Page 136 [136]
OCR
inakhtef and the grandfather of Paser, who was jmj-h.t ‘chamberlain’, might have been contemporaries, both of them in service at the court of Amenhotep II. Helck also agrees that the two name variations belong to the same person, moreover he presumes his kinship with the family of Paser.** Despite the relatively large number of his functional titles represented on his monuments, nothing can ascertained about their temporal distribution. The inscriptions on the block statue contain htp-dj-nswt formulae addressed to different gods on the front“ and praises on the sides. The stele of Paser also holds a htp-dj-nswt formula, in the frame of which a long self-presentation of Maaninakhtef can be read, full of self-praising expressions but without any biographical data. Finally, as usual, the funerary cone does not have such information either. Looking through the functional titles of Maaninakhtef, one can observe that he functioned in the royal administration, in connection with the royal domains, as well as in the royal household. His position in the latter is demonstrated by the three versions of the title that he meant as his most important one, since he repeated it nine times on his remains: wh3 nswt ‘royal wb?’ (seven times), wb} nswt wb \wj and wb3 n nswt wb wj ‘royal wb3 clean of hands’. The other titles were connected to the administration of the royal domains, and all of them derived from one function, denoted by two titles: jmj-r3 pr wr nnswt ‘high steward of the king’ and jmj-r3 pr nb n nswt ‘steward of every estate of the king’. Interestingly, all the functional titles are some sort of jmj-r3 ‘overseer’ in different areas in connection with the royal domain, such as that of the servants, the double granary, the cattle, the arable lands, bread and the peasants of the king. Except for the two latter ones, every title has a specific indicative to the ruler, clearly expressing that the titles as well as the functions themselves refer to the private properties of the king and not those of the state.45 For instance, Maaninakhtef held the title jmj-r3 snw.tj n nswt r Sm'w Mhw ‘overseer of the double granary of the king in Upper and Lower Egypt’ and not the similar title, one of the highest positions in the state administration jmj-r3 463 Helck, 1958, 367. 464 For a similar textual structure on statues, see van de Walle, 1971, 131-133; and Desroches Noblecourt — Vercoutter, 1981, 222. Helck, 1958, 103-104. Quirke does not see any evidence in the Middle Kingdom sources for private property of the king and for national land-holdings, and as he notes, the king(ship) is the state, so he does not see the high steward as manager of the private land-holdings of the king either. Quirke, 2004, 11. However, according to these titles, there was definitely a distinction between the two properties during the 18" dynasty, and a clear difference can be seen between the organization of the civil and royal administration, as Grandet names these spheres, which were responsible for the state and the royal administration respectively. See Grandet, 2013, 865-875. 46
