G 2391
Western Cemetery
Details
- ID
- G 2391
- Alternate IDs
- G2391; G 2391
- Site Name
- Western Cemetery
- Site Type
- Stone-built mastaba
- Site Dates
- type: PorterMoss Date; date: Dynasty 6
- Tomb Owner
- Yes
- Bibliography
- Brovarski, Edward. "False Doors & History: the Sixth Dynasty." In Miroslav Bárta, ed. The Old Kingdom Art and Archaeology. Proceedings of the Conference held in Prague, May 31-June 4, 2004. Prague: Czech Institute of Egyptology, 2006, pp. 94-95. Brovarski, Edward. “The Senedjemib Complex at Giza: Report on the February-March 1999 Field Season of the Giza Mastabas Project.” Annales du Service des Antiquités de l'Égypte 76 (2001), pp. 68-69, 71-72, pl. III. Brovarski, Edward. "The Senedjemib Complex at Giza: An Interim Report." L'Égyptologie en 1979. Axes prioritaires de recherches, tome II. Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique No. 595. Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1982, pp. 120-121. Porter, Bertha, and Rosalind L.B. Moss. Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs, and Paintings 3: Memphis (Abû Rawâsh to Dahshûr). Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1931. 2nd edition. 3: Memphis, Part 1 (Abû Rawâsh to Abûsîr), revised and augmented by Jaromír Málek. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1974, p. 92.
- Remarks
- There were originally four false doors (see photo HUMFA_B8533_NS): from S to N Neferi, one badly weathered (no inscription preserved?), Irenakhet, and Kaesites. Sometime before 1993 (see photo PDM_1993.117.35), the poorly preserved door was removed. Sometime between 1993 and 2004, the S door (Neferi) was shifted northwards (see photos PDM_2011.01.17_255, PDM_01113), and the wall reconstructed around the remaining three doors. There has been a great deal of confusion regarding the shafts between G 2391 and G 2450. According to unpublished manuscript page HUMFA_GN2_K12_p176, there are four shafts: (from S to N) G 2452 A, G 2389 A and B, and G 2391 X (see plan HUMFA_EG000498). However, according to the sketch plan on diary page HUMFA_Vol.04.p.062, there are only three shafts: (from S to N) G 2389 A and B, and G 2452 A. This plan seems to bear closer relation to what is visible in photos HUMFA_A816_NS, PDM_1993.117.35, and PDM_2011.01.17_254. If this is to be believed, the shaft labeled “G 2452 A” on HUMFA_EG000498 is actually G 2389 A; the shaft labeled “G 2389 A” does not exist, the shaft labeled “G 2389 B” is correct, and the shaft labeled “[G 2391] X” is actually G 2452 A. On plan HUMFA_EG023521, the southernmost shaft is labeled “G 2379 A”; this is incorrect, G 2379 A being a larger shaft located further to the SW, inside G 2379 proper. The two central shafts are labeled G 2389 A and B; G 2389 B seems to be correct, but there is no shaft visible in the alleged location of G 2389 A in photographs (see above). This plan does not show the northernmost shaft, which is hypothetically G 2452 A. G 2452 A (which was originally numbered G 2450 Y, see photo HUMFA_C5215_NS) contained a skeleton (see photo HUMFA_C5298_NS). This is perhaps PMAE_59280 (provenance listed in Peabody records and on packing list page HUMFA_PL1428 as “G 2450 X”), but this is far from certain. To summarize: the location of G 2389 B is consistent across all documentation, but G 2389 A and G 2452 A could each be either the northernmost or the southernmost shaft. Meanwhile, the shaft labeled “G 2389 A” on plans HUMFA_EG000498 and HUMFA_023521 is not visible in photographs of the area, and may or may not exist.
