This rectangular plaque of limestone is very similar in material, size, shape, and craftsmanship to
11.150.30 and may have originated from the same context. Unlike its presumable counterpart, however, it does not show part of a human figure on its front. Instead, it features a panel occupied by a short inscription formed of large-scale hieroglyphs, which are finely carved in low relief. Since the panel is slightly sunk into the surface, the hieroglyphs are surrounded on all sides by a raised margin. The inscription offers two of the most common royal titles. The "sedge" plant and the bee together with the two semi-circular loafs of bread represent the title
Nesu-bit ("Double King," commonly translated as "King of Upper and Lower Egypt"), usually preceding the cartouche with the King’s prenomen/throne name. In contrast, the vulture and the cobra in the lower row are a conventional rendering of the "Two Ladies" title, which normally introduces the second of the five traditional components of the Egyptian royal titulary. In the case of 11.150.31, however, no actual royal name is indicated, thereby creating significant challenges for the categorization and dating of the object.
Similar to 11.150.30, the limestone plaque 11.150.31 has provided researchers with many challenges regarding its date, function, and authenticity. For some years it was even considered a forgery, since the lack of clear stylistic parallels to its hieroglyphs made it suspicious. It was not until 2012 that new archaeological discoveries paved the way for a reassessment, helping to establish its likely date in the Eighth Century B.C.
Like its counterpart 11.150.30, 11.150.31 was acquired from the Egyptian art dealer N. Tano in 1911. Owing to their similarities in dimensions, style, and material, 11.150.30 and 11.150.31 were regarded as a pair, which—according to information provided by the dealer—originated in the Eastern Nile Delta. In H. E. Winlock’s first published comments of 1917 he stressed the fact that the arrangement of the royal titles with the direct sequence of the
Nesu-bit and
Nebty titles was a characteristic feature of the early pharaonic period and most typical of the first three dynasties. This assessment was in line with his dating of the plaque 11.150.30 with the royal profile, and accordingly, both artifacts ended up in W. C. Hayes’ well-known 1953 catalogue of Egyptian antiquities in the Metropolitan Museum as specimens representative of the 3rd Dynasty. In subsequent decades, however, this view lost its currency due to the fact that no convincing paleographic parallels from the Old Kingdom could be brought forward. Particularly anomalous were the overlapping arrangement of the leaves of the "sedge" plant and the almost canine-like head of the bee with its rounded snout and relatively large eye. On the known monuments of the 3rd and 4th Dynasties, the bee hieroglyph is usually rendered with a very small, pointed head and a pinhead-style eye. Taking into account the circumstances of acquisition and the many features shared between 11.150.30 and 11.150.31, any doubts raised about the authenticity of one plaque necessarily also affect the other. As a consequence, both 11.150.31 and 11.150.30 were considered problematic and taken from display.
While a number of arguments spoke against 11.150.30 being a forgery (see respective curatorial interpretation for details), it was very difficult to arrive at a favorable assessment in respect to 11.150.31. That situation only changed in 2012, when a French archaeological mission discovered re-used relief blocks from the late Third Intermediate Period at the site of Tanis in the Eastern Delta. These reused limestone blocks, which originally came from a religious building associated with King Osorkon IV of the northern 23rd Dynasty, bear reliefs with ritual scenes executed in a style similar to 11.150.30 and 11.150.31. One of the blocks even provides parallels to the arrangement of leaves of the "sedge" hieroglyph and for the peculiar rendering of the bee’s head. This archaeological find sheds new light on the probable original context of the two plaques in the Metropolitan Museum and gives weight to the assumption that they were used as sculptor’s models in preparation of a particular building project. The combination of the
Nesu-bit title and the
Nebty title may indeed indicate that the maker sought to emulate a form of royal protocol typical of the early Old Kingdom. This would be in line with the general cultural trend conventionally referred to in Egyptology as "archaism," which gained momentum during the late Ninth and Eighth Centuries B.C. In all likelihood, the plaque 11.150.31 was created to assist with the emulation of prestigious artistic styles associated with early pharaonic history. This does not mean, however, that the hieroglyphs of 11.150.31 represent the faithful copy of a particular Old Kingdom model.
Claus Jurman, University of Vienna, Department of Egyptology 2021
ReferencesH. E. Winlock, 1917. "Bas-Reliefs from the Egyptian Delta,"
BMMA 12/3, pp. 64–67 w. fig.
W. M. F. Petrie, 1917. "Review of ‘Bas-Reliefs from the Egyptian Delta,"
Ancient Egypt 4, p. 170.
W. C. Hayes, 1953.
The Scepter of Egypt, vol. I, pp. 59–61 w. fig. 38.
P. Brissaud, 2018.
Tanis : le domaine de la déesse Mout et son lac sacré.
