 46-7, 50, 56, 57-n29, 58-
n40, 59-n53, 60-n81, 64, 66, 68-70, 76, 78, 84-n98,85-n104 & 114, 88,
91, 100-n7, 101-n37, 104-5, 108, 122-n6, 142).
Kanawati, (2000: 30).
Kanawati, (2003:170).
Kees, (1932: 89, 91, 94).
McFarlane, (1995: 74, 84-n470, 89, 264-n1441, 267-n1450, 274-5).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 11-n7, 113, 126, 133-n1, 134, 147, 164-7, 179-181,
185-n5, 187).
Roccati, (1982: 179-180, §170).
Simpson, (2003: 412-3).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 86-8, 227-8 & Plate 26e).
Strudwick, (2005: 342-5). Text 247.
Urk I: I251-5.
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
JE 43370.
JE 43371.
121. Daressy (1917: 140) assigns BM 1341 to Mry-Ra-nfr QAr. James, (1961: 33 & 37-8) does not agree
conclusively with the identification but notes certain similarities. BM 1159 also relates to the same tomb. It
is not impossible that these are the same individual.
63 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[25] Mrw-Bbi/Meru Beby122

Location: Tomb # 20, Sheikh Said/ U.E. 15
PM: IV: 189. PN: I, 95.16.
Consensus Date: VI.3+
King: VI.3.
Kanawati ID: 127 Kanawati Date: VI.1-VI.3.
Baer ID: 192 Baer Date:
PM Date: – Cherpion Date: VI.3.
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 88): VI.5M.
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 300): VI.1-VI.3.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; HqA Hwt; sDAwty bity; Xry-hbt Hry-tp; sm; xrp Sndt nbt;
Epithets: Xry-tp nsw pr-aA; imy-rA niwt mAwt; smr-waty; HqA Hwt Mn-anx Mry-
Ra; sAb aD-mr.
References: Brovarski, (2006: 88, 117).
Davies, (1901c: 24-7, Plates 17-21).
Kanawati, (1980a: 65-6, 72, 74-5, 78, 82-n35, 89, 95, 100-n3, 142, 145-
n46 & n52).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 78).123
Kees, (1932: 98).
LD (Text): 121-2 / LD (Plates) II: 112c&d.
122. Father of Wiw [10].

123. Kanawati & McFarlane (1992: 78), note Mrw Bbi as the first holder of the title imy-rA 5maw in U.E. 15.
64 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[26] Mrri/Mereri
Location: Saqqara.
PM: III2: 607-8. PN: I, 162.22.
King: VI.1124
Kanawati ID: 397 Kanawati Date: VI.5E.
Harpur ID: 419 Harpur Date: VI.3-5E(?)
Strudwick ID: 067 Strudwick Date: VI.4-VI.5E
PM Date: VIL. Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 102): VI.5E.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #125): V-VI.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; iry-pat; HAty-a; smr-waty; tAty sAb TAty; imy-rA Hwt wrt
Epithets: 6; imy-rA sDm nb; imy-rA niwt mr; imy-rA kAt nbt nsw; imy-rA sS a
nsw; sDAwty bity; imy-rA prwy HD; imy-rA Snwty.
Hassan, (1975c: 25-39, Plates XV-XXV)
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #125).
124. Hassan, (1975c: 34) notes the re-use of blocks from another tomb, suspected to be close by with Teti’s
name. Strudwick (1985: 99), points to the continued cult of Teti until Dynasty XII and therefore he
suggests one would not expect that blocks would be removed from a location associated with the cult
whilst the cult was active. This raises the question as to whether the priestly title on the blocks is part of
Mrri’s titulary.
65 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[27] Mrry-anty/Merynemti125
Location: Saqqara. Pyramid enclosure of Queen Neith.

PM: III2: 675 PN: I, 162.17126
I, 69.16127
Consensus Date: VI.5L – VI.6.
King: –
Other Date: Jequier (1933: 55-6): VI.5L-VI.6.128
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA gs-pr; Smr-waty.
Epithets:
References: Jequier (1933: 55, Figure 32).
125. Mrry-anty’s name is written in hieroglyphs using Gardiner Sign G7 in variant form with honorific
transposition for the presence of a deity in the name. Originally Jequier thought that the sign was connected
to Sokar, but Gardiner (1957, reprint 2001: 468) provided an explanation of the reading of the sign as an
ideogram for the God of U.E.12. This deity is also found in other U.E. nomes, particularly U.E. 18.
Anglicized version of name taken from PM.
126. PN I, 162.17: Mrr.
127. PN I, 69.16: anty.
128. Jequier (1933: 55, Figure 32), find made within the chapel of Queen Neith. Jequier, suggests that the find
illustrates the need that those dependent on high ranking personages had to maintain a link with that person
in the afterlife. This find was part of a selection of officials with stelae and offering slabs found in the
pyramid. See Jequier (1933: 55-8) for details of the finds. On the matter of dating, Jequier wonders if the
person was named for the King Nemtyemzaef (Merenre) II that we know little of who may have held a co-
regency with VI.5 at the very end of his reign Jequier suggests that the name of the King may be Merenre-
Sokar-(?)-m-saf which appears very similar to Nemtyemzaef (Merenre) II in my chronology.
66 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[28] MHw/Mehu129
Location: Saqqara.
PM: III2: 619-622. PN: I, 163.27
Consensus Date: VI.1-VI.3.
King: V.5, V.9 & VI.1
Kanawati ID: 136 Kanawati Date: VI.3.130
Harpur ID: 424 Harpur Date: VI.3M-VI.4.
Baer ID: 202 Baer Date: VI.5M.
Strudwick ID: 069 Strudwick Date: VI.3E-M.
LMP ID: 188 LMP Date: VI.1.
PM Date: VI.3+. Cherpion Date: VI.3.
Other Date: - Altenmüller, (1998: 18-19): Four phases under three Kings - V.9,
VI.1 & VI.3.131
- Baud, (1999:#089): VI.3.132
- Brovarski, (2006: 79 & 81): VI.3.
- Saad, (1940: 687): VI.1-3.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #054): VI.3.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw ; imy-rA prwy nbw; imy-rA prwy HD; imy-rA niwt mAwt;
Epithets: imy-rA Hwt wrt; imy-rA Hwt wrt 6; imy-rA sS answ; tAty sAb TAty; smr-
waty; iry-pat; HAty-a; sDAwty bity; Hry sStA n pr dwAt; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp;
imy-rA Snwty; Xry-tp nsw; imy-rA sS answ; imy-rA prwy-HD; imy-rA
Snwty; imy-rA kAt nbt nt nsw; imy-rA gs-pr; imy-rA gswy-prwy;
129. Macquarie University/University of Port Said project to record line drawings and publish those parts of the
mastaba not published in Altenmüller, (1998), underway.
130. Kanawati, (1977: 94 & 153), dated MHw to mid-VI.5. In Kanawati, (1980a: 34), dating was refined to VI.3,
with the suggestion that the mastaba was mainly constructed during this period.
131. Altenmüller, (1998: 18-19)suggests the following:
- Late V.9 [?]-early VI.1: construction of facade of tomb.
- VI.1: walls and internal decoration program.
- Early VI.3: Courtyard, including the unusual portico pillars.
- VI.3: Storeroom converted to offering chapel for Meryreankh.
as the main construction phases.
132. See also Baud, (1999: #126), where spouse, the princess Nrf(t)-kAw.s Ikw is noted as probably the daughter
of Wenis.
67 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; Xry-tp nsw; smA Mnw; 4HD Hm-nTr Mn-nfr-Mry-Ra;
4HD Hm-nTr Dd-swt-6ti; mdw rxyt; iwn knmwt; smr-waty; imA-a.
References: Altenmüller, (1998: passim).133
Brovarski, (2006: 74, 79, 81-2, 89, 92, 99).
Hawass, (2002: 219-224).
Hussein, (1943: 417-425 & Plates 29-38).
Jacquet Gordon, (1962: 419-426(38 S6)).
Kanawati, (2003a: 5, 29 & 170).
McFarlane, (1995: # 063).
Saad, (1940: 687-690 & Plates 80-1).
Strudwick, (2005: 294-6). Text 220.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #054).
Family Tree at at Volume II, Appendix II/B
133. The burials of several of MHw’s descendants also form part of this publication. See Altenmüller,
(1998: 63-77 & 219-261.)
68 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[29] Ni-kAw-issi Issi/Nikauisesi Isesi134

Location: Teti Cemetery Saqqara.
PM: III2: 419.135 PN: –136
King: V.8, VI.1.
Strudwick ID: 076 Strudwick Date: VI.1M – VI.3E.
Other Date: - Goedicke, (1967: 37-40 & Abb. 3): VI.1.
- Kanawati, (2000: 23): VI.1M.
- Kanwati, (2003a: 114): VI.1M-L.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #062): VI.1M.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-is; imy-rA wabty; imy-rA kAt nbt nt nsw; iry-pat; iry
Epithets: nfr-HAt; mniw Nxn; Hry wrw; Xry-Hbt; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; smr-waty;
sDAwty bity.
References: Goedicke, (1967: 37-40 & Abb. 3).
James, (1961: 32-3 & Plate 31).137
Kanawati, (2000: 25-32).
Kanawati, (2006: 16-17).138
134. Kanawati & Abder-Raziq, (2000: 11).

135. PMIII2: 419 – Block with name of Ni-kAw-issi recording title of wt Inpw found at causeway of pyramid of
Wenis. Kanwati, (2000: 12), notes differences in the writing of the name but suggests that this is not a
problem for identifying the block as belonging to Ni-kAw-issi.
136. PN I, 180 has examples of combinations of Ni-kAw-deity names. One presumes similar principles apply in
relation to the use of a King’s name.
137. James, (1961: 32-3): Decree of Teti naming Ni-kAw-issi and addresses him with the title imy-rA 5maw. See
also Goedicke (1967: 37-40), on this decree – for the Temple of Khentiamentiu at Abydos.
138. Publication contains additional references but this is relevant to dating and succession in office.
69 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kanawati & Abder-Raziq, (2000: passim).
Petrie, (1903: Plate XVII).
Strudwick, (1981: 69-71).
Strudwick, (2005: 102-3). Text 19.
Urk I: I207-8.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2: #062).
Museum Collections:
Britsih Museum
BM EA 626.
70 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[30] Ny-anx-Ppy 4bk-Htp 1pi-km or Ny-anx-Mryra 1pi-km / Nyankhpepy

or Nyankhmeryre Sobekhotep139
Location: Tomb #A1 Meir/U.E.14
PM: IV: 247. PN: I, 131.20;
I, 305.6140
King: VI.3141
Kanawati ID: 145 Kanawati Date: VI.5E
Harpur ID: 652 Harpur Date: VI.5E.
PM Date: Cherpion Date: VI.3.
Other Date: - Blackman, various: VI.5E-M(?).142
- El-Khouli & Kanawati, (1989: 26): VI.5L.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw143; imy-rA 5maw mAa144; HAty-a; smr-waty; imy-rA mSa;
Epithets: sDAwty bity; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; Xry-Hbt; imy-rA Hm-nTr; sm; xrp SnDt
nbt; sS mDAt nTr; Hry-tp Nxb; mniw Nxn; imy-rA Snwty; imy-rA prwy
HD; Xry-tp nsw.
References: Blackman, (1914: 9).
Blackman, (1924: 18-9).
Blackman & Apted, (1953a:1-15 & Plates I-II, III-XIV, LI-LIII).
Brovarski, (2006: 117-8).
139. Name suggests born in the reign of VI.3 (Pepy I). His son Ppy-anx 1ny-km [17], also imy-rA 5maw.
140. PN I, 131.20 – Ppi-anx or anx-ppi & PN I, 305.6 – 4bk-Htp.
141. Blackman & Apted, (1953a:Plate IV(2))
142. The Meir publications are intent on trying to clarify the familial relationships within this group of tombs
and do not spend a significant amount of time discussing dating within Dynasty VI. One is left with the
impression of a dating of mid to late Dynasty VI and with the addition of mAa to the title of Overseer of
Upper Egypt, one is left with the impression that dating can be limited to Pepy II – first half of the reign.
143. Blackman & Apted, (1953a: Plates V, VI, VIII).
144. Blackman & Apted, (1953a: Plate XIV).
71 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kanawati, (1980a: 50, 66, 74, 77, 88-9, 135).
Kanawati, (1989b: 75-80).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 105, 118, 133, 143-5, 202-
n1215, 276-7).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 123-4, 134-n3, 135, 147-n5).
72 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[31] Ny-Hb-sd-Ppy-Idi/Ny-heb-sed-pepy Idi145

Location: Abydos/Saqqara
PM: III2: 680. PN: –
King: VI.5.
Other Date: - Borchardt, (1964: 55-6): VI.
- Jequier, (1929, reprint 1983: 21-2): VI.146
- Kanawati, (1980a: 95): VI.5E-M.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw147; HAty-a mAa; Hry-tp Nxb.
Epithets:
References: Jequier, (1929, reprint 1983: 21-2).
Kanawati, (1977: 14).148
Kanawati, (1980a: 76, 85-n113, 95).
Kees, (1940:45-7). 149
145. Son of the Southern Vizier and Overseer of Upper Egypt, Idi [05], whom I have previously suggested is a
son of Nbt and 2wy [41] of Abydos. Thus, this person is the grandson of Nbt and 2wy [41] of Abydos.
146. This dating assertion applies if the individuals are the same person. The name is unusual so I tend to agree
with Kanawati, (1980a:76 & 85-n113) along with earlier comments in Kanawati, (1977: 14).
147. Kanawati (1980a: 95) suggests that N-Hb-sd-Ppy-Idi lost the title of Overseer of Upper Egypt when
responsibilities were added to the responsibilities of the Vizier in the first half of the reign of Pepy II.
148. See note below on Kees.
149. There are issues as to identification of this individual with N-Hb-sd-nfr-kA-ra (Strudwick #72). Kees, (1940:
45-7) has suggested that they are the same individual in his discussions on the Viziers of Pepy II. Strudwick,
(1985: 64) mounts a convincing argument that they are not the same individual. He does, however, make
some of his comments following from views expressed on temple decoration order based on Ptolemaic
temple decoration experiences that may or may not have been valid for the Old Kingdom. These
assumptions have considerable bearing as to his suggestions for the order of successive Viziers and the
identification of individuals within the mortuary temple of Pepy II. If one reviews Jequier, (1940: 56-62 &
Figures 58-61), it becomes clear that N-Hb-sd-nfr-kA-ra (Strudwick #72) and N-Hb-sd-Ppy-Idi are separate
individuals as N-Hb-sd-nfr-kA-ra never held the title of Overseer of Upper Egypt.
73 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
CG 1575.
74 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[32] Nb-kAw-Hr Idw/Nebkauhor (Idu)150

Location: Saqqara. Located near pyramid complex of Wenis.
PM: III2: 627-9. PN: I, 54.9151
Consensus Date: V.9.152
King: V.9.
Kanawati ID: 008 Kanawati Date: V.9L.153
Harpur ID: 437 Harpur Date: V.9 r/u VI.7.
Baer ID: 249 Baer Date: V.8M-V.9M.154
Strudwick ID: 082 Strudwick Date: VI.5+.
LMP ID: 220 LMP Date: VI.
Other Date: - Baud, (1999: #114): VIL.155
- Hassan, (1975a: 5) Possibly V. Probably VI.
- Kanawati, (2003a: 26): V.9L.
- Kanawati, (2003b: 48): VI.1(?)156
- Woods, (2007: V2, #116): V.9 r/u VI.1.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; HAty-a; Xry-tp nsw; imy-rA Hwt wrt 6; imy-rA Snwty;
Epithets: sDAwty bity; smr-waty; tAty sAb TAty; sA nsw; sA nsw Smsw; sA nsw
n.xt.f Smsw.
150. Tomb of Axt-Htp Hmi/Akhethotep Hemi reused by Nb-kAw-Hr idw.

151. PN I, 54.9 = Idw. See PN I, 192.9 showing combination of nb-kAw with ra. Similar principles apply with
1r.
152. I agree with Kanawati that the tomb was likely reused soon after construction by/for Axt-Htp Hmi. This
raises another problem. Nb-kAw-Hr Idw claims to be the son of a King, but which King? See also Dodson
& Hilton, (2004: 77 & family tree at72-3), suggest the possibility that Nb-kAw-Hr idw is a son of Pepy II –
but that would mean that the tomb of Axt-Htp Hmi was re-used much later than the timeline suggested
above, but agrees with Harpur.
153. Kanawati, (2003a: 26) suggests that the location of the mastaba close to the pyramid of Wenis,
154. Baer (1960, reprint 1973: 291), notes the significant issues in relation to titles and the difficulties associated
with allocation between the two tomb owners, though he did seem to think that the majority of the title
sequences on which his dating was based belonged to the first owner. Tomb unpublished when publication
compiled.
155. Baud relies primarily on Strudwick (1982: 89-94), including his analysis of the titles using the patterns
devised by Baer. If differentiation between title-holders not considered, then Strudwick suggests that the
title listing best fits Baer (1960, reprint 1973: 237) sequence VI E or the mid-reign of Pepy II.
156. Kanawati, (2003b: 48) describes Nb-kAw-Hr Idw as ‘probably’ a son of Teti.
75 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
References: Hassan, (1938: 512-9).
Hassan, (1975a: passim).
Kanawati, (2003b: 48-9).
Munro, (1993: 12 & 20-1).
Strudwick, (1982: 89-94). 157
Strudwick, (2005: 187-188). Text 104.
Strudwick, (2005: 261-2). Text 195.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #116).

See also at Volume II, Appendix III: Issues Arising from the Circumstances of
Usurped/Reused Tombs
157. Strudwick, (1982: 89-94), allocates of titles between owners. I have followed this analysis in defining Nb-
kAw-Hr Idw as imy-rA 5maw, rather than Axt-Htp Hmi.
76 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[33] Nfr-sSm-ra SSi/Neferseshemra sesi

Location: Saqqara/Teti Cemetery
PM: III2: 511-2. PN: I, 330.3
King: VI.1.
Kanawati ID: 190 Kanawati Date: VI.1M.158
Harpur ID: 444 Harpur Date: VI.1M-L.
Baer ID: 274 Baer Date: VI.1M-VI.3M159
Strudwick ID: 088 Strudwick Date: VI.1M(?)160
PM Date: VIE. Cherpion Date: VI.1.
Other Date: - Brovarski, (1994a: 21): VI.1-VI.3.161
- Firth & Gunn (1926, reprint 2007: 15-16): Before KA-gmni [50].
- Kanawati, (1998: 18): VI.1E-M.
- Kanawati, (2003a: 111): VI.1E-M.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; tAty sAb TAty; imy-rA kAt nbt nsw; imy-rA Hwt wrt; imy-
Epithets: rA Hwt wrt 6; imy-rA prwy HD; imy-rA prwy nbw; imy-rA sS a nsw;
imy-rA Snwty; iry-pat; HAty-a (mAa); smr-waty; xnty-S Dd-swt 6ti; sHD
Hm-nTr xnty-S Dd-swt 6ti; Xry-Hbt; Xry-tp nsw; iwn knmwt; imy-rA
wpt; imy-rA gs-pr; imy-is; Hry-tp Nxb; imy-rA Xnw.
References: Brovarski, (1994a: 21-n24, 28).
Capart, (1907: Planches VIII-XVII).
Capart, (1908: 17-26).
Firth & Gunn (1926, reprint 2007: 17-20 & 103-4; Plate 14(A1), Plate
15(A1&4), Plate 58 – Inscriptions 5 & 6).
158. Kanawati (1980: 27) suggests that it is possible that Nfr-sSm-ra SSi held office into the reign of Pepy I, but
suggests that this is tentative until the mastaba of 2nm-nty is published as 2nm-nty may have succeeded
Nfr-sSm-ra SSi as vizier.
159. Baer (1960, reprint 1973: 93).
160. Strudwick (1985: 112) suggests should be dated later than KA-gmni.
161. Brovarski, (1994: 21) General dating of the Teti Cemetery.
77 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kanawati, (1980a: 24, 26-7).
Kanawati, (1998: 11-38, Plates 3-19, 39-60).
Lichtheim, (2006: 17).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 186-n1).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 304).
Urk I: I199-200.
Wilson, (1944: 208-n38).
78 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[34] Ra-wr/Rawer
Location: T68a Saqqara, south east of Teti’s mortuary temple.162
PM: III2: 558 PN: I, 425.5163
King: –
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: VI.3L164
Baer ID: Baer Date:
Strudwick ID: 093 Strudwick Date:
LMP ID: 193a LMP Date: –
PM Date: Late VI. Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 100): VI.5E.165
- El-Fikey, (1980: 44): VI.3.
- Kanawati, (2003a: 116): VI.3L.
- Kanawati, (2003b: 50): VI.3.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; iry-pat; smr-waty; HAty-a; tATy sAb TAty; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp;
Epithets: smsw snwt; sm; xrp Sndt nbt; aD-mr 8p; sDAwty bity; imA-a;
References: Brovarski, (2006: 93, 99-100).
El-Fikey, (1980: Passim).
162. El Fikey, (1980: 1).

163. ra-wr wr is the only format found in PN.
164. Kanawati, (1980a: 35) dates Ra-wr to the reign of Pepy I and suggests that he may be the Vizier whose
name was removed from the Dahshur decree. This has also been suggested by Málek in discussion with El-
Fikey (1980: 46). El-Fikey, does not exclude this as a possibility, indeed noting, as has Kanawati, that the
name removed from the decree would be equivalent in length to that of Ra-wr. See Goedicke, (1967: 55-77
& Abb. 5). The evidence is not conclusive either way, though the scenario is potentially suggestive that Ra-
wr was the relevant Vizier. It has been suggested that he was the father-in-law of Pepy I and father of the
Queen that was tried by Wni.
165. Brovarski (2006: 100) assigns Ra-wr to early Pepy II due to nature of tomb and certain stylistic
considerations in relation to the False Door.
79 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[35] Ra-Spss/Rashepses
Location: LS16/S 902, north of the Step Pyramid, Saqqara.166
PM: III2: 494-6. PN: I, 326.16167
Consensus Date: V.8
King: V.8
Kanawati ID: –168 Kanawati Date: V.8L.169
Harpur ID: 456 Harpur Date: V.8M.
Baer ID: 315 Baer Date: V.3+.
Strudwick ID: 095 Strudwick Date: V.8M.
LMP ID: 059 LMP Date:
PM Date: V.8. Cherpion Date: V.8.170
Other Date: - Baud, (1999: V1, 75-n388): V.8.
- Smith (1946, reissue 1978: 193): V.7.
- Willoughby-Winlaw, (2007: 291): V.8.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #068): V.8.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; Hm-nTr MAat; wr mD 5maw; tAty sAb TAty; imy-rA kAt nbt
Epithets: nt nsw; imy-rA sS answ; sHd wr mD 5maw; iwn knmwt; Hry-sStA n
mdw StAt n Hwt wrt 6; Hry-sStA n wDt-mdw StAt n nsw; imy-rA Snwty;
mdw rxyt;
References: Jacquet-Gordon, (1962: 371-2 (19S5)).
Kanawati, (1980a: 13-15).
Kanawati, (2000: 20).171
Kees, (1932: 87-8, 92).
166. S902 refers to Quibell’s numbering system.

167. PN reading is Spss-Ra.
168. Kanawati, (1977: passim). Ra-Spss not included in list of officials whose tombs were assessed.
169. Kanawati, (1980a: 13). Dating based in part on dating of tomb of Pr-nb, now identified as son of Ra-Spss.
170. Cherpion, (1989: 21, n18) notes the letter from V.8 to Ra-Spss from Roccati’s sources and notes that such
correspondence is rare. She also notes the existence of the cartouche of V.8 (1989: 67, n99 & 78, n117)
both by direct comment and also by a reference to LD (Plates) II: 61. Ultimately, her dating is based on her
criteria # 7, 10, 36, 44 &46. Criteria # 7 & 10 relate to furnishings and criteria # 36, 44 & 46 relate to
dress/personal adornments.
171. Kanawati, (2000:20), deals with Goedicke’s (1967: 37-8) possible familial relationship between Ra-Spss
(putative father) and Ni-kAw-issi [29].
80 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
LD (Text) I: 165-170/LD (Plates) II: 60-64.
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 152-3).
Quibell (1909: 23-4, 79-82).
Wente, (1990: 18). Letter #2.
Reisner, (1936: 407).172
Roccati, (1982: 78-9, §58).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 60, 191-3, 354, 357).

Urk I: I179-80.173
Willoughby-Winlaw, (2007: #81. V1, 288-291).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #068).
Plate 2:
The Vizier and Overseer of Upper Egypt,
Ra-Spss [35].
LD (Plates) II: 61b
172. Reisner (1936: 407), Appendix C was authored by William Stevenson Smith and includes a brief
commentary on tomb which notes that estates of Neuserre and Djedkare are mentioned. Jacquet-Gordon
(1962: 371), only mentions estates with Ra-5pss name included.
173. Urk I: I179-80 Djedkare addresses Ra-5pss as Vizier. This gives us a specific reign where the person
reached the highest bureaucratic office in Egypt.
81 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[36] 0nqw 3tti I/Henqu Kheteti I

Location: Tomb #N39, Deir el-Gebrawi/U.E.12
PM: IV: 242.39 PN: I, 230.4
I, 278.15
174
Consensus Date: VI.1L(?).
King: –175
Kanawati ID: 216 Kanawati Date: FIP.
Harpur ID: 645 Harpur Date: FIP.
Baer ID: 323 Baer Date: Dynasty VI+.176
Other Date: - Davies, (1902: V2: 40): Dynasty VL to VIE.177
- Kanawati, (2005: 20, 23): VI.1L(?).178
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 299): VI.1.
- Kees, (1932: 109): VIL.
- Strudwick, (2005: 366): OK +.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #070): VI.1L.
174. Dating decision based on most recent excavations of the tomb by Kanawati, (2005).
175. Kanawati, (2005: 20) notes the absence also in the Teti Cemetery of cartouches for the period near the end
of Teti)’s reign and into the reign of Pepy I.
176. Baer, (1960, reprint 1973: 281) comments on the difficulties of dating the tomb noted by Davies
177. Davies (1902: 38-43) discusses the problems in dating the tombs and in the end primarily relies on name
formats, but notes that some of the lesser nomarchs may be dateable to Dynasty VIL. As is noted by Baer,
1960, reprint 1973: 281) this is problematical.
178. Kanawati (2005: 20) suggests that the title Hry-tp aA was introdued in the reign of Teti, thus no earlier date is
possible for this group of tombs andsuggests the following chronology for the tombs on the Northern Cliff
at Deir el-Gebrawi:
0nqw 3tti/N39 VI.1L(?)
1m-Ra Isi/N72 VI.1L – VI.3E
0nqw Iy…f/N67 VI.3E-M
Nb-Ib/N38 VI.3M
1m-Ra Isi 2/N72 VI.3L
See also Fischer, (1968: 74-n303) for additional comments supporting the dating of Hry-tp aA as a title.
82 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA spAt 5ma(w); HAty-a; Hry-tp aA U.E.12; Hry-tp
Epithets: aA179; Hry sStA; smr-waty; xrp iAt nb; xrp Sndt nbt; Xry-Hbt; Xry-Hbt
Hry-tp; sS mDAt-nTr; sm; smsw snwt; imAxw xr PtH-4kr.
References: Brovarski, (2006: 117-8).
Davies, (1902: V2: 31-44, Plates XXVII - XXVIII).
Kanawati, (1980a: 101-n19, 120).
Kanawati, (2005: 21-36, Plates 4-12).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 70-3, 273).
Kees, (1932: 109).180
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 210-211, 231).
Strudwick, (2005: 366-8). Text 269.
Urk I: I76-9.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #070).
179. Kanawati, (2005: 21) notes the unusual nature of this title - one expects it to read Hry-tp aA n spAt. See
Jones, (2000: Title #2382). Neither of the two examples of the title found in the tomb show this form – it
would appear to be a deliberate writing. See also Fischer, (1968: 75-7) on the writing of the nome
name/emblem with this title where he concludes that in the southern part of Upper Egypt, Hry-tp aA n spAt
with the nome name is the common method of designation, and in the northern parts, the use of the
genitive is common. See also Goedicke (1967: 103 (26)) and Baer, (1960, reprint 1973: 281), who sees the
title of Hry-tp aA as a logical conclusion of the events deriving from the creation of the role of Overseer of
Upper Egypt.
180. Kees, (1932: 109), incorrectly identifies 0nqw 3tti I as a Vizier, but correctly identifies him as a nomarch.
0nqw 3tti I does not appear in the Kees publication on the Viziers of Pepy II.
83 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[37] 1r-xwf/Harkhuf
Location: Tomb # A8/Qubbet el-Hawa # 34, Aswan/U.E. 1
PM: V: 237. PN: I, 250.11
King: VI.4, VI.5.
Kanawati ID: 224 Kanawati Date: VI.4-VI.5E
PM Date: VI.3-VI.5. Cherpion Date: VI.5.
Other Date: - Kees, (1932: 90): VI.4.
- Simpson, (2003: 407): Late OK.
- Strudwick, (2005: 328): VIM.
- Vischak, (2006: 371): VI.5E.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; HAty-a; sDAwty bity; smr-waty; Xry-Hbt; imy-rA xAswt
Epithets: nbt nt tp-5maw; sAw Nxn; Hry-tp Nxb; imy-rA a(w);181 imAxw xr PtH-
4kr; sDAwty nTr; Hry-sStA n mDt nb nt 6p-rsy (or 5maw)
References: Dixon, (1958: 44-55).
Edel, (1960: 18-23).
Edel, (1971: 53, 56-9).
Erman, (1892: 78-83).
Fecht (1979: 105-134).
Fischer, (1964: 29).
Gardiner, (1957: 6).
Goedicke, (1981: 1-20).
Kadish, (1966: 23-33).
181. Kanawati, (1980a: 51), from the appointment of 1r-xwf, holders of the title imy-rA a(w) became
responsible for expeditions to the South rather than responsibility reverting to the Residence.
84 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kanawati, (1980a: 16, 22, 101-n19, 102-n49 & 51)., 117, 120, 122-n6,
126-n95 & 96).
Kees, (1932: 90, 95).
Lichtheim, (2006: 23-7).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 139-n2, 167, 189-n2 &4, 191, 193, 200).
O’Connor, (1986: 27-50).
Roccati, (1982: 200-7, §§189-196).
Simpson, (2003: 407-412).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 226-7).
Strudwick, (2005: 328-333). Text 241.
Urk I: I120-131.
Vischak, (2006: 122-7).
Wilson, (1944: 208).
Yoyotte, (1953: 173-8).
85 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[38] 1m-Mnw/Hem-Min
Location: Tomb #M43, El-Hawawish/U.E. 9.
PM: – PN: I, 239.21.
Consensus Date: V.9-VI.1E.
King: –
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: V.9E.182
Other Date: - Newberry, (1912: 115): XIIE.
- Kanawati, (1985: 5, 8-10): VI.1E.
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 296): V.9E.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #072): V.9E.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA Hwt wr(t); wr mD 5maw; wD mdw [n] Hry wDb;
Epithets: Hm-nTr MAat; sAb aD-mr; smA Mnw.
References: Kanawati, (1985: 7-25; Plates 1-5, 19 & Figures 1-10).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 6, 24-n30, 29-31, 34, 36-7, 40-1, 50, 52,
60-n286, 66, 144-n878, 183, 202-5, 209, 210-n1272, 211-2, 233, 257).
McFarlane, (1995: # 096).
Newberry, (1912: 115).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #072).
182. Kanawati, (1985: 10) originally dated the tomb to early Teti. Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 60) revised the
dating to early Wenis. Kanawati, (1985: 7), also made the observation that 1m-Mnw may be the first imy-rA
5maw resident outside of Memphis before Wni [11]. Also noted by McFarlane, (1995: 223).
86 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[39] 1sy/Hesy
Location: Saqqara, North of Teti’s Pyramid
PM: – PN: I, 254.29
King: –
Other Date: Brovarski, (2006: 87): VI.1L-VI.3E.
El-Khouli & Kanawati, (1988: 19): VI.3E.
Kanawati, (2003a: 126): VI.3.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA imyt Tnwy; imy-rA 5maw; Xrp Sndt nbt; Hry-Hbt; sm; smr-waty;
Epithets:183 sDAwty-bity.
References: Brovarski, (2006: 78-80, 87, 101, 104).
El-Khouli & Kanawati, (1988: 18-22 & Plates 10-3).
183. El-Khouli & Kanawati, (1988: 18) note the absence of ranking titles such as iry-pat and HAty-a in titulary.
87 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[40] 2ai-bAw-3nmw Biw / Kha’baukhnum Biu

Location: Tomb # M14, Saqqara
PM: III2: 684 PN: –184
I, 93.14.
Consensus Date: VI.5M-L.
King: –
Baer ID: 361 Baer Date: VI.5L.
Strudwick ID: 102 Strudwick Date: VI.5L.185
PM Date: VI+/FIP. Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Dittmann, (1936: 161): VI.3.
- Kees, (1940: 48): VI.5L186
- Mc Farlane, (1995: 68): VI.5L.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; imy.rA hwt wrt 6; imy-rA Snwty; imy-rA kAt nbt; tAty
Epithets: sAb TAty187; iry-pat; smr-waty; HAty-a; imy-rA iswy Xkr nsw; imy-rA
wabty; imy-rA pr Hry-wDb; imy-rA prwy-HD; imy-rA xAswt nbt; mniw
Nxn; Hry-tp Nxb; imy-rA xnty-S pr-aA; imy-rA gswy-pr; sDwAty bity;
Hry-Hbt; Hry-Hbt Hry-tp; imy-rA wpt; imy-rA sS mDAt; sS mDAt nTr;
imy-rA Snw pr; imA-a; imy-is.
184. PN I: 263.12-14 show naming constructions with 2ai-bAw-deity names.

185. Strudwick, (1985: 122), “third quarter Pepy II”. Jequier, (1938: Plate 57), shows 2ai-bAw-3nmw Biw’s name
in the form of Biw replacing that of a now un-named official together with the epithet imA-a. Strudwick,
ibid, comments that this title was mainly used by viziers. Strudwick also suggests that 2ai-bAw-3nmw Biw
succeeded to the vizierate after Mry-ra-iAm (Jequier, (1940: 50-6 & Figures 49-55) & (1938: Plates 48 & 71 –
with name Ppy-iAm)) and Pr-Sna-y or 5nay but before Ny-Hb-sd-nfr-kA ra (Jequier, (1940: 56-62 & Figures
58-61)) and 6ti (Jequier, (1940: 67-76 & Figures 69-75)).
186. Kees (1940: 48), actual description is “end of reign” (my translation).
187. Jequier, (1940: 66) makes particular note of the fact that the title of Vizier appears only once in the tomb,
and either may have been at the end of his life/career or because there was only one incomplete location
(column) in the tomb that allowed the recording of this promotion.
88 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
References: Dittmann, (1936: 161).
Jequier, (1934: 76-7).
Jequier, (1938: Plates 57, 73, 88).
Jequier, (1940: 62-7, Figures 65-68, & Plates 52, 55).
Kees, (1940: 48).
McFarlane, (1995: # 109).
89 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[41] 2wy/Khuy
Location: Abydos/Saqqara
PM: III2: 519 PN: I, 265.26 &
I, 266.2188
King: VI.1, VI.3.
Kanawati ID: 237 Kanawati Date: VIL.189
Harpur ID: 472 Harpur Date: VI.4-5(?).
Baer ID: 365 (Saqqara) Baer Date: VI.1M-VI.5L.
366(Abydos) VI.5 (Abydos).
Other Date: - Fischer, (1964: 35): Dynasty VI.
- Kanawati, (2003a: 92): VI.1L-VI.3E.
- Lloyd, Spencer & El-Khouli, (1990: 1-2) VI.190
- Strudwick, (2005: 395): Mid-Dynasty VI.
Selected Titles & Imy-Ra Smaw; smr-waty; Xry-Hbt; imy-rA sDmt nbt StA(t); Hry-sStA n
Epithets:191 wD(t)-mdw nbt; xnty-S 9d-swt-6ti; smsw n DbAt; Hm-nTr Mn-nfr-Ppy;
Hry-sStA n pr-dwAt; imy-rA xnty(w)-S; wr idt; Hry-sStA n wD(t)-mdw
nbt StAt; Hry-sStA n wpt StAt.
References: Drioton (1944: 502-4).
Kanawati, (1980a: 31-3, 58-n51, 62-4, 77, 81-n14, 84-n93, 115, 127-
n100, 140).
Kanawati, (2003a: Case Study # 25).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 86, 222, 250, 253, 269).
188. PN I: 2wi and 2wy: Middle Kingdom names.

189. Kanawati, (1977: 109-110) provides dating for unused Saqqara tomb.
190. Lloyd, Spencer & El-Khouli, (1990: 2) note that the majority of tombs in the report “may well be contemporary
with the larger mastabas in the area which are dateable to Teti and Pepy I”.
191. Note the absence of ranking titles such as iry-pat and HAty-a in titulary.
90 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Lloyd, Spencer & El-Khouli, (1990:33-40; Plates 19-23, 35 & 36[A]).
Mariette, (1880: #525).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 157).
Saad, (1944: 455-6).
Strudwick, (2005: 395-6). Text 295.192
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum:
CG 1575.193
CG 1578.194
192. Stela of 2wy and Nbt (CG1578) from the Central Cemetery at Abydos.
193. Stela of Vizier 9aw.
194. Stela of 2wy and Nbt from the Central Cemetery at Abydos.
91 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[42] 2wy/Khuy195
Location: Abydos/Coptos(?)
PM: – PN: I, 265.26 &
I, 266.2196
Consensus Date: VI.5E-M(?).
King: VI.5.
Other Date: - McFarlane, (1995: 141): VI.5E-M.
- Strudwick, (2005: 107): VI.5.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; HAty-a; smr-waty; sDAwty bity.
Epithets:
References: Goedicke, (1967: 87-116 & Abb. 8).197
Kanawati, (1980a: 63-4, 81-n19, 85-n113, 89).
Kees, (1932: 93-4).
Kees, (1933: 594).
McFarlane, (1995: #231).
Pirenne, (1932-1935: V2: 257-9).198
Strudwick, (2005: 107-9). Text 24.199
195. The family lineage of this title-holder has been debated and the matter is by no means settled. On the basis
of family lineage holding sway, I suggest that this title-holder is the son of Nbt and 2wy [41] of Abydos and
thus is related to the Dynasty VI Royal Family. In this, I am in agreement with Kanawati (1980a: 63-4) and
Goedicke, (1967: 91).
196. PN I: 2wi and 2wy: Middle Kingdom names.
197. Coptos B: decree of Pepy II for the Temple of Min at Coptos – addressed to the Vizier, 9aw and the
Overseer of Upper Egypt, 2wy, among others.
198. Coptos B text.
199. Coptos B text.
92 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Urk I: I280-283.200
Weill, (1912: 6-39; Plates 1 & 5).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
JE41893.201
200. Coptos B text.

201. Coptos B text.
93 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[43] 2ww/Huw
Location: Memphis &Sheikh Said202 / U.E.15
PM: IV: 237-8203 PN: –
King: HAt sp 25: VI.3.204
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: VI.3.
Other Date: Strudwick, (2005: 147): VI.3.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; Hry-tp aA U.E. 15.
Epithets:
References: Kanawati, (1980a: 33, 36).
Roccati, (1982: 250, §243).205
Strudwick, (2005: 146-7). Text 71(?).206
Urk I: I95.14-I96.3.
202. Kanawati (1980a: 33), notes that at this stage the imy-rA 5maw resided in the capital so nothing has been
found in relation to 2ww at Sheikh Said.
203. Hatnub.
204. Inscription at the Hatnub quarries.
205. Roccati, (1982: 250-1), suggests that his text §250 may be an inscription by the son of this title-holder who
references his father with the same name and the title of imy-rA 5maw..
206. Strudwick, (2005: 147), Text 71 suggests that the inscription referred to by Roccati could be a later addition
in that the title ‘great chief” was not known in the area (presumably he is referring to U.E 15, which is
referenced in the graffito), until the First Intermediate Period. This is an interesting observation in that the
title is known in U.E. 14 where the title is evidenced in Ppy-anx 1ny-Km’s [17] Dynasty VI tomb chapel.
See Kanawati, (1980a: 50) who draws attention to the title as held by Ppy-anx 1ny-Km’s eldest son and
Davies, (1901c: Plate XXIX).
94 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[44] 3n(i)-anxw/Kheni-ankhu207
Location: Tomb #H15, El Hawawish / U.E.9
PM: PN: I, 311.7
King: –
Harpur ID: 664 Harpur Date: VIII-FIP.
Other Date: - Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 102-5): VI.5M.
- Kanawati, (1983: 32): VIII+.
- McFarlane, (1995: 72): VI.5E-M.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw mAa; iry-pat; HAty-a; Hry-Hbt; smA Mnw; imy-rA Hm-nTr.
Epithets:
References: Kanawati, (1983: 32-7 & Figure 22-7).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 8, 10, 49, 102-6, 119).
McFarlane, (1995: #116).
Newberry, (1912: 107).
207. Eldest son of KAi-Hp 7ti [53].

95 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[45] 4Abni/Sabni
Location: Tomb #A1/(#26 at Qubbet el-Hawa), Aswan / U.E.1
PM: V: 231-3. PN: –
King: VI.5.
PM Date: Old & Middle Cherpion Date: VI.5.
Kingdom.
Other Date: - Bissing, (1915: 2): VI.
- Brovarski, (2006: 96): VI.5L.
- Kees, (1932: 95): VI.5.
- Roccati, (1982: 216): End VI.
- Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 226): VI.
- Strudwick, (2005: 335): VI.5
- Vischak, (2006: 371): VI.5L.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #088): VI.5L.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; HAty-a; sDAwty bity; smr-waty; Hry-Hbt; imy-rA xAswt;
Epithets: imy-rA a; xnty-S Mn-anx-Nfr-kA-Ra; mH-ib nsw m 6p-rsy.
References: Bissing, (1915: 2-14).
Brovarski, (2006: 96, 116).
Dixon, (1958: JEA44: 44).
Edel, (1960: 22).
Edel, (1971: 53-9).
Fischer, (1968: 68, 69-n279, 82-n345, 102).
96 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kanawati, (1980a: 37-n7, 38-n9, 67, 88, 100-n4, 136, 144-n17).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 224-n1364).
Kees, (1932: 95).
Martin-Pardey, (1976:189-n2 & 4, 191, 194-n4, 201-n1).
Roccati, (1982: 216-220, §§205-7).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 226-7).
Strudwick, (2005: 151). Text 77B.208
Strudwick, (2005: 335-9). Text 243.209
Wilson, (1944: 202).
Urk I: I135-140.210
Vischak, (2006: 73-89).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #088).
208. Graffito from Tomas – Lower Nubia. Also Edel, (1971: 53-63).
209. Qubbet el-Hawa.
210. Qubbet el-Hawa.
97 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[46] 4rf-KA(i)/Serfka
Location: Tomb #24, Sheikh Said/U.E. 15.
PM: IV: 187-8. PN: I, 317.13
Consensus Date: V.8L.
King: V.1.
Kanawati ID: 296 Kanawati Date: V.8L.
Harpur ID: 639 Harpur Date: V.8-9E.211
Baer ID: 457 Baer Date: V.8M-V.9M.
212
Other Date: - Davies, (1901c: 3): V.
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 300): V.8L.
- Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 215): VE-M.
Selected Titles & imy-rA spAwt 5ma(w) Hrywt-ib; Hm-nTr 2wfw; Hm-nTr Wsr-kA.f; imy-
Epithets: rA wpt; imy-rA mnww sSm-tA; imy-rA niwt mAwt.
References: Davies, (1901c: 10-14; plates 3-6 & 17).
Kanawati, (1980a: 4, 12, 15, 67, 71).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 153 – n1).
211. Comments by Kanawati & McFarlane (1992: 40, n140) on potential error in dating when also taking his
son’s tomb (Wererini: tomb#25) into account noted.
212. PMIV: 187, described as “Rock Tombs, Old Kingdom”.
98 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[47] 5psi-pw-Mnw, 3ny, 3n(-anxw)/Shepsipumin Kheni

Location: Tomb #H24, El-Hawawish/U.E. 9
PM: – PN: I, 326.8
II, 311.5/6.
Consensus Date: V.5L.
King: –
Harpur ID: 665 Harpur Date: VIL-VIII.
Baer ID: 396 Baer Date: VI+.
213
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 84): VI.5L/VIII..
- Kanawati, (1980a: 14): VI.5L
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 296): V.5L.
- Fischer, (1968: 75-n313): OK+.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #098): VI.5L.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5ma(w) (m spAt mHywt); 214 imy-rA Sma(w) (m spAt); 215 HAty-a;
Epithets: Hry-tp aA n 2nt Mnw; sDAwty bity; sm Xrp Sndt; smr-waty; iry nfr HAt
(m sStA nb); aD mr 8p sbA 1r xnty py; xrp m nTrw; Xry-Hbt; imy-rA
hm-nTr; smA Mnw; iwn Knmwt.
Kanawati, (1980a: 91, 97, 101-n31, 108).
Kanawati, (1981: 7-47, Plates 1-9, Figures 1-27).
Kanawati, (1989a: 63 & Figure 37A).
Kanawati, (1992: 20 & Figure 9B).
213. PMV: 18-26 places this whole group of tombs in late Dynasty VI-early Dynasty XII.
214. Kanawati, (1981: 7), Overseer of Upper Egypt (in the northern provinces).
215. Kanawati, (1981: 8), Overseer of Upper Egyptian grain (in the provinces). Kanawati questions whether the
title was written incorrectly and should read imy-rA Sma (m spAt mHywt).
99 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 8, 17, 99-n534, 102-4, 106-7, 114, 127-
140, 145, 148, 151, 174, 188, 217, 223-5, 227-n1406, 229, 236, 251, 267,
282).
McFarlane, (1995: #129).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 153 – n1).
Newberry, (1912: 114, 116-9).
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2: #098).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
CG 28015.
100 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[48] 5mAi or 5mAi Iqr/ Shemay216

Location: Coptos/Kom el-Koffar217 /U.E.5
PM: PN: I, 327.20
Consensus Date: VIII.2
King: VIII.2218
Baer ID: 602219 Baer Date: VIII.3220
Other Date: - Habachi, (1983: 210): VIII.2.
- Kees, (1932: 111-2): IX/Heracleopolitan.
- Mostafa, (1987: 171): VIII.2.
- Schenkel, (1965: 11): VIII.
Selected Titles & [HAty-a] imy-rA 5maw xnt m Abw mHt m Mdnit;221 Imy-rA 5maw; imy-
Epithets: rA niwt mr; imy-rA Hm-nTr; iry-pat; HAty-a; it nTr; mry-nTr; smA Mnw;
sDAwty bity; sDt(y) nsw; tAty sAb TAty; smr-waty; imy-rA sS answ; Xry-
Hbt; imy-is; Hry-tp Nxb; mniw Nxn.
References: Fischer, (1964: 35-8).222
Goedicke, (1967: 163-194; 197-213; Abb. 6-27).
Habachi, (1983: 207, 210).
Hayes, (1946: 11-9-8 & PlatesIII-V).
216. Anglicized name taken from Strudwick, (2005: 116).

217. This tomb is not fully published.
218. Based on decrees issued by this King that name 5mAi.
219. Decrees of Neferkauhor from Koptos.
220. Baer, (1960, reprint 1973: 295): “end of eighth dynasty”.
221. See Table 4.1 in this study, Goedicke, (1967: 172, III & Abb. 18).
222. See also Fischer, (1964: 38) on Nbt, wife of 5mAi and daughter of Neferkauhor (VIII.2). The False Door of
Nbt is briefly discussed by Fischer, (1964: 38).
101 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Kanawati, (1980a: 69-70, 76, 96, 112-4, 116, 124-n56 & 58 & 61, 127-
n100, 140, 146-n75).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 134, 148, 154, 161, 166-8, 176, 178, 260,
283, 287-8).
Kees, (1932: 111-4).
McFarlane, (1995: # 131).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 221, 227-8, 230-n1).
Mostafa, (1984-5: 420, 423, 426).
Mostafa, (1987: 169-184 & 2 Tafeln).
Schenkel, (1965: 11-12, 14-19, 21-22).
Strudwick, (2005: 116-122, 345-7). Texts 30-9 & Text 249.
Urk I: I295-303.
Weill, (1912: 81-6).
Museum Collections:
Metropolitan Museum, NY
MMA 14.7.14.223
MMA 14.7.12.224
MMA 14.7.13.225
MMA 14.7.11.226
Cairo Museum
JE 43053.227
JE 41895.228
223. Coptos Decree H, part.

224. Coptos Decrees P & Q.
225. Coptos Decree J, part.
226. Coptos Decree O.
227. Coptos Decree I.
228. Coptos Decree L.
102 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[49] KA-pw-ptH/Kapuptah
Location: Saqqara/Position Unknown.
PM: III2: 693 PN: I, 339.11
Consensus Date: V.8(?).
King: V.3, V.6, V.8.
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: V.8E.
Harpur ID: 532 Harpur Date: V.8/V.9(?)
Baer ID: 517 Baer Date: V8+.
PM Date: V.8+. Cherpion Date: V.7.
Other Date: Baud (1999: 587, # 231): V.8-V.9.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA spAwt 5maw, imy-rA ixt msw nsw m spAwt 5ma(w), imy-rA sS;
Epithets: wr mD 5maw; Hm-nTr Nfr-9D-KA-Ra; Wab Mn-4wt Ni-Wsr-Ra; Wab
BA-Nfr-ir-KA-Ra; mrr nb.f; Hm-nTr Ra 1wt-1r m 4t-ib-Ra.
References: Baud (1999: # 231).
Helck, (1954: 82).
Jacquet-Gordon, (1962: 377 (22S5)).
Kanawati, (1980a: 12-15).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 41).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 153 -n1).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
CG 1563.
CG 1567.
CG 1711.
CG 57160/1229
229. Baud, (1999: 586), notes that CG 57160/1 are not published.
103 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[50] KA-gm-ni mmi/Kagemni

Location: LS10 Teti Pyramid Cemetery, Saqqara.
PM: III2: 521-5. PN: I, 341.2
Consensus Date: VI.1E.230
King: V.8 – VI.1.
Kanawati ID: 361 Kanawati Date: VI.1E.
Harpur ID: 534 Harpur Date: VI.1M.
Baer ID: 548 Baer Date: VI.1.
Strudwick ID: 151 Strudwick Date: VI.1E.
Other Date: - Baud, (1999:#244): VI.1.
- Brovarski, (1994a: 21 & 2006: 73): VI.1E.
- Kanawati, (2003a: 87): VI.1E.
- Kanawati, (2003b: 48): VI.1.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #109): VI.1E.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA 5maw 6A-mHw; imy-rA tA r-Dr.f 5maw 6A-mHw;
Epithets:231 tAty sAb TAty; tAty sAb TAty mAa; imy-rA Hwt wrt 6; imy-rA kAt nbt nsw;
imy-rA gswy-pr; iry-pat; imy-rA prwy-HD; imy-rA prwy-nbw; sDAwty
bity; imy-rA sS answ; Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; sAb aD-mr; sHD Hm-nTr Dd-swt-
6ti; imy-rA niwt Dd-swt-6ti; HAty-a.
230. KA-gm-ni’s biography tells us that he began his career under Djedkare, served under Wenis and became
Vizier under Teti.
231. KA-gm-ni, like Khentika, uses mAa after several titles. See Callender, (2000: 371-3), and James, (1953: 12-3)
for discussions on what this might mean in actuality for the titles held by KA-gm-ni and other officials who
added this designation. An alternate perspective on mAa is outlined in Anthes, (1954: 21-51). Readers must
make their own choice!
104 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
References: Bissing, (1905: passim).
Bissing, (1911: passim).
Brovarski, (1994a: 21-n24, 29).
Edel, (1953: 210-226; Tafeln I und II).
Firth & Gunn, (1926, reprint 2007: 20-1 & 105-130; Plates 5, 7, 8, 10,
12A&B, 14B&C, 50, 52-3, 59, 54 – inscriptions 5-8).
Harpur & Scremin, (2006).
Kanawati, (1980a: 25-6).
Kanawati, (2000: 25, 28).
Kanawati, (2003b: 40, 47-8, 57, Figure 3).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 67, 73-n384, 118, 212).
Kees, (1933: 591).
LD (Text) I: 160.
McFarlane, (1995: # 135).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 43– n4, 153, 186– n1).
Roccati, (1982: 139-141, §§113-6).
Saad, (1944: 451).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 205, 207-9, 213, 250, 255).
Strudwick, (2005: 285-7). Text 213.
Urk I: I194-6.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #109).
Family Tree at Volume II, Appendix II/B
105 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[51] KAi/Kai
Location: Mastaba D19, north of the Step Pyramid, Saqqara.
PM: III2: 479. PN: I, 338.18.
Consensus Date: V.6-V.8.
King: –
Kanawati ID: 329 Kanawati Date: V.8M-L.
Baer ID: 505 Baer Date: V.8M-9M.
Strudwick ID: 136 Strudwick Date: VM/V.6E(?).232
PM Date: V.8+. Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Borchardt (1937: 3): Dynasty V(?).
- Case Study: Volume II, Appendix IV: V.6-V.8.
- James, (1961: 22(5)): Dynasty V.
- Willoughby-Winlaw, (2007: 355): V.6-V.8.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA prwy-HD; imy-rA Hwt wrt; imy-rA Hwt wrt 6;
Epithets: imy-rA kAt nbt nt nsw; tAty sAb TAty, iwn knmwt, wr mD 5maw, Hm-
nTr MAat, sAb aD-mr; imy-rA sS answ; Xry-tp nsw m prwy; Xry-tp nsw;
sHD wr mD 5maw; mdw rxyt; sHD Hm-nTr; Xry-tp nsw; Hry-sStA n wDt-
mdw nbt nt nsw; imy-rA prwy nbw.
References: James, (1961: 22(5) & Plate XXI(5)).
Kees, (1932: 88).
Mariette, (1889: 226-231).
Reisner, (1936: 404).233
Willoughby-Winlaw, (2007: #125. V1, 164-5; V2, Figures III.69 &
III.70).
232. Strudwick (1985: 15). False Door cornice and torus moulding dating criteria used to date KAi.
233. Study # 63.
106 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
CG 1299.
CG 1302.
CG 1303.
JE 15159.234
The British Museum
BM EA 65952.235
234. False Door.

235. James, (1961: 22(5) & Plate XXI(5)).
107 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[52] KAi-ny-nbfwi 2nw/Kanenebfui Khenu

Location: Saqqara, Teti Cemetery.
PM: III2: 537. PN: –
Consensus Date: Late OK/FIP.
King: –
Baer ID: 533 Baer Date: Late.
Strudwick ID: 147 Strudwick Date: Late OK/FIP.
Other Date: –236
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA Snwty; Xry-tp nsw.
Epithets:
References: Duell (1938: Volume 2, Plate 219.B).
Firth & Gunn, (1926, reprint 2007: 27, 38, 42, 186-7, 209(13), 270(1);
Plates 17B, 74.1, 76.2-76.4).
236. Firth & Gunn, (1926, reprint 2007: 27) make the dubious suggestion that this person was a son of Mereruka
and on that basis suggest that the tomb is dated to Dynasty VI. This dating is not included under ‘other
date’ above, but noted for information.
108 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[53] KAi-Hp 7ti/Kai-hep Tjeti

Location: El-Hawawish Kanawati # M8/Newberry #H24/ U.E. 9
PM: – PN: I, 340.16
I, 395.5.
II, 392.2 & 331.27
King: VI.3, VI.4.
Strudwick ID: – Strudwick Date: VI.5E.237
PM Date: –238 Cherpion Date: –
Other Date: - Borvarski, (2006: 83): VI.5M.
- Fischer, (1959: 239-n16): OK+.239
- Fischer, (1968, 75-n313): OK+.240
- Harvey, (2001: Catalogue # A54): VI.4/VI.5.
- Harvey, (2001: Catalogue # B33): VI.5.
- Kanawati, (1982: 14):VI.3-VI.5E.
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 296): VI.5E.
- Kees, (1932: 108-9): early Heracleopolitan.241
- McFarlane, (1987: 70): VI.3-VI.4.
- McFarlane, (1995: # 137): VI.3-VI.5E.
- Robins, (2008:21): VIL.242
- Woods, (2007: V2, #103): VI.5E.
237. Strudwick, (1985: 254), Table 20.

238. PMV: 18-26, places this whole group of tombs in the period late Dynasty VI to early Dynasty XII.
239. Fischer (1959: 239-n16) refers to dating of statue CG221.
240. Fischer, (1968, 75), bases dating on palaeographic grounds for this group of tombs.
241. Kees, (1932: 109) bases his comment on matters related to the coffins associated with this title-holder.
242. Robins (2008: 21) refers to BM EA 29594.
109 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA Smaw; imy-rA Hm-nTr; imy-rA ipt nsw; imy-rA
Epithets:243 sxmx-ib nb; iry-pat, imy-rA prwy HD; mAA wr; HAty-a; sDAwty bity;
Xry-Hbt Hry-tp; Xry-Hbt; Hry-tp aA U.E. 9.
References: Borvarski, (2006: 83).
Fischer, (1968, 75-n313).
Fischer, (1959: 239-n16).
Harvey, (2001: Catalogue # A54 & Catalogue # B33).
Kanawati, (1980a: 49-50, 66, 74, 75).
Kanawati, (1982: 7-32; Plates 1-11 & Figures 1-21).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 10-11, 49-50, 54, 57-n259, 60-n286, 64-
n322, 67, 71, 76, 93, 97-103, 105, 106, 107, 109-117, 119-124, 128-130,
131-n774, 135-n817, 136, 176, 186-7, 191-2, 218, 220-5, 227-9, 233-4,
237, 243, 248-253, 267-n1712).
McFarlane, (1987: 63-70, Plates 1 & 2).
McFarlane, (1995: # 137).
Newberry, (1912: 114):
Robins, (2008:21, Illustration #10).
Roccati, (1982: 170-1, §159).244
Strudwick, (2005: 287). Text 214.
Urk I: I250-1.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #103).
243. Kanawati, (1982: 7-8) notes that several titles are repeated with mAa added. See comments on KA-gm-ni
mmi’s [50] titles with regard to the addition of mAa.
244. McFarlane, (1987: 64), reunites this block, in the Louvre with the Chicago Field Musuem to resolve the
issue of ownership.
110 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum
CG28001. 245
CG28004. 246
CG221.247
Field Museum, Chicag
FM 31700.248
The Louvre
AF9 460.
E 11566.249
The British Museum
BM EA 29594. 250
Plate 3:
Overseer of Upper Egypt, KAi-Hp 7ti [53]
(BM EA 29594)
245. Nfr-Tntt’s (wife) coffin.

246. KAi-Hp’s coffin. See also Kanawati, (1982: Plates 5-8 & Figures 15-17).
247. Borchardt, (1911: 147 & Blatt 46(221)) dates the statue to Dynasty VI. Also, Kanawati, (1987: 57 & plate
18c).
248. McFarlane, (1987, Plate 1).
249. Metropolitan Museum of Art, (1999: Catalogue # 191) identifies Louvre # E 11566. Also, Kanawati, (1987:
57 & plate 20(d)).
250. http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/search_the_collection_database/search_object_details.aspx?obje
ctid=125469&partid=1&IdNum=29594&orig=%2fresearch%2fsearch_the_collection_database%2fmuseu
m_no__provenance_search.aspx, viewed 26 August 2009. British Museum dates this statue to Dynasty VI.
See also Metropolitan Museum of Art, (1999: Catalogue # 190) which identifies BM EA 29594 and
Kanawati, (1987: 57 & plate 17).
111 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[54] 6ti-anx-Km/Tetiankh-Kem
Location: Saqqara. Vicinity of pyramid of Teti.
PM: – PN: I, 384:15.
King: VI.1.
Other Date: - Baud, (1999: #41): VI.3.
- Hawass, (2000): VI.1.
- Kanawati, (2003b: 49): VI.1.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; sA nsw n.xt.f Smsw; sA nsw Smsw n.xt.f; iry-pat; HAty-
Epithets: a; sA-nsw; sDAwty nTr; Hry-Hbt; sS mdw-nTr; smr-waty; imy-rA Snwt(y);
mniw-Nxb;
Ts(w) nxn(?)251
References: Dobrev, (1996: 107-109, Figures 11-13 & Photos 7-8).
Dobrev, (1998: 153, B.1).
Hawass, (1998: 155-160, Plates XVIII-XIX).
Hawass, (2000: 419-422, Figures 5 & 6, Plate 63).252
Kanawati, (2003a: 139 & n238).
251. Dobrev (1996: 108), identifies three titles for 6ti-anx-Km from the blocks found in the pyramid complex of
Pepi I (transliteration as per article):
sA nswt sA nswt Smsw Tz(w) nxn (?).
Tz(w) nxn (?) Gardiner Sign List S24 & O48 respectively.
Wb 5,402 & Wb 2,310 respectively.
Moeller 586 & Moeller 535 respectively.
is translated by Dobrev as ‘administrator of the enclosure wall’. Dobrev notes that the reading of Gardiner Sign
O48 is certain and that Gardiner Sign S24 is based on a restoration of a damaged hieratic glyph.
252. Hawass, (2000: 419 & 430), Tomb discovered during excavations in 1992-93. Excavations completed 1994.
6ti-anx-Km identified as the son of King Teti.
112 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Leclant & Clerc, (1994: 379).
Family Tree at Volume II, Appendix II/B
113 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[55] 7Awty/Tjawty or Thauty

Location: Qasr el-Sayyad/U.E.7
PM: – PN: I, 389.5
PM Date: – Cherpion Date: VI.5.
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 76): VI.5M.
- Kees, (1932: 92): VI.5.
- Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 219): VI.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw253; imy-rA 5maw mAa254; imy-rA aA gAw xAst 5maw; mH-ib
Epithets: n nsw m r-aA xAst 5maw; HAty-a; smr-waty; sDAwty bity; Hry-sStA n pr-
dwAt; iry-pat; Hry-tp aA n spAt; sHD Hm-nTr Mn-anx Nfr-kA-Ra; sHD Hm-
nTr Mn-anx Mry-Ra; sHD Hm-nTr Mn-anx Mr-n-Ra.
El-Khadradgy, (2002b: 210-n24).
Habachi, (1979: 237-8).
Kanawati, (1980a: 47-9, 66, 74, 83-n61, 94-5, 100-n3, 142).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 167-9, 224-n1364, 286-7).
Kees, (1932: 92, 95, 97).
LD (Text) II: 179-180/ LD (Plates) II: 114f-i.
McFarlane, (1995: 286-n1556).
253. Montet, (1936: 102).

254. Montet, (1936: 100).
114 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 134-7, 142-n2a, 147).
Montet, (1936: 84-109).
Mostafa, (1987: 173-182).
Smith, (1946, reissue 1978: 219).
Urk I: I257-8.
115 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[56] 7Awty/Tjawty255
Location: Khozam/U.E.5
PM: – PN: I, 389.5
Consensus Date: VIII/VIII.2(?)
King: –
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: VIII.
Other Date: - Fischer, (1964: 47-9 & Plate XIV): VIII.
- Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 167-9): IXE.256
- McFarlane, (1995: 338): VIII.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; HAty-a; iry-pat; mH-ib n nsw m r-aA gAw rsy.
Epithets:
References: Fischer, (1964: 47-9 & Plate XIV)
Kanawati, (1980a: 111-2, 115, 118-121).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 167-9, 224-n1364, 286-7).
McFarlane, (1995: 90, 338-9, 348-n1852).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 221-n2, 227).
Mostafa, (1987: 179-182).
Museum Collections:
Cairo Museum257
CG 57201.
JE 36338.
255. The identification of this person with 7Awty Iqr [57] has been considered by various commentators. The
data is inconclusive at this stage. See comments on 7Awty Iqr above.
256. Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 167-9) suggest that 7Awty is contemporary or nearly so with Wsr [14] at
Khozam.
257. Fischer, (1964: Plate XIV). CG57201 represents False Door fragments & JE36338, a basalt offering slab
116 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[57] 7Awty-iqr/ Tjawty Iqr258

Location: Wadi Hammamat Inscriptions
PM: VII: 330 PN: I, 389.4
Consensus Date: VIII.
King: No King named in Inscriptions.
Kanawati ID: – Kanawati Date: VIII.
Baer ID: 603 Baer Date: Late.
Other Date: - McFarlane, (1995: 89): Dynasty VIII.
- Schenkel, (1965: 32-4): Post Dynasty VI.259
- Strudwick, (2005: 144): Dynasty VIII+.
Selected Titles & imy-rA 5maw; imy-rA Hm-nTr; HAty-a; smr-waty; iry-pat; it nTr; mry
Epithets: nTr; Xry-Hbt; smA Mnw.
References: Couyat & Montet, (1912: 90-1, Plate XXXV)
Fischer, (1968: 47-8 & Plate XIV).
Kanawati, (1980a: 119-121).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 168, 287).
Kees, (1932: 110).
McFarlane, (1995: # 139).
Martin-Pardey, (1976:223, 227).
Mostafa, (1987: 179-182).
Roccati, (1982: 261-2, §263).
258. Fischer, (1968: 47-8) has suggested the possibility of identification with 7Awty [56]. Possibility has also been
canvassed by Kanawati, (1980a: 119-121) and by Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 168), where it is suggested
that the identification is more than likely a match. The same identification has also been made by Mostafa,
(1987: 180-2). However, we remain uncertain that these are indeed the one period.
259. Schenkel (1965: 29-44) deals with inscriptions dated after Dynasty VI, but without allocation to a particular
period.
117 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Shenkel, (1965: 32-4).
Strudwick, (2005: 143-4). Text 67.
Urk I: I258-9.
118 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[58] 9aw/Djau
Location: Tomb # 12, South - Deir el-Gebrawi /U.E. 8 & 12.
PM: V: 244-6. PN: I, 405.26.
King: VI.5.
Kanawati ID: 386 Kanawati Date: VI.5M.
Baer ID: 592 Baer Date: VI.5L
Strudwick ID: – Strudwick Date: VI.5E-M.260
PM Date: Old Kingdom. Cherpion Date: VI.5
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 91): VI.5M+
- Kanawati, (2003b: 56): VI.5.
- Kanawati & McFarlane: (1992: 299): VI.5M-L.
- Woods, (2007: V2, #114): VI.5M-L.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; iry-pat; HAty-a; Hry-tp Nxb; sDAwty bity; Hry-tp aA U.E.
Epithets: 8 & 12; Xry-Hbt; imy-rA Snwty; imy-rA prwy HD; sHD Hm-nTr Mn-anx-
Nfr-kA-Ra; imy-xt Hm-nTr Mn-anx-Nfr-kA-Ra; xnty-S Mn-anx-Nfr-kA-
Ra.
References: Brovarski, (2006: 91, 84, 112, 115, 117).
Davies, (1902: V2:
Kanawati, (1980a: 38-n19, 48-9, 89, 92, 94, 100-n18, 102-n47, 117, 125-
n89, 136, 138, 144-n17).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 68-9, 75, 84-5, 112, 118, 130, 132-3, 136,
139-141, 145, 148, 151-3, 169, 191, 224-n1364, 258, 273-4, 281).
260. Strudwick, (1985: 201), Table 12.

119 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 117-9, 135-n4, 137, 166-n1, 210).
Roccati, (1982: 227-8, §216).
Strudwick, (2005: 365-6), Text 267.
Urk I: I 1145-7.
Woods, (2007: V1 & V2, #114).
120 of 189
2. PROSOPOGRAPHY
[59] 9aw 4mAi/Djau Shemay

Location: Tomb #13, South - Deir el-Gebrawi / U.E. 8 & 12.
PM: V: 244-6. PN: I, 405.26.
King: VI.5.
Kanawati ID: 386 Kanawati Date: VI.5M.
Baer ID: 592 Baer Date: VI.5L. 261
Other Date: - Brovarski, (2006: 91): VI.5M+.
- Kanawati, (2003b: 56): VI.5.
- Kanawati & McFarlane: (1992: 69): VI.5.
Selected Titles & Imy-rA 5maw; Hry-tp aA U.E. 8 & 12; ; imy-rA Snwty; imy-rA prwy HD;
Epithets: HAty-a.
References: Brovarski, (2006: 91, 84, 112, 115, 117).
Davies, (1902: V2:1-13, Plates I-XVI).
Kanawati, (1980a: 33, 48-9, 89, 94, 100-n18, 102-n47 & 60, 117, 126-
n91, 140, 142, 144-n17).
Kanawati & McFarlane, (1992: 69, 84-5, 111-n612, 112, 130, 133, 139-
140, 169, 224-n1364, 273-4).
Kees, (1932: 97).
Martin-Pardey, (1976: 117-9, 135-n4, 136, 166-n1).
261. Baer, (1960, reprint 1973: 157) refers to issues surrounding the joint tomb. No separate numbering from his
father.
121 of 189
3. THE TITLE: OVERSEER OF UPPER EGYPT
This chapter explores the role of the imy-rA 5maw in the administration of Upper Egypt from
the role’s inception to the end of the Old Kingdom. Although the role of the Vizier is
important to the consideration of the role of the imy-rA 5maw, this chapter does not deal in
detail with the changes to the Vizier’s role in the administration of the Old Kingdom except to
the extent that it impinges directly on the role of the imy-rA 5maw. Each of the individuals
documented in the prosopographical study at chapter 2 contributed to the administration of
Egypt and helped sustain the world’s first nation state. The role is positioned within the Old
Kingdom bureaucracy and to the extent we can discern from primary sources, the
responsibilities of the role are explored. The changes in responsibilities that occurred over
time and the extension and/or contractions in the role are discussed. Evidence does not exist
for a similar role in Lower Egypt during the Old Kingdom, though such a role did exist during
the Middle Kingdom, but in that case, the Overseer of Lower Egypt appears to have largely
been responsible for quarrying expeditions.262
The accession of each King brought a new set of considerations as they made their mark on
the nation. The economic history of the Old Kingdom is not uniform.263 Assumptions should
not be made that what applied in one reign applied equally to the policies of other monarchs.
In many respects, the people most directly affected by such changes included individuals who
held the rank of imy-rA 5maw. Each monarch sought to balance economic requirements
against provincial administration. 264 The redistributive nature of the Old Kingdom economy
meant that the agricultural surplus was transferred to the capital/Residence and then re-
allocated as required. 265 Thus control of revenue from a region as productive as Upper Egypt
was a matter not just of local significance, but of national importance. As Trigger has noted,
262. Grajetski, (2009: 109-110). The responsibilities of the Middle Kingdom role appear to be very limited with
the evidence coming mainly from inscriptions in Sinai.
263. Papazian, (2005: 60).
264. Papazian, (2005: 66).
265. Papazian, (2005: 76).
122 of 189
there is one clear constant in early state development, which applied equally to the Old
Kingdom, that of elites seeking to appropriate or control surplus production through taxes
and/or other impositions.266
The evidence to help reconstruct the role of the imy-rA 5maw comes from several sources. We
have the biographical and titulary information for the individuals listed in the
prosopographical study. There are also a number of royal decrees which either appoint
individuals as imy-rA 5maw or limit their authority when those decrees are issued as
exemptions for the cults of important state deities. We do not have a summary of
responsibilities equivalent to text popularly known as The Duties of the Vizier.267 Thus a purpose
of this study is to reconstruct a description of the role and its responsiblities in relation to the
administration of Upper Egypt. As a first step, the timing of the role’s commencement and
the likely reasons behind its inception are discussed below. This is followed by a positioning of
the role within the wider economy of the Old Kingdom. Discussion of changes to the nature
of the role follow a chronological structure.
3.1 HISTORICAL REVIEW
3.1.1 Inception of the role
Fischer and Kanawati note that a change in provincial administration took place after Dynasty
V was well established. The major transition was to change nomarch responsibilities from
potentially being responsible for several nomes to holding responsibility for one nome.268 The
next stage was the creation of the position of a Southern Vizier.269 The role of imy-rA 5maw
was also created. The dating of this change is generally accepted as the reign of Djedkare in
266. Trigger, (1993: 44).

267. Boorn, (1988: passim).
268. Fischer, (1968: 12) and Kanawati, (1980a: 1-2).
269. Kanawati1980a: 11) and Strudwick, (1985: 340).
123 of 189
the latter part of Dynasty V.270 It also seems likely that Upper Egypt was divided into a
number of administrative areas, as evidenced by the title held by 4rf-KA(i) [46] of imy-rA
spAwt 5ma(w) Hrywt-ib, Overseer of Upper Egypt in the Middle Nomes. The matter of the split of
administrative zones for Upper Egypt is discussed separately at section 3.1.3 below.
Several theories have been advanced as to why the title was created. Martin-Pardey suggests
that the title was created because of changes to tax administration, but we have some
difficulties in determining the exact reason for the creation of the position.271 Martin-Pardey
also noted the positioning of the role between those responsible for nome administration and
the central government.272 Biographical information provided by title-holders gives little
insight into the reasons as to why the position was created though the need to control
resources is adverted to.273 Papazian wonders if the administrative changes were a Residence
response to the already growing power of the nomarchs during Dynasty V. 274 The suggestion
may have some merit.
3.1.2 The imy-rA 5maw in Dynasty V
Due to the paucity of information, it is difficult to determine the extent of responsibilities
allocated to the Vizier responsible for Upper Egypt and the imy-rA 5maw. At this stage,
holders of both positions were at times resident in the capital, as was the case for Ra-Spss [35]
and KA-pw-ptH [49]. But yet we also know of imyw-rA 5maw such as 4rf-KA(i) [46] of Sheikh
Said, who were resident in Upper Egypt. The question becomes one of trying to establish the
270. The dating depends, in the absence of royal decrees or similar evidence, on the dating of tombs of known
imyw-rA 5maw. Some debate exists over the dating of the earliest known title-holder, KAi [51]. See Volume
II, Appendix IV for a discussion of the issues surrounding the dating of KAi.
271. Martin-Pardey, (1976: 55). See also Barta, (2000: 57) who agrees with this assertion. Kanawati, (2005: 19)
suggests that the responsibilities of the office ‘presumably’ (my emphasis) included tax collection.
272. Martin-Pardey: 1976: 152).
273. The biography of Weni is consistent with this comment – it simply reflects the high esteem held by the
King in relation to individuals. Biographies tend to record holding positions, and sometimes achievements
when holding positions, but not the economic reasons underlying the appointment. See Urk I: I98-110.
274. Papazian, (2005: 112). Papazian suggests that the problem of the power of nomarchs as compared with the
central administration may have begun in Dynasty V rather than the usually suggested mid-Dynasty VI. See
also, Baer, (1960, reprint 1973: 301).
124 of 189
limits of responsibility of the vizierate at this time through a consideration of the titles held.
Ten imyw-ra 5maw are currently dated to Dynasty V. Five of these men were also elevated to
the vizierate. The titles particularly relevant to elevation to the vizierate are listed at Table 4.8
and include the titles imy-rA kAt nbt nt nsw and imy-rA sS answ. Four of the men elevated to
the vizierate held the honorific title Xry-tp nsw and three held the ranks of HAty-a and smr-
waty. Five imyw-5maw held the title wr mD Smaw. Of these, neither 1m-Mnw [38] nor KA-pw-
ptH [49] were elevated to the vizierate. imy-rA sS answ was held by the same three Viziers who
also held the title wr mD Smaw: KAi [51], Ra-Spss [35] and Axt-Htp [01]. The titulary evidence
supports Kanawati’s proposal that two Viziers existed from as early as the reign of Djedkare
and that one of them was responsible for Upper Egypt.275
3.1.3 The administrative divisions of Upper Egypt
It seems appropriate at this point to deal with the matter of the administrative divisions of
Upper Egypt. The evidence for such administrative arrangements comes from the titulary of
4rf-KA(i) [46] of Sheikh Said, who held the title variant imy-rA spAwt 5ma(w) Hrywt-ib,
overseer of the middle nomes/provinces of Upper Egypt.276 Map II in Volume II shows the
nome structure of Upper Egypt. It has been suggested that the Middle Nomes represented
nomes 8-15.277 Kees thought that nomes 10-14 were the Middle Nomes.278 If such a title existed,
then the question is raised as to the evidence for administrators in other parts of Upper Egypt.
We know that several officials held title(s) variant on imy-rA wpt and others held titles such as
the overseer of works. it may be that they had some form of responsibility equivalent to that
of 4rf-KA(i) [46], who is dated to the reign of Djedkare. To date, evidence for other imyw-rA
275. Kanawati, (1980a: 15).

276. Jones # 842.
277. Jones # 842.
278. Kees, (1932: 101). He also noted that the 15th nome could be included in the definition, but that the
definition fluctuated from time to time throughout Egyptian history.
125 of 189
5maw for the other parts of Upper Egypt is absent. In Dynasty VI, in the reign of Pepy II, a
similar title appeared and was held by Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-kA 1ny [16] whose title was that of
imy-rA spAwt 5ma Hrywt-ib. There is disagreement as to what constituted the administrative
divisions of Upper Egypt. Scholars have taken differing positions on how the responsibilities
should be allocated. As noted above, Kees suggested that the Middle Nomes were represented
by nomes 10-14 – sometimes including nome 15. Goedicke proposed a structure that saw
three administrative regions with those responsible for each region reporting to an imy-rA
5maw for the whole of Upper Egypt.279 Goedicke’s split depends on the definition of tp-Sma,
which seems to generally be defined as nomes 1-7.280 Baer suggests a tri-partite division of
Upper Egypt but moves the divisions one nome further south than Goedicke.281 Fischer
discusses the issues of allocating the administrative split because of the evidence that
surrounds certain nomarchs in Dynasty VI. Kanawati has similar issues with the administrative
split.282 Kanawati favours the view that the Middle Nomes may not have been an administrative
entity – the nomes certainly existed, but as will be seen in the narrative on Dynasty VI, the
actual allocations of responsibility varied according to reign and the nature of reforms.283 It
seems that there was some division of administrative responsibility during the Old Kingdom,
but it appears that the allocation varied with reign and reform motive.
3.1.4 Responsibilities of the imy-rA 5maw
As discussed above, we must return to primary inscriptionals and archaeological evidence to
determine what the responsibilities of the imy-rA 5maw encompassed. Wni [11] relates in his
279. Goedicke, (1956: 1-10). Goedicke appears to suggest a division of nomes 1-7, 8-15 and 16-22.
280. Urk I: I300-1. Coptos Decree M does not use the phrase tp-Sma, it says instead that Idi [06] is to be imy-rA
5maw over nomes 1-7.
281. Baer, (1960, reprint 1973: 285).
282. Kanawati, (1980a: 69-70) and Fischer (1968: 96-7).
283. Kanawati, (1980a: 71).
126 of 189
biography that, as imy-rA 5maw he ‘…assessed everything that needed assessing for the Residence... ’. It
would appear that he had important tax responsibilities. Wni also relates that he assessed ‘every
regular duty that needed assessing’, a comment which suggests assessing corvée labour requirements
for the Residence. These are the responsibilities that Wni first mentions in relation to his time
as the imy-rA 5maw which suggests that they were, to his mind, the most important
responsibilities. In this regard, the tomb of Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-kA 1ny [16] is instructive in
that his tomb chapel shows him supervising the levying of taxes on cattle and goats of the
Middle Nomes – he was imy-rA spAwt 5ma Hrywt-ib.284 The extent of the taxes or levies made
on individuals or settlements is unknown. The only things we know with certainty are those
matters that were exempted from taxes or levies through the exemption decrees for various
temples, such as for the temple of Min at Coptos, and estates or pyramid towns associated
with royal mortuary cults.285 Coptos Decree A tells us that the KA chapel of Queen Iput was
not to be burdened with any imposts or taxes calculated by the Residence.286 One presumes
that the imy-rA 5maw was responsible for ensuring compliance. The decree serves as a
reminder that the imposts were centrally calculated but locally imposed through the
bureaucratic structure discussed at section 3.2.
In the case of the Dahshur Decree, the pyramid towns for Sneferu’s pyramids were exempted
from any work for the King, taxes from the Residence or any imposts imposed in relation to
water. There was also a requirement to keep a register of the Hntyw-S of the pyramid towns.
The decree says that anyone on the register was not required for corvée labour. The
implication is that there was a requirement for a full listing of able-bodied people to undertake
corvée labour and it was then a requirement to remove from the lists, those persons covered
284. Blackman, (1924: Plate XXVI/2)

285. Urk I209-213, Dahshur Decree. Also Goedicke, (1967: 55-77).
286. Urk I: I214. Also Goedicke, (1967: 41-54).
127 of 189
by various exemption decrees. Severe punishments are listed for those who did not comply
with the requirements of the various decrees.
Coptos Decree B was addressed to the Vizier 8aw and the imy-rA 5maw, 2wy [42] amongst
others and gives us specific information on some of the responsibilities of the imy-rA 5maw.287
The decree deals with some exemptions in the first lines and then tells us that when the levy
of a nome is brought to the attention of the imy-rA 5maw, after it has been checked by the
appropriate people, he is to check for those who are exempted from corvée labour
requirements and to ensure that they are removed from the levy lists. Coptos Decree C also
tells us about certain items that were controlled by the imy-rA 5maw.288 These resources
included gold, copper and some other items (decorative items?).289 It also further mentions
taxes on water and land but there is no clarification as to what that means. Coptos Decree D
again mentions the responsibility of the imy-rA 5maw for gold and copper.290
Coptos Decree G requests the imy-rA 5maw to manage the allocation of lands, in fact to make
a division of land for a royal cult. Goedicke suggests it is for Pepy II, but there is some
confusion.291 This suggests that land division was ultimately a matter to be approved by the
imy-rA 5maw, the divisions to be made in conjunction with the various officials responsible
for the affected towns and lands. Coptos Decree L also deals with land allocations.292 5mAi
[48] was the recipient of the decree and he was instructed to undertake the allocation of the
Estate
287. Urk I: I280-3. Also Goedicke, (1967: 87-116).

288. Urk I: I284-8 and Goedicke, (1967: 117-127).
289. Strudwick (2005: 111) is unclear as to the translation.
290. Urk I: 289-292 and Goedicke (1967: 137-147).
291. Urk I: I293-5 and Goedicke (1967: 127-136). See Strudwick (2005: 114) on the discussion as to which cult
the land division was to be made for.
292. Urk I: I 295-6 and Goedicke, (1967: 165-171).
128 of 189
The decrees, when considered in totality, seem to suggest that the imy-rA 5maw was
responsible to the Residence for all the important people and resource management
requirements of Upper Egypt and for ensuring that all exemptions were properly managed.
Two metals are mentioned in the decrees as being the responsibility of the imy-rA 5maw: gold
and copper but there is no clarification as to whether they were to order mining or simply to
track resources requested by the Residence. Pardey suggests that the nomarchs of nome 15
were responsible for leading expeditions to Hatnub in the late Old Kingdom.293 Thus, it is
quite possible that nomarchs were responsible for the the actual task but the imy-rA 5maw was
responsible for accounting to the Residence. Such a scenario would align with the
responsibilities to the Residence that the imy-rA 5maw had with regard to other matters.
Mry-Ra-nfr QAr [24] and 1r-xwf [37] along with 4Abni [45] and 7Awty [56] also had specific
responsibilities related to Egypt’s borders. Additionally, the evidence attested for 7Awty Iqr
[56] suggests quarrying responsibilities given that his identity is attested at the Wadi
Hammamat.294 Wni [11] also mentions in his biography that he brought the sarcophagus and
pyramidion for Merenre’s pyramid to the Residence.295 This again suggests mining
responsibilities. As does the additional comment that he brought back alabaster from the
Hatnub quarries. Each of these would align with the imy-rA 5maw’s resources management
responsibilities.
When trying to assess the impact of the imy-rA 5maw on the resources of Upper Egypt and
the accounting for same to the Residence, through the Vizier responsible for Upper Egypt, it
must be remembered that we can only guess at the size of temple land and other holdings. We
293. Pardey, (2001: 18).

294. Couyat & Montet, (1912, 90-4, Plate XXXV).
295. Urk I: I 106, also Klemm & Klemm (2008: 301) on the possible location of Ibhat.
129 of 189
do not know what the full extent of the tax take was or could have been. We are left with
reconstructing the responsibilities of office from the evidence that has survived. It is possible
that evidence will be uncovered in the future to help better quantify for the twenty-first
century mind the impact of the imyw-rA 5maw on the Old Kingdom. That is not to dismiss
the existing evidence but adding to what we know would help in a better understanding of
how the Old Kingdom economy functioned. It would also contribute better to our
understanding of personal advancement and wealth creation. Given the exemptions from
levies and labour obligations inherent in the decrees discussed above, one would imagine that
there would be some intention to maximize the extent of the exemptions if one benefited
from same. Less tax means greater resources available for redistribution and therefore
personal wealth creation. The Egyptians had a sophisticated management system that tracked
most things so one would have to presume that they were also alert to the possibilities for
personal advancement through maximizing exemptions from which they individually
benefited. But that is something that can only be speculated on.
3.1.5 The imy-rA 5maw in Dynasty VI
Dynasty VI will be treated chronologically in the following discussion, transitioning through
the key changes in each reign. In the reign of Teti, we know of six imyw-rA 5maw, of which
three were elevated to the vizierate. One of the imyw-rA 5maw who did not progress was a
son of Teti, 6ti-anx-km [54] who predeceased his father him and is buried close to Teti's
pyramid. All of Teti’s imyw-rA 5maw resided in the capital except for 1nqw 3tti I [36] of Deir
el-Gebrawi who is dated to late in Teti’s reign. Certainly all who were elevated to the vizierate
were based in the capital. Kanawati notes that the Vizier Isi of Edfu did not hold the title imy-
rA 5maw and neither did he hold the title imy-rA kAt nbt (nt) nsw.296 so the question of who
296. Kanawati, (1980a: 26).

130 of 189
was responsible for the work programmes comes back to who held the title imy-rA kAt nbt
(nt) nsw, which was held by all of Teti’s viziers. Kanawati suggests that the solution is that
there were two Viziers in the capital: one had responsibility for revenues and one for works
with regard to Upper Egypt alone.297
The transition to the reign of Pepy I may have been fraught with regicide and the succession
of the ephemeral Userkare and then a return to the royal family descended from Teti.298 This
may have been a key reason for the transfer of 2wy [41] and Nbt, the only woman in the Old
Kingdom with the title of Vizier. Pepy married both daughters of this couple and each gave
birth to a future King to Abydos to represent the central administration. The familial
relationship issues related to this transfer are discussed at chapter 4, section 4.2. In the
transition from Teti to Pepy I, we also see the emergence of the title Hry-tp aA to designate
nomarchs. 1nqw 3tti I [36] of Deir el-Gebrawi is the first of the imyw-rA 5maw to hold this
title, suggesting that it emerges at the end of the reign of Teti or early in the reign of Pepy I.
The next identified holder is 2ww [43].299 There is a gap with a relatively short timeframe
supporting the claim in in the biography of Mry-Ra-nfr QAr [24] that he was sent to be
educated with the children of the Hryw-tp. We just do not yet have the evidence for the other
nomarchic title-holders.
Under Pepy I, we have a mix of residency in the capital and in Upper Egypt with regard to the
imyw-rA 5maw. It is noticeable that all those imyw-rA 5maw elevated to the vizierate during
297. Kanawati, (1980a: 26).

298. For a discussion of this and the theories as to what may have happened, see Kanawati, (2003a: passim).
299. Noted by Kanawati, (1980a: 33) along with his comment that it seems odd that there were so few
documented Hryw-tp aA given the comments in the biography of Mry-Ra-nfr QAr [24] that he was sent to be
educated with the children of the Hryw-tp.
131 of 189
the reign of Pepy I were resident in the capital.300 This suggests continuing centralisation or
tight control from the capital. The reign of Pepy I was not without its political intrigue, as
related in the biography of Wni [11] who heard a case against the Queen without any Vizier
present. We know that the tomb of Ra-wr [34] was subject to defacement and it has been
suggested that he may have been connected to the Queen who was tried by Wni. Kanawati
has suggested that the name of Ra-wr [34] may be the name of the Vizier removed from the
Dahshur Decree.301
We do not know who held the office of Southern Vizier under Merenre.302 We do know that
Wni [11] of Abydos was elevated to the vizierate. Given that his tomb is in Abydos one would
suggest that he may have undertaken the responsibilities as he was appointed imy-rA 5maw xnt
n Abw mHt m Mdnit, overseer of over the whole of Upper Egypt. With regard to the vizierate
more generally, Kanawati has suggested that whoever held the office at the end of the reign of
Pepy I may well have continued as Vizier through to the reign of Pepy II.303 One candidate for
consideration would Iww, Wni’s father who may be related to 2wy [41] of Abydos for the
earlier part of Merenre’s reign which only lasted for ten years.304
This transitions the chronology to the reign of Pepy II. We know that there was a Vizier along
with an imy-rA 5maw based at Abydos – both were from the same family: that of 2wy [41]
and Nbt. The Coptos Decree B from Pepy II names both 9aw and 2wy [42]. One of the
imyw-rA 5maw, Mry-Ra-nfr QAr [24] also holds the title of Hry-tp aA. Two imyw-rA 5maw, Idw
I [07] and 7Awty [55] also hold the title Hry-tp aA n spAt. All three imyw-rA 5maw are dated to
early to mid-Pepy II.
300. Inw-Mnw [03], MHw [28] and Ra-wr [34] were the imyw-rA 5maw elevated to the vizierate.
301. Kanawati, (2003a: 116).
302. Kanawati, (1980a: 53).
303. Kanawati, (1980a: 54).
304. See chronology at iii, under Abbreviations and Conventions in this paper.
132 of 189
It appears that the title of imy-rA 5maw was surrendered early in the reign of Pepy II to
become part of the Vizier’s responsibilities. We have examples from tombs where the title
shows, for example in the father’s tomb as held, say, by the son but in the son’s tomb, it
disappears.305 Examples include Wiw Iyw [10] whose tomb is dated to early Pepy II in the
chronology at Table 6.1. He appears in his father’s tomb holding the title but not in his own.
Another example is that of Idw 4nny [08] who is designated imy-rA 5maw in his father
7Awty’s [55] tomb. The issue here is a matter of dating as the dating for 7Awty’s [55] tomb is
Pepy II, early to mid- reign. Kanawati suggests that Ny-Hb-sd-Ppy-Idi [31] lost his title of imy-
rA 5maw as part of these reforms.306
In the second half of the reign of Pepy II fifteen imyw-rA 5maw are attested as compared with
eight in the first half of his reign. Interestingly, of the fifteen attested imyw-rA 5maw, only
three hold the title Hry-tp aA: 9aw 4mAi [59] of Deir el-Gebrawi, 9aw [58] also of Deir el-
Gebrawi, and 5psi-pw-Mnw, 3ny, 3n(-anxw) [47] of El-Hawawish. Two members of this
group of fifteen were elevated to the vizierate. We also know that a number of the nomarchs
had responsibility for more than one nome. In some cases limited information survives on
them so we cannot tell what else may have happened in their careers, but this does not entirely
explain the gap between the titularies explored in this study and the extension of the title of of
imy-rA 5maw to all nomarchs.
3.1.6 The imy-rA 5maw after Dynasty VI
In the period after Dynasty VI, we have a mixed situation when considering the experiences
of the imyw-rA 5maw attested for that period. We see that the designation of iry-pat is attested
305. Kanawati, (1980a: 95).

306. Kanawati, (1980a: 95).
133 of 189
for six of the seven imyw-rA 5maw. Two imyw-rA 5maw were elevated to vizierate: Idi [06]
and 5mAi Iqr [48]. We lack complete titularies so commentary is limited. The nomarchs were
increasing their power bases. There is an increase in the likelihood of an imy-rA 5maw holding
the title of imy-rA Hm-nTr and therefore having access to greater resources, but this should be
considered in the context of the discussion at chapter 4, section 4.7. This may just simply be a
more obvious version of traits that had already emerged during earlier periods.
3.2 THE imy-rA 5maw WITHIN THE BUREAUCRACY
The main arms of government reported through the Vizier. The first level of government was
the Residence administration which had five divisions.307 There were various legal entities,
workshops, administration, and records offices. There were also officials with specific
responsibilities that reported to the Vizier and finally, the central office for provincial
administration.308 At the next level, one can discern that the judiciary, expedition leaders,
economic (treasury) and production administration officials reported to the Vizier as did the
administration of cereals and other foodstuffs.309 Temples and pyramid towns made their
reports separately to this structure directly to the Vizier.
Given the structure of the vizierate with a Vizier responsible for Upper Egypt, the next most
senior official was the imy-rA 5maw. The responsibilities of the imy-rA 5maw have been
outlined at section 3.1.4 above insofar as they can be reconstructed from primary evidence. In
turn, as can be seen from the various decrees, nomarchs, town officials and other officials
within the bureaucracy of Upper Egypt were responsible to the imy-rA 5maw for the activities
within their sphere of responsibility. The structure represents a logical and sophisticated
approach to managing the resources and reporting obligations of Upper Egypt to the
307. Andrassy, (1991: 3 and Abb 2).

308. Andrassy, (1991: Abb 2).
309. Andrassy, (1991: Abb 3).
134 of 189
Residence. The structure obtained well into Dynasty VI until the title devolved to a larger
number of individuals in the reign of Pepy II. This is explored at section 3.1.5 above.
3.3 SUMMARY
The economic history of the Old Kingdom is circuitous and in many respects poorly
documented due to lack of evidence. The role of imy-rA 5maw was created in Dynasty V,
probably during the reign of Djedkare. The reasons for the role’s creation are not entirely clear
and may have been influenced by changes in the responsibilities of nomarchs from
responsibility for multiple nomes to responsibility for one nome. Suggestions have been made
that the role was part of the response to the growing power of provincial administration rather
than being purely a revenue-raising role. Initially, the imy-rA 5maw was based in the capital,
but even in the reign of Djedkare we have evidence that there was an element of
decentralisation. Speculation abounds as to whether or not Upper Egypt was broken up into
smaller administrative units and has been fuelled by the example of 4rf-KA(i) [46] of Sheikh
Said, who was resident in Upper Egypt and who also held a title variant, imy-rA spAwt 5ma(w)
Hrywt-ib, Overseer of Upper Egypt in the Middle Nomes. One also recalls that Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-
kA 1ny [16] whose title was that of imy-rA spAwt 5ma Hrywt-ib dated to mid-Pepy II in
Dynasty VI. It seems that there was some degree of division of administrative responsibilities
but the allocations varied with reign and the nature of the reform process.
One of the aims of this chapter was to try and construct a summary of the responsibilities of
the imy-rA 5maw. To do this, the research effort returned to primary source materials. The
responsibilities of the role do not seem to have been exclusively taxing responsibilities. The
evidence suggests that the imy-rA 5maw was responsible for all the important people and
resource management requirements related to Upper Egypt. He was required to account to
the Residence for ensuring that royal decrees were complied with and may have had special
135 of 189
responsibility for metals such as gold and copper. Exactly what those responsibilities were is
unclear.
The nature of the role evolved over time, as new Kings acceded to the throne. One overall
trend is clear and that is of decentralisation. The further one progresses through the
chronology of imyw-rA 5maw (see table 5.1) decentralisation becomes more obvious. Early to
mid reign of Pepy II, there appears to have been a surrender of the title of imy-rA 5maw to the
Southern Vizier but then later in Pepy II’s reign there is a dramatic increase, a doubling of
numbers of individuals holding the title of imy-rA 5maw. This occurs around the time that we
also see an expansion in the nomarchic responsibility for multiple nomes. It is not clear what
benefit the central administration hoped to gain from this expansion because not all the
recipeients of the title were nomarchs, a number were viziers for whom we have very little
information. Speculation as to why this might happen does not yield logical amswers.
On the question of where the role was positioned within the overall bureaucracy, we can say
that the structure represents a logical and sophisticated approach to managing the resources
and reporting obligations of Upper Egypt to the Residence. The structure obtained well into
Dynasty VI until the title devolved to a larger number of individuals in the reign of Pepy II.
As noted above, it is not clear what the Residence hoped to achieve with this change. At the
height of its influence, it is easy to understand the importance of the role in Egypt’s
administrative structures. There are still large gaps in our knowledge and they will truly only be
filled by discoveries such as archival information similar to that at Abusir’s royal mortuary
temples. Whilst that is not the only option, the discovery of such information would enable a
more concrete summary of the roles and responsibilities devolved onto the imy-rA 5maw.
136 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
The aim of chapter 4 is to analyse the information gathered as part of the prosopographical
study and to interpret that information in the context of the historical analysis outlined in
chapter 3.This chapter will evidence a high degree of standardisation in the use and writing of
the title imy-rA 5maw. Several variants of the title which were confirmed during the
prosopographical study and these variants are the first matter for consideration in this chapter.
Thereafter, the chapter considers familial implications for progression to high office such as
that of imy-rA 5maw or ultimately elevation to the vizierate. The chapter then goes on to
consider other matters relevant to an official’s career by surveying a selection of important
titles and examining the importance of ranking or honorific titles as predictors of high office
along with functional titles which provide similar indicators. Matters such as evidence of links
with the capital and confidence in officials on the part of the King are considered.
The data analysed in this part of the study is available on the CD ROM attached inside the
back cover of this Volume.
4.1 EPIGRAPHIC EVIDENCE
The title was written in several forms, though there was a remarkable consistency in writing
the title in its most ‘famous’ form. Table 4.1 lists the known variants of the title. The
commentary that follows utilises the references from Jones used in Table 4.1 and focuses
primarily on the writing of the title variants.310
310. Jones, (2000: Passim).

137 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
TABLE 4.1: OVERSEER OF UPPER EGYPT AND TITLE VARIANTS
Jones
Title Transliteration Reference#311 Translation/comment
840 Overseer of Upper Egypt

imy-rA spAt 5ma(w)
841 Overseer of the Southern Nomes/Provinces of Upper Egypt.

imy-rA spAwt 5ma(w)
842 Overseer of the Middle Nomes/Provinces of Upper Egypt (U.E. 8-15).

imy-rA spAwt 5ma(w) Hrywt-ib
843 Overseer of the Nomes of Lower Egypt/Northern Nomes of Upper Egypt (Formerly
imy-rA spAwt 6A-mHw
or
the ‘Nine Nomes’ (U.E. 16-22) plus the Fayum and a ‘Goat Nome’ south of the
Fayum).
895 Overseer of Upper Egypt.

imy-rA 5maw
896 Overseer of Upper Egypt.

imy-rA 5maw
311. Jones, (2000: Passim). Jones supplies a reference number for each title and rather than referring to pages as well as the referencing system, I use the main reference from Jones. Title
transliterations and translations are from Jones.
138 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
TABLE 4.1: OVERSEER OF UPPER EGYPT AND TITLE VARIANTS (CONTINUED)
Jones
Title Transliteration Reference# Translation/comment
897 Overseer of Upper Egypt in reality/True Overseer of Upper Egypt.

imy-rA 5ma n bw mAa
imy-rA 5ma(w) mAa 898 True Overseer of Upper Egypt.
899 [Count and] True Overseer of Upper Egypt from Ta-Sety (Elephantine) in the
[HAty-a] imy-rA 5maw xnt m
Abw mHt m Mdnit South to Medenyt (Aphroditopolis) in the North (U.E. 1-22).
900 Overseer of Upper Egypt in the Northern Nomes/Provinces.

imy-rA 5ma m spAwt mHywt
901 Overseer of Upper Egypt in the Middle Nomes/Provinces (probably U.E. 9-15).
imy-rA 5ma(w) m spAwt Hrywt-
ib
139 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
Table 5.1 in chapter 5 in this study includes a chronological listing of all known imyw-rA 5maw
and the title variants that they were awarded. Of the fifty-nine known title-holders, forty-seven
individuals held the title in its standard form of imy-rA 5maw. Five imyw-rA 5maw held a title
variant alongside the standard title. Ten individuals also held the title variant imy-rA 5maw
mAa, True Overseer of Upper Egypt. Three held the variant imy-rA 5ma(w) n bw mAa Overseer of
Upper Egypt in reality and this was their main form of the title.
Jones # 840, imy-rA spAt 5ma(w) is documented for 0nqw 3tti I [36] in Dynasty VI, whilst
also holding the standard writing of the title, imy-rA 5maw.312 KA-pw-PtH [49] is the only
known holder of the variant, imy-rA spAwt 5ma(w), Jones #841. 4rf-kA(i) [46] of Sheikh Said,
who is dated to the reign of Djedkare held the title imy-rA spAwt 5ma Hrywt-ib, Jones # 842
which appears to have been restricted in authority to U.E. 8-15. This title form provides
evidence for some form of division of Upper Egypt from early in the history of the
administrative reforms that instituted the role of imy-rA 5maw in Dynasty V. Prior to these
reforms, officials with responsibility for provincial administration are to be found buried in
the Memphite cemeteries, having been based in the capital.
The title form, imy-rA spAwt 6A-mHw, Overseer of the Nomes of Lower Egypt/Northern Nomes of
Upper Egypt (Formerly the ‘Nine Nomes’ (U.E. 16-22) plus the Fayum and a ‘Goat Nome’ south of the
Fayum), Jones # 843, is known only for one title-holder from Saqqara, ISTi 7Ti [04] who is
dated to late in the reign of Pepy II. Two title-holders, Ppy-nxt [15] of Abydos and Ny-anx-
Ppy 4bk-Htp 1pi-km [30] of Meir are documented as holding the variant (Jones #898) imy-rA
5maw mAa alone.
312. See also Fischer, (1968: 95).

140 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
The title form, [HAty-a] imy-rA 5maw xnt m Abw mHt m Mdnit [Count and] True Overseer of
Upper Egypt from Ta-Sety (Elephantine) in the South to Medenyt (Aphroditopolis) in the North (U.E. 1-
22), Jones #899, is known for two title-holders: Wni [11] of Abydos in Dynasty VI and 5mAi
Iqr [48] of Kom el-Koffar in Dynasty VIII. Wni’s autobiography records the title exactly as
written above, whilst 5mAi Iqr received his authority in Coptos Decree I which listed each of
the twenty-two nomes separately.313 Wni also held the variants imy-rA 5maw and imy-rA 5maw
mAa. 5mAi Iqr’s [48] son Idi [06] of Kom el-Koffar was granted the title of imy-rA 5maw but in
relation to U.E. 1-7, to represent his father who was granted the title over the whole of Upper
Egypt.314
imy-rA 5ma(w) m spAwt mHywt (Jones # 900) is attested for 5psi-pw-Mnw, 3ny, 3n(-anxw)
[47] of El-Hawawish from the reign of Pepy II. Whilst imy-rA 5ma(w) m spAwt Hrywt-ib
(Jones # 901) is attested only for Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-kA 1ny [16] of Meir who also held the
title of imy-rA 5ma(w) n bw mAa. His title form, dated to the mid reign of Pepy II is similar to
that of 4rf-kA(i) [46] of Sheikh Said, from the reign of Djedkare, who held the title imy-rA
spAwt 5ma Hrywt-ib. Kanawati notes that the two titles are very similar and suggests that both
individuals experienced governmental reforms with similar features – hence the similarity in
titles.315
313. For Wni [11], see Urk I: I98-110. For 5mAi Iqr, see Goedicke, (1967: 172, III & Abb. 18).
314. See Goedicke, (1967: 184-9 & Abb. 20), Coptos Decree M for the granting of authority over U.E. 1-7,
naming the individual nomes.
315. Kanawati, (1980a: 71).
141 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
TABLE 4.2: DISTRIBUTION OF imy-rA 5maw TITLE VARIANTS BY DYNASTY
V -------------------------VI------------------------- VIII IX
Pepy II - Pepy II -
First Second
Teti Pepy I Merenre Half Half
imyw-rA 5maw 10 6 8 5 8 15 4 3
imy-rA spAt 5ma(w) 1
imy-rA spAt 5maw 1
imy-rA spAt 5maw Hrywt-ib 1
imy-rA spAwt 6A-mHw 1
imy-rA 5maw 8 6 8 5 5 9 3 3
imy-rA 5maw n bw mAa 2 1
imy-rA 5maw mAa 2 3 4 1
imy-rA 5maw xnt n Abw mHt m Mdnit 1 1
imy-rA 5ma(w) m spAt Hrywt-ib 1 1
142 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
The Overseer of Upper Egyptian Grain appears to be a title derived from the title imy-rA
5maw. 316 The two extant variants of the title are set out below in Table 4.3. One can mistake it
for the title that is the subject of this study, but it is generally identified by the addition of a
glyph for three grains to distinguish it from the overall administration of Upper Egypt. Several
imyw-rA 5maw also held this title, which is transliterated as imyw-rA Smaw with a lower case S
being the only difference if looking at a transliterated page of text.
TABLE 4.3: OVERSEER OF UPPER EGYPTIAN GRAIN
Jones
Title Transliteration # Translation/comment
319 Overseer of Upper Egyptian Grain.
imy-rA (it)
or 5ma(w)
320 Overseer of Upper Egyptian

imy-rA (it) Barley/Grain in the Nomes.
5ma(w) m spAwt
4.2 FAMILIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Volume 2, Appendix II includes the abbreviated family trees of select imyw-rA 5maw and will
be referred to as part of this discussion. In Dynasty V, we see the importance of connections
to the royal family through the familial arrangements of the Vizier PtH-Spss. The daughter of
Neuserre, 2a-mrr-Nbty A married the Vizier PtH-Spss and they had several children as
illustrated at Volume II, Appendix II/A. The marriage between the Vizier and the daughter of
the King could be seen as an attempt to stabilise the throne after the exceptionally short reign
of Shepseskare, who followed in quick succession after Ra’neferef – two kings in two years
would be seen as unstable. 317
316. Fischer (1968: 94-n423) briefly discusses that this title may have had it’s origin in the title, imy-rA 5maw.
317. See chronology of Dynasty V at iii. Also Callender, (2000: 146-7) who discusses the potential political issues
surrounding the marriage of Pth-Spss to 2a-mrr-Nbty A , daughter of Neuserre, as being within the
context of a less stable throne transition after the short reign of Shepseskare.
143 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
The mastaba of Pth-Spss confirms that he already had a family which was then superseded by
the offspring of his new marriage. One of the offspring of the marriage to 2a-mrr-Nbty A is
Pth-Spss Junior II [23], imy-rA 5maw. The mastaba of the Vizier Pth-Spss at Abusir is almost
on a royal scale, indicating considerable power and wealth.318 It is unsurprising that a King
would seek to cement support for his throne through an alliance with his Vizier. Pth-Spss
Junior II [23] was elevated to the rank of imy-rA 5maw in the reign of Djedkare. The next
Dynasty V King to favour family with high office was Wenis, in appointing his son Wnisanx
[12] as imy-rA 5maw. Nfr(t)-kAws, daughter of Wenis, married MHw [28]. Several of MHw’s
descendants were elevated to the vizierate.319
The familial relationships continue into the Dynasty VI with Teti marrying a daughter of
Wenis, Iput I. Volume II, Appendix II/B provides an abbreviated family tree to illustrate the
comments that follow.320 Teti had a son, 6ti-anx-km [54] who predeceased him and who
received the rank of imy-rA 5maw. Teti also married a number of his daughters to important
officials to strengthen his position. 321 Amongst those officials was the Vizier and imy-rA 5maw
KA-gmni mmi [50] who married Nbty Nwb-Xt 4SsSt. One further example of Teti granting
high office within his family may lie with Nb-kAw-Hr Idw [32] who has a titulary including the
title imy-rA 5maw. Nb-kAw-Hr Idw [32], was a King’s son of his body and may indeed have
been Teti’s son.322 He was buried in the tomb originally belonging to Akhethetep/Hemi in the
Wenis cemetery.323 Nb-kAw-Hr Idw [32] has not been included in the family tree at Volume II,
Appendix II/B due to uncertainty as to the identity of his royal father. Thus high officials
318. Verner, (1977: passim) and subsequent publications on the mastaba.

319. Altenmüller, (1998: passim).
320. See Volume II.
321. See Callender, (2000: 146-7), on possible royal policies of marrying royal princesses to officials of high
standing.
322. Kanawati, (2003a: 48-9) on the possibility that Nb-kAw-Hr Idw [32] may have been a son of Teti.
323. Hassan, (1975a: passim).
144 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
were kept close to the King by familial connection. The elite in turn would surely have sought
to strengthen their position through marriage opportunities with the royal family. Another of
Teti’s offspring was Pepy I and it is to his relationships amongst high officials that we next
turn.
Inw Mnw [03] who was imy-rA 5maw, had a
son and daughter. The son’s name was 2wy
[41] and he also was elevated to the rank of
imy-rA 5maw. 2wy [41] married Nbt, who is
most famous for being a female Vizier.
Figure 5 illustrates a stela showing Nbt and
her family. The figure shows her title as
Vizier. As noted by Fischer, the text also
shows 2wy [41] with titles that one would
normally expect of a person of considerable
stature such as a Vizier.324 We know 2wy
[41] held the title of imy-rA 5maw. It seems
sensible to agree with Fischer that it is likely
that 2wy actually exercised the authority of
the Vizier in reality. As can be seen from
the family tree at Volume II, Appendix
II/C, 2wy [41] and Nbt were the parents of
two future Queens of Pepy I: anx.s-n-Mry-

Figure 2: CG1578
Ra I and anx.s-n-Mry-Ra II, mothers of Stela of 2wy [41] from Abydos
with his wife, the female
Vizier, Nbt.
(Upper left hand text from Mariette.)
324. Fischer, (2000: 37).
145 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
Merenre and Pepy II respectively. It is also true that it would be inappropriate for the mother-
in-law of a King and grand-mother of two future Kings to be designated as a commoner –
hence the elevated titulary.325 2wy [41] and Nbt were also parents to Idi [05] of Abydos who
was elevated to the rank of imy-rA 5maw and Southern Vizier and Ny-heb-sed-pepy-Idi [31].
Kanawati suggests that Ny-heb-sed-pepy-Idi [31] lost the title imy-rA 5maw when the
responsibilities for Upper Egypt were consolidated with the responsibilities of the Southern
Vizier.326 They had another son 9aw, who was elevated to the rank of Vizier, but was not imy-
rA 5maw. His son Ibi [02] held a number of titles with the addition of mAa including imy-rA
5maw mAa. 327 This provides a linkage to the powerful family at Deir el-Gebrawi.
An additional possibility is also canvassed in the proposed family tree, that of a relationship to
Wni [11] of Abydos. Kanawati has written on the possibilities in this regard with the
suggestion being that 2wy [41] would be Wni’s [11] grandfather with the relationship deriving
from a marriage to an un-named second spouse for 2wy.328
The other powerful family in Upper Egypt was that linked to the nomarchs and imyw-rA
5maw buried at Meir. Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-kA 1ny [16] of Meir dated to the mid-reign of Pepy
II and had a son, Ny-anx-Ppy 4bk-Htp 1pi-km or Ny-anx-Mryra 1pi-km [30] also of Meir,
dated to late in the reign of Pepy II.329 Both were imyw-rA 5maw, but Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-kA
1ny [16] held his titles as imy-rA spAwt 5ma(w) Hrywt-ib and imy-rA
325. Fischer, (2000: 37). Also Fischer, (1976: 74-5). Kanawati, (1980a: 31-3) is more equivocal on the matter of
whether this titulary was purely honorific in nature.
326. Kanawati, (1980a: 95).
327. Kanawati, (2007: 19) notes that there is ongoing discussion amongst Egyptologists as to whether Ibi [02] is
the son of 2wy [41] and Nbt or grandson.
328. Kanawati, (2007: 19-22).
329. El-Khouli & Kanawati, (1989: 11-26) suggest third quarter of the reign of Pepy II.
146 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
5ma(w) n bw mAa whilst Ny-anx-Ppy 4bk-Htp 1pi-km or Ny-anx-Mryra 1pi-km [30] held his
title as imy-rA 5maw and imy-rA 5maw mAa. Ppy-anx 1ny-km [17] was the son of Ny-anx-Ppy
4bk-Htp 1pi-km [30] and was also elevated to the rank of and imyw-rA 5maw taking his title(s)
as imy-rA 5maw and imy-rA 5maw mAa.
The final example to be considered is that of Idi [06] and 5mAi Iqr [48] of Kom el-Koffar in
Dynasty VIII, recipients of the King’s approval and appointed as imyw-rA 5maw under
Coptos Decree I, in the case of 5mAi Iqr who was appointed over all twenty-two nomes of
Upper Egypt. Idi was appointed imy-rA 5maw over nomes 1-7 in Coptos Decree M. The King
appointed his son-in-law 5mAi Iqr [48] to look after his interests in the whole of Upper Egypt.
5mAi Iqr was married to Neferkauhor’s daughter Nbt. In appointing Idi [06] to look after
nomes 1-7, the King appointed his grandson as his father’s representative but also ensured
that a family member was close to the border regions of Egypt to look after the King’s
interests.
As can be seen from the examples discussed above, family influenced career progressions,
particularly amongst the elite where there are examples of close links to the royal family
through marriage and amongst the nomarchs themselves where there are examples of son
succeeding father.
147 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
4.3 LINKS TO THE KING/RESIDENCE
The titles discussed below are titles that relate either directly to the personal service of the
King or to the management of the Residence. Several imyw-rA 5maw who later served their
King in Upper Egypt spent time at the Residence as children. Examples include Mry-Ra-nfr
QAr [24], KAi-Hp 7ti [53] Wni [11] and Ibi of Deir el-Gebrawi [02] who all mention time at the
Residence in the presence of the King in their biographies. This clearly encouraged closer
relationships between senior officials returning to the nomes and the capital when one was a
member of a group that spent a considerable amount of time together.
Mry-Ra-nfr QAr [24] held the title of imy-rA wpt nbt nt nsw, which is generally seen at
Memphis. The role related to this title may have been supported by royal authority.330 Fischer
believes that he acquired this title due to time at the Residence.331 He was also the only imy-rA
5maw to hold the title rX nsw in Upper Egypt during Dynasty VI.332
The title Hry-sStA n pr-dwAt appears to be associated with the King’s morning rituals and is
rarely attested in the nomes.333 All the imyw-rA 5maw who held this title date to Dynasty VI. It
was held by 2wy [41] who was send to Abydos with his wife, Nbt. Mry-Ra-nfr QAr [24] who
spent time in the capital and attributed his promotion to senior positions to the good work he
did managing the Residence.334 It was also held by Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-kA 1ny [16]. In the
capital, was held by Inw-Mnw [03] and MHw [28]. Holders of this title, whether in the nomes
330. Goedicke, (1964: 39-41) and McFarlane, (1995: 274-n1477).

331. Fischer, (1968: 70 & 74) and McFarlane, (1995: 274-n1477).
332. Fischer, (1968: 70) believed that this derived from his time at the Residence. Also McFarlane, (1995: 267).
333. McFarlane, (1995: 286). See also Blackman, (1918: 148-165) for a discussion of this role.
334. El-Khadragy, (2002b: 211, line (5)), new transliteration and translation of Mry-Ra-nfr QAr’s [24] offering
niche texts.
148 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
or in the capital were close to the King usually through family links as in the case of MHw [28],
Inw-Mnw [03] and 2wy [41] or because they spent time at the Residence being educated.
The title imy-rA ipt nsw was held by KAi-Hp 7ti [53]. He is the only holder of this title
amongst all the imyw-rA 5maw. Wni [11] relates in the first quarter of his biography how
prestigious it was to be in the personal service of the King and in fact even though he held at
the time, relatively lowly titles he was judged reliable and most capable of hearing a case
against the Queen without the Vizier present.335 This is particularly unusual because one would
normally expect the chief judge of the country to hear a case, even in secret, against the
Queen. Wni [11] did this when he was imy-rA xnty-S pr-aA. As can be seen from the biography
of Wni, the imyw-rA xntyw-S pr-aA were in the personal service of the King. Other imyw-rA
5maw to hold this title included Idw 4nny [08] from mid-Pepy II, Ppy-anx 2wy [18] from the
reign of Pepy I and possibly also Merenre, and 2ai-bAw-3nmw Biw [40] from late in the reign
of Pepy II. One other rarely attested title linked to the Residence was that of imy-rA Xnw. It is
attested for Ppy-anx 1ny-km [17] dated to late in the reign of Pepy II and Nfr-sSm-ra SSi [33],
dated to the reign of Teti.
4.3.1 Titles implying trust and confidence of the King
The titles discussed above were held by individuals who spent time at some stage during their
career in close proximity to the King and were of a more personal nature, generally also
including either direct personal service to the King or within the royal household. The titles
discussed below deal with the trust and confidence of the King to carry out policy or
instructions.
335. Urk I: I98-110 for full biography.

149 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
Ibi [02] of Deir el-Gebrawi was the only imy-rA 5maw to hold the epithet wr m iAt.f smsw m
saH.f. This epithet appears to demonstrate prestige and closeness to the King. 336 Moreno
Garcia suggests that this is implicit in the title.337 The individuals who held Hry-sStA titles were
amongst the King’s most trusted advisers. The word sStA refers to secret/confidential matters.
Table 4.4 provides a listing of all the imyw-rA 5maw who held such titles.
Two titles particularly relate to Egypt’s relationships with Nubia – Hry-sStA n mDt nb innt
mrA-aA gAw m xAswt rs(yw)t held by Mry-Ra-nfr QAr [24] and Hry-sStA n mDt nb nt 6p-rsy
which was held by 1r-xwf [37]. We also know that Wni [11] also had reason to deal with the
Nubians because he obtained wood from them to build barges and transport ships.338 Török
suggests that the implication of Wni’s biography is that the Egyptian administration had to
exercise a large degree of control over Lower Nubia so that the products from Upper Nubia
could be transported to Aswan.339 1r-xwf [37] tells us in his biography that he conducted four
expeditions. Three expeditions were carried out under Merenre and the fourth was carried out
with the authority of Pepy II. Török views the description by 1r-xwf [37] of opening the way
to Yam as suggesting that trade relations had to be re-established on the ascent of a new
King.340 1r-xwf [37] also tells us that during his third expedition he ‘satisfied’ the ruler of Yam
and in return received goods which were transported by donkey.341 This trade exchange is not
detailed any further but calcite vessels with the name of Pepy I have been found at Kerma.342
The exchange may in part have been similar to this. 4Abni [45] did not hold a Hry-sStA title
related to Egypt’s links to Nubia/surrounds but held a title: mH-ib nsw m 6p-rsy. This title,
336. Kanawati, (2007: 21).

337. Moreno Garcia, (1997: 127-8).
338. Urk I: I108-9.
339. Török, (2009: 59).
340. Urk I: I124 and Török, (2009: 60).
341. Urk I: I126-7 and Török, (2009: 70).
342. Török, (2009: 59) discusses Reisner’s find at Kerma of more than twenty calcite commerative vessels.
150 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
confidant of the King in the southern doorway, implies a similar level of trust by the King in 4Abni
[45] to that relevant to a Hry-sStA title. Two imyw-5maw held titles of a similar nature. 7Awty
[55] of Qasr el-Sayyad held the title mH-ib n nsw m r-aA xAst 5maw and 7Awty [56] of
Khozam held the title mH-ib n nsw m r-aA gAw rsy, confidant of the King in the narrow southern
doorway.
imy-rA ixt msw n spAwt 5ma(w) held by KA-pw-ptH [49] in the reign of Djedkare (V.8) was
responsible for the property of the royal family’s children in the nomes of Upper Egypt.
Fischer translates this title as Overseer of the property of the Royal Children in the Nomes of Upper
Egypt.343 No other imy-rA 5maw held this responsibility. Similar titles are attested in the Old
Kingdom for the protection of the royal family’s property.
343. Fischer (2000: n88).

151 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
TABLE 4.4: HOLDERS OF Hry-sStA TITLES
2ai-bAw-3nmw
Mry-Ra-nfr QAr
Ppy-anx-Hry-ib
0nqw 3tti I
Nfr-kA 1ny
Pth-Htp 7fi
Inw-Mnw
1r-xwf
Ra-Spss
MHw
2wy
Biw
KAi
Ibi
[51] [35] [22] [36] [28] [3] [41] [2] [37] [24] [16] [40]
V.6-V.8 V.8 V.9M VI.1L(?) VI.1-VI.3 VI.3E VI.3 VI.4-VI.5E VI.4-VI.5E VI.5E-M VI.5M VI.5M-L
Hry-sStA 9 9 9
Hry-sStA n wpt StAt 9
Hry-sStA n wDt-mdw nbt nt nsw 9 9 9
Hry-sStA n wDt-mDw nbt StAt 9
Hry-sStA n wDt-mDw StAt n nsw 9
Hry-sStA n pr-dwAt 9 9 9 9 9
Hry-sStA n mDt nb innt m rA-aA gAw m xAswt rs(yw)t 9
Hry-sStA n mDw StAt n Hwt wrt h 9
Hry-sStA n mDt nb nt 6p-Rsy 9
Hry-sStA n nsw m swt.f nbt 9
tAty sAb TAty 9 9 9 9 9
152 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
4.4 RANKING/HONORIFIC TITLES
Like many who rose through the bureaucracy, the imyw-rA 5maw included a range of titles,
some of which were honorific or ranking titles in their titulary. This section seeks to examine
the major honorific titles and to determine whether there is any pattern in titulary held. Table
4.5 summarises the frequency of main honorific or ranking titles held by the imyw-rA 5maw
during the Old Kingdom.
During Dynasty V, there are no holders of iry-pat, but three holders of the rank of HAty-a. In
Dynasty VI, the titularies alter with thirty-three of forty-two imyw-rA 5maw holding the rank
of HAty-a or HAty-a mAa. Ibi [02] was the only imy-rA 5maw to hold both HAty-a and HAty-a mAa.
Nfr-sSm-ra SSi [33] and N-Hb-sd-Ppy-Idi [31] held the rank of HAty-a mAa. The rank of iry-pat
becomes important in the reign of Teti after being absent from the titulary of the imyw-rA
5maw of Dynasty V. In Dynasty VI, nineteen of forty-two imyw-rA 5maw held the rank of iry-
pat. The title smr-waty displays importance as a ranking title throughout the Old Kingdom as
can be seen from Table 4.5.
Comments on the honorific title combinations relevant found in those individuals elevated to
the vizierate can be found at section 4.9 of this chapter. Section 4.9 also deals with functional
titles relevant to elevation to Vizier.
153 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
TABLE 4.5: FREQUENCY OF PRINCIPAL HONORIFIC TITLES
V -------------------------VI------------------------- VIII IX
Pepy II Pepy II
First Second
Teti Pepy I Merenre Half Half
imy-rA 5m'w 10 6 8 5 8 15 4 3
imy-is 2 2 1 1
imA-a 1 1
iry-pat 4 2 3 5 5 4 2
mniw Nxn 2 1 2 1
rx nsw 1
HAty-a 3 4 3 5 7 12 4 2
HAty-a mAa 1 1 1
Hry-tp Nxb 1 2 2 6
Xry-tp nsw 4 2 2 3 1 - 1
smr-waty 3 4 6 3 4 11 2 1
smr-waty mAa 1
smsw snwt 1 1
sDAwty bity 1 3 4 4 7 9 1 1
sDAwty nTr 1 1
154 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
4.5 RELIGIOUS TITLES
This section looks at the types of religious or mortuary cult titles held by the various imyw-rA
5maw. These titles are important to consider due to the redistribution arrangements that
existed at the mortuary temples and the obligations that one had within families for funeral
rites. The single title that was most commonly held was that of Xry-Hbt or lector priest. This
was held by twenty out of the fifty-nine imyw-rA 5maw. This was followed by Xry-Hbt Hry-tp
which was held by thirteen imyw-5maw. Several held both titles: 0nqw 3tti I [36], Inw-Mnw
[03] in the first part of Dynasty VI and KAi-Hp 7ti [53], 2ai-bAw-3nmw Biw [40], Ppy-anx
1ny-km [17] and Ny-anx-Ppy 4bk-Htp 1pi-km [30] from the second half of the reign of Pepy
II.
Those holding the title of overseers of pyramid towns are found towards mid-Dynasty VI, but
there is one early in Dynasty VI, MHw [28]. 2wy [41], Mrw-Bbi [25] and Wni [11] all hold this
title or a variant. There are two overseers of pyramid towns dated to the reign of Pepy II: Mrri
[26] from early in Pepy II’s reign and 5psi-pw-Mnw, 3ny, 3n(-anxw) [47] from late in Pepy
II’s reign. 5mAi Iqr [48] of Dynasty VIII is also attested as holding this title. Ten imyw-rA
5maw, held the title of sm, sm-priest and six held the prestigious title of smA Mnw or Stolist of
Min: 1m-Mnw [38], dated to Dynasty V, MHw [28], Idw I [07], 3n(i)-anxw [44] from Dynasty
VI and from Dynasty VIII: 5mAi Iqr [48] and 7Awty-iqr [57].
There were of course relationships to the mortuary cults of Kings and links to pyramid towns
or estates supplying the various mortuary cults. A few held multiple religious titles in royal
mortuary cults (i.e. the cult of more than one King): KA-pw-ptH [49] and Pth-Htp 7fi [22] in
Dynasty V. In Dynasty VI, MHw [28], 7Awty [55], and Idw 4nny [08] were similarly favoured.
155 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
4.6 EPITHETS SUGGESTING TIME IN THE CAPITAL
As has been discussed above, children of nomarchs were frequently sent to the Residence to
be educated. Some clearly also spent some of the early years at least of their career in the
capital and where service relates to the personal service of the King, that is not recounted
again here. See section 4.3 for discussion of titles that indicate links to the King. KAi-Hp 7ti
[53] of El-Hawawish held the title of high priest of Heliopolis: mAA wr. He is the imy-rA 5maw
to hold this title. 1r-xwf [37] records the epithet imAxw xr PtH-4kr as does 0nqw 3tti [36].
Martin-Pardey suggests that as the cult centre for Ptah was at Memphis, this epithet suggests
time in the capital.344 Mry-Ra-nfr QAr [24] also is noted as having an epithet: imAxw xr PtH-
rsi-inb.f.345
4.7 INTERACTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND RELIGIOUS TITLES
The religious and secular worlds were one and the same for the people of the Nile Valley and
so any consideration of resources available to high officials must take into account the
potential for rights and responsibilities within both spheres which would impact on the net
worth of an individual. Other than royal decrees exempting estates or temple domains and
their dependants from any state revenue collection or labour imposition, there is relatively
little direct evidence available to explain wealth accumulation. We are left to infer from a
combination of personal biographies, representations on tomb walls, limited information from
the royal mortuary temple archives in Abusir on daily management and redistribution of
certain items, and of course titularies the likely sources of gain for an elite individual. Weeks
has suggested that the growth in titles towards the end of the Old Kingdom may be linked to
344. Martin-Pardey, (1976: 134-5).

345. El-Khadragy, (2002: 211), new tranlsation of Mry-Ra-nfr QAr’s offering niche. Also Martin-Pardey,
(1976: 135).
156 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
pressure on officials to maximise return from access they had to redistribution from cults.346
He is not suggesting that individuals were increasing wealth but rather the increase in titles
may be linked to attempts to stave off pressure on officials.347 One has to acknowledge that
some of this is purely speculative, but when one takes into account the evidence from
Kanawati’s study on officials’ financial resources which shows the disappearance of lower
level officials from the burial record at the end of Dynasty V, then one must at least consider
the possibility that Week’s hypothesis has some basis in reality.348
One further matter to consider is that the higher officials who were given the status of xnty-S
of a pyramid or similar titles were further bound to the King making the allocation. Such
grants enabled the King to bind his officials closer to him. Presuming that the phyle system
operated in all cases in royal mortuary cults, as at Abusir, then a wider number of officials
could be more closely bound to any given monarch through the grant of status in relation to
the mortuary cult. Loyalty in return for access to some level of redistribution through the cult!
The question as always is the extent of the level of redistribution and the answer to that we
simply do not know.
4.8 TITLES RELATED TO THE GOVERNMENT OF UPPER EGYPT
The titles dealt with in this section exclude additional discussion of imy-rA 5m’aw and the
vizierate, even though both were intimately connected with the government of Upper Egypt.
Comments about the vizierate influence on the government of Upper Egypt are dealt with at
chapter 3. Other titles not considered here include the titles related to expeditions as the
holders of these titles have been dealt with at section 4.3.1 above. Additionally, titles such as
imy-rA kAt nbt nsw are also excluded, as they relate to the whole country.
346. Weeks, (1983: 18).

347. Weeks, (1983: 18).
348. Kanawati, (1977: 69), particularly in relation to lower officials who would have been dependant on higher
officials, who in turn may have had less to redistribute to them, hence reduced capacity to construct tombs.
157 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
Generally the titles related to the government of Upper Egypt are linked to the nomarchy as is
the case in Dynasty VI. This can be seen in Table 4.6. Hry-tp aA together with the nome
emblem usually indicated nomarchy. The addition of n spAt occurs in Dynasty VI. One other
title has been included in the table overleaf, that of wr mD 5maw, greatest of Ten of Upper
Egypt. This may refer to phyles in Upper Egypt. It has been noted by Roth that other titles
relevant to Upper Egyptian phyles appear for some individuals where this title appears.349
Strudwick has suggested that this title may be linked to imy-rA kAt nbt nsw which relates to
the work programmes.350 Helck has suggested there are a series of titles that may be linked to
to imy-rA kAt nbt nsw.351 It is noticeable that the title wr mD 5maw features in Dynasty V and
then becomes almost obsolete in Dynasty VI.
349. Roth, (1991: 120-1).

350. Strudwick, (1985: 222).
351. Helck, (1954: 92-105). Further work is needed in this area.
158 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
TABLE 4.6: GOVERNMENT OF UPPER EGYPT
159 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
4.9 Elevation to the rank of Vizier
Elevation to the rank of Vizier was not a forgone conclusion for those who reached the rank
of imyw-rA 5maw. The evidence can be summarised as in Table 4.7(A) below. In considering
this raw data, one must remember administration arrangements for Upper Egypt changed,
even if only in a minor manner, with each new accession to the throne. There were tranches
of centralisation and greater decentralisation.
TABLE 4.7(A): ELEVATION TO VIZIER – DYNASTIES V - IX
V VI VIII IX
imy-rA 5maw 10 42 4 3
tAty sAb TAty 5 13 2 0
Percentages 50% 31% 50% 0%
When we analyse further Dynasty VI, the pattern below emerges.
TABLE 4.7(B): ELEVATION TO VIZIER – DYNASTY VI IN DETAIL
Pepy II Pepy II
Teti Pepy I Merenre First Half352 Second Half353
imy-rA 5maw 6 8 5 8 15
tAty sAb TAty 3 2 1 2 5
Percentages 50% 25% 20% 25% 33.3%
352. Title-holders dated VI.5E-M.

353. Title-holders dated VI.5M or VI.5M-L.
160 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
It is also noteworthy that in Dynasty V, a son of Wenis, Wnis-anx [12] is also designated as
imy-rA 5maw in his tomb close to his father’s pyramid. One could surmise that he predeceased
his father, given the location of his tomb close to his father’s pyramid. Similarly, in Dynasty
VI, Teti lost a son.354 His name was 6ti-anx-Km [54] whose highest non-royal title was imy-rA
5maw.
The honorific title predictions of vizierate as an elevation from imy-rA 5maw in Dynasty VI
were typically holding all of HAty-a, smr-w’ty, iry-pat, Xry-Hbt Hry-tp and sDAwty bity. The
principal exceptions from this pattern are Idi [05], son of 2wy [41] and Nbt of Abydos in
Dynasty VI. 2wy [41], whilst not elevated to the vizierate was married to Nbt, who was named
Vizier. Their situation is discussed at section 4.2 above. Looking back to Dynasty V, we do
not find similar patterns to predict elevation in relation to honorific title combinations.
We now move to consider functional titularies and to ask which titles are most likely to be
found in the titularies of those who were elevated both to the rank of imy-rA 5maw and then
ultimately to the rank of Vizier.
354. Hawass, (2000: 422) notes that this son was the Kings’ eldest son. His tomb lies close to his father’s
pyramid and near the pyramid of Queen Iput I.
161 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
TABLE 4.8: FUNCTIONAL TITLES IMPORTANT IN ELEVATION TO VIZIER FROM THE RANK OF
imy-rA 5maw
Dynasty Dynasty VI Dynasty

V First Half Second Half VIII
imy-rA prwy-nbw 1 3
imy-rA prwy-HD 2 4 2
imy-rA Hwt-wrt 2 3
imy-rA Hwt-wrt h 2 3 2
imy-rA Hm-nTr 4 2
imy-rA sS answ 3 3 4 1
imy-rA Snwty 2 3 4
imy-rA kAt nbt nsw 2 3 3
imy-rA gs-pr 2 3 2
imy-rA gswy-pr 3 1
This table provides an overview of the functional titles most regularly held by those imyw-rA
5maw elevated to the rank of Vizier. The Dynasty VI analysis simplistically places Merenre
into the second half of Dynasty VI for the purpose of this table. Titles relating to
revenue/taxes are important in Dynasties V and VI. So too titles related to the law courts and
as the Vizier was Egypt’s chief judge, this should not be altogether surprising. Equally, the
importance of imy-rA sS answ suggests linkages to imy-rA prwy-HD and imy-rA Snwty.The
links may in some cases be coincidental, as noted by Strudwick.355 The practical realities of
355. Strudwick, (1985: 314).

162 of 189
4. ANALYSIS
interconnections beween the collection of revenue and its ultimate redistribution through
various arms of government seem unmistakable and have not changed even in the twenty first
century.
4.10 SUMMARY
As noted in the opening to this chapter, there is a remarkable degree of conformity in the
writing of the title imy-rA 5maw. The analysis of the way that the title was written therefore
focused on the variant titles. In some cases, those titles were held by only one or two
individuals but some, such as imy-rA 5maw mAa are attested on a number of occasions. Table
5.1 provides a complete listing of the known title-holders with the title variants that are
attested. It is evident from the prosopographical study that the extent of family ties cannot be
ignored in considering the elevation of officials to the rank of imy-rA 5maw and in some cases
to the vizierate. It is clear that Kings sought to ally themselves with powerful families through
marriage and in turn the descendants of those unions profited from their ability to progress
through the bureaucracy. The analysis also demonstrates that it was very important to have the
confidence of the King and many tomb-owners record epithets or titles that demonstrate the
confidence the King had in their abilities. Several imyw-rA 5maw tell us in their biographies
that they spent time at the Residence and indeed some of their early career in the capital. This
is evidenced in their titularies through epithets or titles that generally one does not find in the
nomes. The analysis also considered the influence of certain honorific and functional titles in
progression, particularly to the vizierate and it is clear that there are certain patterns that
emerge. Table 4.8 lists the most important titles from a functional perspective that were
relevant to elevation to the vizierate – it was not guaranteed!
163 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
The principal aim of this study was to document the known Overseers of Upper Egypt and to
re-consider the importance of the role in the context of the Old Kingdom bureaucracy.
Although a substantial body of research has been undertaken with regard to Upper Egypt,
there has been no specialist study of the role of the Overseer of Upper Egypt or imyw-rA
5maw. The prosopographical study at chapter 2 documented fifty-nine currently known
holders of the title or variants thereof.
This study did not set out to provide a chronology of title-holders, but as work progressed, it
became obvious that in order to assess title role at various stages during the history of the Old
Kingdom, it was necessary to have a chronological framework within which to consider the
impacts of matters such as changes in the patterns of titulary and what that might mean as a
predictor of higher office. The outcome of this additional work is Table 5.1, which has been
constructed from the prosopographical study at section 2.3 of chapter 2. The table provides a
listing of all known title-holders and the title variants associated with their titularies.
Then an historical study was undertaken to review the introduction and development of the
role within the administration of Upper Egypt and the central government. It narrates the
movement from the capital to Upper Egypt of the imy-rA 5maw together with the various
cycles of centralisation and decentralisation that accompanied the accession of a new King.
In the evidence analysis stage, the study considered epigraphic evidence related to the title and
analysed the data derived from the prosopographical study to understand the importance of
certain titles being acquired or the external circumstances impinging on an individual’s career
path that, in some cases, ultimately led to elevation to the rank of Vizier. This chapter
documents the overall findings
164 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
TABLE 5.1: CHRONOLOGICAL LISTING OF ALL KNOWN OVERSEERS OF UPPER EGYPT, INCLUDING ALL KNOWN TITLE VARIANTS
Dynasty V
Reference Name Title Location Dating
[51] KAi imy-rA 5maw Saqqara V.6-V.8
[23] PtH-Spss. imy-rA 5maw Abusir V.8.
[49] KA-pw-ptH imy-rA spAwt 5maw Saqqara V.8(?)
[35] Ra-Spss imy-rA 5maw Saqqara V.8.
[46] 4rf-KA(i) imy-rA spAwt 5ma(w) Hrywt-ib Sheikh Said V.8L.
[01] Axt-Htp imy-rA 5maw Saqqara V.8L-V.9E.
[12] Wnis-anx imy-rA 5maw Saqqara V.9.
[32] Nb-kAw-Hr Idw imy-rA 5maw Saqqara V.9.
[22] Pth-Htp 7fi imy-rA 5maw Saqqara V.9.M.
[38] 1m-Mnw imy-rA 5maw El-Hawawish/U.E.9 V.9-VI.1E.
165 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
Dynasty VI
Reference Name Title(s) Location Dating
[50] KA-gm-ni mmi imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.1E
[54] 6ti-anx-Km imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.1.
[29] Ni-kAw-issi Issi imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.1M.
[33] Nfr-sSm-ra SSi imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.1M(?)
[36] 0nqw 3tti I imy-rA 5maw; Deir el-Gebrawi/U.E.12 VI.1L(?)
imy-rA spAt 5ma(w).
[28] MHw imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.1-VI.3.
[03] Inw-Mnw imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.3E.
[39] 1sy imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.3E.
[41] 2wy imy-rA 5maw Abydos/Saqqara VI.3.
[43] 2ww imy-rA 5maw Memphis & Sheikh Said / VI.3.
U.E.15
166 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
[25] Mrw-Bbi imy-rA 5maw Sheikh Said/ U.E 15 VI.3+
[18] Ppy-anx 2wy imy-rA 5maw Kom el-Ahmar VI.3+
Sawaris/U.E. 18
[34] Ra-wr imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.3L.
[13] Wnis-anx imy-rA 5maw Khokha, Thebes VI.3-VI.5(?)
[11] Wni Iwn 299I [HAty-a] imy-rA 5maw xnt m Abw mHt m Mdnit; Abydos VI.4.
imy-rA 5maw mAa;
imy-rA 5maw
[02] Ibi imy-rA 5maw; Deir el-Gebrawi/ U.E.12 VI.4-VI.5E.
imy-rA 5maw mAa.
[53] KAi-Hp 7t imy-rA 5maw El-Hawawish/ U.E.9 VI.4-VI.5E.
[37] 1r-xwf imy-rA 5maw Aswan/ U.E.1 VI.4-VI.5E.
[10] Wiw Iyw imy-rA 5maw Sheikh Said/ U.E 15 VI.4-VI.5E.
167 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
[15] WDAy imy-rA 5maw mAa Abydos/U.E.8 VI.5E(?)
[26] Mrri imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.5E.
[05] Idi imy-rA 5maw Abydos/U.E.8 VI.5E-M(?)
[07] Idw 1 imy-rA 5maw; Dendera/ U.E. 6 VI.5E-M.
imy-rA 5maw n bw mAa
[42] 2wy imy-rA 5maw Abydos/Coptos(?) VI.5E-M.
[44] 3n(i)-anxw imy-rA 5maw mAa El-Hawawish/ U.E.9 VI.5M.
[24] Mry-Ra-nfr QAr imy-rA 5maw Edfu / U.E. 2 VI.5E-M.
[55] 7Awty imy-rA 5maw; Qasr el-Sayyad/ U.E.7 VI.5E-M.
imy-rA 5maw mAa
[16] Ppy-anx-Hry-ib Nfr-kA 1ny imy-rA spAwt 5ma(w) Hrywt-ib; Meir/ U.E. 9-15 VI.5M.
imy-rA 5ma(w) n bw mAa
[08] Idw 4nny imy-rA 5maw Qasr el-Sayyad/ U.E.7 VI.5M.
168 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
[31] N-Hb-sd-Ppy-Idi imy-rA 5maw Abydos/Saqqara VI.5M(?)
[20] Ppy-snb imy-rA 5maw Abydos/U.E.8 VI.5M(?)
[21] Pr-Sna-y or 5nay imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.5M.
[40] 2ai-bAw-3nmw Biw imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.5M-L.
[45] 4Abni imy-rA 5maw. Aswan / U.E.1 VI.5M-L.
[59] 9aw 4mAi imy-rA 5maw Deir el-Gebrawi / VI.5M-L.
U.E. 8 & 12.
[58] 9aw imy-rA 5maw. Deir el-Gebrawi / VI.5M-L.
U.E. 8 & 12.
[19] Ppy-nxt imy-rA 5maw mAa Abydos/U.E.8 VI.5.
[30] Ny-anx-Ppy 4bk-Htp 1pi-km imy-rA 5maw mAa Meir/U.E.14 VI.5L.
[17] Ppy-anx 1ny-km imy-rA 5maw; Meir / U.E. 14 VI.5L.
imy-rA 5maw mAa
169 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
[04] ISti 7Ti imy-rA spAwt 6A-mHw Saqqara VI.5L.
[47] 5psi-pw-Mnw, 3ny, 3n(-anxw) imy-rA 5maw m spAwt mHywt. El-Hawawish/ U.E.9 VI.5L
[27] Mrry-anty imy-rA 5maw Saqqara VI.5L-VI.6.
Dynasty VIII
Reference Name/Title(s) Location Dating
[48] 5mAi Iqr [HAty-a] imy-rA 5maw xnt m Abw mHt m Mdnit; Coptos/Kom el-Koffar VIII.2.
imy-rA 5maw.
[06] Idi imy-rA 5maw UE 1-7 Coptos & Kom el-Koffar VIII.2.
/ U.E.5
[56] 7Awty imy-rA 5maw Khozam/U.E.5 VIII.2.
[57] 7Awty-iqr imy-rA 5maw Wadi Hammamat VIII.
170 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
Dynasty IX/First Intermediate Period
[52] KAi-ny-nbfwi 2nw imy-rA 5maw Saqqara Late OK/FIP.
[14] Wsr imy-rA 5maw Khozam Dynasty IXE.
[09] ab-iHw imy-rA 5maw; Dendera Dynasty IX.
imy-rA 5maw mAa
171 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
As mentioned previously, the historical analysis in chapter 3 looked at why the role of imy-rA
5maw was created in Dynasty V. The reasons for the role’s creation are not entirely clear and
may have been influenced by changes in the responsibilities of nomarchs from responsibility
for multiple nomes to responsibility for one nome, that it was not purely related to taxation
requirements. Initally, the imy-rA 5maw was based in the capital, but even in the reign of
Djedkare we have evidence of decentralisation. Chapter 3 also sought to construct a summary
of the responsibilities of the imy-rA 5maw. To do this, the research effort returned to primary
source materials. The evidence suggests that the imy-rA 5maw was responsible for all the
important people and resource management requirements related to Upper Egypt, including
the taxt requirements.
The nature of the role evolved over time, as new Kings acceded to the throne. One overall
trend is clear and that is of decentralisation. The further one progresses through the
chronology of imyw-rA 5maw (see table 5.1) decentralisation becomes more obvious. Early to
mid reign of Pepy II, there appears to have been a surrender of the title of imy-rA 5maw to the
Southern Vizier but then later in Pepy II’s reign there is a dramatic increase, a doubling of
numbers of individuals holding the title of imy-rA 5maw. It is not clear what benefit the
central administration hoped to gain from this expansion because not all the recipients of the
title were nomarchs, a number were viziers for whom we have very little information.
On the question of where the role was positioned within the overall bureaucracy, we can say
that the structure which saw the imy-rA 5maw report to the Residence through the Vizier
represents a logical and sophisticated approach to managing the resources and reporting
obligations of Upper Egypt to the Residence. Equally, the Residence had the ability to filter
172 of 189
5. CONCLUSIONS
information back to the nomes through the same channels as information and resources were
passed back to the capital. The structure obtained well into Dynasty VI until the title devolved
to a larger number of individuals in the second half of the reign of Pepy II, but it is not clear
what the Residence hoped to achieve with this change.
Chapter four noted that there is a remarkable degree of conformity in the writing of the title
imy-rA 5maw, even when considering title variants. It is evident from the prosopographical
study that the extent of family ties cannot be ignored in considering the elevation of officials
to the rank of imy-rA 5maw and in some cases to the vizierate. It is clear that Kings sought to
ally themselves with powerful families through marriage and in turn the descendants of those
unions profited from their ability to progress through the bureaucracy. The analysis also
demonstrates that it was very important to have the confidence of the King and many tomb-
owners record epithets or titles that demonstrate the confidence the King had in their abilities.
Several imyw-rA 5maw tell us in their biographies that they spent time at the Residence and
indeed some of their careers in the capital. The analysis also considered the influence of
certain honorific and functional titles in progression, particularly to the vizierate and it is clear
that while certain patterns emerge, elevation to the vizierate was not guaranteed.
Future work in this area is not without possibility. It could seek to better clarify the exact
interaction between various titles and career progressions, just as the arena of familial
influence has proved fertile ground for understanding why certain individuals progressed to
the highest levels of administration and others did not. It may also be possible to better clarify
the responsibilities of the role and its interaction with those holding direct nomarchic
responsibilities.
173 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
174 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, J.P., (2001), Middle Egyptian: An Introduction to the Language and Culture of Hieroglyphs,
(Cambridge).
Altenmüller, H., (1998), Die Wanddarstellungen im Grab des Mehu in Saqqara, (Mainz).
Andrassy, P., (1991) „Zur Strukturder Vervaltung des Alten Reiches“, Zeitschrift fur Ägyptische
Sprache und Altertumskunde 118: 1-10.
Andrassy, P., (2008), Untersuchungen zum ägyptischen Staaatdes Alten Reiches und seinen Institutionen,
(Berlin & London).
Anthes, R., (1954), “The Original Meaning of MAa Xrw”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 13/1:
21-51.
Aufrère, S., (1982), «Contribution à l’Étude de la Morphologie du Protocole “Classique”»,

Bulletin de L’Institut Français D’Archéologie Orientale 82: 19-73.
Baer, K., (1960, reprint 1973), Rank and Title in the Old Kingdom: The Structure of the Egyptian
Administration in the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties, (Chicago).
Baines, J. & J. Málek, (2000), Cultural Atlas of Ancient Egypt, (New York).
Bárta, M. (2000), “The Mastaba of Ptahshepses Junior II at Abusir, Ägypten und Levante 10: 45-
66.
Bárta, M. (2003), “Architectural Innovations in the Development of the Non-Royal Tomb

during the reign of Nyussera” in P. Jánosi (ed.), Structure and Significance: Thoughts on Ancient
Egyptian Architecture, (Vienna): 105-125.
Bárta, M. (2006), “Non-Royal Tombs of the Old Kingdom at Abusir” in H. Benešovská & P.
Vičková (eds.), Abusir: Secrets of the Desert and the Pyramids (exhibition catalogue), (Prague): 123-
147.
Baud, M., (1999), Famille Royale et Pouvoir sous l’Ancien Empire Égyptien (2 tomes), (Cairo).
Begelsbacher-Fischer, B., (1981), Untersuchungen zur Götterwelt des Alten Reiches: In Spiegel der
Privatgräber der IV. Und V. Dynastie, (Göttingen).
Bissing, F. Von, (1905), Die Mastaba des Gem-ni-Kai, Band I, (Berlin).
175 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bissing, F. Von, (1911), Die Mastaba des Gem-ni-Kai, Band II, (Leipzig).
Bissing, F. Von, (1915), «Les Tombeaux d’Assouan», Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte
15: 2-14.
Blackman, A., (1914), The Rock Tombs of Meir, Part I, (London).
Blackman, A., (1915a), The Rock Tombs of Meir, Part II, (London).
Blackman, A., (1915b), The Rock Tombs of Meir, Part III, (London).
Blackman, A., (1918), “The House of the Morning”, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 5/3:
148-165.
Blackman, A., (1924), The Rock Tombs of Meir, Part IV, (London).
Blackman, A. & M.R. Apted, (1953a), The Rock Tombs of Meir, Part V, (London).
Blackman, A. & M.R. Apted, (1953b), The Rock Tombs of Meir, Part VI, (London).
Boorn, G.P.F. van den, (1988), The Duties of the Vizier: Civil Administration in the Early New
Kingdom, (London).
Borchardt, L. (1907), Das Grabdenkmal des Königs Ne-User-Re‘, (Leipzig).
Borchardt, L. (1911), Catalogue Général des Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire: Nos 1-1294:
Statuen und Statuetten von Königen und Privatleuten, (Berlin).
Borchardt, L. (1937), Denkmäler des Alten Reiches (ausser den Statuen) im Museum von Kairo, Nr
1295-1808, Teil 1 – Text und Tafelen zu 1295-1541, (Berlin).
Borchardt, L. (1964), Denkmäler des Alten Reiches (ausser den Statuen) im Museum von Kairo, Nr
1295-1808, Teil 2 – Text und Tafelen zu 1542-1808, (Cairo).
Brinks, J., J. Dittmar, F. Gomaà, P. Jurgens & W. Schenkel, (1984), “Al-Kom Al-
Ahmar/Sharuna: 1984”, Göttinger Miszellen 79: 73-84.
Broderick, M., & A.A. Morton, (1899), “The Tomb of Pepi Ankh (Khua), near Sharouna”,
Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology XXI: 26-33.
Brovarski, E., (1982), “ Naga-ed-Dêr”, in W. Helck & W. Westendorf (eds), Lexikon der
Ägyptologie, Bd IV, (Wiesbaden): 296-317.
Brovarski, E., (1994a), “Abydos in the Old Kingdom and First Intermediate Period, Part II”,
in D. P. Silverman (ed), For His Ka: Essays Offered in Memory of Klaus Baer, (Chicago).
176 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Brovarski, E., (1994b), “Abydos in the Old Kingdom and First Intermediate Period, Part I”,
Hommages à Jean Leclant, Volume 1: Études Pharoniques, Contributions réunies par C. Berger, G.
Clerc et N. Grimal: 99-121.
Brovarski, E., (2006), “False Doors & History: the Sixth Dynasty”, in M. Bárta (ed),
The Old Kingdom Art and Archaeology: Proceedings of the Conference held in Prague,
May 31 – June 4, 2004, (Prague).
Callender, V.G., (2000), “À propos the title of r Nxn n zAb” in M. Bárta & J Krejčí (eds),
Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2000, (Prague): 361-380 and plates 53-4.
Callender, V.G., (2002), “Excursus II: Observations on the Position of Royal Daughters in the
Old Kingdom” in M. Verner, M., & V.G. Callender, Abusir VI: Djedkare’s Family Cemetery,
(Prague).
Capart, J., (1907), Une Rue de Tombeaux a Saqqarah, Second Volume: Planches, (Brussels).
Capart, J., (1908), Une Rue de Tombeaux a Saqqarah, Premier Volume: Texte, (Brussels).
Cherpion, N., (1989), Mastabas et Hypogées d’Ancien Empire: Le Problème de la Datation, (Brussels).
Couyat, J., & P. Montet, (1912), Les Inscriptions Hiéroglyphiques et Hiératiques du Ouâdi Hammâmât,
(Cairo).
Davies, N.de G., (1901a), The Mastaba of Ptahhetep and Akhethetep at Saqqareh, Part I. The Chapel
of Ptahhetep and the Hieroglyphs, (London).
Davies, N.de G., (1901b), The Mastaba of Ptahhetep and Akhethetep at Saqqareh, Part II. The
Mastaba. The Sculptures of Akhethetep, (London).
Davies, N.de G., (1901c), The Rock Tombs of Sheikh Said, (London).
Davies, N.de G., (1902), The Rock Tombs of Deir el-Gebrawi, (Two Volumes), (London).
Davies, N.de G., (1918), “The Work of the Robb de Peyster Tytus Memorial Fund at
Thebes”, The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 13/3 Supplement: The Egyptian Expedition
1916-17: 14-24.
177 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Dittmann, H., (1936), „Bericht uber archäologische Unternehmungen in Ägypten 1934-1936“,

Mitteilungen des Deutschen Instituts fur Ägyptische Alterumskunde in Kairo 6: 158-168.
Dixon, D. M., (1958), “The Land of Yam”, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 44: 40-55.
Dobrev, V., (1996), «Les Marques sur Pierres de Construction de la Nécropole de Pépi Ier:
Étude Prosopographique», Bulletin de l’Institut Français D’Archéologie Orientale 96: 103-142.
Dobrev, V., (1998), «Les Marques de la Pyramide de Pépi Ier : Notes Complémentaires»,
Bulletin de L’Institut Français D’Archéologie Orientale 98: 151-170.
Dodson, A. & D. Hilton, (2004), The Complete Royal Families of Ancient Egypt, (London & New
York).
Droiton, E., (1944), «Description Sommaire des Chapelles Funeraires de la VI Dynastie

Recemment Decouvertes derriere la Mastaba de Mererouka a Saqqarah» Annales du Service
des Antiquités de l’Égypte 43: 487-514.
Droiton, E & J.P. Lauer, (1958), «Une Groupe de Tombes à Saqqarah: Icheti, Nefer-Khouou-
Ptah, Sebek-em-khenet et Ankhi (avec 25 planches)», Annales du Service des Antiquités de
l’Égypte 55: 207-251 et Planches I-XXV.
Duell, P., (1938), The Mastaba of Mereruka, (2 Volumes), (Chicago).
Erman, A. & H. Grapow, (1971), Wörterbuch der aegyptischen Sprache im Auftrage der deutschen
Akademien, 7 volumes, (Berlin).
Edel, E., (1953), „Inschriften des Alten Reiches: II. Die Biographie des KAj-gmjnj
(Kagemni)“, Mitteilungen des Instituts fur Orientforschung 1: 210-226; Tafeln I und II.
Edel, E., (1960), „Inschriften des Alten Reiches“, Zeitschrift fur Ägyptische Sprache und
Altertumskunde 85: 18-23.
Edel, E., (1971), „Zwei neue Felsinschriften aus Tumâs mit nubischen Ländernamen“,
Zeitschrift fur Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 97: 53-63.
El-Khouli, A. & N. Kanawati, (1988), Excavations at Saqqara, North West of Teti’s Pyramid,
Volume II, (North Ryde).
El-Khouli, A. & N. Kanawati, (1989), Qusier el-Amarna: The Tombs of Pepy-ankh and Khewen-wekh,
(North Ryde).
178 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
El-Fikey, S., (1980), The Tomb of the Vizier Re-wer at Saqqara, (Warminster).
El-Khadragy, M., (2002a), “Some Palaeographic Features of Weni’s Biography”, Göttinger

Miszellen 188: 61-7, Plates 1-2 & Figures 1-3.
El-Khadragy, M., (2002b), “The Edfu Offering Niche of Qar in the Cairo Museum”, Studien
zur Altägyptischen Kultur 30: 203-228 & Tafeln 4-10.
Erman, A., (1892), „Zu den Inschriften des 1r-xwf“, Zeitschrift fur Ägyptische Sprache und
Altertumskunde 30: 78-83.
Fecht, G., (1979), „Die Berichte des 1rw=xwj.f ober seine Drei Reisen nach JAm“, in M. Görg
& E. Pusch (eds), Festschrift Elmar Edel, 12. Marz 1979, unter Mitwirkung von Agnes Wuckelt und
Karl-Joachim Seyfried, (Bamberg): 105-134.
Firth, C.M. & B. Gunn, (1926, reprint 2007), The Teti Pyramid Cemeteries, (Two Volumes), (Cairo
& Mansfield Centre, CT).
Fischer, H.G., (1956), “A Daughter of the Overlords of Upper Egypt in the First Intermediate
Period”, Journal of the American Oriental Society 76/2: 99-110.
Fischer, H.G., (1959), “A Scribe of the Army in a Saqqara Mastaba of the Early Fifth
Dynasty”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 18/4: 232-272.
Fischer, H.G., (1962), “A Provincial Statue of the Egyptian Sixth Dynasty”, American Journal of
Archaeology 66/1: 65-69 & Plates 17-18.
Fischer, H.G., (1968), Dendera in the Third Millennium B.C., down to the Theban Domination of Upper
Egypt, (Locust Valley, NY).
Fischer, H.G., (1976), Varia, (New York).
Fischer, H.G., (1996), Varia Nova, (New York).
Fischer, H.G., (2000), Egyptian Women of the Old Kingdom and of the Heracleopolitan Period, (New
York).
Gardiner, A.H., (1957, reprint 2001), Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of
Hieroglyphs, Third Edition, Revised, (Oxford).
179 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Gardiner, A.H., (1957), “The Reading of the Geographical Term ”, The Journal of Egyptian
Archaeology 43: 6-9.
Goedicke, H., (1955), “The Abydene Marriage of Pepi I”, Journal of the American Oriental Society
75/3: 180-3.
Goedicke, H., (1956), „Zu imy-rA Sma und tp-Sma im Alten Reich“, Mitteilungen des Instituts Für
Orientforschung der Deutschen Akademie der wissenschaften zu Berlin IV/1: 1-10.
Goedicke, H., (1964), “Diplomatic Studies in the Old Kingdom”, Journal of the American
Research Center in Egypt 3: 31-41.
Goedicke, H., (1967), Königliche Dokumente aus dem Alten Reich, (Wiesbaden).
Goedicke, H., (1981), “Harkhuf’s Travels”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 40/1: 1-20.
Grajetzki, W., (2009), Court Officials of the Middle Kingdom, (London).
Habachi, L., (1979), “Discoveries in the Jabel al-Tarif”, The Biblical Archaeologist 42/4: 237-8.
Habachi, L., (1983), “The Tomb of Princess Nebt Discovered at Qift”, Studien zur
Ältagyptischen Kultur 10: 205-213 & Tafel IIIb.
Harpur, Y., (1987), Decoration in the Tombs of the Old Kingdom: Studies in Orientation and Scene
Content, (London & New York).
Harpur, Y. & P. Scremin, (2006), The Chapel of Kagemni: Scene Details, (Oxford).
Harpur, Y. & P. Scremin, (2008), The Chapel of Ptahhotep: Scene Details, (Oxford).
Harvey, J., (2001), Wooden Statues of the Old Kingdom: A Typological Study, (Leiden, Boston &
Köln).
Hassan, S., (1938), “Excavations at Saqqara 1937-1938”, Annales du Service des Antiquités de
l’Égypte 38: 503-522.
Hassan, S., (1975a), Excavations at Saqqara, 1937-1938 – Volume I: The Mastaba of Neb-Kaw-Her
(re-edited by Dr Zaky Iskander), (Cairo).
Hassan, S., (1975b), Excavations at Saqqara, 1937-1938 – Volume II: Mastabas of Ny-‘cankh-Pepy
and Others (re-edited by Dr Zaky Iskander), (Cairo).
180 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Hassan, S., (1975c), Excavations at Saqqara, 1937-1938 – Volume III: Mastabas of Princess Hemet-Rc
and Others (re-edited by Dr Zaky Iskander), (Cairo).
Hawass, Z., (1998), “A Unique Old Kingdom Headrest and Offering Tablet of Seven Sacred
Oils Found at Saqqara”, Memnonia IX: 155-160 & plates XVIII-XIX.
Hawass, Z., (2000), “Recent Discoveries in the Pyramid Complex of Teti at Saqqara” in M.
Bárta & J Krejčí (eds), Abusir and Saqqara in the Year 2000, (Prague): 413-444 and plates 59-
66.
Hawass, Z., (2002), “An Inscribed Lintel in the Tomb of the Vizier Mehu at Saqqara”, Lingua
Aegyptia: 219-224.
Hayes, W.C., (1946), “Royal Decrees from the Temple of Min at Coptos”, The Journal of
Egyptian Archaeology 32: 3-23 & Plates I-V.
Helck, W., (1954), Untersuchungen zu den Beamtentiteln des Ägyptischen Alten Reiches, (Glückstadt,
Hamburg, New York).
Hornung, E., R. Krauss & D.A. Warburton, (2006), Ancient Egyptian Chronology, (Leiden &
Boston).
Hussein, A.S.M., (1943), “The Reparation of the Mastaba of Mehu at Saqqara: 1940”, Annales
du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 42: 417-425 & Plates 29-38.
Jacquet-Gordon, H.K., (1962), Les Noms Des Domains Funèraires sous l’Ancien Empire Égyptien,
(Cairo).
James, T.G.H., (1953), The Mastaba of Khentika called Ikhekhi, (London)
James, T.G.H., (1961), British Museum Hieroglyphic Texts from Egyptian Stelae etc., Part I, 2nd Edition,
(London)
Janssen, J.J., (1979), “The Role of the Temple in the Egyptian Economy during the New
Kingdom” in E. Lipiński (ed.), State and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East II, (Leuven).
Jequier, G., (1929, reprint 1983), Tombeaux de Particuliers Contemporains de Pepi II, (Cairo).
Jequier, G., (1933), Les Pyramides des Reines Neit et Apout, (Cairo).
Jequier, G., (1934), «Rapport Préliminaire sur les Fouilles Exécutées en 1933-1934 dans la
Partie Méridionale de la Necrople Memphite (avec 3 planches)» Annales du Service des
Antiquités de l’Égypte 34:76-82.
181 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Jequier, G., (1938), Le Monument Funéraire de Pepi II, Tome II: Le Temple, (Cairo).
Jequier, G., (1940), Le Monument Funéraire de Pepi II, Tome III: Les Approches du Temple, (Cairo).
Jones, D. (2000), An Index of Ancient Egyptian Titles, Epithets and Phrases of the Old Kingdom (Two
Volumes), (Oxford).
Kanawati, N., (1977), The Egyptian Administration in the Old Kingdom, (Warminster).
Kanawati, N., (1980a), Governmental Reforms in Old Kingdom Egypt, (Warminster).
Kanawati, N., (1980b), The Rock Tombs of El-Hawawish: The Cemetery of Akhmim, Volume 1,
(Sydney).
Kanawati, N., (1981), The Rock Tombs of El-Hawawish: The Cemetery of Akhmim, Volume 2,
(Sydney).
(Sydney).
(Sydney).
(Sydney).
(Sydney).
Kanawati, N., (1989a), The Rock Tombs of El-Hawawish: The Cemetery of Akhmim, Volume 9,
(Sydney).
Kanawati, N., (1989b), “The Chronology of the Overseers of Priests at El-Qusiya in the Sixth
Dynasty”, Göttinger Miszellen 111: 75-80.
(Sydney).
Kanawati, N., (1998), The Teti Cemetery At Saqqara, Volume 3: The Tombs of Neferseshemre and
Seankhuiptah, (Warminster).
182 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Kanawati, N., (2000), “A new HAt/rnpt-zp for Teti and its Implications for Old Kingdom
Chronology”, Göttinger Miszellen 177: 25-32.
Kanawati, N., (2003a), Conspiracies in the Egyptian Palace: Unis to Pepy I, (London & New York).
Kanawati, N., (2003b), “Nepotism in the Egyptian Sixth Dynasty”, The Bulletin of the Australian
Centre for Egyptology 14: 39-60.
Kanawati, N., (2005), Deir El-Gebrawi: Volume I – The Northern Cliff, (Oxford).
Kanawati, N., (2006), The Teti Cemetery at Saqqara, Volume VIII: The Tomb of Inumni, (Oxford).
Kanawati, N., (2007), Deir el-Gebrawi Volume II, The Southern Cliff: The Tomb of Ibi and Others,
(Oxford).
Kanawati, N. & M. Abder-Raziq, (1999), The Teti Cemetery at Saqqara, Volume V: The Tomb of
Hesi, (Warminster ).
Kanawati, N. & M. Abder-Raziq, (2000), The Teti Cemetery at Saqqara, Volume VI: The Tomb of
Nikauisesi, (Warminster ).
Kanawati, N. & A. McFarlane, (1992), Akhmim in the Old Kingdom, Part 1: Chronology and
Administration, (North Ryde).
Kees, H., (1932), Beiträge zur altägyptischen Provinzialverwaltung und der Geschichte des Feudalismus,
(Berlin): 85-119.
Kees, H., (1933), Beiträge zur altägyptischen Provinzialverwaltung und der Geschichte des Feudalismus: II
Unterägypten, (Berlin): 579-598.
Kees, H., (1940), Beiträge zur Geschichte des Vezirats im Alten Reich: Die Chronologie der Vezire unter
König Phiops II, (Gottingen): 39-54.
Klemm, R. & D.D. Klemm, (2008), Stones and Quarries in Ancient Egypt, (London).
Leclant, J., & G. Clerc, (1994), «Fouilles et Travaux en Égypte et au Soudan 1992-1993 (Tab.
VI-XLV)», Orientalia Nova Series 63/4: 345-473.
Lehmann, K., (2000), Der Serdab in den Privatgräben des Alten Reiches, 3 Bd, (Unpublished PhD
Dissertation), (University of Heidelberg)
Lepsius, C.R., (1897-1913), Denkmäler aus Äegypten und Äethiopien, 12 BD, (Leipzig).
183 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Lichtheim, M, (2006), Ancient Egyptian Literature: Volume I: The Old and Middle Kingdoms, With a
New Foreword by Antonio Loprieno, (Berkley)
Lloyd, A.B., A.J.Spencer & A. El-Khouli, (1990), Saqqara Tombs II: The Mastabas of Meru,
Semdenti, Khui and Others, (London).
McFarlane, A., (1987), “The First Nomarch at Akhmim: The Identification of a Sixth Dynasty
Biographical Inscription”, Göttinger Miszellen 100: 63-70, Plates 1 & 2.
McFarlane, A., (1995), The God Min to the end of the Old Kingdom, (Sydney).
McNeill, W.H., (1985), Mythistory and and Other Essays, (Chicago & London).
Málek, J., (1986), In the Shadow of the Pyramids: Egypt during the Old Kingdom, (Norman).
Mariette, A. (1880), Catalogue Général des Monuments d’Abydos Découverts Pendant les Fouilles de cette
Ville, (Paris).
Mariette, A. (1889), Les Mastabas de L’Ancien Empire: Fragment du Dernier Ouvrage, (Paris).
Martin-Pardey, E., (1976), Untersuchungen zur ägyptischen Provinzialvervaltung bis zum Ends des Alten
Reiches, (Hildesheim).
Martin-Pardey, E., (1983), “Review: The Egyptian Administration in the Old Kingdom.
Evidence on its Economic Decline. By Naguib Kanawati”, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
69: 168-170.
Metropolitan Museum of Art, (1999), Egyptian Art in the Age of the Pyramids (exhibition catalogue),
(New York).
Möeller, G, (1909-1936), Hieratische Palaographie: die ägyptische Buchschrift in ihrer Entwicklung von
der fünften Dynastie bis zur römischen Kaiserzeit, (4 volumes), (Leipzig & Osnabrück).
Montet, P., (1936), «Les Tombeaux Dits de Kasr-El-Sayd», Kemi 6: 81-129.
Moreno-Garcia, J.C., (1997), Études sur l’administration, le pouvoir et l’idéologie en Égypte, de l’Ancien
au Moyen Empire, (Liège).
Mostafa, M., (1984-5), „Erster vorbreicht über einem Ersten Zwischenzeit text aus Kom El-
Koffar (avec 2 planches)“, Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 70: 419-429 et 2
planches.
184 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Mostafa, M., (1987), „Kom El-Koffar. Teil II: Datieurung und Historische Interpretation des
Textes B“, Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 71:169-184 & 2 Taflen.
Munro, P, (1993), Unas-Friedhof: Nord-West I, (Mainz).
Newberry, P.E., (1912), “The Inscribed Tombs of Ekhmîm”, Annals of Archaeology and
Anthropology (Liverpool) 4: 99-120.
O’Connor, D., (1986), “The Locations of Yam and Kush and their Historical Implications”,
Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 23: 27-50.
O’Connor, D., (1996), “Sexuality, Statuary and the Afterlife; Scenes in the Tomb-Chapel of
Pepyankh (Heny the Black). An Interpretative Essay” in P. D. Manuelian & R.E. Freed
(eds.), Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, Volume 2, (Boston): 621-632.
Ockinga, B. G., (2005), A Concise Grammar of Middle Egyptian: Second Revised Edition, (Mainz).
Otto, E., (1968), Egyptian Art and the Cults of Osiris and Amon, (London).
Paget, R.F.E, A.A. Pirie & F.L.L. Griffith, (1898), The Tomb of Ptah-hetep. Included with The
Ramesseum by J.E. Quibell. Egyptian Research Account Second Memoir, (London).
Papazian, H., (2005), Domain of the Pharaoh: The Structure and Components of the Economy of Old
Kingdom Egypt, (Unpublished PhD Dissertation), (Chicago).
Pardey, E., (2001), “Administration: Provincial Administration” in D. Redford (ed.) The Oxford
Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, (3 Volumes), (Oxford and New York): 16-20.
Petrie, W.M.F., (1898), Denderah, (London).
Petrie, W.M.F., (1902), Abydos, Part I, (London).
Petrie, W.M.F., (1903), Abydos, Part II, (London).
185 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Pirenne, J., (1932-1935), Histoire des Institutions et du Droit Privé de l'ancienne Égypt, 3 Volumes,
(Brussels).
Porter , B., & R.L. Moss (assisted by E.W. Burney) (Ed. J. Malek), (1927-2007), Topographical
Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, 8 volumes, (Oxford).
Quibell, J.E., (1909), Excavations at Saqqara (1907-1908), Volume III, (Cairo).
Ranke, H., (1935-1976), Die Ägyptischen Personennamen, 3 Bd, (Gluckstadt, Hamburg & Locust
Valley, NY).
Reisner, G.A., (1936), The Development of the Egyptian Tomb Down to the Accession of Cheops,
(Cambridge, Mass.).
Reisner, G.A., (1942), A History of the Giza Necropolis, Volume I, (Cambridge, Mass.).
Richards, J., (2002), “Text and Context in late Old Kingdom Egypt: The Archaeology and
Historiography of Weni the Elder”, Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 39: 75-102.
Robins, G., (2008), The Art of Ancient Egypt, (London).
Roccati, A. (1982), La Littérature Historique Sous l’Ancien Empire Égyptien, (Paris).
Roth, A.M., (1983), “Review of Governmental Reforms in Old Kingdom Egypt”, Journal of
Near Eastern Studies 42 (2): 154-5.
Roth, A.M., (1987), “The Organization and Functioning of the Royal Mortuary Cults of the
Old Kingdom in Egypt” in M. Gibson & R.D. Biggs (eds), The Organization of Power. Aspects
of Bureaucracy in the Ancient Near East, (Chicago): 115-121.
Roth, A.M., (1991), Egyptian Phyles in the Old Kingdom. The Evolution of a System of Social
Organization, (Chicago).
Rusch, A, (1923), „Die Entwicklung der Grabsteinformen im Alten Reich“, Zeitschrift fur
Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 58: 101-124.
186 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Saad, Z.Y., (1940), “A Preliminary Report on the Excavations at Saqqara (1939-1940)”,

Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 40: 675-714.
Saad, Z.Y., (1944), “Preliminary Report on the Excavations of the Department of the
Antiquities at Saqqara 1942-1943”, Annales du Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 43: 449-486.
Schenkel, W., (1965), Memphis x Herakleopolis x Theben: Die Epigraphischen Zeugnisse der 7.-11.
Dynastie Ägyptens, (Wiesbaden).
Saleh, M., (1977), Three Old Kingdom Tombs at Thebes: I, The Tomb of Unas-Ankh no 413; II, The
Tomb of Khenty no. 405; III, The Tomb of Ihy no. 186, (Mainz).
Sethe, K., (1933), Urkunden des Alten Reiches, (Leipzig).
Simpson, W.K., (1995), Inscribed Material from the Pensylvania-Yale Excavations at Abydos, (New
Haven & Philadelphia).
Simpson, W.K., (2003), The Literature of Ancient Egypt: An Anthology of Stories, Instructions, Stelae,
Autobiographies, and Poetry, (New Haven & London).
Smith, W.S., (1946, reissue 1978), A History of Egyptian Sculpture and Painting in the Old Kingdom,
(New York).
Smolenski, M.T., (1907), «Le Tombeau d’un Prince de la VIE Dynastie A Charouna» Annales du
Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte 8: 149-153.
Strudwick, N.C., (1981), “The Overseer of Upper Egypt ny-kAw-izzi”, Göttinger Miszellen 43:
69-71.
Strudwick, N.C., (1982), “Notes on the Mastaba of AXt-Htp; hmi and Nb-kAw-Hr; idw at
Saqqara”, Göttinger Miszellen 56: 89-94.
Strudwick, N.C., (1985), The Administration of Egypt in the Old Kingdom: The Highest Titles and Their
Holders, (London).
Strudwick, N.C., (2003), Texts from the Pyramid Age, (Atlanta).
Sweitzer, U., (1948), „Archäologischer Bericht aus Ägypten (Saqqara)“, Orientalia Nova Series
17: 262-268 & Plates XVI-XXIV.
187 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Török, L., (2009), Between Two Worlds: The Frontier Region between Ancient Nubia and Egypt
3700BC – 500 AD, (Leiden & Boston).
Trigger, B., (1993), Early Civilizations: Ancient Egypt in Context, (Cairo)
van Walsem, R., (2008), Mastabase: The Leiden Mastaba Project, (Leuven).
Vandier, J., (1950), Mo’alla: La Tombe D’Ankhtifi et La Tombe de Sébekhotep, (Cairo).
Verner, M., (1977), Abusir 1: The Mastaba of Ptahshepses (Reliefs), (Prague).
Vischak, D., (2006), Locality and Community in Old Kingdom Provincial Tombs: The Cemetery at
Qubbet el-Hawa, (New York University).
Weeks, N., (1983), “Care of Officials in the Egyptian Old Kingdom”, Chronique d’Égypte
LVIII: 5-22.
Weill, R., (1912), Les Décrets Royaux de l’Ancien Empire Égyptien, (Paris).
Wente, E., (1990), Letters from Ancient Egypt, (Atlanta).
Willoughby-Winlaw, S., (2007), Fifth Dynasty Mastabas at Giza: Typologies, Chronology and Use of the
Cemetery, 2 Volumes, (Unpublished PhD Dissertation), (Macquarie University).
Winlock, H.E., (1943), “The Eleventh Egyptian Dynasty”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 2/4:
249-283.
Wilson, J.A., (1944), “Funeral Services of the Egyptian Old Kingdom”, Journal of Near Eastern
Studies 3/4: 201-218 .
Winlock, H.E., (1947), The Rise and Fall of the Middle Kingdom in Thebes, (New York).
Woods, A., (2007), A Day in the Marshes. A Study of Old Kingdom Marsh Scenes in the tombs of the
Memphite Cemeteries, 2 Volumes, (Unpublished PhD Dissertation), (Macquarie University).
188 of 189
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Yoyotte, J., (1953), «Pour une Localisation du Pays de Iam», Bulletin de l’Institute Français
d’Archéologie Orientale 52: 173-8.
Ziegler, C., (1997), Les Statues Égyptiennes de l’Ancien Empire, (Paris).
189 of 189

The Overseer of Upper Egypt in Egypt's Old Kingdom (2009) Volume 1 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Overseer of Upper Egypt in Egypt's Old Kingdom (2009) Volume 1 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE OVERSEER OF UPPER EGYPT IN

EGYPT’S OLD KINGDOM

A prosopographical study of the title-holders

Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the

Department of Ancient History, Faculty of Arts

Opening Words – Part One

Mythistory and Other Essays, 1985.

Egypt: A prosopographical study of the title-holders and a re-examination of the

university or institution other than Macquarie University.

thesis itself have been appropriately acknowledged.

Date: 16 October 2009

important, not only to me but to him.

inspiration, I need only think of Dr Camilla Di Biase-Dyson.

opportunity to learn from you. Professor Marnie Hughes-Warrington (now of Monash)

privileged to be part of your team.

CD ROM LOCATED INSIDE BACK COVER OF VOLUME I

VOLUME II: MAPS AND APPENDICES

of Upper Egypt: Fischer, (1968: 204, Figure 40).

Nbt. Fischer, (2000: 37, Figure 27).

[12]. Field Museum Negative A111074c.

http://www.fieldmuseum.org/tut/popups/IAE8. Website viewed 18

(1897-1913), Denkmäler aus Äegypten und Äethiopien, 12 BD, (Leipzig): LD

(Plates) II: 61b.

ovenance_search.aspx. Website viewed 26 August 2009.

TABLE 4.2 Distribution of imy-rA 5maw title variants by Dynasty

TABLE 4.3 Overseer of Upper Egyptian Grain

TABLE 4.4 Holders of Hry-sStA titles

TABLE 4.5 Frequency of principal honorific titles

TABLE 4.6 Government of Upper Egypt

TABLE 4.7(A) Elevation to Vizier – Dynasties V – IX

TABLE 4.7(B) Elevation to Vizier – Dynasty VI in detail

known title variants

are referenced using traditional citation conventions:

CG/JE Catalogue Général des Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire/Journal d’Entrée,

Cairo Museum. Publication authors are identified in the Bibliography.

Generally, the title of the publication identifies the holdings documented in

the publication which are numbered CG XXXXX or JE XXXXX.

LD Lepsius, C.R., (1897-1913), Denkmäler aus Äegypten und Äethiopien, 12 BD,

Möller Möeller, G, (1909-1936), Hieratische Palaographie: die ägyptische Buchschrift in ihrer

2007), Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, 8 volumes,

PN Ranke, H., (1935-1976), Die Ägyptischen Personennamen, 3 volumes, (Gluckstadt,

Hamburg & Locust Valley, NY).

Urk I Sethe, K., (1933), Urkunden des Alten Reiches, (Leipzig).

Wb Erman, A. & H. Grapow, (1971), Wörterbuch der aegyptischen Sprache im Auftrage

der deutschen Akademien, 7 volumes, (Berlin).

ii. Grammatical Conventions used in translation and transliteration

The following conventions apply:1

. Separates stem from grammatical ending, where used by translator.

( ) Not written in hieroglyphs but added for clarification.

{ } Editor believes there is an error in the text.

< > Brackets added.

[ ] Damaged text in original form, brackets added.

where it is also possible to substitute an s.2

1. Ockinga, (2005: §13).

from Dynasty IX.

Userkaf V.1 2435-2429BCE+25

Sahure‘ V.2 2428-2416BCE+25

Neferirkare‘ Kaki V.3 2415-2405BCE+25

Ra‘neferf/Neferefr e‘ V.4 2404 BCE+25

Shepseskare‘ Izi V.5 2403 BCE+25

Neuserre‘ Ini V.6 2402-2374BCE+25

Menkauhor V.7 2373-2366 BCE+25

Djedkare‘ Izezi V.8 2365-2322 BCE+25