sign in sign up
<<
Home , Djedefre, Djer, Djoser, Huni, Khafre, Menkaure

EGYPTIAN ART IN THE AGE OF THE

THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART, NEW YORK DISTRIBUTED BY HARRY N. ABRAMS, INC., NEW YORK This volume has been published in ulIljunction 1\\1 ri~brs reserwd. No pari 01 Ibis pnhli":II;on 'I'Llnsl:lli,,,,, Iwnl tbe I:relll·b hy .I:III1l·S p. Allen with the exhibition «Egyptian Art in the Age of Illay he reproduced or 'T:lIlSlllilled hy any Ill"ans, of essays hy Nadine CIl<'rpion and .Iean-Philipl'" the Pyramids," organized by The Metropolitan electronic or mechanical, indllding phorocopyin~, I.ann; hy .Iobn McDonald of essays by Niu,las Museum of Art, New York; the Reunion des recording, or information retrieval system, with­ Crilllal, I\ndran I.abrollsse, .Ie'lIl I.edant, and musees nationaux, Paris; and the Royal Ontario out permission from the publishers. Christiane Ziegler; by Jane Marie Todd and Museum, Toronto, and held at the Gaieries Catharine H. Roehrig of entries nationales du Grand Palais, Paris, from April 6 John P. O'Neill, Editor in Chief to July 12, 1999; The Metropolitan Museum of Carol Fuerstein, Editor, with the assistance of Maps adapted by Emsworth Design, Inc., from Art, New York, from September 16, 1999, to Ellyn Childs Allison, Margaret Donovan, and Ziegler 1997a, PI'. 18, 19 January 9, 2000; and the Royal Ontario Museum, Kathleen Howard Toronto, from February 13 to May 22, 2000. Patrick Seymour, Designer, after an original con­ Jacket/cover illustration: Detail, cat. no. 67, cept by Bruce Campbell King and a Queen Gwen Roginsky and Hsiao-ning Tu, Production Frontispiece: Detail, cat. no. 67, King Menkaure Robert Weisberg, Computer Specialist and a Queen The exhibition is made possible by

Lewis B. and Dorothy Cullman. Site and new object photography by Bruce Hieroglyphic dedication on page v from White; additional new object photography at Teachings ofPtah-hotep, 509-10. Addironal support has been provided by the Metropolitan Museum by Anna-Marie The Starr Foundation. Kellen and Oi-Cheong Lee, the Photograph Stu­ Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data dio, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New Egyptian art in the age of the pyramids An indemnity has been granted by the Federal York. For a more complete listing of photograph p. em. Council on the Arts and the Humanities. credits, see p. 53 6. Catalogue of an exhibition held at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Sept. 16, 1999­ Educational programs have been supported by in Sabon and Adobe Weiss by Professional Jan. 9, 2000. the Malcolm Hewitt Wiener Foundation. Graphics, Rockford, Illinois Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-87099-906-0 (HC). - ISBN 0-87099­ The publication is made possible by The Adelaide Separations by Professional Graphics, Rockford, 907-9 (pbk.) -ISBN 0-8109-6543-7 (Abrams) Milton de Groot Fund, in memory of the de Groot Illinois 1. Art, Egyptian Exhibitions. 2. Art, and Hawley families. Ancient-Egypt Exhibitions. 3. Egypt­ Printed and bound by Arnoldo Mnndadori, Antiquities Exhibitions. 4. Egypt-Architec­ Published by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, S.p.A., Verona, It,tly ture Exhibitions. I. Metropolitan Museum of New York Art (New York, N.Y.) N5350.E37 1999

Copyri~ht

Lenders to the Exhibition VIII

Directors' Foreword Franfoise Cachin, Philippe de Montebello, Lindsay Sharp x

Acknowledgments Dorothea Arnold, Krzyszto( Grzymski, Christiane Ziegler XI

Contributors to the Catalogue and Key to the Authors of the Entries XIV

Maps XVI

Notes to the Reader XVIII

Chronology A Note on Elisabeth XIX Dynastic and Regnal Dates James P. Allen XX

Introduction Dorothea Arnold, Christiane Ziegler XXI

INTRODUCTORY ESSAYS

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE OLD KINGDOM 3 Jean Leclant

THE STEP PRECINCT OF KING Jean-Philippe Lauer

PYRAMIDS AND THEIR TEMPLES 21 Audran Labrousse

THE TOMBS OF OFFICIALS: HOUSES OF ETERNITY 27 Peter Janosi

OLD KINGDOM IN THEIR ARCHITECTURAL SETTING 41 Dieter Arnold

ROYAL STATUARY 51 Krzyszto( Grzymski NONROYAL STATUARY 57 Christiane Ziegler

RESERVE HEADS: AN ENIGMA OF OLD KINGDOM 73 Catharine H. Roehrig

ROYAL RELIEFS 83 Dorothea Arnold

THE HUMAN IMAGE IN OLD KINGDOM NONROYAL RELIEFS 103 Nadine Cherpion

FURNITURE OF THE OLD KINGDOM II7 Julie Anderson

STONE VESSELS: LUXURY ITEMS WITH MANIFOLD IMPLICATIONS 121 Dorothea Arnold and Elena Pischikova

EXCAVATING THE OLD KINGDOM: FROM 'S VALLEY 133 TEMPLE TO THE GOVERNOR'S CITY AT BALAT Nicolas Grimal

EXCAVATING THE OLD KINGDOM: THE AND 139 OTHER FIELDS Peter Der Manuelian

EXCAVATING THE OLD KINGDOM: THE EGYPTIAN 155 ARCHAEOLOGISTS

CATALOGUE THIRD DYNASTY 168

FOURTH DYNASTY 194

FIFTH DYNASTY 314

SIXTH DYNASTY 434

Glossary 494

Bibliography 495

Indexes 517

Photograph Credits 53 6

ROYAL STATUARY

KRZYSZTOF GRZYMSKI

tatues of Egyptian rulers form a unique category, office itself, rather than the individual, was considered separate from that of the members of the royal divine. 3 An Egyptian royal sculpture was not an exact family, nobles, and ordinary human beings. representation of a particular human being but a depic­ SWhen admiring the superior workmanship and tion of the divine aspects of an individual who held the artistry of Old Kingdom royal statuary, we must keep in highest office. Such did, however, often dis­ mind that Egyptian art was not made for purely aesthetic play elements unique to a particular king, distinguishing purposes but was in fact primarily functional. The royal him from his predecessors and successors. The ruling statues had a specific role: to make manifest the position was the image of a god on earth; the of the ruler in Egyptian society. The king was the key ele­ embodied this fact and therefore legitimized the ruler's ment of the society, not because of the political power of exalted status. Certain conventions and symbols were his office but because of his centrality to Egyptian ideol­ used when depicting the king. The workmanship had to ogy and religion. Without a king there would be no soci­ be of superior quality, and the pose, regalia, and choice ety to speak of, no state, no order; there would be only of material and color all had symbolic meaning. Inter­ chaos. Any Old Kingdom pharaoh could state ''l'Etat, estingly, the Egyptian royal sculptures seem to appeal to c'est moil) with far more justification than Louis XIV. the modern viewer more than any other sort of Egyptian The exact nature of the king and kingship in Egypt is art. These three-dimensional figures, despite such pecu­ an often-discussed issue. While some scholars stress the liarities as the use of so-called negative space and back divine character of Egyptian kingship, others emphasize pillars, are highly realistic to our eyes. The inimitably

its human aspect. I There are few literary sources that Egyptian depiction of the body in two-dimensional relief, give an Egyptian account of the character of kingship. which strikes some modern viewers as awkward, is not Thus, scholars attempt to define Egyptian kingship through a factor here. study of royal iconography, whether in sculpture, paint­ Depictions of statues on First Dynasty seal impres­ ing, or relief, with literary and religious texts providing sions and stone vessels indicate that the Egyptians some elucidation of symbolism and conventions. At the produced royal statuary from the beginning of their very least the king had a semidivine, superhuman status civilization. 4 Early textual evidence confirms that royal and acted as an intermediary between the gods and statues, particularly of copper or gold, were manufac­ humankind. One is tempted to see the royal statue serv­ tured in the Archaic and Old Kingdom Periods. Interest­ ing the same cuitic function as did any other statue of a ingly, almost all of the statues referred to in the texts were divinity. However, among the preserved Old Kingdom made for the temples of various gods and not for the sculptures royal statues outnumber statues of gods by a mortuary complexes that are the source of most of the wide margin. Moreover, most of the known royal statu­ known examples. Royal funerary statues are, however, ary comes from mortuary temples and is therefore an mentioned in at least one Old Kingdom text, from the expression of the cult of the deceased king and not of the famous papyri (cat. no. II?), which refers to a living ruler. In this context it is often not clear whether a festival honoring royal statues of the deceased pharaoh. royal statue depicts a divine king, the embodiment of None of the Old Kingdom royal statues bears the sig­ , ruler of the netherworld, or whether it simply rep­ nature of a sculptor, except perhaps for one from the time resents the king's . 2 of Djoser. 5 It is generally, albeit incorrectly, assumed that Whatever the relationship between the divine and Egyptian artists worked anonymously. In fact, the names human aspects of the king, it is almost certain that the of several artists, including sculptors, were preserved in

King Menkaure and a Queen (cat. no. 67) Fig. 28. Detail, Khafre Seated with the Falcon behind His Fig. 29. Detail, Djoser Seated. , , JE 6008 Head. Egyptian Museum, Cairo, CG 14 I "

the paintings and reliefs that served as tomb decorations. symbolic and religious significance, although this remains Some of these scenes depict the actual making of sculp­ an open question. The examples most often cited to tures, thus allowing art to reconstruct the pro­ establish such meaning were the royal statues of . duction process and techniques used by the Egyptians.6 The magnificent head of this king (cat. no. 54) and George Reisner's discovery of a group of unfinished stone almost ~ll the other sculptures of him were made of red statuettes of King Menkaure prompted him to posit eight quartzite quarried at Gebel Ahmar, not far from Heli­ stages of production, beginning with the pounding of the opolis, the principal sanctuary of the sun god Re. The block with a stone to create the figure's general shape, growing importance of the cult of the sun god, evident in followed by stages involving rubbing, sawing, and drilling, the name of the king himself, makes this association and ending with the final polishing. Although the canon between the solar cult and the choice of m~terial plausi­ of proportions certainly existed during the Old Kingdom, ble. The same material was also frequently used to depict there is no evidence of the use of a square grid at that another Egyptian sun king, the New Kingdom pharaoh time'? The chief artist simply indicated the guiding lines Amenhotep III. 8 Red granite, popular with the Fifth and points in red paint for his assistants and appren­ Dynasty pharaoh Niuserre, may also be connected with tices. These lines from the early stages of production the solar cult. Problems arise, however, in identifying the are preserved on the Menkaure figures (cat. no. 73). symbolic and religious significance of other stones whose The Old Kingdom royal statues were made in a vari­ use was not limited to royal or even private statuary but ety of materials: ivory, wood, limestone, quartzite, Egyp­ extended to stone vessels and palettes. Perhaps the ease tian , graywacke, anorthosite gneiss, gabbro of crafting the statues from limestone and graywacke was gneiss, and granite. The choice of material may have had a primary consideration when selecting these materials. The Cairo Khafre (fig. 28) is the best-known anor­ The repertoire of kingly postures was limited. Seven thosite gneiss sculpture, but many others were made for different poses can be identified: 10 this pharaoh (cat. no. 61) and for (cat. no. 109). The choice of anorthosite gneiss, often incorrectly called I. Standing with feet together (Djoser's Osiris-like "Chephren's [that is, Khafre's] diorite," is puzzling. figure at ) Found in a distant Nubian quarry, it is hard to work and 2. Striding with left foot advanced and usually with only moderately attractive. However, it has a rare opti­ both arms hanging and fists clenched (cat. no. 67) cal property-it glows in sunlight. Its deep blue glow, 3. Sitting on a throne or a block and wearing either caused by the presence of the iridescent mineral bytown­ the kilt, with the left hand placed on the knee and ite, was noticed by geologists visiting the quarry. This the right hand in a fist vertically on the thigh (cat. quality is not evident in the artificial light of a museum no. 109), or the Heb Sed robe, with one or both and therefore went unremarked by scholars until arms crossed over the chest and usually holding the recently. Now, however, it has been suggested that this regalia blue glow, visible in the desert sunlight, attracted Egyp­ 4. Appearing as a (cat. no. 171) tians to the material.9 Interestingly, art historians fre­ 5. Appearing as part of a group sculpture, accompa­ quently mentioned the "radiant" facial expression of nied either by a deity or by the principal queen Khafre's statues, a term that now seems to refer to the (cat. no. 67), or as a pseudogroup, that is, a double physical properties of the stone itself. One could specu­ statue of the king (Staatliche Sammlung Agyptischer late that this blue radiance signifies the celestial connec­ Kunst, Munich, AS 6794) tion and association with the cult of Horus. It must be 6. Kneeling and presenting a pair of pots (cat. remembered, however, that many statues, and almost no. 170) certainly all the limestone sculptures, were either par­ 7. Squatting with one hand held to the mouth. tially or completely covered by paint, thus veiling the material's possible symbolic and religious content. The first five attitudes date from the early phases of the Whatever the material, a number of attributes sepa­ Old Kingdom; the last two are known only from Sixth rated the image of a king from that of a mere mortal. Dynasty examples. Among these are formal headdresses such as the white Identification of materials, attributes, and attitudes crown of (cat. no. 63), the red crown of deepens our understanding of iconography, stylistic (cat. no. 62), and the , the traditional changes, and dating. More than four decades have passed royal head cover (cat. no. 170). These may be enhanced since the publication of the last great syntheses of Old by the attachment of the , the royal cobra, to the Kingdom art.II During this period previously unknown front of the headdress (the earliest sculptural examples of royal statues have come to light either through museum the uraeus date to the reign of Djedefre). In the few acquisitions from private collections or through archae­ instances in which the king wears a simple wig, the ological excavations. This new material revived interest uraeus distinguishes him from private individuals. Often in the art of the Pyramid Age, and recent years have seen the king is depicted with cosmetic lines at the outer cor­ the publication of several monographs discussing the ners of his eyes, a feature also found on nonroyal sculp­ royal sculpture of the First to the Third Dynasty, the tures. Sometimes a royal false beard is shown attached to Fourth Dynasty, and the Sixth Dynasty.12 The discovery the chin by a strap. The king may hold one or more of of Fifth Dynasty statues of King in 198413 and the symbols of his earthly power, among them a flail, a the 1997 publication of Old Kingdom sculpture at the crook, and a mace. It was technically difficult to repre­ Louvre14 added yet more works to the corpus of royal sent such long, thin objects, and the artists used short, statuary. Since most of these royal representations are round forms variously interpreted as either symbolic rep­ well provenanced and therefore attributable to individual resentations of a staff or simply as handkerchiefs. The rulers, their study has increased knowledge of the stylis­ dress of an Old Kingdom pharaoh was simple. Sculpted tic and iconographic elements typical of a given period or images show the king wearing either the knee-length robe dynasty. The dating and attribution of unpr"ovenanced associated with the Heb Sed or the characteristic tripar­ objects have been facilitated to a degree, but differences tite kilt known as a shendyt. The king is shown naked in of opinion about individual pieces will continue, given only two Sixth Dynasty representations, in which he our reliance on personal experience and instinct in assess­ appears as a child. ing works.

53 Only four royal statues are presently known from the small statuette, while that of his little-known successor, Archaic Period, which includes the first two dynasties. Djedefre, whose pyramid at Abu Rawash lies in ruins, One, a faience figurine of , was found at ;1 5 is represented by numerous statues. The portraits of three others, an ivory figurine of an unidentified king and Djedefre in red quartzite show a characteristically bony two stone statues of the Second Dynasty king Khasekhe­ and angular face with prominent cheekbones and a mui,were excavated at Abydos. The feet from a pair of strong jaw evincing strength and determination. In the wood statues excavated at Saqqara, possibly of King head (cat. no. 54.), among the greatest master­ Qaa, should perhaps be added to this list. 16 Third pieces of Egyptian art, this'force is tempered by a certain Dynasty royal statuary, especially that of Djoser, is bet­ resigned wisdom expressed in the pouches under the eyes ter represented in the corpus of pharaonic sculpture. The and tensed muscles at the corners of the mouth. famous seated limestone statue from the serdab of the Most surviving royal images of the Fourth Dynasty at Saqqara (fig. 29) shows the king dressed date to Djedefre's successors Khafre and Menkaure and in a Heb Sed robe; a large wig surmounted by a nemes were found during excavations of their temples at Giza. frames his broad face, with its high cheekbones, large A statue of Khafre protected by Horus in the shape of a ears, wide mouth, and long beard. The sense of heavy, falcon and group statues of Menkaure (fig. 28; cat. nos. somber majesty is striking. The unfinished pillar-statue 67, 68) are among the greatest art objects ever created. of the standing Djoser, still in the festival court at The sculptors who made these royal images remain Saqqara, also has a broad face and a long beard, but anonymous to us. However, differences in treatment of because of the shape of its wig it is more reminiscent of the physiognomies of the two are easily recog­ the early divine images in Brooklyn (cat. no. 10) and nizable, as are differences among images of the same Brussels'? than of the serdab statue. Fragments of other ruler, suggesting that there were at least two and proba­ statues of Djoser are also known, some identified only bly more sculpture schools or ateliers. Sorting out these recently in the site magazine. Two magnificent early royal styles is problematic; opinions differ and ultimately the portraits-the oldest surviving colossal head of a king decision rests with the viewer. The choice of material may from the Brooklyn Museum (cat. no. 21) and a small have an important bearing on this matter. The limestone limestone head from Munich (cat. no. H)-can be dated image of Khafre (cat. no. 62) is quite different from to the end of the Third Dynasty or to the early Fourth Khafre's graywacke head in Leipzig (1946). The latter Dynasty. In both, the round full face, the undefined eye­ has some resemblance, however superficial, to the head brows, and broad nose are similar to features of the ivory of Djedefre in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo (JE 35 138­ figurine of from Abydos that is now in the Egyp­ Suez S 10), but it also has the wide face, soft cheeks, tian Museum, Cairo (JE 36143), while the depth of the and serene expression of the gneiss statues of Khafre crown and the cupped ears are reminiscent of the (fig. 28; cat. no. 61). Likewise, the fleshy round nose, full Khasekhemui statues. Whether the Brooklyn and Munich cheeks, and faint smile appear in all depictions of heads depict , Snefru, or even Khufu remains an Menkaure,'9 but the alabaster portraits of this king have open question. Together with the figurine of Khufu, they such distinctively prominent eyeballs (cat. no. 70) that form a stylistic group that documents the transition from at least one has been thought to portray another one dynasty to another. pharaoh, Menkaure's successor, . The earliest undisputed examples of Fourth Dynasty The attribution of most Fourth Dynasty sculpture was royal sculpture are the two broken statues of Snefru dis­ based on inscriptions or archaeological context. This covered at Dahshur, one of which is now on display in information is rarely available for Fifth Dynasty royal the Egyptian Museum, Cairo. 18 They mark the birth of statuary, perhaps the least homogenous group of all the a new style in Egyptian sculpture, known by the German Old Kingdom assemblages. , the first king of the term Strenger Stil (severe style), which emphasizes sharp­ Fifth Dynasty, is known from a colossal head found at his ness, strength, and simplicity of form rather than expres­ temple at Saqqara (cat. no. 100). The attribution to this siveness of subject. Except for the two images of Snefru, ruler of other portraits, including an example in the all other examples of this style fall into the class of non­ Cleveland Museum of Art and one found at Abusir, is royal statuary. often based on their similarities to heads of Menkaure. The royal portraits of Snefru's successors vary in num­ Using this criterion, one could also assign two other ber. Ironically, the visage of Snefru's son Khufu, who statues (Louvre, Paris, AF 2573, and Egyptian Museum, built the Great Pyramid at Giza, is known from only one Cairo, JE 391°3) to Userkaf or another early Fifth

54 Dynasty ruler. The group statue of Sahure (cat. no. 109), figure on one of Djedefre's statues, to an equal partner of whose identity is assured by its inscription, also contin­ Menkaure, and finally to the embodiment of Isis protecting ues the traditions of Fourth Dynasty artists, and it has her son, Horus, in the statue of Ankh-nes-meryre n with even been redated, albeit unconvincingly, to the reign her son Pepi II (cat. no. 172).2.5 of Khafre.2.0 Generally speaking, the royal statuary of the Old Statues of the later Fifth Dynasty pharaohs Neferefre Kingdom shows the same characteristic elements known and Niuserre form the bulk of the corpus of Fifth from the private statuary, such as cubic form emphasized Dynasty royal portraits. A statuette of Neferefre showing by placing the subject on a base and using a back pillar the king wearing a wig and protected, like the Khafre to support the figure. Art historians have noted that mentioned above, by the falcon-headed Horus,2.1 has a the best Old Kingdom sculptures are slightly asymmet­ rare feature: the limbs were carved in the round. The six rical in such details as the placement of the ears and the known statuettes of Neferefre were made in a variety of execution of eyes or lips. In fact, one could posit that materials and show different attitudes and attributes but all the statues are asymmetrical because of the forward have common traits, such as the roundness of the face, stride of the left foot and the different positions of hands the 'ihape of the eyes, and the modeling of the nasolabial or other body parts or attributes. Indeed, axiality and furrows. In three statuettes the king holds a mace, a royal frontality rather than symmetry characterize Egyptian symbol that rarely appears in sculpture. The head of a sculpture. This exhibition presents a unique opportu­ statuette in Brussels2.2. may also be identified as that of nity to study these and other aspects of the historical and Neferefre. Niuserre is known from five remarkably sim­ stylistic development of Egyptian royal sculpture, which ilar statues: all show the king wearing the nemes, and all was one of Egypt's most important contributions to but one are made of red granite, the exception being the our civilization. calcite pseudogroup in Munich, the only Old Kingdom double statue of a king. Three other royal portraits of unidentified kings (Athens, L120; Agyptisches Museum I. Frankfort 1948; Posener 1960; Wildung 1980b; Baines 1995. und Papyrussammlung, Berlin, 14396; Egyptian Museum, 2 Heick 1966, p. 40. Cairo,]E 391°3) may be attributed to the Fifth Dynasty, 3. Goedicke 1960, pp. 3-6. although different dates have also been proposed. The 4· Eaton-Krauss 1984, pp. 89-94· 5. Lauer 1996. only attributable image of the later kings of this dynasty 6. Smith 1946, pp. 350-6o. is a small and possibly unfinished statuette of Menkauhor 7· Robins 1994, p. 64· (Egyptian Museum, Cairo, CG 40). 8. Kozloff and Bryan 1992, p. 133. A recent study by Romano of the fourteen securely 9· Harrell and Brown 1994, pp. 54-55· 10. Reisner 1931, pp. 123-25; Romano 1998. I would like to identified and eleven undated statues of the Sixth Dynasty express my gratitude to Dr. Romano for placing at my disposal found that many (for example, cat. no. 170) show an the galley proofs of his article prior to its publication. "exaggeration of details including wide, piercing eyes II. Smith 1946; Vandier 1958; see also Altenmiiller 1980b, and thick everted lips, bodies with unnaturalistically cols·557-63· 12. Sourouzian 1995; Stadelmann 1995b; Romano 1998. attenuated torsos, and long thin arms with little trace of 13. Verner 1994a; Verner 1995. musculature. "2.3 These characteristics are typical of the 14. Ziegler 1997a. so-called Second Style, first identified in private sculp­ 15. Dreyer 1986, pp. 101-2. ture.2.4 Romano has also noted that while many individ­ 16. Sourouzian 1995, pp. 133-40. 17. Wildung 1972. ual details appeared in earlier periods, the combination 18. Fakhry 1961b, pIs. 33-37; Stadelmann 1995b, pp. 164-66. of them is new. An example of this innovative use of 19. In this respect the facial expression on the so-called Mycerinus iconographic details is the placement of the Horus falcon (Menkaure) head at Brussels-(eat. no. 69), with its upwardly on the back pillar of an alabaster statue of Pepi I, where turned mouth, differs from other graywacke portraits of that king; see Gilbert 1961; and Tefnin 1988, pp. 18-19. it serves both as a sculpted hieroglyph of the royal name 20. Seidel 1996, pp. 51-53· and as the protector of the pharaoh (Brooklyn Museum 21. Verner 1985a; Verner 1994a, pp. 143-48. of Art, 39.120). 22. No. E.7II7; Tefnin 1988, pp. 20-21. The representation of queens is beyond the scope of 23. Romano 1998, p. 269. 24· Russmann 199p. this essay, but it may be worthwhile to note the gradual 25. A discussion of nine statues of Old Kingdom royal women was elevation of the queen from a small and subservient recently published by Fay (1998).

55