Seite 58 [58]
OCR
The concept of clustering of tombs within the Saqqara necropolis according to the profession of their owners, has recently been suggested by some scholars recently.” Malek presents the idea in his study about the tomb chapel of the ‘royal wb?’ Heqamaatreneheh that the tombs in the cemetery around the Teti pyramid seem to be grouped on the basis of professional relationships, however, he notes that the available material is insufficient for definite conclusions to be drawn.’” Raven mentions that the cemetery near the Teti pyramid seems to have been preferred by ‘royal wb3s’, as well as by gold-workers, other craftsmen and certain military officials, at the same time, he points out that this evidence is still not conclusive in itself since most of the officials bore several titles in the course of their careers and in many cases, it is not clear at all which title was considered as the most important one for them according to which they identified themselves within the social and administrative hierarchy.* Two other factors can also be considered in the organization of the tombs, as Raven also notes, the pattern of patronage when a superior official allowed a favourite assistant to be buried close to his own monument, or even within the precincts of his own funerary structure, on the one hand, and on the other hand, dynastic considerations as in the case of the layout of tombs in the vicinity of the tomb of Horemheb when the proximity of the founder of the dynasty had greater importance than other patterns of association. Based on detailed studies on different aspects of the Saqqara necropolis, Staring concluded that while the general composition of the two main cemeteries is quite comparable, differences became obvious in regard to the ranks held by the officials: the cemetery south of the Unas causeway contains the tombs of higher ranking officials than those located in the one around the Teti pyramid.’ He also presents a closer look at the case of ‘royal wb3s’ regarding the distribution of tombs within the necropolis, although without any further conclusions concerning the pattern of organization.*® However, looking at the distribution of their certain and hypothetical place of burials (Tables 9-10.), such grouping based Malek, 1985; Malek, 1988; Raven, 2000; Staring, 2017. ‚= Mälek, 1985, 50; Mälek, 1988, 136. 13 Raven, 2000, 136-137. “4 Staring, 2017, 601. 15 Staring counts eighteen officials who are represented by the available records, however, the title of Qenherkhepeshef designated as wh3 is not convincing at all according to the remaining inscription on his stone block, consequently he is not represented in the present corpus. The cloth-sign, which might mistakenly have led to the identification of Qenherkhepeshef as an wb3, should rather be considered as the determinative of the expression #3-s.t n3-S“t ‘office of letters/documents’ which forms the latter, remaining part of his title. For the photo of the stone block, see Quibell, 1908, pl. XXXVIL.1.
