1887 - 68810-Full Text

Necropolis journal: daily records of events in an ancient Egyptian
artisans’ community
Morfini, I.
Citation
Morfini, I. (2019, February 21). Necropolis journal: daily records of events in an ancient
Egyptian artisans’ community. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/1887/68810
Version: Not Applicable (or Unknown)

Licence agreement concerning inclusion of doctoral thesis in the
License:
Institutional Repository of the University of Leiden
Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/68810
Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if applicable).
Cover Page
The handle http://hdl.handle.net/1887/68810 holds various files of this Leiden University

dissertation.
Author: Morfini, I.
Title: Necropolis journal: daily records of events in an ancient Egyptian artisans’
community
Issue Date: 2019-02-21
Necropolis journal:
Daily Records of events in an

Ancient Egyptian Artisans’ Community
Academisch Proefschrift
ter verkrijging van
de graad van Doctor aan de Universiteit Leiden,
op gezag van Rector Magnificus prof. mr. C.J.J.M. Stolker,
volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties
te verdedigen op donderdag 21 februari 2019 klokke 15:00 uur door
Irene Morfini
geboren te Lucca, Italië, in 1980

1
Irene Morfini Ph.D – Daily records of events in an Ancient Egyptian Artisans’ Community
Promotor: Prof. dr. O.E. Kaper
Copromotor: Dr. R.J. Demarée
Promotiecommissie: Prof. dr. A. Dorn (Uppsala University)
Dr. B.J.J. Haring
Prof. dr. J. van der Vliet
Mw. Prof. dr. Caroline Waerzeggers
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 13
1.1 Status quaestionis ............................................................................................... 14

1.2 Research questions ............................................................................................. 20
1.2.a Did the concept of a Necropolis journal exist? ............................................. 20
1.2.b What do the different kinds of annals and day-books have in common? ..... 20
1.2.c Who was the intended readership of the day-books? .................................. 21
1.2.d How many types of journal can we identify?................................................ 21
1.2.d How can the list of documents become a useful updatable tool
available to all scholars interested in the subject?................................................ 22
2. RESEARCH CONTEXT
2.1 The village ........................................................................................................... 23

2.2 The workmen of Deir el-Medina ........................................................................... 24
2.3 Necropolis journal and writing material ................................................................ 26
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 A journal in Ancient Egypt .................................................................................... 30

3.2 The corpus of documents .................................................................................... 32
3.3 Who was reading a Necropolis journal? ............................................................... 32
3.4 Variety of journals ................................................................................................ 33
3.5 The future of the journals ..................................................................................... 33
PART II
4. WHAT WAS CONSIDERED A JOURNAL IN ANCIENT EGYPT
4.1 The notion of journal in a broader Egyptian perspective....................................... 35

4.2 Overview of annals and day-books ...................................................................... 43
4.2.a The Papyri of Wadi el-Jarf........................................................................... 44
4.2.b The Palermo Stone ..................................................................................... 48
4.2.c The South Saqqara Stone ........................................................................... 51
4.2.d The Gebelein Papyri ................................................................................... 51
4.2.e The Abusir Papyri and the “new” Abusir Papyri ........................................... 52
4.2.f The Reisner Papyri ...................................................................................... 58
4.2.g The Illahun archives .................................................................................... 62
4.2.h The Annals of Amenemhat II ....................................................................... 68
4.2.i The Ramesseum Papyri ............................................................................... 70
4.2.j The Middle Kingdom Tax Assessor’s Day-book ........................................... 76
4.2.k Papyrus Boulaq 18. ..................................................................................... 78
4.2.l Papyrus Louvre E. 3226. .............................................................................. 80
4.2.m The Annals of Thutmose III ........................................................................ 86
3
4.2.n The Papyri Brooklyn 35.1453 A and B ........................................................ 88

4.2.o The Rollin Papyri (accounts of Sethi I) ........................................................ 92
4.2.p The Ship’s log of Leiden I 350 verso and Papyrus Turin 2008+2016........... 95
4.2.q Tomb construction journal of Saqqara....................................................... 100
4.3 Similarities and differences ................................................................................ 101
4.3.a Other scribal traditions .............................................................................. 115
5. LIST OF NECROPOLIS JOURNALS FROM DEIR EL-MEDINA
5.1 The creation of the list: criteria ........................................................................... 118

5.2 The list ............................................................................................................... 124
5.2.a First section: documents dated with certainty ............................................ 125
5.2.b Second section: documents not dated with certainty ................................. 153
6. THE STUDY OF THE JOURNALS (IN A SEPARATE APPENDIX)
PART III
7. DISCUSSION
7.1 The concept of a Necropolis journal ...................................................................... 181

7.2 Readership of the day-books ................................................................................ 182
7.2.a Day-books for internal use? ...................................................................... 186

7.2.b Day-books to be audited? ......................................................................... 188
7.3 Different types of journal ....................................................................................... 190

7.3.a Classification according to the type of information and contents ............... 195
7.3.b Charts of the data obtained ...................................................................... 205
7.4. The database ....................................................................................................... 211

7.4.a The initial idea ........................................................................................... 211
7.4.b The website ............................................................................................. 212
FINAL CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................... 217
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................. 220
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................... 258
4
IN A SEPARATE APPENDIX
6. THE STUDY OF THE JOURNALS
6.1 Dynasty XVIII ....................................................................................................... -2-

O. Ashmolean Museum 0007............................................................................... -2-
6.2 Dynasty XIX ......................................................................................................... -7-

6.2.a Ramesses II ................................................................................................ -7-
O. Cairo 25645 ............................................................................................. -7-
O. Cairo 25803 ............................................................................................. -8-
O. Cairo 25502 ........................................................................................... -10-
O. Cairo CG 25815a and b ......................................................................... -13-
O. University of Memphis Expedition n. 97 .................................................. -16-
6.2.b Merenptah................................................................................................. -19-

O. Cairo 25581 ........................................................................................... -19-
O. Cairo 25552 ........................................................................................... -21-
O. Valley of Kings, Area A, Square G 0, between KV 62 and KV 7 ............. -22-
O. Cairo 25504 ........................................................................................... -23-
O. DM 594 .................................................................................................. -30-
P. Berlin 23300 and 23301.......................................................................... -31-
P. Ashmolean Museum 1960.1283 ............................................................. -41-
6.5.c Amenmesse .............................................................................................. -46-

O. Cairo 25779 ........................................................................................... -46-
O. Varille 26 ................................................................................................ -55-
O. Ashmolean Museum 0290 ...................................................................... -57-
O. Cairo 25780 ........................................................................................... -58-
O. Cairo 25782 ........................................................................................... -59-
O. Cairo 25783 ........................................................................................... -67-
O. Cairo 25784 ........................................................................................... -76-
O. DM 898 .................................................................................................. -78-
6.2.d Sethi II ...................................................................................................... -82-

HO 64, 1 (O. MMA 14.6.217) ...................................................................... -82-
O. Cairo 25509 ........................................................................................... -85-
O. Cairo 25510 ........................................................................................... -91-
O. Berlin P 14842........................................................................................ -93-
O. DM 889 .................................................................................................. -96-
O. Cairo CG 25529 ..................................................................................... -98-
O. Cairo 25512 ......................................................................................... -107-
O. Cairo 25516 ......................................................................................... -109-
O. Cairo 25517 ......................................................................................... -114-
O. Cairo 25538 ......................................................................................... -121-
O. Cairo 25515 ......................................................................................... -122-
6.2.e Siptah ..................................................................................................... -148-

O. Cairo 25515 ......................................................................................... -148-
O. Cairo 25536 ......................................................................................... -148-
5
O. Cairo 25516 ......................................................................................... -152-

O. Cairo 25525 ......................................................................................... -152-
O. Cairo 25518 ......................................................................................... -153-
O. Cairo 25517 ......................................................................................... -156-
O. Cairo 25519 ......................................................................................... -156-
O. Cairo JE 72475 (old text) ..................................................................... -160-
O. DM 908 ................................................................................................ -161-
O. Cairo 25521 ......................................................................................... -165-
O. Ashmolean Museum 0118 .................................................................... -174-
O. DM 10052 ............................................................................................ -176-
O. Cairo JE 72451 .................................................................................... -179-
O. DM 10051 ............................................................................................ -179-
P. Greg P.UC 34336 ................................................................................. -182-
O. DM 899 ................................................................................................ -199-
O. DM 909 ................................................................................................ -202-
O. DM 910 ................................................................................................ -203-
6.3 Dynasty XX ...................................................................................................... -207-

6.3.a Ramesses III ........................................................................................... -207-
O. DM 99 .................................................................................................. -207-
O. DM 253 ................................................................................................ -208-
O. Turin 57020 .......................................................................................... -210-
O. Varille 36 .............................................................................................. -211-
O. DM 422 ................................................................................................ -212-
O. Turin 57034 .......................................................................................... -214-
O. Turin 57047 .......................................................................................... -216-
O. Turin 57026 .......................................................................................... -221-
O. DM 625 ................................................................................................ -225-
O. Turin 57027 .......................................................................................... -227-
O. Turin 57046 .......................................................................................... -229-
O. Turin 57039 .......................................................................................... -233-
O. DM 164 ................................................................................................ -236-
O. Turin 57029 .......................................................................................... -238-
O. IFAO [unnumbered]+O. Varille 06 ........................................................ -240-
O. Turin 57028 .......................................................................................... -243-
O. Turin 57056 .......................................................................................... -247-
O. Gardiner AG 139 .................................................................................. -251-
O. Turin 57055 .......................................................................................... -251-
O. Turin 57033 .......................................................................................... -253-
O. DM 32 .................................................................................................. -256-
O. UC 39648 ............................................................................................. -259-
O. UC 39626 ............................................................................................ -263-
O. Turin 57031 .......................................................................................... -266-
O. Glasgow D.1925.67 .............................................................................. -268-
O. Glasgow D.1925.76 .............................................................................. -273-
O. Berlin P 12295...................................................................................... -277-
O. Turin 57475 .......................................................................................... -280-
O. DM 654 ................................................................................................ -281-
O. Hildesheim 5464 .................................................................................. -284-
O. Turin 57044 .......................................................................................... -285-
O. DM 148 ................................................................................................ -288-
O. IFAO 00284 + O. IFAO 00285 + O. IFAO 00286 + O. IFAO 00287 ...... -292-
O. Turin 57153 .......................................................................................... -294-
6
O. DM 911 ................................................................................................ -296-

O. DM 653 ................................................................................................ -300-
O. DM 633 ................................................................................................ -303-
O. DM 33 .................................................................................................. -305-
O. IFAO 00253.......................................................................................... -308-
O. DM 00034 + O. Heidelberg Inv. Nr. 567 ............................................... -310-
O. DM 427 ................................................................................................ -315-
O. DM 156 ................................................................................................ -320-
O. Berlin P 10663...................................................................................... -323-
O. Turin 57007 r° ...................................................................................... -324-
O. DM 284 ................................................................................................ -326-
O. Berlin P 10633...................................................................................... -329-
O. Berlin P 14689...................................................................................... -331-
O. DM 604 ................................................................................................ -333-
O. Turin 57007 v° ...................................................................................... -334-
O. Cairo 25530 ......................................................................................... -337-
O. IFAO 1255+O.Varille 39 ....................................................................... -338-
O. Brussel E. 7359 .................................................................................... -345-
O. DM 330 ................................................................................................ -347-
P. Turin 2006+1961 .................................................................................. -349-
P. Turin Cat. 1880 ..................................................................................... -353-
O. DM 98 .................................................................................................. -385-
O. Prague H 14 ......................................................................................... -386-
O. DM 55 .................................................................................................. -389-
O. DM 158 ................................................................................................ -390-
O. DM 36 .................................................................................................. -392-
O. DM 578 ................................................................................................ -397-
O. DM 37 .................................................................................................. -398-
O. Michaelides 073 ................................................................................... -400-
O. DM 38 .................................................................................................. -402-
O. DM 39+174 .......................................................................................... -405-
P. Turin 1949+1946 .................................................................................. -410-
O. Turin 57432 .......................................................................................... -416-
O. IFAO 00268 + O. IFAO 00278 .............................................................. -419-
O. Turin 57156 .......................................................................................... -420-
O. Berlin P 14255...................................................................................... -422-
O. Louvre E 13160 .................................................................................... -423-
O. Louvre E 25325 .................................................................................... -425-
6.3.b Ramesses IV .......................................................................................... -429-

O. DM 39+174 .......................................................................................... -429-
P. Turin 1949+1946 .................................................................................. -429-
O. Berlin P 12631...................................................................................... -429-
O. DM 40+O.Strasbourg H. 042 ................................................................ -435-
O. DM 41+ O. Berlin P 12626 ................................................................... -440-
O. DM 42 .................................................................................................. -445-
O. DM 43 .................................................................................................. -449-
O. DM 47 .................................................................................................. -452-
O. Berlin P 12641+12628 .......................................................................... -458-
O. DM 161+O.Berlin P 12640+Strasbourg H82 ......................................... -463-
O. DM 44 .................................................................................................. -470-
O. IFAO 00295.......................................................................................... -477-
O. DM 45 .................................................................................................. -478-
7
O. DM 46 .................................................................................................. -483-
P. Turin 1891 r°......................................................................................... -487-
HO 73, 1 (O. Ashmolean Museum 0113) ................................................. -489-
O. DM 401 ................................................................................................ -493-
O. MMA 14.6.216 ...................................................................................... -496-
O. Cairo CG 25266 ................................................................................... -499-
O. DM 398 ................................................................................................ -502-
O. Cairo CG 25271 ................................................................................... -506-
O. IFAO 00383.......................................................................................... -508-
O. Cairo CG 25272 ................................................................................... -509-
O. Berlin P 09897...................................................................................... -510-
O. Cairo CG 25274 ................................................................................... -511-
O. Berlin P 09906...................................................................................... -512-
O. DM 657 ................................................................................................ -513-
P. Turin PN 109 (Provv. 6258) ................................................................. -515-
O. DM 393 ................................................................................................ -519-
O. DM 617 ................................................................................................ -521-
O. DM 10049 ............................................................................................ -522-
O. Cairo CG 25303 ................................................................................... -523-
6.3.c Ramesses V............................................................................................ -524-

O. Cairo 25609 ......................................................................................... -524-
P. Turin 2044 ............................................................................................ -528-
P. Turin 2002 r°......................................................................................... -535-
6.3.d Ramesses VI .......................................................................................... -547-

HO 68, 1 (O. BM EA 50722 + O. Cairo CG 25726 + 660) ......................... -547-
O. Cairo 25254 ......................................................................................... -550-
O. Cairo 25256 ......................................................................................... -551-
O. BtdK 659 .............................................................................................. -551-
O. Ashmolean Museum 0302+O. Ashmolean Museum 0342 rev .............. -555-
P. Bibliotheque Nationale 237, Carton 1 ................................................... -557-
O. Cairo 25566 ......................................................................................... -559-
O. Cairo 25269 ......................................................................................... -561-
P. Turin 1885 v° ........................................................................................ -562-
6.3.e Ramesses VII ......................................................................................... -565-

P. Turin 1885 v° col. III, l. 3-8 .................................................................... -565-
P. Turin 2070/154 ..................................................................................... -566-
P. Turin 1883+2095 .................................................................................. -572-
O. Cairo CG 25297 ................................................................................... -577-
6.3.f Ramesses IX ........................................................................................... -578-

O. Ashmolean Museum 0187 rev. ............................................................ -578-
P. Milan E 0.9.40126 + P. Milan E 0.9.40128 ............................................ -580-
P. Turin 2013 + P. Turin 2050 + P. Turin 2061 .......................................... -587-
P. Turin 2002 r° (col. IV end of line 21 and lines 22-23) + P. Turin 2002 v°-612-
P. Milan E 0.9.40127 + P. Turin fragment gamma + P. Turin 2074 ........... -630-
P. Turin 2072/142 ..................................................................................... -640-
8
P. Turin 1900 + P. Turin 2048 + P. Turin 2088 + P. Turin 2093 + P. Turin

2097 + P. Turin 2101 ................................................................................ -644-
P. Turin [unnumbered 1] .......................................................................... -652-
P. Turin 54021 .......................................................................................... -654-
O. Cairo CG 25305 ................................................................................... -659-
P. Turin 2071/224 [140]+frgt ..................................................................... -661-
P. Turin 1891 v° ........................................................................................ -664-
P. Turin 2087 v° ........................................................................................ -666-
Giornale, pl. 4-7 (P. Turin 1999 + P. Turin 2009 v°) .................................. -668-
O. Léningrad 2973 r°................................................................................. -676-
O. Cairo 25299 ......................................................................................... -677-
HO 69, 1 (O. BM EA 05672 + O. Cairo CG 25649) .................................. -678-
P. Turin 2071/224+1960 ........................................................................... -681-
P. Turin Cat. 1884 + P. Turin Cat. 2067 + P. Turin Cat. 2071 + P. Turin Cat.
2105.......................................................................................................... -689-
2082 + P. Turin Cat. 2083 verso (Giornale year 17B)................................ -697-
2078 recto (Giornale year 17A) ................................................................. -733-
2082 + P. Turin Cat. 2083 recto (Giornale year 17B) ................................ -741-
2078 verso (Giornale year 17A) ................................................................ -766-
P. Turin Cat. 2106 + P. Turin Cat. 2107 ................................................... -773-
O. Cairo CG 25314 ................................................................................... -744-
6.3.g Ramesses X ........................................................................................... -775-

Giornale, pl. 50-63 (P. Turin 1898 + P. Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P. Turin
2094) ....................................................................................................... -888-
O. Cairo CG 25244 ................................................................................... -797-
6.3.h Ramesses XI .......................................................................................... -798-

Giornale, pl. 50-63 (P. Turin 1898 + P. Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P. Turin
2094) ....................................................................................................... -798-
P. Turin 1895 + P. Turin 2006 Turin taxation papyrus ............................... -799-
P. BM EA 09997 ....................................................................................... -815-
Gardiner, RAD, 64-68 (P. Turin 1888 + P. Turin 2085) ............................. -818-
P. Turin 2094 [1] ...................................................................................... -824-
O. Cairo CG 25243 ................................................................................... -828-
9
LIST OF FIGURES
fig. 1 Wadi el-Jarf papyrus. After Ahram Online. (In the photo the praenomen and the Horus name of
Cheops are visible)........................................................................................................................................... 46
Fig. 2 Wadi el-Jarf papyrus. Accounts recorded in tabular form. After Tallet-Marouard 2014, 7 .................. 46
Fig. 3 Wadi el-Jarf papyrus. The log book of captain Merer. Photo by Mostafa AlSaghir (Cairo Museum,
temporary exhibition, July 2016)..................................................................................................................... 47
Fig. 4 Wadi el-Jarf papyrus. Transcription of the first columns of the log book shown in fig. 3. The days are
written in the upper horizontal boxes. The events of each day are recorded in two vertical columns. After
Tallet 2016, 29 ................................................................................................................................................. 47
Fig. 5 Fragment of the Palermo stone, face side. After Wilkinson 2000 ......................................................... 50
Fig. 6 Abusir papyrus. Detail of a duty-table. After Posener-Kriéger 1968, pl. IIIa......................................... 56
Fig. 7 P. Reisner I Section B. After Simpson 1963, pl. 2a ................................................................................. 60
Fig. 8 Illahun papyrus. Fragments of journal. UC 32190. After Griffith 1898, pl. XXII ..................................... 64
Fig. 9 Illahun papyrus. Fragments of journal. UC 32190. After Griffith 1898, pl. XXII ..................................... 65
Fig. 10 Illahun papyrus. Fragments of journal. UC 32190. After Griffith 1898, pl. XXIII .................................. 66
Fig. 11 Illahun papyrus. Fragments of journal. UC 32190. After Griffith 1898, pl. XXIII .................................. 67
Fig. 12 Annals of Amenemhat II, Farag-block. After Altenmüller 2015, Falttafel............................................ 70
Fig. 13 Page five of Semna Dispatches. After Smither 1945, pl. VIa................................................................ 72
Fig. 14 Accounts, P. Ram. III verso. After Barns 1956, pl. 24 ........................................................................... 74
Fig. 15 Papyrus Ram. XIII verso. After www.britishmuseum.org .................................................................... 75
Fig. 16 Papyrus Ram. XIII verso. After Gardiner 1955, fig. 1............................................................................ 75
Fig. 17 Papyrus Harageh 3. After Smither 1941, pl. IXa................................................................................... 77
Fig. 18 Papyrus Boulaq 18, detail of event text on year 3. After Mariette 1872, pl. 30. Transcription after
Scharff 1922, pl. 15** ...................................................................................................................................... 79
Fig. 19 Papyrus Boulaq 18. Column 12. Balance sheet. After Mariette 1872, pl. 18 ....................................... 79
Fig. 20 Papyrus Boulaq 18 column 51. Black horizontal guidelines dividing the data. After Mariette 1872, pl.
31 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 80
Fig. 21 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226. Frag. A recto IV. After Megally 1971b, pl. IV ................................................ 82
Fig. 22 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226. Frag. A recto VII. After Megally 1971b, pl. VII .............................................. 83
Fig. 23 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226. General plan, left part of Megally’s plate. After Megally 1971b, pl. LXIIa ... 84
Fig. 24 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226. General plan, right part of Megally’s plate. After Megally 1971b, pl. LXIIb . 85
Fig. 25 Thutmose III Annals, cols. 1-13, the beginning of the first campaign. After Redford 2003, fig. 1 ....... 87
Fig. 26 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 A recto, after
https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/45059/Fragment............................................. 89
Fig. 27 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 A recto, after Condon 1984, 60-61 ........................................................... 90
Fig. 28 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 A recto, after Condon 1984, 62................................................................. 91
Fig. 29 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 B recto, after
https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/45059/Fragment............................................. 91
Fig. 30 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 B recto, after Condon 1984, 77 ................................................................. 92
Fig. 31 Papyrus Rollin 1884. After Spiegelberg 1896, pl. VIIa, corresponding to Pleyte 1868 Pl. VII ............. 93
Fig. 32 Papyrus 1889. After Spiegelberg 1896, Pl. IVb, corresponding to Pleyte 1868 Pl. XVII-XX.................. 94
Fig. 33 Papyrus Leiden I 350 verso, detail of col V. After www.rmo.nl/collectie/ .......................................... 96
Fig. 34 Papyrus Leiden I 350 verso, detail. After Janssen 1961 ....................................................................... 97
10
Fig. 35 Papyrus Turin 2008+2016 recto, details. After Janssen 1961 .............................................................. 99
Fig. 36 Part of papyrus JE 52002, recto. After Posener-Kriéger 1981, 48 ..................................................... 101
Fig. 37 Papyrus Gebelein III, after Posener-Kriéger 2004, recto (Pl. 22) above and a modern empty Excel
sheet below. If we compare the grid made on the ancient papyrus with the Excel page, a modern
spreadsheet for calculation and organisation of data, we can see many similarities. The space is divided into
grids by means of columns and lines and usually headings are written at top of the page in order to
organise the information. .............................................................................................................................. 114
Fig. 38 Chart representing the groups of documents divided per single pharaoh (the results are obviously
limited to the fact that there are some short and some long reigns; the chart does not give us firm statistics,
but merely an indication) .............................................................................................................................. 206
Fig. 39 Chart representing the groups of documents divided per dynasty ................................................... 207
Fig. 40 Chart representing the documents on papyri divided per group ...................................................... 209
Fig. 41 Chart representing the documents on ostraca divided per group .................................................... 210
Fig. 42 Example of a page of the database .................................................................................................... 212
Fig. 43 Chart representing distribution in time of journals written on ostraca vs journals written on papyri
(only documents dated with certainty). Considering what was stated on p. 28, that 40% of the papyri is
palimpsest, we can imagine that papyri with records now dated to R. IX, X or XI earlier may have carried
records dating to R. VI, VII or VIII. This would change the picture of the chart. ........................................... 213
Fig. 44 Chart representing the number of ostraca vs the number of papyri (the whole corpus) ................. 213
Fig. 45 The homepage of the website ........................................................................................................... 216
11
PART I
12
1. Introduction
The past century has seen the appearance of an impressive number of studies, both
general and detailed, on the artisan’s community of Deir el-Medina.
Since the first official excavations at the site of Deir el-Medina by Schiaparelli (1905-
1909), followed by Baraize (1912), Möller (1911-1913) and Bruyère (1922-1951), a
yearly growing number of books and articles have been published, touching upon almost
every aspect of the life and work of the inhabitants of this unique village. Objects from
this site had already been noticed in the late 19th century, but the function or status of
their original owners remained unknown. The meaning of their title was first correctly
identified by Černý in his article “L'identité des ‘Serviteurs dans la Place de Verité’ et des
ouvriers de la nécropole royale de Thèbes” (1929). To him we owe the knowledge that
they were actually the artisan workers responsible for the creation of the royal sepulchers
in the Valley of Kings and the Valley of Queens dating to the New Kingdom. Many years
later Cerný also was the author of a posthumously published work “A Community of
Workmen at Thebes in the Ramesside Period” (1973a), which until today is still a
comprehensive study of the workmen or artisans of that community. In 1985 another
fundamental and essential work about Deir el-Medina, notably with detailed chapters on
the ancient documents, was published by Valbelle: “Les ouvriers de la Tombe. Deir el-
Médineh à l'époque Ramesside”.
Although since then many ostraca and papyri have been partially published, a substantial
number of documents once studied by scholars like Gardiner, Peet and Černý are still
available only in transcriptions or summary translations (like in Kitchen, Ramesside
Inscriptions. Historical and Biographical = KRI, 1975-1990), without any photo or
facsimile. This state of affairs severely hampers knowledge about format and layout of
the documents. With regard to translations, especially those by Allam 1973, Kitchen
1993ff (Kitchen, Ramesside Inscriptions Translated & Annotated: Translations = RITA,
and Kitchen, Ramesside Inscriptions Translated & Annotated: Notes & Comments =
RITANC), McDowell 1999 and Helck 2000 are useful, although most are often
fragmentary and selective, as the authors often only translated what they needed for
their own purposes1.
1
The work of Helck presents many mistakes and needs to be cautiously used. Demarée
(Demarée 2004, 286-294) offers a list of major remarks, corrections and notes to this work.
13
A primary research tool for the study of the written documents that have been preserved
from the artisan workers’ community is the Deir el-Medina Database2, which enables the
user to retrieve information on the documents relevant to his researches from the corpus
of non-literary or administrative texts produced by the “workmen of the Tomb3”.
From these texts, insight has been gained into all aspects of the life and times of these
artisan workmen, their work, their collective administration, their private affairs and their
contacts with higher authorities and the world outside their village. Amongst this mass of
records, a certain type has been given a specific name ever since the first publication of
such documents from the late 20th Dynasty by Botti and Peet 1928 (“Il Giornale della
Necropoli di Tebe”). They were collectively labeled as “the Journal of the Necropolis” or
later “Journal of the Necropolis”. Since they clearly record first of all “activities” or “events”
linked to specific dates, the question has arisen as to whether indeed this was a specific
type of document.
In order to understand how the idea and notion of “a journal” and notably “an events
journal” developed amongst Egyptologists, it is necessary to discuss the various
fundamental publications on this subject.
1.1 Status quaestionis

In the introduction of “Il Giornale della Necropoli di Tebe” (Botti and Peet 1928, 5 and 7),
referring to the documents presented in the volume, it is said that “abbiamo di preferenza
rivolta l’attenzione ai papiri di carattere civile amministrativo che riguardano la necropoli
di Tebe […] e fra questi […] quelli che contengono il Giornale, in gran parte tuttora
inedito”. Further on, in reference to the Drovetti collection, the term “the journal” is used
again “L’ornamento più prezioso di questi papiri è però il Giornale” 4.
2
Demarée-Haring 1999 and online at: http://dmd.wepwawet.nl/
3
It is worth noting that in the previous publicatios (except Valebelle 1985), the workmen of Deir
el-Medina used to be called “workmen of the Necropolis”, while nowadays we refer to them as
“workmen of the Tomb”, since the institution to which they belonged actually was locally known
as “the Tomb”.
4
Some fragments of texts included in the publication of Botti and Peet had already been published
by Pleyte and Rossi in 1869 in Papyrus de Turin, but they were not called Giornale. The second
half of the first page, the second and third page of the Giornale dell’anno 17, and part of the fifth
and sixth page, indeed, had already been published in 1869 (Pleyte-Rossi 1869, Pl. XCIV and
130-131; Pleyte-Rossi 1869, Pl. XCII and 128-128). In that publication, however, the papyri later
labelled Giornale are called “fragments de compte”.
14
The administrative papyri concerning the Necropolis are here for the first time called
journals5. The title of the book clearly indicates a typology of documents, but no
explanation is given in the introduction or elsewhere for the choice of this name nor any
criteria to recognise such documents and distinguish them from others. The existence of
such a genre is taken for granted and no question is raised about the meaning of this
strict classification. Botti and Peet speak about the journal, and that led following
generations of Egyptologists to think that there was such a thing as the one and only
journal, although neither Botti-Peet nor later Valbelle, with a promising title “Le Journal
de la Tombe” say clearly what makes these documents the journal (worth noting, Valbelle
provides already the correct term ‘la Tombe’ almost innocently. See further p.18).
Since Botti and Peet 1928, the term journal is thus used to identify administrative
records on papyri and ostraca describing activities of the community of Deir el-Medina.
Nobody seems to have felt the need to investigate the intrinsic meaning of the term.
In the introduction of Hieratic Ostraca 1957, Gardiner and Černý wanted to define the
word ‘ostracon’ more precisely and “to state explicitly the extent of the field which it will
be used to cover”, but no question is raised about the term ‘journal’ which is then used
to define the content of some of the ostraca (“journal of work on the Royal Tomb”).
On pp. 34-35 a classification of the documents included in the book is attempted
according to their contents and we find: “journal of work”, “enumeration of work or
workmen”, “distribution of victuals”, “supply of victuals”, “various accounts”, “list of
goods”6. The terms are not explained in detail and the criteria for the classification are
not provided. Most of the time the typologies seem to overlap somewhat.
In A Community of Workmen at Thebes in the Ramesside Period (Černý 1973a),
references to the Giornale of Botti and Peet are often made in the footnotes, especially
in Chapter X (104-120), and on page 226. Černý describes the notes of the so-called
journals as “papyrus diary, a veritable chronicle of the Tomb”. On page 332 it is said:
“...the scribe who kept the journal of the work and the accounts of the presence and
absence of staff of the Tomb...”. The journal is mentioned here, but its existence and
genre is taken for granted and no explanation or definition is given to the reader.
Again in 1973, a posthumously published work of Černý, The Valley of the Kings.
Fragments d'un manuscrit inachevé, mentions the “journal of work” without any further
5 Griffith 1898, 55, already called a group of fragments (A, C, and D) “official journal” as if he
would like to identify a specific typology of administrative documents, but no explanation is given
there, nor any criteria for their identification.
6 Černý 1957, 34-35.
15
explanation: page 18 (“Journals of the work were kept by scribes…”), page 37 (“…a
journal of work of the Tomb…”), and page 51 (“Into the journal of the work…”).
Valbelle, in Les ouvriers de la Tombe (1985), in the chapter dedicated to “the
journal of the tomb”, gives an overview of documents considered to be journals, but she
doesn’t give here any introduction nor any indication about the meaning of the term nor
about the kind of documents she is selecting7.
However, in the previous chapter about the archives of the tomb, she states about
the terms used for the classification of the documents that “Je suis, en même temps,
consciente de ce que peut avoir d’artificiel un essai de classification, pour nous
nécessaire, de documents que les Egyptiens de l’époque juxtaposaient ou mêlaient
volontairement”8. And further on the same page, she describes briefly the contents of the
“journal de la Tombe” as a mix of information about work, supplies and tools, food for the
workmen and the officials, important events, etc. and she states that “dans le journal,
tous les jours sont notés, avec ou sans commentaire selon l’actualité, tandis que les
autres documents ne présentent que les dates pertinentes en fonction du sujet traité”.
On page 39, regarding P. Turin Cat. 1883 (+2095) it is said that “la structure du
passage convient à un journal”. Why? What is a journal and what does it look like? What
are the criteria to define a document as such? No consideration is given to the notion of
a journal according to Egyptian standards and point of view.
Further on page 40, to understand if the document can be considered a journal, its
structure is compared with the Giornale of Botti and Peet, taking for granted that ‘the
journal’ as a genre existed and that it was the kind of document Botti and Peet published9.
Valbelle also briefly examines other types of notes that might have something in
common with the journal: “Je ne connais pas, à l’heure actuelle, de chronique
proprement semblable à celle-ci, quoiqu’on puisse la comparer aux tableaux de services
des P. Abousir10, aux registres des P. Reisner I et III11, au «Tempel Tagebuch» des P.
Illahoun12 ou encore aux deux journaux de bord des P. Leyde 350 v° et P. Turin cat.
2008 + 201613. Les premiers, par leur structure même de tableaux (plus ou moins
détaillés), ont une forme plus systématique. Leur propos aussi est assez éloigné,
puisqu’il s’agit essentiellement d’indiquer nominativement la tâche quotidienne dans le
temple d’un personnel employé par roulement. Les inventaires, comptabilités, listes de
7 Valbelle 1985, 33-35.

8 Valbelle 1985, 27-32.
9 Valbelle 1985, 40, note 2.
10 Posener-Kriéger 1976.
11 Simpson 1963 and Simpson 1969.
12 Griffith 1898.
13 Janssen 1961.
16
fonctionnaires semblent tous des documents très spécialisés et je ne vois pas, dans ces
archives, apparemment tenues avec une grande minutie, de document à la fois régulier
par ses notations journalières, hybride et souple dans le choix des informations retenues,
comme l’est le journal de la Tombe14”.
Papyrus Reisner I and III are more similar to a journal according to Valbelle
because of their contents: the scene is a building site, and the progress of the work is
presented in large “tableaux-calendriers”, lists of workers and some accounts. The main
purpose of the texts is the accounting of working days to control productivity.
With Papyri Illahun, Valbelle states that the context is a funerary temple, but the
fragments are too small to attempt a true comparison. It seems to be a daily log, with
information on the various activities of the temple, personnel, land and wages.
Regarding ship's logs, Valbelle notes that they record the daily progress of boats,
the nature of their cargo, crew rations of bread and the correspondence between boat
owners and captains. A variety of content and the irregularity of the layout are similar in
many respects to Necropolis journals, but the setting is obviously different.
Valbelle thus briefly analyses different kinds of notes that can be compared with
the journal, but she never poses the question whether such a Necropolis journal existed
and what, according to Egyptian standards, a journal would eventually have looked like.
Some years later, Janssen (Demarée and Egberts 1992, 91) presents a list of
journal texts on ostraca describing what we should call a “typical journal” and providing
the (insufficient) criteria for the inclusion of a document in such a list: “...the possibility of
dating it [i.e. the ostracon] after the names,...besides, of course, being a day-by-day
record of deliveries to the workmen”.
Häggman, in Directing Deir el-Medina. The External Administration of the
Necropolis (2002), in the background information, writes a short paragraph about
“Administrative documents: the necropolis journal and other work-related texts” 15. She
accepts the earlier definition of the documents that she is analysing as “journals”: “a
series of records of the daily activities of the Necropolis is found in log form, in texts
representing what is called the Necropolis Journal”.
In Donker van Heel and Haring (2003, 68), Donker van Heel differs from Janssen’s
view about the definition of Necropolis journal saying: “It appears, then, that our views
differ on what a necropolis journal really is. To my mind ‘the’ necropolis journal of Deir
el-Medina would be made up of two separate but equal parts, namely the labour journal
14 Valbelle 1985, 45-49.

15 Häggman 2002, 19-20.
17
made at the worksite and the duty-roster and day-to-day deliveries to the workmen,
probably at the xtm16”.
Summing up, while both Griffith (1898) and Botti and Peet (1928) did not bother to define
what a journal is, Valbelle (1985), Janssen (1992) and Häggman (2002), offer us at least
a few suitable criteria, albeit still unsufficient, for the definition and identification of
journal(s) as genre: a series of day-by-day records of daily activities of the Necropolis
including details about work, supplies and administrative matters, but also including
notes on official important events like the death of the sovereign. Nonetheless, what the
ancient Egyptians would have understood by the term ‘Necropolis journal’ was never
investigated and therefore needs to be ascertained.
Before presenting what our intention is in the present work, a clarification about the term
is needed: the term ‘necropolis journal’ is actually a misnomer. This is not a journal of a
necropolis as cemetery, but rather a journal of the daily affairs of an institution called
“The Tomb”, therefore “Necropolis” with a capital “N”. The term was coined by Botti and
Peet and also used by scholars such as Gardiner and Černý, based on the translation of
the term pA xr as “the tomb”, “the necropolis”, but since an institution is meant (the
department that employed the Deir el-Medina gang of artisans to build royal tombs), it is
now common to write the term with a capital “N”. The same applies (see note 3) to “the
gang of the Tomb/Necropolis”, denoting again the group of artisans at Deir el-Medina.
It is also worth noting that unfortunately these texts do not refer to themselves. There
are no internal references that can clarify us what they were called and what they meant
for the Ancient Egyptians. The lack of a specific term is clear, for example, in a letter
(Papyrus DM 2817) to the chief workmen, in which the vizier Neferronpet confirms that
he has received their r-a-sS.w (verso 1). Eyre18 translates the term as “drawing
equipments(??)”, while, according to Neveu19, this word can stand both for a process
and for its result and, in this context, it seems possible that the term refers to a document
containing technical administrative data for the construction of the royal tomb,
instructions to start or to continue work on the site. The word itself, to our mind, means
nothing more than writings, documents20, a very generic word that indicates the absence
of a precise term to define what eventually was a Necropolis journal. In Papyrus JE
16
For hypothesis on the role and location of the xtm n pA xr see Burkard 2006.
17
Černý 1986, 5, pls. 18-19a.
18
Eyre 1987, 18-19.
19
Neveu 1990.
20
See Papyrus Ambras 1, 5 (KRI VI 837, 1): “Total: papyrus rolls which were in the jar, 9
documents” (r-a-sS.w). That the nine r-a-sS.w mentioned are written documents is no doubt here;
they contain records on robberies, thieves and stolen goods.
18
52002 line 4 (the tomb construction journal of Saqqara, see further Chapter 4.2.q) r-a-
sS.w is indicated to describe the “documents of all the commissioned works which are to
be executed on the construction site of the Place of Eternity…”.
Furthermore, in a fragment of an unpublished journal from year 14, in Cartellina F
257 in Turin, it is noted that there seems to be a special box for keeping the “writings of
the lists of workmen”: afD.t sS.w n p3 imy-rn=f21). Here once again, what we expect to be a
Necropolis journal, is described as ‘writings’.
Before trying to understand the Egyptian point of view about the so-called journal, we
need to determine what a journal is for us nowadays. The Oxford English Dictionary
provides the following definitions22 for the words “journal”, “diary” and “log”:
Journal: “1. (In bookkeeping by double entry) book in which each transaction is entered,
with statement of accounts to which it is to be debited and credited. 2. Daily record of
events.” Journal comes from Latin diurnalis, meaning diurnal, daily.
A day-by-day kind of note is therefore expected.
Diary: “Daily record of events or thoughts, journal; book prepared for keeping this in;
book etc. with daily memoranda esp. for persons of a particular profession.” Diary comes
from Latin diarium (dies = day).
Here as well the main thing to expect is a day-by-day list of information.
Log: “3. ~-(-book), book with permanent record made of all events occurring during
ship’s or aircraft’s voyage(s) (including rate of ship’s progress shown by log).”
The daily record of notes is not fundamental here, even if the writer is supposed to write
down and note the events at a consistent frequency.
Nowadays the term journal is therefore used for both account journal (intended as a
double-entry bookkeeping system) and event journal, intended as a daily record of
events (e.g. a newspaper published everyday23). Concerning the event journal, both the
facts which happened and those which still need to happen are included (on newspapers
21
For the word afD.t. as ‘chest’ for documents see Demarée 2005, 10-11 (BM EA 75017 recto 3)
and 21-22 (BM EA 75021 verso 9).
22 The Oxford English Dictionary 1982.
23
An Italian newspaper issued daily since 1974 is very simply called Il Giornale.
19
for example, we usually find news of the last events happened in the world but also
weather forecast, horoscope, and events which will happen during the coming days).
Our first and basic intention in this study is therefore to try to answer the
questions: What is a ‘Necropolis journal’ and did the concept of a Necropolis
journal exist in the minds of the scribes of Deir el-Medina?
What the Ancient Egyptians understood by this term should be investigated. Detailed
research questions will now follow.
1.2 Research questions
1.2.a Did the concept of a Necropolis journal exist?
As we have seen above, the texts called “Giornale della necropoli di Tebe” have been
known since Botti and Peet’s 1928 work. Until this publication, such Necropolis
documents were unknown. Is it correct to define such notes as journals? What was their
format? Would they be considered to be journals from an ancient Egyptian point of view?
The need at the time was to manage a community of workers. Was the journal the
administration’s answer to this need? This type of document Botti and Peet published,
according to scholars and to the keyword in the Deir el-Medina database, are commonly
labelled journals24.
The crucial research questions to answer in this study must therefore be: What is a
Necropolis journal and, primarly, did the concept of a Necropolis journal exist?
In order to answer these questions, the definition of journal in Egyptian terms must be
ascertained.
1.2.b What do the different kinds of annals and day-books have in common?
In order to understand what in Egyptian terms a journal would or should look like, an
overview of annals and day-books, ranging from the Old Kingdom until the New
Kingdom, is therefore, according to me, necessary (Chapter 4). Comparing common
features and differences amongst the material, we want to extract the guidelines which
will allow me to formulate the necessary criteria to select the material (i.e. Necropolis
journals) for this study. The comparative material to be analysed includes different kinds
of documents, such as ship’s logs and temple day-books, which contain different types
24 Http://dmd.wepwawet.nl/
20
of information. Even if these records are of a different nature, they share common traits.
What do the different kinds of annals and day-books have in common? Can they
be compared with the so-called Necropolis journal? What features are similar? It
is therefore only after this overview and comparison, when we will be able to set the
criteria and use them to define what is commonly called a Necropolis journal (Chapter
5).
1.2.c Who was the intended readership of the day-books?
After compiling a new list of “Necropolis journals” from Deir el-Medina (see chapter 5.2),
a review of all available photos or facsimiles of the documents to identify the layout of
the text and its arrangement on the writing material will be undertaken. The study of the
layout of the documents and the format of the lines of text on papyri and ostraca, together
with the content, could help determine when the notes were written and this may in turn
provide information about the possible use of these documents25.
The present study will therefore analyse the layout of the available material and try
to answer the following questions: Under what circumstances were they drawn up?
How are the documents organised? Who was their intended readership? Were
they for internal use or to be consulted and audited by someone else?
1.2.d How many types of journal can we identify?
Once we have defined what a Necropolis journal is and who was the intended
readership, if there was one, we could see if it is possible to isolate subgroups into this
massive corpus of documents. The aim of this work is not to make a strict classification
of different types of journal as separate genres, the intent is not to trace the boundaries
of neat categories or typologies, but instead to identify and list the differences between
individual journal texts. For reason of study, identifying smaller subgroups of texts is
useful due to the large number of texts available. Whether or not the differences in style
and type of document preserved is a real reflection of administrative choice or simply the
result of chance (some types of material being more prone to preservation and
discovery), shall remain uncertain, but because the aim of this work is to treat the whole
large corpus of documents, this is, to our mind, inevitable26.
25
See chapter 7.2.
26Whilst creating a classification, we must always keep in mind that this is only a modern tool that
makes the work within the corpus easier. Naturally, it is unlikely to reflect the actual method of
categorising these notes in ancient times.
21
If such notes can be called journals, the fourth research question is therefore: How
many types of journal can we identify?
1.2.e. How can the list of documents become a useful updatable tool available to all
scholars interested in the subject?
The new list of texts created (see chapter 5.2) inevitably remains incomplete, but is
nonetheless necessary for the present study. Without it, research in the vast number of
documents to retrieve the necessary information would be an almost impossible task.
The last step of this study is therefore to ensure that the research is not undertaken only
for its own sake, but also as something useful to all interested Egyptologists, with easy
reference to the contents of an important group of ancient records.
22
2. Research context
Since the existing literature provides extensive background details and general
information27, only a brief introduction to the village of Deir el-Medina will be included in
the present work.
2.1 The village
The village of Deir el-Medina was created ex nihilo at the beginning of the 18th Dynasty
to house the members of the community of craftsmen who built the tombs for the kings,
for their spouses and children and for the most important nobles of the New Kingdom.
The community of workmen, or “gang”, seems to have been established at the site
around the beginning of the 18th Dynasty, at least by the reign of Thutmose I, since
mudbricks from the enclosure wall of the village are stamped with the name of this
Pharaoh and could indicate that the earliest settlement was created under this ruler28.
The fact that the villagers held Amenhotep I and his mother Queen Ahmose Nefertari in
high esteem over many generations, possibly as patrons of the Tomb29, seen for many
years as evidence that this ruler had founded the village, it is now considered highly
uncertain30.
The 18th Dynasty occupation of the site is not well documented and until the reign
of Horemheb, information about the history of the village and its inhabitants is lacking
due to the scarcity of the available records31.
It is still an open matter if the site was abandoned, at least partially, during the
Amarna interlude, when Amenophis IV (Akhenaton) moved his royal residence and had
his tomb prepared at Tell el-Amarna. Most of the community was believed to have moved
with him to the new capital32. Workmen’s marks at Amarna, however, “do not offer any
hard evidence that allows for an identification of the workmen at Amarna with the Theban
necropolis workmen of the end of the 18th Dynasty or from the early 19th Dynasty”33. At
27 For a general bibliography about the village see A Systematic Bibliography on Deir el-Medîna
online at http://dmd.wepwawet.nl/ under General Information and The Village.
28
Bonnet-Valbelle 1975, 431-432 (with note 2 referring to Bruyère Fouilles 1934-1935, 24-26) and
Pl. LXVI.
29
See i.a. Gitton 1975.
30
Valbelle 1985, 2 and n. 1.
31
We lack hieratic documentary texts, nonetheless we have ostraca with marks dated to this
period, see Soliman, D. M.unpublished PhD Thesis 2016, chapter 1, 4.1.
32
See Müller 2014, 156-168.
33
Soliman, D. M. unpublished PhD Thesis 2016, 54.
23
the very end of the 18th Dynasty, during year 7 of the reign of Horemheb, the royal work
gang was installed in western Thebes. The community at Deir el-Medina thrived during
the 19th and 20th Dynasties.
At the end of the 20th Dynasty, the situation in western Thebes was insecure.
Recurring incursions by raiding Libyans34, followed by civil war, in combination with
irregular and insufficient payments, may have forced the inhabitants of the village to
gradually and partially leave the site of Deir el-Medina. It seems probable that the
villagers moved to within the mighty walls of the mortuary temple of Ramesses III at
nearby Medinet Habu35. Here they stayed until the beginning of the 21st Dynasty, when
the abandonment of the Theban Necropolis as burial place for sovereigns made it
pointless to maintain the community of craftsmen36.
The tomb of Ramesses XI was the last royal tomb to be built in the Valley of the
Kings. The history of the community of Deir el-Medina developed thus in parallel with the
history of the monarchy of the New Kingdom, whose fate it shared.
2.2 The workmen of Deir el-Medina37
The modern name of the workmen’s settlement, Deir el-Medina (in Arabic
“the monastery of the town”), originally referred to one of the late antique monastic
settlements between Medinet Habu and Deir el-Bahari. In present-day Egyptology, Deir
34
For a general overview see Haring 1993.
35
The date of the abandonment of the village is uncertain and scholars have voiced different
opinions on the matter. Valbelle (1985) postulates that during year 16 or 17 of Ramesses IX, the
inhabitants are still living in Deir el-Medina, but she is not able to give an exact date for the
abandonment of the village (“Il n’est pas très aisé de situer avec precision la période d’abandon
du village”). Taylor (1995) states that “...in the reign of Ramesses XI the workmen left their village
and moved to...Medinet Habu” while McDowell (1999) suggests that the date of the move
probably “fell late in the reign of Ramesses X or in the first few years of his successor”. Peden
(2000, 288) states that “…perhaps early in the rule of Ramesses IX, and certainly by the first
decade of Ramesses XI, the crew and their officers were moved from Deir el-Medina and resettled
behind the high walls of Medinet Habu”, and Demarée (2016) confirms the uncertainty of the date
for the abandonment of the village: “The final stage of the history of the workmen of Deir el-Medina
is still shrouded in mystery. Part of the community may have left their houses in the village at the
end of the Twentieth Dynasty to go live somewhere near the temple of Ramesses III at Medinet
Habu. Whether this move had anything to do with incursions of Libyans, as has often been
asserted, still lacks unequivocal proof”.
36
Evidence that the workmen lived inside Medinet Habu could be the fact that the xtm as place of
delivery of goods is no longer mentioned in the documentation after Ramesses IX, nor the regular
series of names of men on watch (wrS) who had been based there. Furthermore, the water
carriers, who used to bring water regularly to the village, no longer appear as for example in Tur.
Cat 2018 dated to Ramesses XI. It is likely that the provisions were already inside the temple and
that they were distributed to the workmen there. Peden (2000, 288-289) relates the marked
decline in graffiti in the Theban Mountain, other than the protected Valley of the Kings, to the
move of the community of Deir el-Medina into Medinet Habu.
37 See Černý 1973, Chapter X.
24
el-Medina has become a brand name for studies about the village inhabited by the
workmen and their families throughout most of the New Kingdom. This group of men
engaged in the work on the king’s tomb was called “the gang of the Tomb/Necropolis38”.
The “gang”, which was also the word used for a ship’s crew (ist), was divided into two
halves: a “right side” and a “left side”. A foreman was in charge of each side, “great one
of the crew”, and he was assisted by a “deputy”. Probably each side worked on a different
zone of the tomb that was first excavated in the rock and then decorated and completed
before the funerals could take place. The administrative work of each “side” was under
the responsibility of a scribe (or even two scribes), who had to keep records of the
activities and wages of the gang possibly for the benefit of higher authorities and other
departments of the administration39. For an attestation of more than one scribe at work,
an example is P. Turin 1898 + P. Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P. Turin 2094 (dated to
Ramesses X40), which is clearly written by two different hands. The first six lines in
column II are indeed in a different handwriting than the rest of the text (visible from a
photo and clear especially from the difference in noting month 2 of Smw). Moreover, P.
Turin 2018 (dated to Ramesses X), containing accounts from regnal years 8-10 of the
delivery of grain, includes the names of the two Necropolis scribes who recorded the
distribution among the right and left sides of the gang: the right side under scribe Pawero
and the left side under scribe Dhutmose41. Further, in Papyrus Chester Beatty III, verso
4, 12, a copy of a letter written by scribe On-Hr-xps=f to the vizier PA-NHs.y about
construction work on the royal tomb, rations and other matters, it is said “…write to the
two scribes of the Tomb…” (hAb n pA sS 2 n pA #r42).
The average number of recorded workmen varies from around 30 to 60 men (see
Davies 2017), the highest number of workmen noted being 120 during the reign of
Ramesses IV (P. Turin 1891), but this should be understood to be an exceptional
situation.
Although the workmen were direct employees of the state and the king was the
nominal head of the institution, his active involvement in Tomb matters and in the
administration of tomb work was very limited. Still, there was a strong link between the
Tomb and the king. In theory, the king was the nominal superior of the institution, the
workmen’s source of employment and income, as the “gang” worked on his tomb. In
reality, however, responsibility for the Tomb laid with the vizier of Upper Egypt who
38 Denoting the central administrative unit at Deir el-Medina. See also Introduction p. 18.
39
Häggman 2002, 156-158.
40
KRI VI, 687-699, 850 and 851.
41
KRI VI, 852, 1 and 853, 10.
42
KRI IV, 87, 6.
25
resided in Thebes43. The vizier was responsible for the supplies and well-being of the
community, and he instructed the gang on the work to be done and periodically checked
the progress (see note 201 for examples of documents with records of his visits or arrival
of letters with instructions to the gang).
2.3 Necropolis journal and writing material44
The documents called Necropolis journals are generally records, written on ostraca or
papyri, concerning the work carried out by the Deir el-Medina community of workmen:
the group of men employed in the construction of royal tombs in the Valleys of the Kings
and Queens throughout most of the New Kingdom. Clearly it was important in Deir el-
Medina to list incoming food, tools and other goods, as well as to record who was absent
from work on a daily basis and make note of all events related to village life.
In the notes, written by the scribe in hieratic, we indeed find information about the
workers’ attendance, matters regarding rations and the collective administration of the
crew, as well as private problems concerning individual crew members. The scribe would
also note, sometimes in great detail, the circumstances of the work carried out; lists, not
only of the workmen but also of other staff; the regular supply of the materials used and
the huge deliveries of food; the internal perturbations (strikes, demonstrations, trials…);
or the visits or incursions of Meshwesh (MSwS) and Libu (Rbw). The documents also keep
record of the great events which were announced to the community, such as the death
of the king, change of reigns and local festivals. The records are therefore of extreme
importance as they provide detailed information about the life of the village and its
inhabitants during the Ramesside period.
Despite the abundance of documentary texts from the Deir el-Medina community,
many matters about administrative practices remain unsolved. First of all the purpose of
the records and the reason for an uneven chronological distribution of ostraca and papyri.
From the beginning of the 19th until the end of the 20th Dynasties, the period when
journals were produced, a change in writing material seems to occur45.
43
From year 29 of Ramesses III, the vizier becomes vizier of both parts of the country (see O.
Berlin P 10633).
44
For a general overview on papyrus, its manufacture, dimensions, use, and evolution in time see
Černý 1985. For remarks about changes in writing style, handwritings within a single document
and color changes in a piece of papyrus, see Frandsen 1991, 22 and 48-49 as an example.
45
At least this is what we can conclude from the corpus of material we have found so far (see fig.
43-44).
26
The preserved journal fragments from the 19th Dynasty are almost exclusively
written on ostraca46. Over the course of the 20th Dynasty, however, papyrus becomes
the primary writing material for this type of note and the number of accounts written on
ostraca decreases47. Then, with the shift from ostraca to papyri, the earlier brief and
succinct accounts are partly replaced by more elaborate lists, covering a wider range of
subjects, since papyrus provided more space to be used for one document.
Whether the great number of ostraca of earlier periods represent actual official
documents or merely temporary drafts to store information, which would then be
transferred to a more presentable form onto papyrus, is still debated48. References to the
same event in more than one document have been found and point to the existence of
preliminary notes and drafts, probably intended for use as a basis for journal texts49. The
matter is still open to debate because if it is accepted that drafts on ostraca were later
copied onto papyrus, the question remains as to why so few papyri are preserved from
the 19th and early 20th Dynasties and why there are no drafts or temporary notes from
later times on ostraca50.
46
With the exception of few papyri: P. Berlin 23300 and 23301, P. Ashmolean Museum
1960.1283, P. Greg P.UC 34336, P. DM 32 (three very small fragments of an absence list)
certainly belonging to the 19th Dynasty (in Černý 1986, pl. 22) and small fragments in Berlin
strikingly similar to P. DM 32 and probably belonging to it (P. Berlin P. 14485 A-D + 14449 C+G;
I and 14448, in Fischer-Elfert 2000, 101-107, pl. XX-XXII).
47
According to Häggman 2002, 19, the choice of material may have been affected by the new
location of the administrative centre of the temple of Medinet Habu, where papyrus may have
been more readily available and where the immediate availability of limestone was instead more
limited; nonetheless, we have to consider that maybe there were more papyri earlier, which are
now lost or reused.
48
Some ostraca were clearly discarded, some were possibly used as drafts (e.g. O. DM 40 and
O. DM 41 and here 7.3 for examples of Necropolis journals that cover the same date and could
possibly be considered as drafts), and some were kept and reused (e.g.: O. Cairo 25504 years 7
and 8 under Merenptah, O. Turin N. 57072 records notes from three different years, 28, 29 and
30 of Ramesses III), so perhaps one should not consider every ostracon as a draft, and consider
instead a number of applications for the ostracon, that of having served as a draft of a main copy
being only one of these.
For the possibility of the existence of archives of ostraca, see Allam 1968, 124-128 and here note
53. For archives in ancient Egypt, see Hagen-Soliman 2018. For a general view see Donker van
Heel-Haring 2003 and further below p. 28.
49
See here 190-195 for the examples: O. Turin 57031 and O. Glasgow D.1925.67; O. Cairo
25530, O. IFAO 1255 + O. Varille 39, Turin Cat. 1880 and O. Brussel E.7359; O. DM 47 and O.
Berlin P 12641+12628; Papyrus Turin 1949+1946 and Ostracon DM 39+174.
50
According to Černý (1985, 23), the ostraca of the Ramesside period were used as substitutes
for papyrus (and “commonly used for texts of ephemeral importance”) since it (papyrus) was a
“relatively expensive material”. In reality, it was simply a matter of how and where to get it. The
price of papyrus, as we understand from business transaction texts, is indeed quite low (see
Janssen 1975, 447-448). Furthermore, Eyre (1980a, 5 and 2013, 26) tells us that in Ramesside
time, the cost of a papyrus was about two deben (after P. Turin 2008+2016 verso II, 1), which,
when compared to other commodities, is in fact not expensive. The problem was thus not the
price, but possibly its availability, since we lack clear information on how papyrus was supplied or
acquired.
27
A connected problematic topic concerns the storage of the documentation. If the material
was produce to be used as draft, consulted or copied, indeed, we expect it to be stored
somewhere.
Allam states that there were archives of ostraca at Deir el-Medina51. For some
ostraca, it is indeed clear that they were reused even after several years to write down
new notes52. It may therefore be assumed, according to Allam, that ostraca were kept in
archives to be used again and not discarded as drafts53. According to Allam, ostraca
were therefore not drafts for official texts on papyri, they simply had other purposes than
journals written on papyri54.
However, it must be noted that this difference on the spatial and chronological
distribution of documentary ostraca and papyri could also be due to the different
conditions required for finding and preserving the documents. Therefore, the absence or
presence either of ostraca or papyri could also be ascribed exclusively to these
conditions55. The state of preservation, especially of papyrus, indeed, could be the main
reason of its absence. Papyrus is a very fragile material, and even if the dry climate of
the Theban necropolis can help to preserve it, much of it is now unfortunately lost. If we
add the fact that this material was often reused, i.e. papyri were washed off and recycled,
and at least 40% of the material is a palimpsest, we get a better picture of what might
have happened56. For ostraca, approximately 5% are palimpsest and it seems that the
scribe did not just choose a random chip of limestone; instead, according to recent
51
Allam 1968, 124-128.
52
Allam cites O. Cairo CG 25517, which was erased and reused three times.
53
No definitive proof has been found so far as for a Deir el-Medina archive (see, Donker van Heel-
Haring 2003, 7-18), nonetheless, as noted by Allam, the fact that a single document records notes
separated in time (sometimes even yearly accounts!) means that the document was not discarded
but stored for a period of time before being used again, i.e. the scribe needed to store the
documents somewhere for future reference. For administrative archives in Pharaonic times, see
Allam 2009 and for the terminology concerning the archives, see Trapani 2009. Interestingly, on
some documents from Deir el-Medina, it is stated that the scribe kept its documents in a particular
box (i.a. on a fragment of an unpublished journal from year 14, in Cartellina F 257 in Turin, it is
noted that there seems to be a special box for keeping the lists of workmen: afd.t sXA.w n p3 imy-
rn=f and again in Demarée 2005, 10-11 (BM EA 75017 recto

3) and 21-22 (BM EA 75021 verso 9).
If the documents were kept somewhere, in an archive, how could the scribe retrieve one of them
from a large collection? We can imagine making use of wooden labels. Unfortunately the
archaeological evidence is scanty and, if they ever existed, we have to accept that they went lost
(Donker van Heel-Haring 2003, note 72).
54
Eyre is of the same opinion (Eyre 2013, 251): “The mass of texts on ostraca were ends in
themselves, and not drafts: not preparatory notes nor compositional drafts for reports of record”.
55
More about this matter in Donker van Heel-Haring 2003, 1-82.
56
Data after Haring “Material matters. Documentary Papyri and Ostraca in Late Ramesside
Thebes”, forthcoming.
28
studies and lithic analisis, there was a specific process for the production of these scribal
supports57.
In our opinion, due to the fact that we will never have the whole corpus of
documents available for study for obvious reasons (preservation of documents,
documents still to be found or definitely lost), too much time shouldn’t be spent
speculating. Furthermore, if we consider that new fragments of papyri belonging to the
first part of the 20th Dynasty are being re-discovered in the archives of Turin Museum
(see e.g. note 175, 177, 178), it seems that the uneven chronological distribution of
ostraca and papyri over the Ramesside period is not that strongly pronounced anymore
and the different opinions formulated could possibly change in the next few years.
57
Pelegrin-Andreu-Lanoë-Pariselle 2016.
29
3. Methodology
Amongst the multitude of documents preserved, produced in Deir el-Medina during the
Ramesside period (over 10.000 ostraca and more than 200 papyri, whose number is
lately increasing due to the re-discovery of many unpublished documents held in Turin
Museum), some can be fairly clearly defined, like letters, oracles, oaths, etc., while others
are less clearly identifiable58. Belonging to this last group are all kinds of lists, accounts,
dated events, inventories, deliveries, and journals. As illustrated in the introduction
(chapter 1.1), the so-called Necropolis journals have always been considered such, the
question as to whether there really was one such document was mostly neglected and
the existence of this genre was taken for granted59. The word “journal” was never deeply
investigated and clear criteria to identify this genre, if it existed, were never provided.
“The Ramesside village of Deir el-Medina provides the one administration in Pharaonic
Egypt for which a reasonable overview of the practice of scribal administration is
possible”60. Would the notes they kept for administration have been considered to be
journals from an ancient Egyptian point of view61?
In order to answer the main research questions and analyse the numerous aspects and
queries arising from that, we consider it necessary to provide an historical overview of
Egyptian texts like annals and day-books from the Old Kingdom until the Ramesside
Period, and draw then conclusions in the form of criteria that will be used to select journal
documents.
The different objectives of the present study will now be listed and broken down into
steps.
3.1 A journal in Ancient Egypt
The first objective is to determine if the collected notes so-called journals would be
considered as such according to an ancient Egyptian point of view, i.e. if the concept of
58
For a detailed classification of Egyptian texts by taking Egyptian terminology (i.e. to establish
what types of records were distinguished by the Egyptian scribes), see Donker van Heel-Haring
2003, part II.
59
Eyre (1980a, chapter 1) sees the necessity of “some attempt… to make classification of the
texts” stating “The term daybook will be used here, in the contexts of the documents of the Tomb,
to refer to the long series of ostraca recording the daily receipts of the Tomb”.
60
Eyre 2013, 233
61
We know that ancient Egyptians had terms or words for day-books: hrw.yt, hAy, AhAry, or h(A)r,
or the circumlocution ar(t) hAw, “roll of days”. (see chapter 4.1).
30
Necropolis journal existed. To do that we will analyse what a journal would look like
according to Egyptian notions.
Step 1. An overview of documents such as annals and day-books (material from the Old
Kingdom until the New Kingdom) will follow. Comparative material will be used to identify
common features and differences between these records and the so-called Necropolis
journals62:
 Papyri of Wadi el-Jarf
 Palermo Stone
 South Saqqara Stone
 Gebelein Papyri
 Abusir Papyri and the “new” Abusir Papyri
 Reisner Papyri
 Illahun archives
 Annals of Amenemhat II
 Ramesseum Papyri
 Middle Kingdom Tax Assessor’s Day-book
 Papyrus Boulaq 18
 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226
 Annals of Thutmose III
 Papyri Brooklyn 35.1453 A and B
 Rollin Papyri (accounts of Sethi I)
 Ship’s log of Leiden I 350 verso and Papyrus Turin 2008+2016
 Tomb construction journal of Saqqara
Step 2. Similarities between the analysed documents (day-books, ship’s logs, annals,
etc.) and the so-called Necropolis journal will be discussed. Common features will be
62 The names of the documents are those which are most commonly used.
31
indicated and explained. For the purposes of study and to allow for easier comparison,
useful features will be presented in an organised table.
3.2 The corpus of documents
The creation of a new list of journals from Deir el-Medina, including new unpublished
material, is also part of the first objective.
Step 1. Each document (either ostracon or papyrus) in the compiled list will be examined,
if possible directly from the photos of the original or using the available transcriptions.
According to specific criteria (see chapter 5.1), which document belongs in the new list
and which does not will be assessed. Unpublished material from Deir el Medina will also
be added.
Step 2. For each document, photo(s) or facsimile, transcription, translation and

bibliography will be provided. The purpose of the present work is not a philological study
and therefore no transliterations or notes to the translations will be offered.
Step 3. Based on this list of documents, the type of notes the administrators kept will be
defined and whether these are, according to our definition, journals, will be determined.
3.3 Who was reading a Necropolis journal?
The second objective is to identify, if possible, the audience and the intended readership
of the so-called Necropolis journals from the study of their appearance and layout. This
may provide information about the use of such documents and if they were for internal
use or meant to be submitted to a possible higher authority. A purely hypothetical
scenario, but a possible one.
Step 1. All available photos or facsimiles of the documents will be collected and the
layout of the text or sections of the documents will be checked.
Step 2. In order to try to understand for whom journals were written, the way the content
-of some of the records used as examples- is organized, will provide the starting point.
Step 3. If possible, conclusions will be drawn about a possible audit of the day-books
and their purpose.
32
3.4 Variety of journals
If these records can be called journals, the third objective is to attempt a classification
identifying how many types of journals are there and study the differences. As there are
a great number of documents, it can be useful to identify smaller subgroups, if only for
purposes of study.
Step 1. The documents in the new list or database of dated texts from Deir el-Medina
will be classified into subgroups according to the type of information and content of the
texts.
Step 2. Each subgroup will receive a name and its characteristics will be described.
Step 3. The data obtained will be shown in charts.
3.5 The future of the journals
The fourth and last objective is to make use of the research, organizing the work as a
useful updatable tool available to all scholars interested in the subject.
Step 1. Updating a database with new unpublished documents from Deir el-Medina.
Step 2. The new list or database will be published online.
Step 3. The database will be accessible, once assigned a password, to any interested
scholar. It will also be possible, upon verification, to add new documents considered to
be journals to the list.
33
PART II
34
4. What was considered a journal in ancient Egypt
4.1 The notion of journal in a broader Egyptian perspective
In order to understand what a journal would actually look like according to Egyptian
standards, the notion of journal in a broader Egyptian perspective must be considered.
The studies by Redford, Pharaonic King Lists, Annals and Day-Books, Eyre, The Use of
Documents in Pharaonic Egypt, and Moreno García, Ancient Egyptian Administration,
are fundamental; while for the concept of accountability, Ezzamel, Accounting, Control
and Accountability: Preliminary Evidence from Ancient Egypt and Farazmand,
Bureaucracy and Administration, will provide the guidelines.
What was the practice of keeping continuous daily records and notes of activities, facts,
lists of goods, income, and how was this done?
“The Egyptians who live in the cultivated parts of the country,

by their practice of keeping records of the past,
have made themselves much the best historians of any nation
of which I have had experience”
(Herodotus in II, 77.2)
The ancient Egyptians have long been recognised for having developed an obsession
with bureaucratic detail. For example, Kemp, in describing ancient Egyptian society,
writes: ‘‘A developed bureaucratic system reveals and actively promotes a specific
human trait: a deep satisfaction in devising routines for measuring, inspecting, checking,
and thus as far as possible controlling other people’s activities’’63.
As is evident from the many discoveries made throughout Egypt, and especially in
the village of Deir el-Medina, the ancient Egyptians were fond of bureaucracy.
Everything, event or daily business, was noted, copied and recorded. The lists of staff,
food, tools, and rations are abundant, as well as all kinds of dated entries that record in
detail the work that was completed (e.g. the work in the tombs of the pharaohs) or the
annals of the kings.
63 Kemp 2018, 165.

35
The question regarding what genre terms the Egyptians themselves applied to their own
texts should be asked. The administrative documents of the Ramesside Necropolis are
varied, and it is difficult to classify them. It is true that Necropolis scribes used a number
of denominatives to differentiate between texts, but some of them, such as ‘writing’ (r-Ꜥ-
sS), are very general and does not provide us with substantial information for a
classification of the material. Others denominatives have been investigated by Donker
van Heel and Haring (2003, 85-123) and can be listed as follows: ‘memorandum’ (sḫꜢ.w),
‘name-list’ (ı̓m.y-rn⸗f), ‘property-deed’ (ı̓m.y.t-pr), ‘dated record’/ ‘dated document’ (hry.t),
‘account’ (ḥsb), and ‘list’ (snn).
Nevertheless, it should be kept in mind that all kinds of records and notes we might
define as a fixed genre are abstractions, necessary for purposes of studies and which
may or may not reflect the ancient Egyptian point of view. We should not forget that, as
it happens with ancient Egyptian ‘poetry’ and ‘literature’, we are using here an heuristic
approach, i.e. we are assuming that a genre distinction did exist in Ancient Egypt, but
are we sure that the scribes knew they were producing literature, poetry, Necropolis
journals? Probably not. The use of genres for ancient Egyptian documents is a modern
etic structure that does not always fit; therefore identifying genres in Egyptian texts is
extremely problematic64. Using the words of Michalowski, warning caution in relation to
Mesopotamian literature, valid to Egyptian texts as well, “Generic categorizations…are
closely linked with reception, and the reading of ancient texts, when no continuous
tradition of reading has survived, presents particular problems that are different from
those encountered in old texts belonging to a living stream of interpretation…By placing
together certain texts we create a close and closed intertextuality, which, in turn, provides
us with a false sense of security in reading” (Michalowski 1989, 4). Nonetheless, “the
absence of a consistent terminology for Egyptian genres does not imply that no concept
or system of genre existed65”, and it is our duty, for study reasons to try to sort the
material. Besides “pure” genres, combinations and hybrids can be expected; but the
main features and characteristics of the first type should be defined.
In order to consider the notion of journal in a broader Egyptian perspective, we will start
by giving a summary of historical records that the ancient Egyptians kept, called
protodynastic labels, annals and king lists66:
64
Parkinson 1996, 297 and Parkinson 2000, 32-42.
65
Parkinson 1996, 298.
66
See Redford 1986, chapter 1-2.
36
 PROTODYNASTIC LABELS. The format sometimes adopted a series of

horizontal registers, usually divided by lines. The basic division was into a right
side (containing the events) and a left side (containing the royal name and
variables). The kinds of events memorialised in these tablets include acts of
worship, progress, taxation, sculpture, construction, and battles; in short, content
identical in every way to that of the Palermo stone and the Cairo fragments. The
latter include flood levels absent from the labels.
 ANNALS (from the early Old Kingdom onwards) (gn.wt67).

The Egyptian word is the plural of gn.t ‘memorization’, derived from gnw.t ‘branch’,
which originally referred to a tally stick that served to aid the memory68. It seems
fairly clear that these purported to be records of some kind, arranged by regnal
years. The format is usually date + royal names and titulary + events in infinitive
or, less commonly, date + nswt-bity + royal names + jr.n=f m mnw=f formula. The
content is the same as that of the yearly “rectangles” of the protodynastic labels
and the Palermo and Cairo fragments.
 KING LISTS (from the 1st Dynasty onwards) 69. The basic form consists usually
(not in the Den seal impression) of a line in which the following elements occur:
1 - nswt-bity, king of Upper and Lower Egypt; 2 - the cartouche containing the
king’s name; 3 - a figure which can be in tripartite form (year, month and day).
As for daily records, the topic of this work, the ancient Egyptians kept day-books:
 DAY-BOOKS. At an early date, the central government and its institutions had
developed a genre of daily records for the practical requirements of day-to-day
business. The Egyptian term denoting such a “journal” varies over the two
millennia of its occurrence.
67
See Schott 1990, 379 n. 1655 for hieroglyphic attestations.
68
LÄ I, 278 n.3; Redford 1984, 327-341.
69
See Deicher-Maroko 2015.
37
In what must be its pristine form70 it appears as hrw.yt71, “day-(book)”, derived

fairly certainly from the word hrw, “day”, but in the New Kingdom and later hrw.yt
turns up as hAy, AhAry, or h(A)r, or is rendered by a circumlocution such as ar(t)72
hAw73, “roll of days”.
DAY
hrwy.t
hAy
ar(t) hAw
By the Ramesside period, the term acquired an additional meaning of “dated

record of a legal act or declaration”74. Only three Ramesside attestations of the
term are known so far: P. Ashmolean Museum 1945.97 (Naunakhte document,
recto I 4-5), P. Berlin P 10496 (verso 15) and O. Turin N. 57455 (verso 5-6) 75.
In any case, the term hrwy.t and its variants denotes a document which records
an event or series of events by dates. The fact that the word “day” is the root from
which the term is derived underscores the importance of the calendric notation:
“the hrwyt has its meaning and function only because it is provided with specific
dates”76.
70
Wb 2, 500.26; Faulkner 1962, 159. The word occurs as early as the 12th Dynasty in P. Berlin
10012, a temple journal containing a copy of the letter announcing the heliacal rise of Sothis.
71
See Schott 1990, 289 n. 1348 for hieroglyphic attestations.
72 See Schott 1990, 39-40 n. 65 for hieroglyphic attestations.
73
Curiously, we also find this term in the Tale of Wenamun (dating to the 21st Dynasty), when
Wenamun is in front of the Prince of Byblos who “had the daybook of his forefathers brought and
had it read before me”. The word used for daybook is , “roll of days”,
evidence of a well-known practice of keeping daily records. (See Gardiner 1931, 68, Wenamun
2, 8-9).
74
Redford 1986, 101.
75 Černý, 1945, 32 ff.
76
Redford 1986, 101; LÄ VI, 151.
38
Focussing on the last type of documents, Redford first looked for the term "day-book" in
various documents in order to understand what the Egyptians meant by this term77. He
then analysed other documents that could be called such, even if they did not contain or
mention this specific term.
He concludes that “the day-book of an institution was a heterogeneous collection
of dated entries, recording a variety of events which would be of use to that institution in
the future. The dependence of the organization of these events on a simple,
chronological format shows that the criterion for filing was that of an archive: the hrwyt
was a diary, and items would be looked up under date”. [...] “the hrwyt in essence is a
record of human events and activity, acts and states of nature, or statements of purpose
or intent. The calendrical notations constitute the single most important criterion in
ordering the material. The hrwyt commonly notes [...] the arrival and departure of officers
and messengers on official business, and receipts and disbursements of commodities
with which the institution in question is concerned. It can also record verbal declarations,
or contains copies of official correspondence [...] lists of people are common”.
Syntactically, in this type of document defined as “day-book”, there is a constant
recourse to the “absolute” use of the infinitive78, a general laconic style, a preference for
unintroduced prepositional phrases, and a tendency toward simple tabulation.
We have to note that the type of activity recorded depends on the group, office or
institution involved (a ship’s hrwyt might note the vessel’s progress or the state of the
weather; a workshops’ hrwyt, the work to be assigned etc.). Different types of content,
therefore, do not necessarily correspond to different document genres79.
As we have seen, recording events is intrinsic to the culture of ancient Egypt. The political
and economic domains were coordinated by a powerful bureaucracy where accounting
and accountability played a major role.
77 Redford 1986, 97 ff.

78Gardiner 1957, §306. “…the infinitive may be used as the equivalent of a sentence, i.e. as
significant and complete in itself… It often occurs absolutely in headings…, titles… and the like…”.
79
In those cases where royal annals and administrative documents relate to the daily operation
of royal palaces and other institutions catering to the king, for example, the emphasis is on the
location of the king, which is part of their standardised dating formula: ‘regnal year, month and
day’, and adding the information that ‘the king is in (such-and-such a place)’. In this case, we can
understand that “the king’s precise location was a matter of great importance to individuals
charged with the running of royal institutions, and to those who were responsible for the
expenditure of royal resources” (see Hagen 2016, 155-181).
39
In regards to this concept (accounting and accountability), Ezzamel, drawing on

evidence from the New Kingdom, provides some preliminary findings related to
accounting, particularly as it relates to control and accountability80.
Large numbers of administrative texts have survived from ancient Egypt, showing
the history of bureaucracy back to the third millennium BC. As numerous sources
demonstrate, detailed accounting records were constantly kept, not only for taxation
purposes, but also to document daily temple income, lists of equipment inventory and
personal wealth, wages of Necropolis workers, barter transactions in village markets,
and detailed activities in other state institutions such as dockyards, workshops and
breweries81. The use of accounting calculations was widespread in ancient Egypt.
Accounting systems in the New Kingdom operated as powerful mechanisms for closely
monitoring human performance in state institutions, and also as a means of endowing
action with legitimacy by emphasising conformity to expectations.
A calculative and reporting mentality pervaded all aspects of the administration of
the New Kingdom in Egypt.
According to Ezzamel, this system was leading towards a system of accountability
or, to use his words, ‘‘complete accountability’’. He describes a system of ‘‘complete
accountability’’, quoting Hoskin and Macve as one in which “accounting data are used to
construct a managerial system of cost and labour efficiency, one that involves the
monitoring of material flow and human performance” 82.
In conclusion, with the words of Ezzamel, “the social and economic contexts of
ancient Egypt reveal an extremely powerful bureaucracy at work, with the Pharaoh at its
apex and an army of administrators and accountants measuring, recording, and
monitoring activities in considerable detail. Accounting developed a simple, yet
extremely powerful, metric that made calculable and visible the activities of those
individuals who inhabited state organisations. By engaging in the process of quantifying
and reporting economic activities, it played a major role in defining, and thereby
constituting, the domain of economic transactions that were deemed of concern. Through
its ability to measure and quantify, accounting imparted particular meaning and
significance upon these transactions”.
The physical monitoring measures adopted by the administrators, and the quest
for details from the scribes, were buttressed to a large extent by powerful social and
religious sanctions which inflicted shame and supernatural punishments upon those who
80 Ezzamel 1997.
81 E.g. Janssen 1975 and Kemp 2018.
82 Hoskin-Macve 1988, 37-73 and Hoskin- Macve 1992.
40
were perceived to have failed the Pharaoh83. Accounting systems in the New Kingdom
therefore operated as powerful mechanisms for monitoring human performance in state
institutions, thereby controlling costs and labour efficiency84.
If we consider the role of the vizier and the scribe as it appears from the ‘Duties of
the Vizier’, we can have a clearer idea on rule and governance, since it offers one way
into the subject of Ancient Egyptian administration85. The so-called ‘Duties of the Vizier’
is a composition found on the walls of the tombs of four viziers at Thebes belonging to
the 18th and 19th Dynasty86. The text lays out the duties associated with the highest civil
office in the state administration and the functioning of his bureau and it was composed
before the first phase of ‘the Tomb’. The text clearly stresses that every leader of any
institution or the like in the country should report to the vizier. Further, the text stipulates
that the scribes of the vizier are sitting immediately beside him (line 2 of text from TT 100
of Rekhmira, Van den Boorn 1988, 13), therefore holding a very significant and crucial
role. Scribes of the vizier are also regularly mentioned as coming to visit the Tomb,
bringing the orders and going back with progress reports, closely linking writing to social
control. Examples of the efficiency and all-controlling tasks of the scribes of the vizier are
contained in e.g. P. Turin Cat. 1898 + P. Turin Cat. 1926 + P. Turin Cat. 1937 + P. Turin
Cat. 2094 recto I16-17, where the scribe of the vizier arrives together with the high priest,
or in P. Turin Cat. 1881 + P. Turin Cat. 2080 + P. Turin Cat. 2092, where the scribe of
the vizier is mentioned three times and in P. Turin Cat. 1999 + P. Turin Cat. 2009 verso
I, 12-15, where assistants of the vizier, including the scribe, come to collect a bed and a
letter for him.
A different approach is used by Eyre to study ancient Egyptian bureaucracy. He chooses
to “focus on the importance of writing as symbol of authority, and on bureaucracy as a
process and not as a record87”. He believes that the action of writing per se was much
83
As Ezzamel well indicates as happening in the Nauri Decree issued by Seti I (punitive measures
were laid down to protect his religious Foundation at Abydos), where the guilty one was not only
punished by being beaten, but also punished by Osiris, who will castigate him by not letting him
rest in the necropolis. Furthermore, in P. Brooklyn 35.1446 (recto, line 63), the punishment for not
delivering what the bureaucracy had expected extends to even innocent family members.
84Quoting the definition in Ezzamel-Hoskin, 2002, 335, accounting is a “practice of entering in a
visible format a record (an account) of items and activities […] any account involves a particular
kind of signs which both name and count the items and activities recorded […] the practice of
producing an account is always a form of valuing: (i) extrinsically as a means of capturing and re-
presenting values derived from outside for external purposes, defined as valuable by some other
agent; and (ii) intrinsically, in so far as this practice of naming, counting, and recording in visible
format in itself constructs the possibility of precise valuing”.
85
For translation and commentary, see Van den Boorn 1988.
86
TT 29 Amenemope, TT 100 Rekhmira, TT 131 User, TT 106 Paser. Parts of this text were also
found on fragments of a same ostracon discovered in front of TT29, see Tallet 2010.
87
Eyre 2009, 16.
41
more important than reference to the written text. According to him, the answer to what
the scribe did with his writings once he had produced them is: nothing. He claims that
the scribe, in the act of writing a document, is a symbol of social and hierarchical
authority, simply “performing his function”, and he considers that there is no evidence in
Pharaonic history of an effective way of retrieving information. We do not fully accept
this theory. Admittedly, it was impractical to use documents that had not been stored in
an accessible way, even though we do not know much about the requirements of
Egyptian archives (see note 53). However, we have at least evidence from the Deir el-
Medina material that some of the documents included ‘markers’ of control process and
were therefore checked and not only written per se (see further 7.1). It is hard to our
mind to see bureaucracy only as a process and not as a record and to believe that a
Necropolis journal was simply used to “control people at work”.
However, the myth of an overwhelming, exceptionally efficient bureaucracy requires

caution, and the same can be said for the idea of the state (= the Pharaoh) as source of
unlimited authority and apparatus of power. As illustrated by Moreno García88, a limit to
the efficiency of the bureaucracy is to be seen in deeply entrenched local powers, which
should have limited the role of the state and its apparatus of power and lead to a gradual
paralysis in decision-making and to the emergence of autonomous institutions and
spheres of influence more concerned with their own immediate interests than with the
effectiveness and the smooth working capacity of the entire system. As we can easily
understand, “an increasingly dense structure of divisions, functions, and officials might
limit and complicate decision-making, thus leading to the consolidation of autonomous
spheres of power within the structure of the state. New divisions and new appointments
would only exacerbate the problems they intended to solve. […] The fact of Egypt’s
complex bureaucratic organization, so often considered as proof of efficiency, can thus
be seen to be rather misleading and may in fact point to increasing difficulties in the
exercise of power and authority89”.
88
Moreno García 2013, 2.
89
Moreno García 2013, 4-5.
42
4.2 Overview of annals and day-books90
An overview of documents such as annals and day-books (material from the Old
Kingdom until the New Kingdom) will provide comparative material to identify common
features and differences between these records and the so-called Necropolis journals.
“In assigning texts to genres, the Egyptologist should adopt a historical approach
that uses ancient sources such as titles and context, together with an inductive
approach in which the genres are elucidated from the works themselves91”
The intention of this work, however, is not to include a complete list of earlier similar
documents, but rather to show the ones which can be similar and therefore useful for a
comparison with the so-called Necropolis journal92. Sometimes the notes of the previous
periods will be used only to compare a short passage, sometimes to identify similarities
in the layout of the documents or in the organisation of the different parts of the papyrus.
The material which will be presented in the following pages, has been selected in
order to provide the reader with a background of texts which are precursors of the journal
texts in Deir el-Medina, and to draw conclusions and observations which will serve as
the basis in formulating criteria which will be used in the selection of journals made in
this study. The material included in the overview contains different documents with
different purposes very similar in many respects to Necropolis journals. For each of them,
the reason of their inclusion in this overview will be provided at the beginning of each
paragraph.
Annals are clearly not daily notes, and their purpose was not administrative,
nonetheless they are included in this overview of texts since they spring from the same
idea of a calendric structure. They have consecutive dated events and might be
informative and provide the background from which journals originated.
All the documents which follow are written in hieratic (except the Palermo and South
Saqqara Stone, the Annals of Amenemhat II and the Annals of Thutmose III in Karnak
90
Depending on the intention to show different features of the document, we will provide either
the photo or the transcription of each text, while in some cases both will be shown.
91
Michalowski 1989, 34 and Parkinson 1996, 299.
92
The recently discovered papyri archive from the mortuary temple of Thutmose III at Thebes, as
part of the Spanish-Egyptian excavation project directed by Myriam Seco Alvarez, are still
awaiting for publication, therefore these documents will not be dealt with here. The vast majority
of the fragments are administrative and stem, for the most part, from a daybook roll organised
chronologically with headings in red ink for each day, often simply followed by a list of offerings
(Hagen-Soliman 2018, 99-100).
43
which are in hieroglyphs); only some photos for each document will be provided and only
when considered useful, since a few examples will suffice to illustrate the point. No
translation will be given, except in some cases when considered necessary.
4.2.a The Papyri of Wadi el-Jarf93
These texts, one of the oldest ever-found on papyrus, are included here since one of
these records daily activities of a team of workmen involved in the building of the Great
Pyramid of Cheops, a very similar task to the one of the Deir el-Medina artists. In an
interview immediately after the discovery, Pierre Tallet (expedition leader from the
University of Paris-Sorbonne) states that, “the journal discovered provides a precise
account for every working day”. The purpose of the production of such documents was
to administer such an important royal activity. We therefore expect to see similarities with
the Deir el-Medina journal. We can identify mainly two categories of documents:
accounts of monthly deliveries organised in tables, and a ships’ log that records the
progress report corresponding to the activity of the crew on that specific day.
On April 12, 2013, the then Minister of State for Antiquities, Dr. Mohamed Ibrahim,
announced the discovery of what is believed to be the most ancient harbour ever found
in Egypt. The harbour dates back to the time of Pharaoh Cheops and is located in the
Wadi el-Jarf area, about 180 kilometres south of Suez. The place is considered one of
the most important commercial harbours in ancient Egypt as all the trading expeditions
to import copper and other minerals from Sinai to the Nile Valley were supposedly
launched there.
The 4,500-year-old port was discovered by a French-Egyptian team headed by
Pierre Tallet (IFAO) and Sayed Mahfouz (University of Assyut). The mission also
discovered a collection of vessel anchors carved in stone as well as the harbour’s docks
and the remains of workers’ houses. Thirty caves were discovered along with the stone
blocks used to close their entrances, inscribed with Cheops’ cartouche written in red ink,
and ship ropes and stone tools used to cut ropes.
The most important find unearthed during the excavation in the storage galleries is
a large group of several hundred papyrus fragments, some measuring over 80 cm in
length, revealing details of the daily life of the Egyptians during year 27 of Cheops. The
newly discovered papyri are considered the oldest found so far. They are administrative
93
For a general overview see Tallet-Marouard 2014, Tallet 2016 and Tallet 2017.
44
documents dating to c. 2600 BC, and they include two categories of documents: a large
number of accounts organised in tables, which describe daily or monthly deliveries of
food from various areas including the Nile Delta; and a logbook that records everyday
activities of a team led by a Memphis official involved in the building of the Great Pyramid
of Cheops, inspector Merer, who was in charge of a team of about 200 men.
Many of the papyri describe how the central administration, under the reign of
Cheops, sent food, mainly bread and beer, to the workers involved in the Egyptian
expeditions departing from the port.
The papyri have now been transferred to the Suez Museum for documentation and
further studies. It is obvious that we are dealing with an “Old Kingdom administrative
style”, where the data are included in grids composed of horizontal and vertical lines,
written in red or black ink (see Abusir Papyri). This documentation is dominated by an
analytical spirit and by a purely geometric appearance resembling offering lists.
As we can see from the fragment of a document (a ships’ log) represented in fig. 3
and 4 (photo with a partial transcription corresponding to the right side of the papyrus),
the tabulation and the arrangement of the data in columns is very simple: below the
mention of each day, two columns are available to draw up a progress report
corresponding to the activity of the crew on that specific day. We notice here that the
scribe mainly uses the infinitive verb form (such as nat, “to navigate”, or sDrt, “to spend
the night”), the stative and the Hr + infinitive form (see Papyrus Boulaq 18, further fig. 18
for the use of the same verb nat). The results are short sentences where the construction
is never complex, for example: “Jour 27: appareiller [literally to sail] depuis l’Étang de
Chéops, navigation vers l’Horizon de Chéops, chargé de pierres; passer la nuit à
l’Horizon de Chéops”94. Syntactically, this use of the narrative infinitive and laconic style
is characteristic of this type of document called “day-book” 95.
94
Translation after Tallet 2016, 17.
95
See Tallet 2017, 33 and here chapter 4.3.
45
Fig. 1 Wadi el-Jarf papyrus. After Ahram Online. (In the photo the praenomen and the Horus name of Cheops are
visible)
Fig. 2 Wadi el-Jarf papyrus. Accounts recorded in tabular form. After Tallet-Marouard 2014, 7
46
Fig. 3 Wadi el-Jarf papyrus. The log book of captain Merer. Photo by Mostafa AlSaghir (Cairo Museum, temporary
exhibition, July 2016)
Fig. 4 Wadi el-Jarf papyrus. Transcription of the first columns of the log book shown in fig. 3. The days are written in
the upper horizontal boxes. The events of each day are recorded in two vertical columns. After Tallet 2016, 29
47
4.2.b The Palermo Stone96
The reason of the inclusion of annals like “Palermo Stone”, “Saqqara Stone” (4.2.c), and
the Annals of Amenemhat II (4.2.h) in this overview, as already indicated in the
introduction of this chapter, is their arrangements of events in consecutive dates97.
Annals were clearly not daily notes, nonetheless they spring from the same idea of a
calendric structure and might provide the background from which journals originated.
The regnal years of each king are usually listed, plus important events which occurred
during each king's reign (the height of the Nile flood, information on festivals, taxation,
sculpture, buildings and warfare). The purpose of annals is not certainly the same of
journals written on papyrus; we are not here in front of an administrative process of an
ongoing project, instead, events which took place are chronologically mentioned and
written in the stone.
The Old Kingdom Annals, most commonly known as the Palermo Stone, is a large
fragment of what was originally a stela known as the Royal Annals and dating to the Old
Kingdom. It contains records of the kings of Egypt from the 1st Dynasty through the 5th
Dynasty. It was composed during the 5th Dynasty (2565-2420 B.C.), and it is the oldest
extant written chronicle of Egyptian history98.
The stela is made of black basalt and it is inscribed on both sides. Originally, it
probably measured about 2.2 metres tall by 60 cm wide and 6.5 cm thick. It was broken
into an unknown number of pieces, many of which are now missing. The original location
of the stela is unknown, but a fragment of it was found at an archaeological site in
Memphis. Since 1866, this has been located at the Palermo Museum in Sicily (Italy),
while another five smaller fragments are at the Cairo Museum and one is at the Petrie
Museum of the University College of London.
The text of the stela is a list, written in hieroglyphic and formatted as a table, which
covers the period from the Old Kingdom back thousands of years into the predynastic
period99. It starts with the predynastic god-kings, proceeding on through the demi-gods,
and finally with a long list of Egyptian kings down to the middle of the 5th Dynasty (up to
King Neferirkare Kakai). The regnal years of each king are listed, plus important events
which occurred during each king's reign (the height of the Nile flood, information on
96
For a general view see O' Mara 1979, Von Beckerath 1997, St. John 1999, Wilkinson 2000.
Jiménez 2004.
97
The Annals of thutmose III will be dealt with later (4.2.m).
98 For a discussion about the date when the annals were compiled and inscribed, see Wilkinson
2000, 23.
99 From the second register onwards, the rectangular format used has a year-branch on the right.
48
festivals, taxation, sculpture, buildings and warfare for some kings). Each name of a
ruler is contained within a rectangular compartment set out in horizontal rows or
registers.
The annals begin a new year compartment regardless of the beginning or end of a
reign. Indeed, “…each year designated by a separate compartment begins on New
Year’s Day, the first day of the first month of the inundation; whereas regnal years,
regularly used in date formulae from the First Intermediate Period onwards, ran from a
king’s accession date to each subsequent anniversary of his accession”100.
What can this stela tell us about the ancient Egyptians’ own view of history?
Sethe notes that the intentions of those who compiled the annals was never to give
a complete record of the early dynasties, but rather a simplified chronological table101.
The original location of the annals is still not certain, but it seems most probable that they
were displayed in a temple context, perhaps as part of an ancestor cult and to stress the
legitimacy of the reigning king as latest in a long line of rulers stretching back in an
unbroken succession to the time of the gods102. This should dispel at once any ideas of
accuracy, reliability and historicity.
The royal activities recorded in the annals concern: the administration of
government (the biennial ‘following of Horus’103 and the biennial census of the country’s
wealth (Tnwt) amongst the most important); the ritual activities connected with the king to
display his own power and to defeat the forces of chaos; and the actions undertaken by
the king in his religious role (dedication of new divine images, visits to centres of worship,
foundation of temples, etc.).
It is highly unlikely that the annals were ever intended as an objective historical
record. Nevertheless, they present a vivid picture of the ancient Egyptians’ own view of
their past and the way they arranged information.
Fig. 5 illustrates the face side of the fragment of Palermo formatted as a table and
with the information regularly inserted into compartments. Each line is divided into small
compartments. With the exception of the first register, all the cells are introduced by the
sign for “year”, thus separated from the others. In turn, the cells are divided into two
registers: the upper one, larger, mentions the most relevant events; and the lower one,
where in most cases the height of the Nile during that year is registered. Sometimes the
upper part of some cells show a few internal subdivisions.
100 Wilkinson 2000, 19.

101 Sethe 1903, 70 n.2.
102 Roccati 1982, 36.
103
Sms-@r: the biennial progress of the royal court on a travelling judicial and tax-collecting visit to
demonstrate royal authority throughout the Egyptian land. See LÄ III, 51, esp. note 8.
49
Fig. 5 Fragment of the Palermo stone, face side. After Wilkinson 2000
50
4.2.c The South Saqqara Stone
What is called the “South Saqqara Stone”, known as a “Palermo Stone” for the VI
Dynasty, is worth noting in spite of its bad state of preservation (almost completely
erased). The text was identified in 1993 on the sarcophagus lid (recto and verso) of
Queen Ankhnespepy (anx.s-n-Ppjj, possibly the mother of Pepy II), found at south
Saqqara in 1931 and now held in Cairo Museum (JE 65908)104. The inscribed texts are
royal annals (using the typical formula nswt-bity + cartouche + jr.n=f m mnw=f n and the
typical narrative infinitive) covering the period from the reign of Teti to that of Merenre on
the upper surface of the sarcophagus=recto and the years from Merenre into the reign
of Pepy II on the verso. Differently from the Palermo Stone, we note here the absence
of separation lines in the inscription, whether columns or lines. Only on the verso, we
can appreciate two large rnpt-signs delimiting a band of two horizontal lines.
4.2.d The Gebelein Papyri105
These administrative papyri are here briefly mentioned (Papyrus Geb. III recto) since
they present a series of consecutive dated notes, the daily accounting of cereals and
working lists for the construction of a temple, and we expect that their features can be
compared with the journal of Deir el-Medina.
The village of Gebelein, located in Upper Egypt, about 29 km south of Thebes, on the
west bank of the Nile, takes its name from the presence of two hills (Gebelein in Arabic).
In ancient times, the first hill housed a fortress with sections of its walls made of mud
brick and a temple dedicated to the goddess Hathor. The second hill housed the
Necropolis with tombs from the Old to the Middle Kingdom. It was in the Necropolis,
during excavations in 1935 by the Italian Mission of Giulio Farina, where the papyri of
the Old Kingdom were discovered106.
Five papyri and some fragments of various dimensions are at the Egyptian
Museum in Cairo (JE 66844). Other fragments are at the Egyptian Museum in Turin
(Suppl. 17505/1-2-3-4-5). These administrative papyri were part of the funerary
equipment of an Old Kingdom tomb. The papyrus rolls of Gebelein normally have two
104
See Baud-Dobrev 1995 and Baud-Dobrev 1997.
105
For an introduction see Donadoni Roveri, D'Amicone, Leospo 1994, Posener-Kriéger 2004
and Roccati 2006.
106 Schiaparelli started the excavations there in 1910 after he abandoned the work in Deir el-
Medina, but Farina took over in 1930.

51
different sizes: the standard one of 20-22 cm, and a smaller one of 10-12.5 cm. These
dimensions, also common to the Abusir papyri, seem to be typical of administrative
documents in the Old Kingdom.
The administrative papyri contain working lists for the construction of a temple,
notes about distributed food rations, a bread and materials list, and sales receipts. The
papyri were in large part published in 2004 (Posener-Kriéger). Only a section of the
documents will be shown here.
Papyrus Geb. III recto

This is a daily accounting of cereals arranged within a grid that has been designed but
not fully used. In fact, in the final part of the document, only the headings of the columns
remain, without any data inside the cells, which shows that the grids were drawn before
the text was actually included (see fig. 37). The daily record is divided into four sections:
the revenue of the chief village aq HqA, the total amount rxt dmD, the actual expenditure pr
nb km, and the remainder wDAw xt. For each of these sections, seven corresponding
columns indicate the people interested in the accounting.
4.2.e The Abusir Papyri and the “new” Abusir Papyri107
The Abusir documents are administrative papyri and are included in this overview
because, being mainly concerned with the daily life of the temples at Abu Gorab and its
economy, present a series of daily dated notes, as we expect in a journal. The grids,
divided in thirty horizontal compartments representing the three decades of the month,
list the activities necessary for the running of a mortuary temple.
The Abusir Papyri and the “new” Abusir Papyri are one of the most important finds of
administrative documents from the Old Kingdom. They provide detailed information
about the running of a royal mortuary temple and include duty rosters for priests,
inventories of temple equipment, and lists of daily offerings to the two solar temples at
Abu Gorab, north of Abusir, as well as letters and permits.
The site of Abusir is located about 10 km south of Giza. It contains two types of
monuments: tombs of kings, queens and private individuals coming from the time of the
5th Dynasty, and tombs from the Saite-Persian period.
107
For a general overview see Posener-Kriéger 1968 and 1976, Posener-Krieger, Verner,
Vymazalova 2006 and Verner 1995.
52
The large royal cemetery of the Old Kingdom includes four kings' pyramids from
the 5th Dynasty and other tombs built by royal family and officials. In addition, the kings
of the 5th Dynasty constructed solar temples to the northwest of the pyramids.
The Abusir Papyri are a collection of administrative papyri dating to the 5th Dynasty
and they are considered to be a major archive of Old Kingdom documentary texts. They
are of key importance to the study of the organisational and economic aspects of the
royal funerary complexes of the Old Kingdom. These documents represent a unique and
important source in that they contain information rather distinct from the formal and royal
records or tomb inscriptions.
The papyri were found in the archives of the funerary temple complexes of
Neferirkare Kakai (found in storerooms located in the southwestern part of the complex),
Raneferef (called here “new” Abusir Papyri) and Khentkaus II108.
The first papyri were discovered in 1893 at Abu Gorab, near Abusir in northern
Egypt, during illegal excavation. They contained manuscripts regarding Neferirkare
Kakai. Their origins are dated to the 5th Dynasty. Later on, a large number of additional
manuscript fragments were discovered in the area by the Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft
expedition under the direction of L. Borchardt in 1907. Nowadays, they are divided
between the British Museum, the Louvre, the Cairo Museum, the Egyptian Museum of
Berlin (Ägyptisches Museum und Papyrussammlung) and the Petrie Museum in London.
In the mid 1970s, based on information in the first Abusir Papyri, Czech
archaeologists from the Czech Institute of Egyptology, under the leadership of Miroslav
Verner, found the funerary monument of Raneferef with an additional 2,000 separate
pieces of new papyri.
Further excavations by the Czech expedition on the site also uncovered papyri at
the funerary monument of Khentkaus (the mother of Khentkaus II).
In addition to the successful excavations in the Abusir pyramid conducted by the
Czech Institute of Egyptology of Charles University since the early seventies, the Institute
of Egyptology of Waseda University began its work in September 1990.
The Abusir documents are mainly concerned with the daily life of the temple and
its economy. They illustrate the integration of the royal funerary complexes into the state
economy and their connection with various institutions that provided an economical base
108
Few fragments of papyri were discovered during the Czech archaeological excavation of the
small pyramid complex of Neferirkare’s wife, Khentkaus II. These fragments were published by
Verner (Verner 1995) with contributions by Paule Posener-Kriéger and Peter Jánosi and relate to
the queen’s cult. They will not be included in the present study because of their poor state of
preservation and because of their fragmentary condition. They wouldn’t add any further useful
information for a comparison.
53
for cemeteries (e.g. residence). Of particular importance are the accounts, which provide
detailed information about the running of a royal mortuary temple and include duty
rosters for priests, lists of people involved, inventories of temple equipment, registers of
income and expenses, records of inspections of the temple furniture, special duty tables
for priests officiating feasts, accounts of all kinds and lists of daily offerings to the two
solar temples at Abu Gorab.
Although such information cannot be complete, much can be learned about daily
income and expenses of the temple economy. Not only amounts of commodities
delivered to or from the funerary temple were inspected, but also their sources or
destinations and names of responsible persons were recorded. These documents are
more or less uniform and they work with a specific account terminology, which expresses
all the necessary operations.
ARCHIVE OF NEFERIRKARE KAKAI

Only the documents considered relevant will be shown here:
Duty tables
They were compiled to allocate the daily tasks to each member of the temple staff on
duty. There is a detailed type inscribed in the compartments of a grid, and a more
summary type. It may be supposed that the more summary duty tables were a kind of
outline of what had to be recorded in detail later in the compartments of a grid. Some
duty tables were compiled for one month and deal with regular daily tasks, while other
duty tables were compiled for special occasions, such as various feasts.
Example of a duty table:109
The duty table shown here is arranged in a grid. In the top lines, the tasks of the temple
staff are specified, while the rest of the page is divided horizontally into three groups of
ten compartments, each group ending with a red line. The grid therefore consists of thirty
horizontal compartments representing the three decades of the month. Each day has a
compartment for each of the tasks specified in the top lines. The columns for the tasks
are then divided into secondary columns for the time of day or the place where the same
109
Only one example will be given here. The duty tables are all slightly different, but this example
shows the main features.
54
tasks have to be performed. As we can see, the last nine days of the month have been
left empty as if the workers were all off duty.
We can imagine that every scroll of the archives would start in the same similar
way: date of the document, subject of the scroll and the organisation of the table (date
of the service, statements of tasks, titles of men on duty). On the left of the table, the
days of the month were indicated, at the top, the tasks and, across from days and tasks,
the name of the person in charge is indicated.
55
Fig. 6 Abusir papyrus. Detail of a duty-table. After Posener-Kriéger 1968, pl. IIIa
56
From the corpus of documents, we know that the records in the temple archives included
the following for each month:
- One duty table in which all the tasks of the temple staff on duty were noted.
- Daily records of income, as well as account notes from which they were compiled.
- One monthly account table.
- One monthly food distribution account.
- Expenditure accounts.
Red and black ink was used. In the various monthly tables, a single or double red line
separates the spaces where the headings of the tables were entered from the spaces
allotted to the days of the month. The use of red ink is not restricted to the lines of the
various grids. It is also used in the headings of duty tables, both for specifying a particular
duty and for indicating the time and place of performance; and in the monthly accounts,
when specifying the origin or quality of the deliveries. In the inventories, the material from
which objects are made may be written in red, and, also, records of the objects which
have been damaged. In the accounts, numerals are written in both red and black. The
sums and the total numbers of objects of one kind are generally written in red. Instead
of clarifying things, this excessive use of red ink is quite confusing.
“NEW” ABUSIR PAPYRI

Regardless of the number of differences in details, the character of Raneferef’s papyrus
archive does not differ in a substantial way from Neferirkare’s. Therefore the documents
will be not dealt with here (see Posener-Krieger, Verner, Vymazalova 2006).
57
4.2.f The Reisner Papyri110
P. Reisner I and III (P. Reisner II and IV will not be investigated here) concern the
organisation of a work project. Accounts of manpower, occasionally listed by institution,
with summaries for each individual month as well as longer periods of time, and
occasional notes on mustering and the absence of workers are included. The year, the
month and the indication of the date introduce each entry of the daily account like in a
journal. Some numbers are struck out in red and there are calculation aids in the form of
multiplication tables inserted in the tables (both for the number eight, which is frequently
used as a multiplier, and both written upside-down in relation to the rest of the text) 111.
Section A of Papyrus Reisner I records daily notes (122 consecutive days) of the number
of workmen assigned to a particular task, while in section C the work force is divided into
a number of separate gangs, like it happens for the workforce in Deir el-Medina.
The documents were discovered by G.A. Reisner during the excavations in 1901-1904
in Nag’ ed-Deir in southern Egypt. Four papyrus rolls were found in a wooden coffin in a
tomb. The texts provide great insight into the composition of accounts at the beginning
of the 12th Dynasty, and contain records of wages, contracts, projects and work. They
probably date to the reign of Sesostris I112. Only the relevant documents and sections
will be shown here.
P. REISNER I
This is an account papyrus dating probably to the second reign of the 12th Dynasty
(Sesostris I)113. It was found during the excavations conducted by. G.A. Reisner on behalf
of the University of California at Nag’ ed-Deir, a site opposite Girgeh in Upper Egypt114.
The papyrus was one of four rolls discovered lying on one of the three wooden coffins in
tomb N 408 (N 406 on the basis of a renumbering of the tombs apparently conducted by
the excavators115). The document is now at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston bearing
the number 38.2062.
In common with many of the account papyri of the Old and Middle Kingdom (Abusir
Papyri, Illahun Papyri), there are ruled guidelines, most likely to assist the scribe in
110
For an overview of the documents see Simpson 1963, 1965, 1969, 1986 and Wente 1972.
111
Hagen 2018, 124.
112 The dating of the papyri is still debated.
113 For a discussion about the date of the papyrus, see Simpson 1963, 19-21.
114 1901-1904; 1912 and 1923-1924 (the last excavation on behalf of Harvard University and the
Museum of Fine Arts of Boston).

115 Simpson 1986, 7.
58
Irene Morfini P Ph.D – Daily records of events in an Ancient Egyptian Artisans’ Community
aligning his writing and to make the account clearer, and several headings are dated with
the year, month and day.
For practical convenience, the papyrus has been cut and the different sections of
the document have been assigned a letter. The sections relevant to our argument are:
Section A: an account and summation of the number of workdays spent on a certain

unspecified project and a calculation of the number of bread rations involved. The
document supplies information about the daily record of the number of workmen
assigned to a particular task. The number of men does not vary widely from day to day
(22 to 38 men).
The section is arranged in tabular form with the lines closely spaced. Horizontally
ruled lines have been drawn at regular intervals so that five lines of text are ordinarily
included in each ruled space. As an aid to the proper alignment of the columns, five
vertical lines are also used. Three provide a ruled edge for the columns indicating the
days of the month, and two provide a similar margin for the figures representing the
number of enlistees and the number of different loaves of bread.
The year and its numeral are written in black with the month and day of the month
in red. There is a list of 122 consecutive days of the year and the number of labourers
who reported for work on each of these days. The list of days with the enumeration of
the workers and new enlistees is interrupted only by the figures for the totals at the end
of each month or partial month.
The document could represent a sort of ration or pay sheet which recorded the
total amount of compensation for the workmen. This record may have been prepared for
a disbursing or fiscal agency of the Pharaonic government to serve as a supporting
document for the expenditure of rations in the form of loaves of bread.
Section B: a record of the number of days each man was present. A list of men who
performed the work with indications of the days they were present or absent. Each entry
bears the name of the individual in the form X’s son Y.
59
Fig. 7 P. Reisner I Section B. After Simpson 1963, pl. 2a
60
Section C provides a list of 134 men and 15 leaders, arranged in 16 crews or gangs,
who were assigned to work on the xbsw-lands in charge of the steward Anhur-hotpe.
Section C is interesting because of the manner in which the work force is divided into a
number of separate gangs. It warrants attention since the system is not reflected in the
name lists in sections B, P or D. A similar system is instead followed in sections E and
F. The work force of section C consists of 16 subdivisions and each group is indicated
by the name and title of the foreman (written in red ink). Below the name of the foreman
is a list of the subordinate members of his gang, written in black, and at the end of each
gang, the figure for the total number of men in the gang is written in red.
Sections G, H, I, J, K are records of the construction of a temple: lists, with
measurements, of blocks of stone, calculations about different materials, list of the
assignment of the labour force, water transport etc.
The final result is a record of the total number of man-hours spent on the
undertaking during the period involved. The purpose of the account is the calculation of
the expense of labour necessary, allowable or spent on this portion of the project.
Numerous checkmarks are present, showing that it was a working document.
P. REISNER III116
The subject matter is essentially the same as that of P. Reisner I and concerns the
organisation of a work project for the construction of a temple or other religious structure.
The document is now at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston (number 38.2119).
Horizontal guidelines are also used here extensively to aid in alignment.
The regnal years must be assigned to Amenemhat I or his successor and co-regent,
Sesostris I.
Sections A, B, C and D: the register is a daily summary of the number of workmen
employed or assigned to the miscellaneous tasks specified by the headings. The year,
the month and the indication of the date introduce each entry of the daily account.
Section B reflects a daily account for 177 days. After the heading indicating the year, the
month and the day, the subject of the account follows: “Number of mny-laborers who are
in This”. A summary closes the section.
Sections F, G, K, and L: in these accounts, foremen who are responsible for work on a
building project and who have been assigned crews of labourers are listed.
The framework is the list of consecutive days with a heading consisting of a proper name
and different labels for the other columns. Each entry line refers to a single day.
116
For general information about the discovery, see P. Reisner I above.
61
Section K consists of a heading, now lost, and five paragraphs or subsections. The
column headings can be restored as follows: enrolled men (days of work per man); the
second column figures are the multiples of 10 units per day of work per man, possibly
hours or else volume or sum; the third column figures represent the work completed; and
the fourth column the remainder.
Sections E, H, and J deal with a work project and part of the operations involve a temple.
Also, here, we have the date and a general heading followed by column headings.
4.2.g The Illahun archives117
These texts present dated entries in red and black ink organized by year-month-day, and
record events and accounts related to a group of workmen engaged in a specific task.
We therefore expect to see similarities with the Deir el-Medina journal. Petrie, in Illahun,
Kahun and Gurob (1891, 48), when referring to the different kinds of papyri found,
mentions, “accounts kept journal-fashion”. “These accounts are lists of superintendents
and workmen engaged in dragging stone […] kept by a scribe of the royal treasury […]
contains for each day concise and formal notes of the occasions for which several drafts
or payments were made, together with names of persons and lists of things paid out or
received. At the end of the day the clerk drew up his balance sheet”.
El-Lahun or Kahun is the name of the workers' village in Fayyum associated with the
pyramid of Sesostris II. Between 1889 and 1899, el-Lahun yielded the largest haul of
surviving Middle Kingdom papyri, a collection of ancient Egyptian texts concerning
administrative, mathematical and medical topics.
The archive of el-Lahun is one of the most important temple archives and dates
from the second half of the 12th Dynasty (covering a period of 50 years, from year 5 of
Sesostris II to year 36 of Amenemhat III). The find is divided into two parts that were
found ten years apart, in 1889-90 and 1899, at the excavations of Flinders Petrie. The
first part is now at the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology at University College
London, the second one almost completely in the State Museum of Berlin.
The London papyri are said to have been discovered in the funerary temple of
Sesostris II by Flinders Petrie, while the Berlin papyri were bought by Ludwig Borchardt
for the Egyptian Museum in Berlin in 1899. Inspired by the discovery of new papyri,
Borchardt conducted a small-scale excavation around the temple area and found an
additional corpus of hieratic manuscripts. The Berlin find comprises documents of daily
117
For a general introduction about the documents, see Collier-Quirke 2002, 2004 and 2006,
Griffith 1898, Horváth 2009, Petrie 1891, Luft 1992a and 1992b, Luft 2006, Kóthay 2015.
62
worship in the mortuary temple of King Sesostris II such as letters, temple diaries, supply
and festival lists. The significance of the Berlin papyri is made even greater by the fact
that the date of the Heliacal Rise of Sirius is recorded in the temple diary of year 7 of
King Sesostris III. The London papyri comprise items of a more individual character such
as legal documents, household lists, contracts, and even literary pieces.
Different kinds of papyri were found at Kahun between 1889 and 1899. The texts
span a variety of topics (literary, medical, veterinari, mathematical, legal, letters), but only
the account papyri are interesting to our work, and amongst them, those called official
journal in Griffith 1898, 55118. The following illustration shows some of these fragments.
III.1. A. page 3 recto (Griffith 1898, pl. XXII, ll. 1-9 = UC 32190+frs 32315). This is an
abstract of a communication and the reply written in guidelines. The subject of the
communication seems to be workers who stay home instead of coming to work. The
writer requests instructions on how to proceed and promises compliance. The other
fragments contain accounts with total and remainder (III.1. A. page 4 recto, Griffith 1898,
pl. XXII, ll. 10-16 = UC 32190+frs 32315), dates and figures recording the daily
consumption, or output, or receipt of materials (III.1. D. recto, Griffith 1898, pl. XXII, ll.
25-36 = UC 32190+frs 32315), rations which are given to an attendant, division of the
plots of land (III.1. C. recto, Griffith 1898, pl. XXII, ll. 37-48 = UC 32190+frs 32315), and
numbers of men employed (III.1. B. verso, Griffith 1898, pl. XXII, ll. 49-61 = UC 32190+frs
32315).
118Griffith 1898, 55, cals fragments A, C, and D “official journal” as if he would like to identify a
specific typology of administrative documents, unfortunately no explanation is given there, nor
any criteria for their identification.
63
Fig. 8 Illahun papyrus. Fragments of journal. UC 32190. After Griffith 1898, pl. XXII
64
Fig. 9 Illahun papyrus. Fragments of journal. UC 32190. After Griffith 1898, pl. XXII
65
The following illustration again shows some of the fragments (UC 32190) which are called
journals in Griffith 1898. In III.1. D. verso (Griffith 1898, pl. XXIII, ll. 1-7) we probably have part
of a record of daily attendance for a month, while in III.1. C. verso (Griffith 1898, pl. XXIII, ll. 8-
10) some soldiers are named, probably for an expedition to the quarries. III.1. A. verso (Griffith
1898, pl. XXIII, ll. 12-22) includes amounts paid and allocation of plots and III.1. A. recto
(Griffith 1898, pl. XXIII, ll. 24-40) contains figures in four columns (the third column may indicate
aruras or cubits) and accounts of bricks. Horizontal lines divide single sections of the
document.
Fig. 10 Illahun papyrus. Fragments of journal. UC 32190. After Griffith 1898, pl. XXIII
66
Fig. 11 Illahun papyrus. Fragments of journal. UC 32190. After Griffith 1898, pl. XXIII
67
The previous illustrations are fragments from one or more papyrus rolls containing what
is called in Griffith 1898 an ‘official journal’ with hieratic entries in red and black by year-
month-day, recording events and accounts in year 34 of Amenemhat III, in medium-
sized, thick, clear signs over guidelines on both sides. As we can clearly see, these
documents differ from the previous Old Kingdom papyri. The documentation is still
dominated by an analytical spirit and by a purely geometric appearance resembling the
offering lists, but the previous grid is reduced gradually and only labels and sum lines
still remain in some instances. Red ink is not used as much as in the previous period.
4.2.h The Annals of Amenemhat II
In 1974 Sami Farag (Director of Egyptian Antiquities in Memphis and Saqqara) raised a
large inscribed granite block found under the base of a colossal statue of Ramses II near
the Ptah temple in Memphis. It contained the remains of 41 columns describing events
in the reign of king Amenemhat II. Most of these events concern offerings made to
different deities and temples all around the country. However, there are also records of
military enterprises. A smaller fragment was already discovered by Flinders Petrie in
1908 and this contained a similar annals text from another period of Amenemhat II's
reign. Although the two fragments do not physically join, they clearly belong to the same
inscription.
The two fragments of the inscription form an extremely important source for the political
history of Egypt at the beginning of the Middle Kingdom. Both report numerous
foundations of Pharaoh for the gods of Egypt, the large fragment describes the reception
of delegations of foreign powers from Nubia and Asia and names the composition of the
tributes. It is not known where these annals were originally placed; it seems possible that
they once decorated the funerary temple of Amenemhat II’s pyramid at Dahshur119.
An analysis of the texts shows that the events of the annals are not systematized
according to subject groups, but in a chronological sequence (though without specifying
month and year dates). This is particularly clear in the first part of the Farag-block, where
the chronological arrangement is best observed120.
The formal structure of these annals fits in the tradition of the annalistic texts of the Old
Kingdom. They follow in the overall system the old model, which best-known
representatives are the annals preserved in the fragments of the 1st to 5th dynasty of
the Palermo/Cairo stone. Nonetheless, even if the events are sequentially recorded, they
119
Altenmüller 2015, 282-283.
120
68
are not, as in the annals of the Old Kingdom, summarized in annual blocks within a
graphically outlined annual field. Over the two year fields of the Farag-fragment, an upper
horizontal line was probably present, which probably contained the name of the reigning
King Amenemhat II and the well-known dedication formula ir.n=f m mnw=f. The original
state of the annals text could be reconstructed as follows: (a) the upper boundary of the
annals text probably formed a horizontal line with the name of the ruler. In this line the
dedicatory formula ir.n=f m mnw=f would be present. It is uncertain whether the
consecration formula was written year by year over the annual fields or whether it was
used selectively; (b) the main text is written in vertical lines from right to left, with the
records of the foundations and the individual events following each other directly. The
annals in the main text are brief and contain the description of the foundations for each
year (for the gods and kings, introduced by the dative-n, e.g.: AnnM x+9 end “…for Montu
in Armant, Asian copper: 1 ds-jug“; AnnM x+10 end “…for Montu in El-Tod, Asian copper:
1 ds-jug“,) and the outstanding events, introduced by a verb in the infinitive form (e.g.:
AnnM x+13 “…Arrival (spr) of the expeditionary army that had been sent out to the
Turquoise Terrace = Sinai. They brought:…[follows list of minerals]”)121.
121
69
Fig. 12 Annals of Amenemhat II, Farag-block. After Altenmüller 2015, Falttafel
4.2.i The Ramesseum Papyri122
The following documents are mentioned here since they offer a series of daily dated
events or diaries recording consecutive days. Concerning the Semnah dispatches, they
are included here because from these letters one may conclude that the frontier post
kept a kind of “border journal”123. In the letters there are indeed references to events on
certain days.
122 For more information on the discovery and the content of the papyri, see Barns 1956, Gardiner
1955, Quibell 1896, Smither 1945, Spiegelberg 1898a, Parkinson 2011 and Hagen forthcoming.
123
Same style as later in Papyrus Anastasi III verso VI, (EA10246, 1) dated to year 3 of
Merenptah. See Caminos 1954, 108-113. The text provides an overview of the movement of
travellers recorded in a daybook from a border official over a period of ten days.
70
In 1895-96, Flinders Petrie discovered a plundered tomb shaft as he and James Quibell
excavated the funerary temple of Ramesses II, the Ramesseum. In the north-west corner
of the temple complex, there was a shaft, on an angle to the wall of one of the chambers
of the later temple’s brick storeroom and running under it. At the bottom of the shaft, two
small chambers opened. They were cleared and found to be empty. Lastly, the heap left
in the middle of the shaft was removed and in it the excavators discovered a group of
objects, apparently, the remains of burial goods that had been removed from one of the
burial chambers. There was a wooden box containing papyri, surrounded by a mass of
other material. The papyri and objects that were discovered were divided between
several institutions. Many fragments of the papyri were lost or disintegrated over the
years through the process of mounting them on glass smeared with beeswax. In regard
to dating the documents, the reign of Amenemhat III provides a terminus a quo. The date
is conventionally given as the 13th Dynasty. The majority of the papyri are at the British
Museum.
The corpus includes literary papyri, ritual and magical texts, hymns, mythological spells,
mathematical texts, the Ramesseum Onomasticon, funerary texts, wisdom texts and
fragments of accounts.
The documents of interest for this work are the following:
 P. Ram. C (BM EA 10752.1-6) and P. Ram. 19 (BM EA 10772.2) Semna

Dispatches (Smither 1945, Gardiner 1955, 8, 11, Quirke 1990, 191-3, Vogel
2004, 61-3, 78-87, Parkinson 2011, Kraemer-Liszka 2016)
The papyrus contains, on the recto, copies of a number of dispatches sent from
the fortress of Semna called “Khakawre (=Sesostris III) is mighty” or from
elsewhere.
The papyrus was found at Thebes, but the texts were copied at Semna
West and later travelled to Thebes in one papyrus (Kraemer-Liszka 2016, 48-49
against Smither 1945, 4). The dispatches would be received in ordinary letter
form and then copied into a 'journal' or book of letters as a permanent record. The
verso of the papyrus is covered with magical texts, and it is probably for the sake
of these alone that the papyrus was preserved and travelled to Thebes.
The dispatches deal with the comings and goings of Nubians, who came to
Semna to trade their wares, and the Medjay people, and mention more than once
the steps taken to keep track of the movements of these southerners in the
desert.
71
Fortunately, it seems possible to date the dispatches fairly accurately. The

many dates mentioned, all in year 3 of an unnamed king, afford no clue, but the
Simontu referred to was identified by Smither (1944), doubtless correctly, as the
man of the same name and titles who left records of himself on the rocks at
Semna dated to the years 6 and 9 of Amenemhat III, i.e. about 1844 and 1841
B.C. Since this king reigned for about half a century, and since in the name of the
Semna fortress, Sesostris III, his predecessor, is referred to as mAa-xrw we may
quite safely ascribe the papyrus to his reign.
As an example, only page five of the Semna Dispatches is shown below.
Fig. 13 Page five of Semna Dispatches. After Smither 1945, pl. VIa
72
 P. Ram. III verso (BM EA 10756) (Gardiner 1955, 9, 17, pl. 7, 9, pl. 63 verso,
Barns 1956, 15-23, pl. 12, B 1-4, pl. 13, B 19-28, pl. 24-25 verso, Quirke 1990,
188-9)
Accounts with ruled lines. The text is written in vertical lines. Gardiner proposes
that “the subject is deliveries of various kinds of grain to the Residence, to a
storehouse (mXr), and to the houses of certain individual persons, and that these
transactions are dated in the sixth year of some king unknown”124. The accounts
concern distribution of a variety of commodities including oil, vegetables, and
bread.
124 Gardiner 1955, 17.

73
Fig. 14 Accounts, P. Ram. III verso. After Barns 1956, pl. 24
 P. Ram. XIII verso (BM EA 10766) (Gardiner 1955, 14-15, Quirke 1990, 187,
Parkinson 2011)
A diary of an embalment with ruled lines recording 77 consecutive days in vertical
columns divided into seven-day periods, written against the last day of each is
74
the sign for “total”, dmD, followed by the word for “purification” (wabt). It appears to
be a checklist of embalming days, perhaps for general guidance.
Fig. 15 Papyrus Ram. XIII verso. After www.britishmuseum.org
Fig. 16 Papyrus Ram. XIII verso. After Gardiner 1955, fig. 1
75
4.2.j The Middle Kingdom Tax Assessor’s Day-book125
This fragment of a diary of the scribe of the revenue department, records brief dated
entries of how the scribe spent his business hours and the names of those who worked
with him. It is likely enough that officials who travelled on government business were
required to submit a report to the central office of how they spent their time. The format
of this diary, with its brevity of style and mentioning what happened for each recorded
day, offers a good example of a day-book, in which daily events are noted.
This document, together with other fragments, was discovered on a site close to the
Fayyum, at Harageh (thus known as P. Harageh 3, now kept at the Petrie Museum as
papyrus UC 32775) by the British School of Archaeology in Egypt, under the
archaeologist Reginald Engelbach, during the excavations on the Gebel Abusir in the
winter of 1913-1914.
The document shown here is a very worm-eaten page from the diary of a scribe of
the revenue department and it was found “in the surface rubbish, and in the filling of
some of the tombs”126.
The palaeography closely resembles that of the papyri from Illahun, a few miles
away, and must be of the same period (end of the 12th, beginning of the 13th Dynasties).
The scribe has written vertically the beginning of I. 12, to show that it is to be read after
each of lines 7-11. The same device is used again in l. 26. At the beginning of a line, a
blank space serves as the equivalent of ditto marks.
The page shown here (fig. 17) is a list of staff (probably on day 14).
Days 15 until 19 were spent on an enquiry in the bureau of fields, southern(?)
section, while day 20 was spent recording the assessment of income due in the bureau
of fields, northern section, and “assembly before the national overseer of fields
Redianptah, northern section. List of staff assembled by the Scribe of the Mat, keeper of
regulations, Paentieni”.
Days 21 until 23 were spent “in the bureau of fields”.
Red ink is here used for the date, but also for entire sentences, while, instead of
the grid, we find horizontal lines dividing different sections.
125
See Engelbach-Gunn 1923, Grajetzki 2004 and Smither 1941.
126 Engelbach-Gunn 1923.
76
Fig. 17 Papyrus Harageh 3. After Smither 1941, pl. IXa
77
4.2.k Papyrus Boulaq 18127
Papyrus Boulaq 18 consists of two fragments written in hieratic during the 13th Dynasty
and found by Mariette in 1860 in the Theban Necropolis, at Dra Abu el-Naga in the tomb
of the “scribe of the great enclosure”, Neferhotep, next to a rishi coffin. The documents
are now at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo (CG 58069).
The papyrus contains accounts of the expenses of the royal palace during a visit to
Thebes, dates to the 13th Dynasty (around 1750 BC) and lists the palace officials and
the daily rations they received. For each day the income and expenditure, as well as the
total and the remainder, are indicated, comparable to what happens in many Deir el-
Medina texts. It also reports on the journey of the king to the temple at Medamud and on
the arrival of a delegation of Nubians.
The exact dating of the document is debated. The name of the king is heavily
damaged. The fragments are commonly attributed to Sobekhotep II.
The largest fragment of Papyrus Boulaq 18 contains the daily accounts of income
and expenditure in the palace of Thebes during a period of 12 days, in the second and
third month of the flood, year 3. Between the last date of the recto and the first of the
verso, there is an interval of 11 days, but it is unclear if there were originally records also
for these 11 days. The recto has a different character from the verso and is characterised
by the absence of the royal family. It is therefore likely that the original ended about
where it ends today, and so little has been lost. From what we can see, the accounts
represent the financial records of a royal visit to Thebes at the initiation or completion of
the monuments to Montu at Medamud.
Day summary lists follow the more detailed accounts for each day. The document’s
layout is similar to the other documents of this kind and shows in two instances horizontal
guidelines in black ink dividing the data and different headings for different types of food
(kinds of bread, dates, beer, vegetables, meat, etc.). For each day, the account revenue
(input) and the debit (output) is indicated, as well as the total and the remainder.
The account revenue consists of three sections: the total revenue entered in for
the Pharaoh; the daily dues from the temple of Amun; and the remainder from the
previous day.
127
For further discussion, see Griffith 1891, Mariette 1872, Scharff 1922, Spalinger 1985 and
1986, Miniaci-Quirke 2009.
78
The structure of the summaries of the daily accounts divides the usual beneficiaries
of the palace into three groups: the pr-aA (palace), the private quarters of the palace, and
the servants.
Fig. 18 Papyrus Boulaq 18, detail of event text on year 3. After Mariette 1872, pl. 30. Transcription after
Scharff 1922, pl. 15**
Fig. 19 Papyrus Boulaq 18. Column 12. Balance sheet. After Mariette 1872, pl. 18
79
Fig. 20 Papyrus Boulaq 18 column 51. Black horizontal guidelines dividing the data. After Mariette 1872, pl. 31
4.2.l Papyrus Louvre E. 3226128
Papyrus E. 3226 is an account document belonging to the reign of Thutmose III. The
papyrus counts 61 pages and deals with the accounting transactions and the delivery of
grain and dates to two parallel teams of workmen made over seven years (years 28-35
of Thutmose III). The recall to the two “sides” of the gang of workmen in Deir el-Medina
is clear.
The document actually consists of two large pieces (called fragment A and fragment B)
measuring 2.21 and 2.23 metres respectively. They both belonged to the same roll which
probably comes from Thebes.
In the accounts, there are two main elements: the lists of deliveries (analysis,
classification and recording of data), and the balances of the accounts (the synthesis).
All four texts present a simple and homogeneous appearance and the transactions
recorded follow a clear chronological order. Each page contains a limited number of lines
128
For an overview of the document see Megally 1971a-b and Megally 1977a-b.
80
and the space is never overloaded. This clarity facilitates verifying the accounts and
reading them easily. The accounts are both concise and complete.
Normally, an account is started on a new page and usually has the following
characteristics: the full date with the year in black and the month and the day in red; the
opening formula (rdyt Hr-sA Hsb and Ssp Hr-sA Hsb= “what has been given after the account”
and “what has been received after account”); the statement of the nature of the delivery
(grain or dates); the units of measure.
The balances of the accounts, which follow the transactions, provide a summary
of all the accounts of the said period, and give the precise results. The balances are
generally started on a new page detached from the body of the accounts for the sake of
clarity.
Megally hypothesizes (1977b, Conclusions) that to develop this set of accounts,
the accounting person probably had to use other documents: brief accounting documents
(e.g. ostraca) on which he noted one or more transactions; some sort of journal where
all daily transactions were recorded. From these documents, he could establish the
accounts included in this papyrus. Indeed, if we look at the layout of the document, very
neat and clear, we can imagine it was copied from a previous draft, even if mistakes and
corrections are still present in the text.
Below, some examples of the accounts:

 Recto VII: account of date suppliers from the year 29 until year 31.
81
Fig. 21 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226. Frag. A recto IV. After Megally 1971b, pl. IV
82
Fig. 22 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226. Frag. A recto VII. After Megally 1971b, pl. VII
83
Fig. 23 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226. General plan, left part of Megally’s plate. After Megally 1971b, pl. LXIIa
84
Fig. 24 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226. General plan, right part of Megally’s plate. After Megally 1971b, pl. LXIIb
85
4.2.m The Annals of Thutmose III129
These records mainly derive from entries in a day-book kept during the campaigns and
from a leather role preserved within the temple of Amun130. The name of these texts is
in fact poorly chosen, because they do not represent annals in the strict sense as “yearly
records of memorable events”131. Rather, they are almost all summaries of annual
military campaigns to Syria-Palestine during some twenty regnal years of this monarch.
These summaries only contain the main goal of the campaign and the most important
results in terms of victories and booty. Yet, the record of the first campaign is an
exception because this is introduced by a brief war diary, beginning with the starting date:
“Year 22, month IV of Peret, day 25. His Majesty crossed the (border) fortress of Tjaru
on the first campaign of victory, to overthrow that vile enemy and to extend the
boundaries of Egypt in accordance with the command of his father Amen-Re” (Urk. IV,
647). Then follow dated notes recording on year 23, month I of Shemu, day 3 the
coronation day spent in Gaza, day 5 departure from Gaza, day 16 war council in IHm,
day 19 reaching the city of Aruna, and finally day 21 the battle of Megiddo. After this
short series of dated events follow lists of booty.
The texts of the Annals are located behind the Sixth Pylon on the inside walls of the
chamber housing the “holy of holies” and known as the “Annals room” at the great Karnak
Temple and the room measures 25 metres in length and 12 metres wide. The style is
clear and succinct, in third-person narration; the main source of information for the
Annals were military field reports (hrwyt nt mSa) that were systematically kept from day-
to-day.
General structure of the annals:
 An opening section is common to all the year sections in the form: “Lo, his majesty
was in X upon his Y campaign of nxtw”. Where X is a foreign land and Y the
number of the campaign.
 The day-book summaries.
 The list for the complete year.
129
See Grapow 1949, Spalinger 1977 and Redford 2003.
130
Allusion within the Annals (Col. 94) refers to this original document.
131
See also Grapow 1949, 7: “Diese von uns “Annalen” genannten Texte sind eben offenbar im
ägyptischen Sinne keine “Annalen”, keine gnw.t: die Nichtanwendung dieser Bezeichnung wird
schon ihren guten Grund haben”.
86
Fig. 25 Thutmose III Annals, cols. 1-13, the beginning of the first campaign. After Redford 2003, fig. 1
Somewhat similar to the annals of Thutmose III is an embedded annalistic text on two
stelae of his successor Amenhotep II132. One stela was found in Memphis and the other
in Karnak. The text contains the record of the first and second campaigns of this king in
Syria133. The main attention is focussed on the personal exploits of the Pharaoh himself,
as in the later campaign records of Sethi I, Ramesses II and Ramesses III (Libyan Wars)
which have much in common with earlier Annals.
132
See Urk. IV, 1302.1–5 and 1310.10–16.
133
Van Seters 1997, 150-151
87
4.2.n The Papyri Brooklyn 35.1453 A and B
The papyri were acquired in Egypt in the late 19th century by Charles E. Wilbour and
given to the Brooklyn Museum in 1935 by his daughter. Their provenance is unfortunately
unknown. They can be dated to the late 18th Dynasty, or, according to Condon, to the
Amarna period, in view of the personal names composed with the element Aten134.
Janssen prefers a date in the early 19th Dynasty135.
The text of fragment A contains a kind of ship's log or day-book with dated entries, names
of ports and lists of women, with their parents and the indication of their origin, followed
by specific quantities of products (mainly garments and honey). According to Condon the
text may record the distribution of payments by a temple to temple-workers, in the form
of rations136. Janssen thinks that the text concerns the journey of a ship along the river,
travelling from port to port collecting goods from retail dealers137. The lay-out of the
document is arranged in horizontal lines without a grid or dividing lines.
The use of red ink is reduced and has a more effective role in the distinction of
accounting transactions. Red ink is indeed used to indicate “delivery”, dates and
numbers when they are used to indicate the hin as a measure of honey. The text of
fragment B only preserves a date where the delivery and income of certain quantities of
products are recorded. Red ink is here used only for the date, “arrival”, “deficit” and never
for the quantities.
134 Condon 1984, 57.

135 For a wider discussion about the disagreement on the contents and dating of the documents,
see Janssen 1985 and Condon 1986.
136 Condon 1984, 58.
137 Janssen 1985.
88
Fig. 26 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 A recto, after

https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/45059/Fragment
89
Fig. 27 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 A recto, after Condon 1984, 60-61
90
Fig. 28 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 A recto, after Condon 1984, 62
Fig. 29 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 B recto, after

https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/45059/Fragment
91
Fig. 30 Papyrus Brooklyn 35.1453 B recto, after Condon 1984, 77
4.2.o The Rollin Papyri (accounts of Sethi I)138
The Rollin papyri are kept in the Collection des Monuments égyptiens of the National
Library in Paris. They contain accounts of wood (papyrus Rollin 1882 and 1883), grain,
flour and bread provided for the supply of one of the residences of Sethi I. The Rollin
Papyri are numbered from 1882 to 1889 and they all contain administrative matters,
except numbers 1887 and 1888, which contain a hymn and a legal document,
respectively.
From the following illustrations, we can see that the layout of the documents is
simplified: abandoning the use of grids and only notation in horizontal lines makes
reading the pages easier. The use of red ink is not excessive and has a more effective
role in the distinction of accounting transactions. The accounts are no longer bristled with
titles, subtitles and tracks marked in red.
 Papyrus Rollin 1884 (Pleyte 1868 Pl. V-IX) year 2 of Sethi I: the text concerns
an account of people with the title “baker”. The lists of accounts begin with the
138
See Chabas 1869, Eisenlohr 1897, Pleyte 1868 and Spiegelberg 1896.
92
name of the baker and the quantity of flour delivered and, perhaps, the bread
produced(?).
Fig. 31 Papyrus Rollin 1884. After Spiegelberg 1896, pl. VIIa, corresponding to Pleyte 1868 Pl. VII
 Papyrus Rollin 1885 (Pleyte 1868 Pl. X-XIV) year 2 of Sethi I: the document is
composed of two sheets, 1885A and 1885B. The first contains three columns of
which the first notes the number of krSt loaves received in the storage area by
different scribes on several dates. We find here the indication of the month and
the day and then “received in the magazine of the palace from the scribe X” and
the quantity of loaves stored. Then follows the account of receipt from the bakers,
first (PI. XII) of large loaves, then of large (XIII, 3) and small loaves (XIII, 4-23; X)
in the storage area of the royal court.
 Papyrus Rollin 1886 (not in Pleyte 1868) year 3 of Sethi I: a small fragment
which does not contain baking accounts but the account of amounts of poultry
supplied to the court of Sethi I by the scribe Pai.
93
 Papyrus 1889 (Pleyte 1868 Pl. XVII-XX) year 2 of Sethi I: the text contains dated
accounts of grain and flour and the distribution of flour to the bakers.
Fig. 32 Papyrus 1889. After Spiegelberg 1896, Pl. IVb, corresponding to Pleyte 1868 Pl. XVII-XX
94
4.2.p The Ship’s log of Leiden I 350 verso and Papyrus Turin 2008+2016139
Two papyri from the Ramesside Period contain daily records on the journey of a ship.
PAPYRUS LEIDEN I 350 VERSO

Papyrus Leiden I 350 is part of the large collection of Giovanni Anastasi acquired in 1829
for the National Museum of Antiquities. The recto of the papyrus contains a Hymn to
Amun. The verso, however, was used by a scribe to make daily notes about the events
aboard a ship: a ship’s log.
The document measures 89x38 cm and the text is arranged over six rather small
columns. It is dated to year 52 of Ramesses II and probably comes from Memphis. The
writing is cursive and very difficult to read because of the many ligatures (combinations
of signs). According to Janssen 1961, 4-5 “[The scribe] intended to make a copy in uncial
script when the journey was finished, and these were only his working notes, and if so
this would explain why he used the verso of a papyrus with a religious text and once
even wrote in between the lines of it (col. V, 21)”.
The text concerns the daily rations of food distributed to the crew of the ship, from
II prt, day 25, to III prt, day 4.
139 See Janssen 1961.
95
Fig. 33 Papyrus Leiden I 350 verso, detail of col V. After www.rmo.nl/collectie/
96
Fig. 34 Papyrus Leiden I 350 verso, detail. After Janssen 1961
Following each date first detailes about the wind and the movement of the ship are
mentioned. The members of the crew are always listed in four categories: the people of
the regiment, the personnel of the temple, the sailors, and the people of the house (of
prince Ramesse). Red ink is used in the dates, in the headings of the inw-entries and in
the calculations of the daily rations. Different from the rations of the artisans in Deir el-
97
Medina, the crew of this ship mainly receives a daily bread ration (but it could also be
that other deliveries were noted on other documents that have not yet been discovered
or that haven’t been preserved, or that other goods were delivered before the departure
to each crew member).
PAPYRUS TURIN 2008+2016

The exact provenance of this papyrus is unknown. It was bought, together with other
papyri from the collection of Drovetti, in 1824 by the king of Sardinia for the Museum in
Turin.
Both on the recto and the verso, three columns remain. Originally the roll was
longer than it is now; the measurements of the papyrus in its present conditions are
45x38 cm. Recto and verso are written by the same hand. The writing has a very cursive
character. Also here, red ink is always used to indicate month and day and sometimes
for the words hrw n, hAw, and mn. The dating of the text is still under discussion. The text
concerns the same subject as Papyrus Leiden I, 350: transport of goods and the daily
rations of food to the crew of the ship.
98
Fig. 35 Papyrus Turin 2008+2016 recto, details. After Janssen 1961
The text on the recto is a straightforward ship’s log, noting the daily progress of the boat
since its departure. Seeing that the verso, which is clearly by the same hand as the recto,
begins with a list of the “freight which is in the boat of the high priest of Amun”, it would
seem a fairly safe assumption that we are dealing with the same ship’s log. The
document is dated to year 7 of an unknown king (it was probably written in the title, now
lost). The ship was on a voyage, which, in part at least, had a commercial goal.
99
Both texts record the transport of different kinds of goods. Papyrus Turin 2008+2016
contains a list of the cargo of the ship (verso col. I), which shows that this consisted of a
great variety of foodstuffs and materials, while for papyrus Leiden I 350 verso, such a list
is not available, even if from the inw-entries we may conclude that the cargo of the ship
was similar. The “Turin ship” was concerned with the trading of garments, the “Leiden
ship” with the collection and distribution of food.
4.2.q Tomb construction journal of Saqqara140
Papyri JE 52002, JE 52003, JE 52004 and MMA 3569 + Vienna 3934/3937 + 9352
concern the details of a tomb construction project at Saqqara, a report drawn up by the
scribe Buqentef, responsible for the construction of the funeral monument for a high
functionary in the years 15-16 of Ramesses III, May. The papyri that are now in Cairo
(JE 52002-3-4) were found in 1927 by Cecile Firth in one of the smaller rooms in the
mastaba of the 6th Dynasty vizier Ni’ankhba, along the north side of the Unas causeway
at Saqqara, while for the other two, now in Vienna and New York, the provenance is
unknown.
The papyri preserve the daily notes of the construction project, recording everything from
Buqentef’s initial arrival at Memphis and his delivery of the necessary documents and
permits, to his assembly of a crew of workers, and then the gradual progress of the
building work. The scribe writes these daily notes starting with year 15, IV month of pr.t
day 6 and they cover about eight months. He introduces the notes with a heading:
“Document [r-a-sS.w] of all the commissioned works which are to be executed on the
construction site of the Place of Eternity (i.e. the tomb) of the royal scribe and general
May, which is being made to the west of Memphis by the workmen under the authority
of the scribe Buqentef” (line 4 of JE 52002, recto, see fig. below).
140
See: KRI VII, 263: 4-273: 7; Posener-Kriéger 1981, 47-58; Posener-Kriéger 1996, 655-664;
Van Dijk 1993, 24-25; Demarée 2008, 7-10; Hagen 2016, 155-181.
100
Fig. 36 Part of papyrus JE 52002, recto. After Posener-Kriéger 1981, 48
4.3 Similarities and differences
The first and main research question of this study is to determine whether the notes of
the so-called journals would be considered as such according to the ancient
Egyptian point of view, i.e., if the concept of a Necropolis journal existed. To this end,
the concept of journal in a broader Egyptian perspective has therefore been researched.
Now, this material will be examined in order to identify common features and
differences between these records and the so-called Necropolis journal and to
draw conclusions in the form of criteria to identify a Necropolis journal.
A first observation we can make is that, amongst the documents discussed in this
chapter, we can distinguish three main types:
 Annals
In the annals, engraved on stone, the regnal years of each ruler are listed,
plus important events occurred during these reigns, like the height of the
Nile flood, festivals, etc. This information is formatted as a chronological
table in which each year, designated by a separate compartment, begins
on New Year’s Day, the first day of the first month of the inundation
(Palermo Stone and South Saqqara Stone). Mostly they use the typical
formula nswt-bity + cartouche + jr.n=f m mnw=f n and the typical narrative
infinitive. With the annals of Amenemhat II, the chronological arrangement
of the events is presented in columns, with the upper boundary probably
forming a horizontal line with the name of the ruler. The Annals of Thutmose
III, also in columns, include an exception, because the records of the first
101
campaign are introduced by a brief war diary with a short series of dated
events in years 22 and 23.
 Account journals
Account journals, all written on papyrus, are those documents which usualy
record monthly or daily deliveries, working lists, inventories, registers of
income and expenses, list of objects or products, etc. They are either
organized in grids with a strong geometric appearance (some of the
documents of Wadi el-Jarf papyri, Gebelein Papyri, Abusir Papyri), or
arranged in tabular form with horizontal ruled lines (Reisner Papyri,
Illahun archives, Papyrus Boulaq 18, Papyrus Louvre E. 3226, Rollin
Papyri).
 Event journals
Event journals, also only written on papyrus, record series of daily activities
which can be very different, like a ships’ log (Wadi el-Jarf papyri ships’ log,
Papyri Brooklyn 35.1453 A and B, Leiden I 350 verso and Papyrus Turin
2008+2016), a border journal (Semna dispatches), a diary of the scribe of
the revenue department (Middle Kingdom Tax Assessor’s Day-book), or a
tomb construction journal (Papyri JE 52002, JE 52003, JE 52004 and MMA
3569 + Vienna 3934/3937+ 9352). The arrangement of the data is in
horizontal lines, except for the ship’s log of Wadi el-Jarf (the oldest
document) which is in columns: below a short horizontal line indicating
each day, two vertical columns contain the progress report about the
activity of the crew on that specific day.
The distinction between account journals and event journals must be stressed, since this
aspect is of primary importance in order to understand our Deir el-Medina texts. Account
journals are all those day-to-day notes that record mainly lists (of food deliveries, tools,
income and expenditure), while event journals register the activities, the events
happening. Both record these notes daily, in a mostly respected chronological order,
and both are journals, nonetheless they describe different aspects.
The main point in our working definition of journal (see Introduction) is that a
Necropolis journal should present a series of day-to-day entries recording events.
we will therefore concentrate on event journals. Amongst the selected material the
texts more similar to Deir el-Medina journal are those recording activities, the event
102
journals (Wadi el-Jarf papyri141 and other ship’s logs, the Middle Kingdom Tax Assessor’s
Day-book, and the tomb construction journal of Saqqara), and it is therefore here that we
have to look more closely for the features that will allow us to formulate precise criteria.
A further feature observed, which might not be immediately relevant to the notion of
‘journal’, is the gradual change in time in the format of the recording technique of the
selected material of this chapter, from the presence of grids to the reduction to guidelines
and finally their absence. Although this is a feature observed in the documents earlier
than the Necropolis journal of Deir el-Medina, it deserves attention. This background
might be the base for the brief and concise style and the use of recurrent formulas found
in the Deir el-Medina journals, and it is therefore useful to summarize here its
development.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF RECORDING TECHNIQUES IN ANCIENT EGYPT:
From the overview of documents such as annals and day-books presented, it is clear
that during the Old Kingdom, data were mostly included in grids composed of
horizontal and vertical lines, and written in red or black ink. This documentation is
dominated by an analytical attitude and by a purely geometric appearance resembling
the offering lists as for example in the Palermo Stone, where the text formatted as a table
shows how this analytical mindset was present since the beginning of Egyptian history,
and in the Abusir Papyri and the Gebelein Papyrus III recto, where the accounts have
been arranged within a grid. The accounts of the Wadi el-Jarf papyri are also organized
in grids, whereas the ships’ log is recorded in columns, with the indication of the day at
the top of the page horizontally, and below it two columns registering the events. In the
following periods, in the administrative texts written on papyrus we can observe a gradual
change in the pattern, an evolution from a layout in columns to one in horizontal lines.
Religious texts, literary texts and letters show a different development. Most of the first
category (on papyrus, wood or linen, like Coffin Texts, Book of the Dead, Amduat,
etcetera) continue to be written in the old pattern, with headings in horizontal lines and
text in columns below. Literary texts and letters were also written in vertical lines until the
end of the Middle Kingdom.
The layout of texts on stone follows instead a different pattern. Early texts like the
Pyramid Texts are arranged in columns, as also the royal decrees (texts containing royal
141
For the category of documents containing the ships’ log that records the progress report
corresponding to the activity of the crew on that specific day.
103
commands, wD-nswt142, written with an introductory horizontal line and a series of vertical
columns below this). In temple texts and many other texts on stone this pattern is
preserved until the very end of the Egyptian history143.
Another typical feature observed in the Old Kingdom documents presented, is that
red ink was used extensively in texts written on papyri. In the various monthly tables,
a single or double red line separates the spaces in which the headings of the tables were
entered from the spaces allotted to the days of the month. However, the use of red ink
is not restricted to the lines of the grids. It is also used in the headings of duty tables, and
in the monthly accounts, when specifying the origin or quality of the deliveries. In the
inventories, the material from which objects are made may be written in red and also the
records of the objects which have been damaged. In the accounts, numerals are written
in both red and black. The sums and the total numbers of objects of one kind in the
inventories are generally written in red. Instead of clarifying things, this excessive use of
red ink results in a rather confusing document (to the modern reader at least).
Throughout the Middle Kingdom, this system remained in use, although slightly
different: the grid is gradually reduced even if labels and sum lines still intersect on a
rather large page and the use of red ink is reduced. P. Reisner I and III, e.g. include
sections arranged in tabular form with the lines closely spaced. Horizontally, ruled lines
have been drawn at regular intervals so that usually five lines of text are included in each
ruled space. As an aid to the proper alignment of the columns, five vertical lines are also
used. The year and its numeral are written in black with the month and day in red. The
lines, horizontal and vertical, are used for the obvious purpose of aligning the figures in
columns with their respective entries to the right. Also in the Illahun documents, the
previous grid is reduced gradually and red ink is not used as much as in the previous
period.
Some documents among the Ramesseum Papyri show accounts with ruled lines
(e.g. P. Ram. XIII verso: a diary of an embalming process with ruled lines recording in
vertical columns 77 consecutive days divided into seven-day periods) as also appear the
Middle Kingdom Tax Assessor’s Day-book and Papyrus Boulaq 18.
During the New Kingdom, the account documents are simplified. We see a
gradual abandonment of grids, which facilitates reading of the pages. The scribe can
now make the most of the surface format of the papyrus, avoiding the need to leave
blank spaces and unused spaces within the grids. The horizontal line becomes
142
Vernus 1991, 239 and Vernus 2013.
143
In a demotic text on ostracon (O. Strasbourg D 283) with measures of the daily level of the
Nile and dated to 221 BC, the text is arranged in columns organized below a horizontal line
(Kaplony-Heckel 2010, 257-260).
104
standard and the use of red ink is moderate. The accounts are no longer bristling with
titles, subtitles and tracks marked in red. All this leads to a simplified arrangement. The
red ink has a more effective role in the distinction of accounting transactions; its usage
is more limited but more effective. For example, in Papyrus Louvre E. 3226 all four texts
present a simple and homogeneous appearance and the transactions recorded follow a
clear chronological order. Each page contains a limited number of lines and the space is
never overloaded. This clarity results in easy reading and verification. The accounts are
both concise and complete and the resulting layout of the document is neat and clear.
Also in Papyri Brooklyn 35.1453 A and B, even if the content it is still a matter of debate,
the grids and the horizontal lines are abandoned, just as in the Rollin Papyri, where the
absence of the grids and the use of horizontal lines facilitates reading and red ink is used
more moderately.
Finally, in The Ship’s logs of Leiden I 350 verso and Papyrus Turin 2008+2016 and
the tomb construction journal of Saqqara, the daily notes are organized in horixontal lines
and red ink is used only in the dates, the headings of the inw-entries and in the
calculations of the daily rations.
PURPOSE AND FORMAT

After having outlined the development in time of the recording techniques, it is also
interesting to investigate if documents that fulfill a similar purpose also follow a similar
format. Does the content and the final use of the text determine its format? A first clear
distinction we need to mark is between texts inscribed on durable materials (annals like
Palermo and South Saqqara stone, the annals of Amenemhat II and those of Thutmose
III) and those written on papyrus. The purpose of annals is indeed very different from
other kinds of day-books: they record on stone, and narrate to people -probably as a
royal propaganda more than as an objective historical record144-, events which took
place under a king’s reign, and they are intended to be visible forever. With day-books
written on papyrus, instead, we are in front of an administrative process of recording
an ongoing project, an activity, where certain information has to be most probably
retrievable later on.
Among the day-books written on papyrus listed in this chapter, we can identify four
main types according to purpose:
144
Eyre 1996, 416; Hoffmeier 1993, 291-299.
105
1- Texts accounting the activities of a team of workmen involved in a construction

project of a temple, a tomb, etc. (papyri of Wadi el-Jarf, Gebelein papyri, Reisner
papyri, tomb construction journal of Saqqara). We mostly find here a number of
workdays, daily or monthly deliveries of food with amounts, expenditures and
remainders. These records may have been prepared for a spending or fiscal
department of the Pharaonic government to serve as a supporting document for the
expenditure of rations.
2- Texts known as ship’s logs (ships’ log of Wadi el-Jarf, Papyri Brooklyn 35.1453 A
and B, Ship’s log of Leiden I 350 verso and Papyrus Turin 2008+2016), recording in
chronological order daily movements of ships, the nature of their cargo, crew rations
with deliveries and calculations. We know little about where they would have been
kept or deposited, or to what extent they would have been consulted after the ships
returned home. It seems reasonable to assume that in the case of ships belonging
to institutions this would have happened, yet, “what processes of checking and
accounting might take place at that stage, remains largely unknowable145”.
3- Texts related to the daily affairs of the temple or the granaries (Abusir Papyri,
Illahun archives, Papyrus Louvre E. 3226), including duty rosters, lists of people
involved, inventories, registers of income and expenses, records of inspections, a
series of notes which were probably required by the central administration, in order
to document the daily routine of a temple or a granary.
4- Texts dealing with the expenses of the royal palace (Papyrus Boulaq 18, Rollin
Papyri), consisting mainly of accounts of income and expenditure, with totals and
remainders, of the deliveries provided for the supply of the residences.
Observing the four groups here gathered and considering the summary given above
on the development of the recording techniques, it is clear that the content and the final
use of the text did not necessarily determine its format. We can indeed observe that
the format or layout including tables, grids or horizontal guidelines, is only following a
chronological development and it is not caused by a different purpose of the document.
For example, the accounts found among the papyri of Wadi el-Jarf and those in the
Reisner Papyri do not show the same format even if both fulfilled a very similar purpose,
145
Hagen-Soliman 2018, 130.
106
the organisation of a work project. In the first, we have both accounts data inserted in
a table and a ships’ log, while for the second only guidelines are used. It seems
therefore that the chronological development observable concerning the format most
certainly applies to scribal tradition in general and does not follow the purpose of the
texts.
Before proceeding to the next chapter, where the criteria for the selection of the Deir el-
Medina Necropolis journals will be listed, the main features of all the analysed documents
and the similarities between them and the so-called Necropolis journal will now be
presented together in a table for a general summary.
107
TABLE AND CHART OF THE FEATURES PRESENT IN THE ANNALS AND DAY-BOOKS ANALIZED
FEATURES CHRONOLOGIC EXTENSIVE
DATED HEADINGS LISTS OF GEOMETRIC GRIDS/ ONLY
AL ORDER OF 147 USE OF
ENTRIES PERSONS/GOODS APPEARANCE COMPARTMENTS GUIDE LINES
DOCUMENTS THE NOTES146 RED INK
Papyri of Wadi el-Jarf X X X? X X X X
Palermo Stone X X X X
South Saqqara Stone X X X X
Gebelein Papyri X X X X X X X
Abusir Papyri X X X X X X X
Reisner Papyri X X X X X X
Illahun archives X X X X X X
Amenemhat II Annals X X X X
Ramesseum Papyri X X ? X X
Middle Kingdom Tax
X X ? X X
Assessor’s Day-book
Papyrus Boulaq 18 X X X X X X
Papyrus Louvre E. 3226 X X X X
Thutmose III Annals X X (partial) X
Papyri Brooklyn 35.1453 A
X X X X
and B
Rollin Papyri X X X X
Ship’s logs of Leiden I 350 v°
and of Papyrus Turin X X X X
2008+2016
Tomb construction journal of
X X X X
Saqqara
Necropolis journal X X X X
From the above table and following bar-chart, it is clear that some changes occurred over the years. The changes were probably due to the
development of accounting techniques, with the main features remaining the same over the whole period. As we have seen, the geometric appearance
of the layout of the first period, with grids and compartments or horizontal guidelines, gradually disappeared just like the extensive use of red ink in the
day-books. What remains the same during the whole period analysed is what can be defined as the main feature: a chronological order of the notes
and the inclination to dated entries. This is also the main characteristic of Necropolis journals: a collection of dated notes organised in chronological
order, recording a variety of events and activities of an institution.
146 Yearly or daily.

147 With the term “headings”, we mean title, section or even formula.
108
20
Necropolis journal
18 Tomb construction journal of Saqqara
Ship's log of Leiden I, 350 v and Papyrus Turin 2008+2016

16
Rollin Papyri
14
Papyri Brooklyn 35.1453 and B
12 Annals of Thutmose III
10 Papyrus Louvre E. 3226
Papyrus Boulaq 18
8
Middle Kingdom Tax Assessor’s Day-book
6
Ramesseum Papyri
4 Amenemhat II Annals
Illahun archives
2
Reisner Papyri
0
Abusir Papyri
Gebelein Papyri
South Saqqara Stone
Palermo Stone
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf
109
Summing up: what do the different kinds of annals and day-books have in common
with the so-called Necropolis journal? What features are similar?
As can be seen from the table and from the chart, what can be defined as the main
feature in common is a chronological order of the notes and generally dated entries;
thus a collection of dated notes organised in chronological order, recording a variety of
events and activities of an institution.
In the Necropolis journal, there are different practices: sometimes the year is in
black with the month and day in red, sometimes all are in black - which perhaps
depended on the whim of the scribe148.
With respect to the contents, what never changes in the course of time is the fact
that the notes contain various lists (of persons, food, goods) and events/activities and
always include headings, titles for the sections or standardised formulas. The notes can
obviously vary depending on the institution that keeps them, but we find a sort of standard
form both in the layout and in the syntax. In general, we can say that the day-books and
annals of the previous period share the main features with the so-called Necropolis
journal and they can therefore be compared.
Concerning the contents, it seems self evident to note that a Necropolis journal is
most similar to documents related to activities comparable with the work and necessities
of the Deir el-Medina community. The recently discovered administrative papyri of Wadi
el-Jarf, for example, with both the monthly account reports of the deliveries and the ships’
log recording the activities of the number of workmen operating in the harbour, is most
likely very close to the conception of Necropolis journal (a complete publication is not yet
available), as are the other ship’s logs (Papyrus Leiden I 350 verso and Papyrus Turin
2008+2016) recording the daily notes about the events aboard a ship, the transport of
different kinds of goods, and crew rations, recalling the distribution of grains and goods
to the workmen of the Village of Deir el-Medina149.
According to the ancient Egyptian point of view, a journal, with all its variants
depending on the institution that produced it, would look like a document which records
a series of events and activities through chronologically ordered entries. The fact that
148
Even in the small notes about a few days, the normal routine is followed: the date indicating
the day and the simple grammatical construction (i. a. see the Strike Papyrus dated to Ramesses
III).
149
It is worth noting that the Taxation Papyrus of the reign of Ramesses XI (P. Turin 1895 + P.
Turin 2006) also shows elements of a ship’s log.
110
the word “day” is the base from which the term is derived (both in our language and in
ancient Egyptian) underscores the importance of the calendric notation.
On a daily basis, the scribe would first observe the facts of a given situation and
then write these down in the form of dated entries. To make it easier to retrieve the notes,
he would add headings to entitle each different section. Syntactically, in this type of
document defined as “day-book”, there is constant recourse to the “absolute” use of the
infinitive150, i.e. the narrative infinitive, a general brevity of style, a preference for
unintroduced prepositional phrases, and the use of recurrent formulas and terms. The
common terminology found in annals and day-books is also present in the texts from the
Deir el-Medina community (account and event journals).
Here follows a list of the most frequent ones:
FROM EARLIER DOCUMENTS

 aHa quantity, amount, number (Papyri Reisner, Papyrus Boulaq 18)
 dmD total (Abusir Papyri, Gebelein Papyri, Papyri Reisner, Kahun Papyri, Papyrus
Boulaq 18)
 Hry-a arrears, refers to the remainder to be paid (Abusir Papyri, Kahun Papyri. In
the form Hryt-a in Papyrus Boulaq 18)
 Hsb.w account
 im.y-rn=f name-list
 ini to bring (Papyri Reisner)
 mn balance due (Papyrus Louvre E 3226, Papyrus Leiden I 350 verso)
 pr expenses (Abusir Papyri, Gebelein Papyri, Kahun Papyri, Papyrus Boulaq 18)
 rxt list, anticipated amount, refers to the quantity that should have been delivered
(Abusir Papyri, Gebelein Papyri, Papyri Reisner, Kahun Papyri, Papyrus Boulaq
18)
 snn list/account
 sxA.w memorandum
 wDAt remainder, the rest left after a transaction has been carried out (Abusir
Papyri, Gebelein Papyri, Papyri Reisner, Kahun Papyri, Papyrus Boulaq 18,
Papyrus Louvre E 3226)
150Gardiner 1957, §306. The infinitive may be used as the equivalent of a sentence, i.e. as
significant and complete in itself. It often occurs in headings, titles and the like.
111
FROM NECROPOLIS JOURNAL

Some of the most used terms and formulas (not including all the variants):
 aHa quantity, amount, number

 aqw regular supplies
 bakw when they worked
 date + Ssp m Dr.t NN …received from NN
 di.t di.w n Abd x giving grain rations of month x
 Diw indicated the first payment of rations, while dni indicated each additional one
 dmD total
 Hsb.w account, can be of grain rations, of deliveries of vegetables, etc.
 Htri deliveries
 inw supplementary deliveries
 im.y-rn=f name-list
 ini to bring
 iw m Dr.t NN entered from NN, recording deliveries of various commodities
 mkw rewards, for special occasions to high authorities consisting of salt, oil, meat,
natron, garments, sandals, etc.
 mn balance due
 snn list/account, series of numbers/calculations; introduces lists of names or
series of items and numbers, with calculations of totals and deficits
 sxA.w memorandum; used either as checkmark next to journal entries (often in red
or larger in size), or used in expressions such as “memorandum/charge
concerning”, “memorandum of deficit”, “memorandum of deliveries”
 wDAt remainder
 wrS they were on duty
 wsf they did not work
Before concluding this section, a few more points should be mentioned. First of all, the
conclusions drawn by Redford 1986 do not consider the background of the day-book
documents overviewed, nor their origin. It is quite clear that the habit of writing day-books
and journals did not start in the New Kingdom ex nihilo. Redford states that it was in the
Middle Kingdom, in the 12th Dynasty, when “day-books of various institutions, both
governmental and private, make their first appearance” (p. 334), but we now know that
there are several earlier documents to be considered as well: the papyri of Wadi el-Jarf,
the Abusir and Gebelein Papyri. We obviously have to bear in mind that Redford
112
published his book in 1986, when these earlier documents were not yet available, or not
fully available.
Additionally, what do all these types of day-books tell us about their background?
Looking at their layout, a question arises spontaneously: how were they composed?
There must have been a common background of knowledge. Perhaps not in the form of
guidelines from a proper business school, but there must have been some sort of
tradition and background to record keeping. The scribe who sat down and started writing
needed to have a basic idea, a scheme to make use of. There was most likely a common
knowledge, from some original source, that was transmitted over the years as a basic
standard to follow.
What if -at least at the beginning- it was the administration who provided the sheets
already laid out with the grids? It is obvious that the grids were drawn before the text was
included (see illustration below). This would also explain why the text is often either too
squeezed or there is much blank space left, or again, some entire columns are left blank,
as if the person who drew the grid was not aware of the real space needed and just
sketched a standard grid. At least initially, this system could have provided a standard,
and then, after having learned the scheme to follow (or according to a different
administration system required), the scribe found the grid to be no longer of use and a
more brief and concise style of recording data remained.
113
Fig. 37 Papyrus Gebelein III, after Posener-Kriéger 2004, recto (Pl. 22) above and a modern empty Excel
sheet below. If we compare the grid made on the ancient papyrus with the Excel page, a modern
spreadsheet for calculation and organisation of data, we can see many similarities. The space is divided
into grids by means of columns and lines and usually headings are written at top of the page in order to
organise the information.
114
4.3.a Other scribal traditions
A short paragraph should be devoted to a brief and not exhaustive overview on other
scribal traditions, namely, how journals/annals/day-books look like in other cultures and
if similarities are to be seen.
The Hittite royal Annals, those of MuršiliII of ¢atti, for example, demonstrates some
similarities with the Annals of Thutmosis III. Both have a prologue and epilogue stating
that the annals contain the campaigns conducted within a certain period of years, even
if the Egyptian Annals are then more specific about dating to the day, month and year of
the king’s reign than the Hittite ones. Both sovereigns were concerned with publishing
their brave or divine deeds for posterity, and the annalistic style arose in both cases as
one way of doing this151.
Babylonian chronicles are a series of tablets in cuneiform script compiled by
scribes recording chronologically noteworthy political and religious events
in Babylonian history. The corpus includes about forty-five Chronicles, written from the
reign of Nabonassar up to the Parthian Period152. The Babylonian chronicles thus
narrate a period of more than 2000 years. Even if the genre is ill-defined (“there is no
consensus about the combination of stylistic, thematic, functional, or redactional
characteristics that should set the chronicles apart as a genre from other types of
historiography written in first-millennium Babylonia, such as annals, king lists, and
epics”153), the Babylonian chronicles -as well as Assyrian Chronicles154- mainly contains
notes about political, military, judicial, and religious events that happened in the recent
or distant past and that were often, though not always, arranged in chronological order.
It seems that, as source of the Babylonian Chronicles, were the astronomical diaries,
day-books containing systematic records of astronomical observations and political
events, as well as predictions based on astronomical observations155. Neither Babylonian
nor Assyrian chronicles can stand the comparison with Roman Annals and later medieval
annals, which have a much broader spectrum of events.
Amongst the many Roman Annales, we will mention those written by the Roman
historian Titus Livy and by the historian and senator Publius Tacitus.
Livy wrote a monumental history of Rome, covering the period from the earliest
legends of the City before its foundation in 753 BC through the reign of Augustus.
151
Van Seters 1997, 150-151.
152
Waerzeggers 2012, 285-298.
153
Waerzeggers 2012, 287.
154
Olmstead 1915, 344-368.
155
Geller 1990 and Rochberg-Halton, 1991.
115
Nowadays we usually refer to this history of Rome as Ab Urbe Condita, even if Livy
himself called his work Annales. The form of Livy’s history follows indeed the annalistic
tradition. Livy’s style alternates between historical chronology and narration, often
interrupting the story to announce the election of a new consul. This was in fact the
system used by the Romans to take account of the years. Livy bases his chronology on
pontifical chronicles, called Annales Maximi, in which the most important events of the
year were recorded and which played a central role in shaping the form of the Roman
annalistic tradition. “From the time when the pontifical records were published,…the
history of the Roman Republic rested upon an authoritative collection of material, set in
a chronological framework, that imposed its tradition upon Roman historiography”
(McDonald 1957, 155).
Tacitus traces the history of the Roman Empire from the reign of Tiberius to that
of Nero (14-68 AC). Even if today those 16 books are known as Annals from their year-
by-year structure, their original title was Ab Excessu divi Augusti. The style is far removed
from the one of Egyptian annals or day-books. The books are written in a narrative, very
descriptive style, filled with commentaries and frequent political observations. What
Tacitus describes is a tragic historiography, full of dramatic events. The style he adopts
is complex, with intricate expressions, rare grammatical forms, and frequent omissions.
On a completely different side, archaeological excavations in China since the
1970s have produced many examples of a type of manuscript called rishu 日書 "day-
book” 156, present in the Chinese cultural sphere of the late Warring States, Qin, and
Western Han periods (ca. 3rd-1st centuries BC). They describe practical methods of
selecting auspicious times and places for a variety of activities in daily life (travel,
marriage, planting crops, seeking an audience, or burying the dead), but they also
incorporate a range of other miscellaneous subjects with the result that no two daybooks
are exactly alike157.
Clearly, Chinese day-books, even if organized chronologically, belong to a very different
category than our journals/day-books: in the last mentioned events which happened
have been recorded, while the rishu are closer to the idea of almanac158. Their main
156
The term is taken from the title that appears on one of the day-books discovered in 1976 at
Shuihudi, tomb 11 (ca. 217 BC). Lagerwey-Kalinowski 2008, 386.
157 Harper-Kalinowski 2017.
158
Almanacs are stil present in Italian popular tradition, as the religious one of Frate Indovino,
printed since 1945, in which we find for every day of the year the appropriate saints, feasts,
meteorological forecasts, lunar phases, and practical advice for farmers and housewives. The
popularity of almanacs in Italy was such that between 1976 and 1994 Rai 1 (Italian national TV
channel) produced a television broadcast called Almanacco del giorno dopo which provided
indication of the position and movement of celestial bodies, a brief biography of the saint of the
day and a TV-column called ‘Tomorrow happened’, with historical films, dedicated to an event
that happened in the past the day after.
116
content concerns hemerology or “knowledge of favourable and unfavourable days”159,

and are intended for everyday use. They show a connection to almanacs still popular in
Chinese communities today as well as to hemerological literature in medieval Europe
and ancient Babylon when tables were produced in order to predict lunar and planetary
phenomena160.
159
In this respect they remind us of the ancient Egyptian Calendars of Lucky and Unlucky Days.
160
Glick-Livesey-Wallis 2005, 29.
117
5. List of Necropolis journals from Deir el-Medina
5.1 The creation of the list: criteria
Genre classification amongst the mass of administrative texts produced in the Deir el-
Medina community during the Ramesside period constitutes a tough matter. The
diversity of texts, including accounts, lists and a variety of dated notes, makes it
complicated to distinguish clearly and outline what a journal would or should have looked
like. Some texts can be clearly defined, like letters, oracles, oaths, hymns, while others,
belonging to the large group of administrative documents, are less clearly identifiable161.
Primary among those are journals. Such a difficulty was certainly also encountered in
compiling the impressive Deir el-Medina Database, where documents very similar in
contents and format (deliveries of firewood or lamps, for example), are sometimes called
journal and in other instances account list, confirming the huge complexity of a genre
classification amongst these documents.
In the introduction of the present study, we outlined how previous works
approached and discussed the problem concerning the definition of the genre. Now, the
criteria used in this work to define what a Necropolis journal is must be set out. How can
we distinguish such documents from others? After looking at the collection of material in
the previous chapter, especially the day-to-day records of the Old, Middle and New
Kingdom, and after observing the shared features with Necropolis journals, we want to
formulate the guidelines which will allow us to create a list of criteria to select the material
for this study and thus identify a document as journal.
The following documents are those called at the end of the previous chapter ‘event
journals’ and therefore share most of the similarities with our Deir el-Medina journal.
The oldest administrative papyri so far discovered, those of Wadi el-Jarf, provide
a very interesting set of documents. We see meticulous accounts organized in monthly
tables and a detailed ships’ log for every working day recording the daily activities and
events of a team commissioned to build the funerary monument of king Cheops. The use
of the infinitive verbal form immediately after the date, the concise style and the
chronologically organized notes, are features shared with the Deir el-Medina texts, even
if here the information is organized in columns and not in lines.
Texts recording the activities of a crew of workmen involved in a construction
project of a temple, a tomb, etc., obviously provide the closest features comparable with
Deir el-Medina journals dealing with the activities concerning the construction of the royal
161
See here introduction to chapter 2 and Donker van Heel-Haring 2003, 85-123, for a
classification according to Egyptian text denominatives.
118
tombs. These texts present dated records keeping track of the number of workdays, and
others recording deliveries of food to the team with the totals and the remainders. The
notes produced are organized chronologically and written in short columns (or grid for
the oldest documents). Papyri JE 52002, JE 52003, JE 52004 and MMA 3569 + Vienna
3934/3937 + 9352, in particular, concerning the notes of a private tomb construction
project at Saqqara, show close similarities to the subject of this thesis. The papyri were
in fact drawn up by a scribe responsible for the construction of the funeral monument for
a high functionary. The text contains the daily notes (covering about eight months) of the
construction project, recording everything from the scribe’s arrival on the site and his
delivery of the necessary documents and permits, to his assembly of a crew of workers,
and then the ongoing work.
The border journal (Semna Dispatches) and the ship’s logs (Wadi el-Jarf Papyri,
P. Leiden I 350 verso and P. Turin 2008+2016) are also closely similar in many respects
to our Necropolis records, especially to those written on papyri162. The Semna
Dispatches consist of a daybook roll recording events that took place over a period of
three weeks, mainly concerned with tracking the movement of people; the ship’s log
record the daily notes about the events aboard a ship, the transport of different kinds of
goods, and crew rations. Papyrus Turin 2008+2016 contains a list of the cargo and a
day-by-day log, noting the progress of the boat since its departure. The Leiden papyrus
records the collection and distribution of daily rations of food to the crew of the ship.
Before providing criteria for selection in order to compile a list of Deir el-Medina journals,
we want to illustrate which kind of texts the large group of administrative documents
discovered in Deir el-Medina include. As we said, Necropolis journal should present
a series of day-to-day entries recording events, which is ‘event journal’ (see
Introduction: the Necropolis Journal -with the article the- is a label put on certain
documents by Egyptologists since 1928 and this is undeniably a form of event journal).
Nonetheless there are other texts which are also journals, i.e. recording day-to-day
notes. Even though there seem to be no distinctive terms, there are at least clearly two
types: ‘account journals’ and ‘event journals’. In the first, the focus is on deliveries and
accounts, in the second the focus is on events, movements, work (both are found already
among the Wadi el-Jarf papyri, see above); of course slight overlaps can be expected.
162
Not included in the overview of the previous chapter because still awaiting publication, but
worth to be mentioned, is Papyrus Turin 2098+2100/306 verso, a Late Ramesside ship’s log
containing a series of day-book notes recording a journey to Middle Egypt by the Necropolis scribe
Dhutmose (Demarée conference in Liège, October 2014, forthcoming).
119
Now first we will discuss three types of journals that are not event journals, and are
therefore not included in the list 5.2:
- Account journals (see point e below): records containing mainly dated lists of goods
or detailed ration distributions, but without any further information on activities/events.
Most probably, some of these were used to fill some data in the event journals, like
probably O. Cairo CG 25799, O. Cairo CG 25719 + O. KV 47/182, O. DM 257, O.
Gardiner AG 95 (very small) and O. BM EA 66412 (= O.Zouche H 6)163. They all record
deliveries and therefore will not be included here, but they deserve to be mentioned since
they all seem to have lines of texts that also appear in P. Greg (from year 5 and 6 of
Sethi II) and therefore look like possible preliminary account notes used sometimes later
for inclusion in a journal.
- Day notes. When only one date is preserved on a document, the choice is extremely
subjective. As an example, O. Cairo 25581 of year 2 of Merenptah II Ax.t day 30, is, in
our opinion, part of an event journal. It records the work done in the royal tomb and lists
the craftsmen to be brought to the village in order to prepare the great place of Pharaoh
and it might be one note from a longer list. A similar case is O. Cairo 25645 dated to
Ramesses II. Alternatively, O. DM 1-18 and related ostraca from the reign of Seti I (O
DM 22-24, O. DM 28, O. Demarée H 5-7, O. Ashmolean Museum 43, O. Or. Inst. 18878),
also mostly registering one date only, will not be included since they merely briefly list
deliveries of pottery, firewood or dung and therefore belong to the type ‘account journal’.
(see further point e below).
-The corpus of texts presenting workmen’s marks, thoroughly studied by Soliman

(Soliman, D. M., unpublished PhD Thesis 2016). These contain partly dated lists of
people and partly accounts.
Based on the discussions in the previous paragraphs there now follows a list of criteria
applied to include/exclude documents in/from the list in 5.2.
163The Basel expedition working in the Valley of Kings found more fragments of similar texts; all
together they form a kind of small dossier of such account or delivery texts from years 5 and 6,
almost certainly used as notes to be included in a journal: i.a., O.Cairo 25641 is completed by a
fragment 166 with dates from year 6 II Ax.t day 4 and Cairo 25719 is completed by a fragment 182
with dates from year 6 I pr.t day 12. The study is unfortunately still unpublished and the documents
are therefore not available (the contribution of Cilli 2014 is only an overview of her PhD thesis,
without a detailed study of the specific documents).
120
CRITERIA FOR THE INCLUSION/EXCLUSION OF A TEXT:
Layout and style
a. The most important criterion, without which, in our opinion, one cannot refer to a(n
event) journal, is that the collection of entries has to be ordered following
calendrical notations, usually in their chronological order, showing that the
intention was to produce a daybook. A general day-by-day organization of the
notes is expected, but not necessarily strictly consecutive.
b. The style has to be concise, with brief sentences, headings and titles for the
sections, and recurrent formulas and terms (see p. 112 for a list of the most
common terms). Immediately after the date (year, month and day) follows a verbal
construction, usually a narrative infinitive. The date is related to an event, an
action, which is directly noted at the beginning of the sentence.
Content
c. The document has to record events, a series of daily activities connected with or
concerning the workmen or artisan community of Deir el-Medina and their
construction work for the tomb of Pharaoh.
d. Guard duty rosters or turnus lists (wrS) are features characteristic of many event
journals texts (not of all), and consist in the indication, mostly immediately after the
date, of the name of the workman who was responsible for the receipt of certain
supplies on that particular day164.
e. Lists with dates but recording mostly only deliveries.

Dated documents containing detailed information on rations distributions or only
mere account lists of goods (lamps, firewood, plaster, fish, beer, natron, dung, etc.),
but without any further information about the activities of the day, will not be
considered journals (see below for examples). When a brief account list is part of a
more extensive text, containing notes on daily activities, the text is then considered
an event journal. The same applies to those texts mentioning simply the actual grain
rations deliveries (“salary” payments) within a wider context.
164
Janssen 1997, 91-94 and Collier 2004.
121
f. A special word must be devoted to the absence lists with dates. They certainly
constitute a particular case, since they include events, even though only in the form
of reasons for the absence (O. BM EA 5634 dated to Ramesses II is a list of
absences, but it is a summary, organized according to names and not to calendar
dates, and is therefore not considered a journal here165).
The selection of documents included in the following list is, however, open for discussion.
One has to bear in mind that the distinction between a journal and what could be a journal
is sometimes based only on a single fragment of text and is therefore inevitably
debatable and subjective. A genre is not a mutually exclusive class, not “all (of whose)
characteristic traits need be shared by every other embodiment of the type” (Fowler
1982, 38). It is important to stress that even if we try to establish criteria – which is
fundamental in order to proceed with the creation of a corpus of documents, and
therefore a study of this kind – it is extremely difficult to identify or classify a document
as belonging exclusively to the genre of journal or not. Name-lists, accounts, registers,
memoranda, are all dated administrative notes written by the same scribes of the village.
Unfortunately, specific terms used by the Egyptians denoting textual genres are very
limited and “their occurrences give only little information on the use and format of the
texts referred to”166 (see also chapter 4.1).
Understandably the dividing line is fluid. As already briefly remarked above in the
paragraph on Day notes, texts containing basically just only accounts like lists of lamps,
plaster, natron, firewood, grain deliveries, fish, etc., that is all kinds of accounts simply
listing goods, but without any further information about the “action”, the events, the
activities of the day, will be excluded from the list. As we have seen, they are journals,
but ‘account journals’.
It may be useful to give two examples to illustrate point e. of criteria above: lamp accounts
and plaster deliveries (more could be given with i.a. firewood, fish or pottery deliveries).
Lamps (xbs ) accounts (see Černý 1973b, chapter V and Donker van
Heel-Haring 2003, 56-64)167 are deliveries, most of the time issued daily; are they then
165
This document must be based on day-to-day records; it seems indeed highly unlikely that the
scribe would have been able to provide a workmen's register for 280 days of the year without
consulting previous documentation.
166 Donker van Heel-Haring 2003, 122.
167 Lamps were extremely important for the work in the royal tombs where lighting was scarce.
These documents record the number of lamps (xbs, which were not “whole” lamps but rather
122
to be considered journals? According to the criteria listed above, no. They are account
journals, therefore excluded from the list in 5.2. They look more like “drafts”, brief notes
possibly to be used later into a journal (see note 169).
Nonetheless, in the classification of journals according to the type of information and
contents (see further below Chapter 7.3.a) Type A, labelled as “Deliveries/provisions”
includes daily consumation of lamps/torches issued. A clarification is needed. It was
decided to include these documents in the corpus of journals because they are not “pure”
lamp accounts, but journals in which a part is dedicated to lamp accounts, that is, lamp
accounts are written here on the same document together with notes on other Necropolis
matters and activities168. When, instead, a document only contains lists of lamps, it was
decided not to include it in the corpus of journals (see above point e.)169.
The same can be said about the plaster (qD ) deliveries (see Černý
1973b, chapter IV), even if those were much more irregular and not issued daily (in O.
DM 330 we can indeed see that the entries were made for every ten days).
I am fully aware of the fact that the dividing line between an events journal and a “simple”
accounts journal is fluid. We can try to describe what a journal should look like, but this
does not mean that the identification of this kind of document is always clear and
objective. Furthermore, if we consider that there are most likely more documents to be
“wicks”) and amounts of lamp oil delivered. They were issued to the right and left side of the gang,
sometimes even divided into morning and evening deliveries.
168
In the corpus there are many journals which, among other matters, list lamp accounts. Those
are i.a.: O. Cairo 25502, O. Cairo 25516, O. Cairo CG 25266, O. Cairo 25536, O. Turin 57031,
O. Turin 57033, O. Turin 57034, O. Turin 57044, O. Turin 57047, O. Turin 57055, O. Turin 57032
(in the list of the documents not dated with certainty), O. Cairo 25249 (in the list of the documents
not dated with certainty), O. Cairo 25511 (in the list of the documents not dated with certainty), O.
Cairo 25816 (in the list of the documents not dated with certainty), O. Valley of Queens 6 (in the
list of the documents not dated with certainty), O. Strasbourg H. 136 (in the list of the documents
not dated with certainty).
169
What we can consider “pure” lamp accounts are i.a: O. Cairo 25539 (lamp/wick account for c.
1 month), O. Cairo 25540 (lamp/wick account for 8 days), O. Cairo 25541 (lamp/wick account for
ca. 3 weeks), O. Cairo 25542 (lamp/wick account for right and left sides during several months),
O. Cairo 25543 verso (lamp/wick account), O. Cairo 25544 (lamp/wick account), O. Cairo 25547
(arrival with lamps/wicks from the storehouse), O. Cairo 25550 (lamps/wicks of right and left side),
O. Cairo 25570 (issue and use of lamps/wicks),O. Cairo 25814 (list of the amounts of lamps used
on days 1-4 of III Smw), O. Cairo 25817 (lamps used and left over on a number of days in I and
II pr.t), and O. Cairo 25818 (amounts of lamps taken from the storehouse on a series of days).
Moreover, we can easily see that all the texts mentioned concerning “pure” lamp accounts are
written on ostraca. Does this give us a sign that they were considered a different type of document
than a journal?
What is more, if we take as an example O. Cairo 25515 and O. Cairo 25516 (matching lamp
account, that is, each time the crew is said not to have come to work, the lamp account
appropriately shows no entry because obviously no lamps were used on that day), written
probably by the same scribe (see Donker van Heel-Haring 2003, 57), they show a probable
combined recording system by the same scribe who was therefore working on two different kind
of documents: journal and lamp account.
123
discovered, the list created must be considered open to new records and not as a
definitive one.
Nonetheless, a new list of Necropolis journals from Deir el-Medina has been compiled.
Each document (either ostracon or papyrus) will then be examined, if possible directly
from the photos of the original or, if not available, using the transcriptions made by earlier
scholars like Černý.
The approach taken was to collect all the available documents which, according to
the criteria formulated above, could be classified as Necropolis journals and arrange
them in a table list 170. The first result of an initial general bibliographic research regarding
lists of Necropolis journals was the list of Valbelle, even though this list is limited to
documents dated with certainty171. A more complete list then resulted from consultation
of the online Deir el-Medina database, where it was possible to find information about
more documents, and finally from the Notebooks of Černý, where transcriptions of
unpublished documents were found.
The chronological table list of all the documents is arranged according to the following:
 Date (Dynasty and if possible the name of the pharaoh)

 Number and type of document and related bibliography172
 Provenance
5.2 The list173
The list of documents is divided into two sections. The first section is dedicated to the
documents dated with certainty. Documents which are not attributed to a specific king
with certainty are presented in the second section174.
170 Dr. Demarée kindly informed me about more unnumbered journal fragments at the Turin
Museum and in the IFAO (clearly written by the scribe ¡r-Sri), unfortunately unpublished and not
available for consultation, therefore not included in the list.
171 Valbelle 1985, 49-54.
172
The bibliography of each document is mainly taken from the Deir el-Medina database
(http://dmd.wepwawet.nl/) with the addition of the most recent publications.
173
As already stated this list should be considered as an open and preliminary one.
174
During the collecting of documents, many ostraca and papyri not yet dated with certainty to a
specific pharaoh were found. As the aim of this work is far from presenting a dating study, we did
not analyse them to determine a specific and precise date, but they are included in a separate
section in the table list. In the present work, we will only deal with documents dated with certainty.
124
5.2.a First section: documents dated with certainty
TYPOLOGY OF
DATE NUMBER OF DOCUMENT PROVENANCE
DOCUMENT
DYNASTY 18
day 12, 14 O. Ashmolean Museum 0007 No indication
ostracon
Černý 1957 7 and pl. XXII-XXIIa no. 1.
DYNASTY 19
RAMESSES II
-Year 20, II Ax.t, day O. Cairo 25645 Valley of the Kings;
11 Černý 1935b, 47-48, 68* and pl. LXIV; Davis/Ayrton
Helck 2002, 55; KRI III, 509. excavations 1907-
ostracon 1908; mark: House
HO (workmen's
houses between
KV 17 and KV 21).
-Year 24, II Smw, day O. Cairo 25803 Valley of the Kings,
22 Černý 1935b, 93, 115*, pls. CVIII, CX; beside entrance of
Helck 2002, 55; KRI III, 510. KV 9;
ostracon
Carnarvon/Carter
excavations 1920-
1921.
-Year 20+x, IV Ax.t O. Cairo 25502 Valley of the Kings,
day 28, 20+x; I pr.t, Černý 1935b, 1, 1*, pl. I; Helck, Helck beside entrance of
day 11, 23, 26 1963b, (701); KRI III, 509-510; Helck ostracon KV 9; Davis/Ayrton
2002, 58. excavations 1905-
1906.
- O. Cairo CG 25815a Valley of the Kings,
III Smw day 6; I Smw Černý 1935b, 96, 117*, pl. CXIII; KRI beside entrance of
day 16-20 III, 567. KV 9;
ostracon
Carnarvon/Carter
excavations 1920-
1921.
- O. Cairo CG 25815b Valley of the Kings,
day 14-15 Černý 1935b, 96, 117*, pl. CXIII; KRI beside entrance of
III, 567. KV 9;
ostracon
Carnarvon/Carter
excavations 1920-
1921.
II Ax.t day 16, 21-30; O. University of Memphis Valley of the Kings,
III Ax.t day 1-5 Expedition n. 97 in front of KV 10,
Demarée 2016/2017, 117-121. ostracon University of
Memphis
Expedition.
MERENPTAH
-Year 2, II Ax.t day 30 O. Cairo 25581 Valley of the Kings;
Černý 1935b, 29, 52*, pl. XLII; Davies Carnarvon/Carter
1997, 245-248; KRI IV, 151-152; excavations 1917-
McDowell 1999, 228-229 n. 179; Helck 1918; valley
2002, 48. ostracon between KV 7 and
KV 9.
-Year 3, I pr.t, day O. Cairo 25552 Valley of the Kings;

17 Černý 1935b, 20, 42*, pl. XXV; KRI IV, Carnarvon/Carter
154; Helck 2002, 51. excavations 1917-
ostracon
1918; valley
between KV 7 and
KV 9.
125
-Year 7, IV O. Valley of Kings, Area A, Square G Flood debris in the

epagomenal day 0, between KV 62 and KV 7 Valley of Kings,
Fisher 2010, 93-100. ostracon Area A, Square G
0, between KV 62
and KV 7.
-Year 7, III Ax.t day O. Cairo 25504 Valley of the Kings;
11-23; IV Smw day Černý 1935b, 2, 2*-3*, pl. II; Daressy Davis/Ayrton
13-20 1927, 167-168 II-III; KRI IV, 155-158; excavations 1905-
Wimmer 1995 1, 40-41; McDowell 1906; northeast of
-Year 8, II Ax.t day 1999, 223-225 no. 173; Helck 2002, ostracon KV 13 at base of
87-88. cliffs.
13-20
-Year 8, III pr.t day 5 O.DM 594 Deir el-Medina;

Sauneron 1959, 9, pls. 22 and 22a; ostracon Qurnet Murai
Helck 2002, 88; KRI IV, 407-408. North, 20-01-1951.
-Year 10, I Ax.t day P. Berlin 23300 and 23301 Probably Georg
17 Fischer-Elfert 2012, 47-73, pl. 1-9. Möller’s
papyrus excavations at Deir
el-Medina in 1911
and 1913.
- P. Ashmolean Museum 1960.1283 Bought by N. de
day 10+x; IV pr.t; III Eyre 1980b, 108-119, pls. XII and XIII; Garis Davies for
pr.t day 21, 24; IV KRI IV, 164-166. A.H. Gardiner
pr.t day 1+x(?); IV ('together with
pr.t day 21; IV pr.t papyrus fragments
day 11, 15, 26 from the Theban
papyrus
tomb of Sunero'
(TT 331)), donated
by the latter to the
Ashmolean
Museum in 1958 or
1960.
AMENMESSE
-Year 1, O. Cairo 25779 Valley of the Kings,
I Ax.t day 18, 22-23, Černý 1935b, 86, 98*-101*, pls. CI and undisturbed
25-28; II Ax.t day 2- CII; KRI IV, 211-216; Helck 2002, 100- stratum east of KV
ostracon
3,6-9, 11-18, 22, 102. 47.
27-28; III Ax.t day 2- Carnarvon/Carter
3,12-17, 21-23 excavations 1922.
-Year 2, O. Varille 26 No indication
I Ax.t day 5, 6, 7, 9, Kitchen KRI VII, 236-237; Helck 2002,
10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 105. ostracon
15,16
IV Smw day [...]
-Year 2, O. Ashmolean Museum 0290 No indication
day 4 Unpublished; Černý Notebook 81.10; ostracon
Helck 2002, 109.
IV pr.t, day Černý 1935b, 86, 102*, pl. CII; KRI IV, undisturbed
2-3, 5-9, 20-21, 23- 220-221; Helck 2002, 116-119. stratum east of KV
ostracon
28 47.
Carnarvon/Carter
excavations 1922.
IV pr.t day 27-28; I Černý 1935b, 87, 103*-104*, pl. CIII; undisturbed
ostracon
Smw day 4-6, 8, 11- KRI IV, 221-223; Helck 2002, 116-119. stratum east of KV
13, 15-18, 22-26 47.
126
Carnarvon/Carter
excavations 1922.
I Smw day 27-28; II Černý 1935b, 87, 105*-108*, pl. CIV; undisturbed
Smw day 1-3, 13-14, KRI IV, 224-227; Helck 2002, 119-121. stratum east of KV
ostracon
27-28; III Smw day 47.
1-8, 11, 15-17 Carnarvon/Carter
excavations 1922.
III Smw day 14-18, KRI VII, 242-243; Helck 2002, 110.
ostracon
20-26, 28; IV Smw
day 3-7
day 24-28 Unpublished; Černý Notebook 45.77; ostracon
Helck 2002, 115.
Year 3 (?) O. Ashmolean Museum 0291 No indication
day 6-7 Unpublished; Černý Notebook 81.11; ostracon
Helck 2002, 112.
III Smw, day 18, 21- Černý 1935b, 87, 109*, pl. CV; KRI IV, undisturbed
23, 25-26, 28-29 227-228; Helck 2002, 120-121. stratum east of KV
ostracon
47.
Carnarvon/Carter
excavations 1922.
- O. DM 898 Deir el-Medina,
III Smw day 6, 8; III Grandet 2003, 3-4, 70-71, 310-313. Kom du Grand
Smw day 6; III Smw Puits, 16-12-1950.
day 5; III Smw day 4;
ostracon
III Smw day 11; III
Smw day 3-5, 26; IV
Smw day 4 III Smw
day 12
SETHI II
-Year 1, HO 64, 1 (O. MMA 14.6.217) Davis excavations.
lost month pr.t day Černý 1957, 18, pl. 64-64A no. 1; KRI Valley of Kings
16; III Ax.t day 12- IV, 298-299; Helck 2000, 130. ostracon before 1913.
13, 15-18, 21-22;
12-19
-Year 1, O. Cairo 25509 Valley of the Kings;
III pr.t day 23-30; IV Černý 1935b, 4, 6*, pl. IV-V; Daressy Davis/Ayrton
pr.t day 1-30; I Smw 1927, 172-173; Černý 1929, 250; excavations 1905-
day 1-13; IV pr.t day Helck 1969, (985); KRI IV, 299-302; ostracon 1906; northeast of
21 Wimmer 1995 1, 43-44; McDowell KV 13 at base of
1999, 209-210 no. 158; Helck 2000, cliffs.
128-129.
-Year (2)? O. Cairo 25510 Valley of the Kings;
IV pr.t day 16-18, Černý 1935b, 5, 7*, pl. VII; KRI IV, 332- excavations Th.
21, 24-26; I Smw day 333; Wimmer 1995 1, 44-45; Helck ostracon Davis.
13 2000, 130-131; Collier 2004, 80-81,
155.
-Year 3 (Sethi II?) O. Berlin P 14842 Deir el-Medina,
IV Ax.t day 1; IV pr.t Deir el Medine online, URL: Village,
day 6(?) http://dem-online.gwi.uni- ostracon excavations G.
muenchen.de Möller 1913; pencil
mark: 'D'.
-Year 4, O. DM 889 Deir el-Medina,
day 11, 13, 18; I Ax.t Grandet 2003, 3, 63, 298-299; ostracon Grand Puits 14-03-
day 20 Grandet 2003b, 215-217, 228. 1949.
127
-Year 5, O. Cairo CG 25529 Valley of the Kings;

I Smw day 24-30; II Černý 1935b, 13-14, 29*, pl. XIX; excavations Th.
Smw day 1-5, 10-29; Helck 2002, 133-135. Davis.
ostracon
III Smw day 1-15,
18-30; IV Smw day
1-30; day 1-15 (?)
I Smw, day 20+x; 24- Černý 1935b, 5-6, 9*-10*, pl. VI; KRI Davis/Ayrton
28; II Smw day 6; III IV, 313-315; Wimmer 1995, 1, 46-47; excavations 1905-
ostracon
or IV Smw Helck 2002, 141; Collier 2004, 31-33, 1906; northeast of
155. KV 13 at base of
cliffs.
-Year 6, O. Cairo 25516 Valley of Kings;
I pr.t day 17-18, 23- Černý 1935b, 7-8, 13*-14*; KRI IV 328 Davis/Ayrton
29; II pr.t day 4, 6, and 384-387; McDowell 1999, 83 no. ostracon excavations 1905-
12,13-15,16-17, 21- 54; Helck 2002, 161-163; Collier 2004, 1906.
24 33-34, 155.
day 24; [ ... ] pr.t Černý 1935b, 8-9, 15*-17*, pl. X-XI; excavations Th.
day 27; I Smw day [ Helck 2002, 140, 166-167; Helck Davis.
... ]; IV Smw day 9; II 2002, 143; KRI IV, p. 320-321, 387-
ostracon
Ax.t day 12; II Ax.t 389; McDowell 1999, 35 no. 10;
day 10 Wimmer 1995, 1, 48-50; Collier 2004,
25-27, 34-35, 155.

II Smw day 16, 25 Černý 1935b, 16, 34*, pl. XXIII; KRI IV, Davis/Ayrton
315; Wimmer 1995 1, 58. excavations 1905-
ostracon
1906; northeast of
KV 13 at base of
cliffs.
II Smw day 16-30; III Černý 1935b, 7, 11*-12*, pl. VIII-IX; Davis/Ayrton
Smw day 1-30; IV Daressy 1912, 39-52 (transcription, excavations 1905-
Smw day 1-30; but not of JE 50340 d-e, which were 1906.
epagomenal day 1- added later); KRI IV, 322-327 and 382-
5; I Ax.t day 1-30; II 384; McDowell 1999, 205-206 no. 154;
Ax.t day 1-30; III Ax.t Helck 2002, 141-147.
day 1-30; IV Ax.t day
1-10, 11-30; I pr.t
ostracon
day 1-30; IV pr.t day
16
SIPTAH
-Year 1,
II pr.t day 1-25; I pr.t
day 29; I pr.t day
24; IV pr.t day 21

II Ax.t day 12; IV Ax.t Černý 1935b, 16, 33*, pl. XXIII; KRI IV, excavations Th.
day 2; III Ax.t day 402-404; Wimmer 1995 1, 56-57; Davis.
28; I pr.t day 11; I McDowell 1999, 216-217 no. 166;
ostracon
pr.t day 8; X pr.t day Helck 2002, 169 and 171, 166-169.
17; year 2 I pr.t day
4-6, 11-13, 15-18,
25
II pr.t day 25; III pr.t Černý 1935b, 7-8, 13*-14*; KRI IV 328 Davis/Ayrton
ostracon
day 28; IV pr.t day and 384-387; McDowell 1999, 83 no. excavations 1905-
5-7; II pr.t day 12- 1906.
128
16; III pr.t day 26- 54; Helck 2002, 161-163; Collier 2004,
28; IV pr.t day 6 33-34, 155.
IV Smw day 12 Černý 1935b, 12, 27*, pl. XIX; KRI IV, Davis/Ayrton
394; Wimmer 1995 1, 54-55; Helck excavations 1905-
ostracon
2002, 165; Collier 2004, 44-45, 156. 1906; northeast of
KV 13 at base of
cliffs.
II Ax.t day 13, 15 Černý 1935b, 9, 18*, pl. XII; KRI IV, excavations Th.
ostracon
390; Wimmer 1995 1, 50; Helck 2002, Davis.
166-167; Collier 2004, 44, 155.
II Ax.t day 15-18, 21, Černý 1935b, 8-9, 15*-17*, pl. X-XI; excavations Th.
22-28 Helck 2002, 140, 166-167; Helck Davis.
2002, 143; KRI IV, 320-321, 387-389; ostracon
McDowell 1999, 35 no. 10; Wimmer
1995 1, 48-50; Collier 2004, 25-27, 34-
35, 155.
II Ax.t day 21; III Ax.t Černý 1935b, 9-10, 18*-19*, pl. XIII; Davis/Ayrton
day 1-3; IV Ax.t day KRI IV, 390-392; Wimmer 1995, 1, 51- excavations 1905-
ostracon
8, 11-12, 14 52; Helck 2002, 166-169; Collier 2004, 1906; northeast of
35-36, 155. KV 13 at base of
cliffs.
-Year 1, O. Cairo JE 72475 (old text) Valley of the Kings.
I Smw day 12 Collier 2004, 46-47, 157; description Davis excavation;
ostracon
and transcription by Černý, Notebook according to
106.99. Journal d'entrée.
-Year 1 (?) O. DM 908 Deir el-Medina,
[x +] I Smw day 25 Grandet 2003, 3, 81-84, 328-329; Kom du Grand
ostracon
Grandet 2003b, 213-214, 226. Puits, 25-03-1950
(or 19-03-1950?).
IV Ax.t day 15,17, Černý 1927b, 184-200; Černý 1935b, Davis/Ayrton
24, 27-28; IV Ax.t 10-11, 22*-25*, pl. XV-XVI; Helck excavations 1905-
day 15-16,23-24,27- 2002, 170-171, 174-175; KRI IV, 397- ostracon 1906; northeast of
28 402; Wimmer 1995 1, 52-54; Collier KV 13 at base of
2004, 36-37. cliffs.
-Year 2,
[…] pr.t day 4-6; I
pr.t day 11-13,
15,17-18,10 + X,
26-27; II pr.t day 5-
6; I pr.t day 4-5,11-
12 (?); I pr.t day 17-
18, 21, 23, 25; II pr.t
day 7
III Ax.t day 10 + X; KRI VII, 252-253; Helck 2002, 178-
ostracon
III Ax.t day 5; III Ax.t 179; Collier 2004, 47-48, 154.
day 7
I Ax.t day 11-14; III Grandet 2006, 57-58, 242-243; Kôm du Grand
ostracon
Smw day 21-24; day Grandet 2003b, 211-212, 222 (note 2), Puits, 16-12-1950.
12-15 224-225.
-Year 3, O. Cairo JE 72451 Valley of the Kings,
III Ax.t day 16; year KRI IV, 404; Helck 2002, 181. ostracon Davis excavations
3 IV Ax.t day 20 According to the
129
Special Register at
Cairo Museum.
-Year 4, O. DM 10051 no indication
III Smw day 10-13 Grandet 2006, 55-56, 241; Grandet ostracon
2003, 214-215, 222 (note 10), 227.
-Year 5, P. Greg P.UC 34336 no indication
I Ax.t day 1; KRI V, 437-448; Janssen 1997, 111-
epagomenal days; 130; Janssen-Janssen 1997, 32-34;
I Ax.t day 17-20; I www.petrie.ucl.ac.uk; Černý Mss,
17.48, 2-14.
Ax.t day 11-22, 27-
29; II Ax.t
-Year 6,
IV Ax.t day 15-18; I papyrus
pr.t; IV Ax.t; IV Ax.t
day 19, 20; IV Ax.t
day 11-20; 21-28
-Year 7,
I pr.t day 12; II Ax.t;
IV Ax.t; I pr.t day 13-
18
Siptah (?) O. DM 899 no indication
III Ax.t day 21-22, Grandet 2003, 3, 71-73, 314-315.
ostracon
26-29; III Ax.t day
21-24
III Smw day 6; [...] Grandet 2003, 3, 84-85, 330. ostracon Kom du Grand
day 14 Puits, 18-12-1950.
- O. DM 910 no indication
Grandet 2003, 3-4, 85-86, 331-332;
ostracon
Grandet 2003b, 215, 216-217, 229.
DYNASTY 20
RAMESSES III175
-Year 7, O.DM 99 Deir el-Medina,
I Ax.t day 10 Černý 1935a, 26, pl. 57; KRI V, 449; Kom de
-Year 8, Helck 2002, 225. decombres au sud
III Ax.t day lost and II ostracon du village
pr.t day 19 (according to Clere
MSS.); mark:
18.1.30 KS (18-01-
1930).
-Year 9
III pr.t day 12, 17 Černý 1939, 4, pl. 4; Helck 2002, 233; Kom de
KRI V, 460. decombres au sud
du village
ostracon
(according to Clere
MSS.), 24-01-
1930; mark:
24.1.30 KS
-Year 16, O. Turin 57020 Valley of the
ostracon
Queens,
175
An unpublished Turin Papyrus (recto) with the temporary number 8538 is a journal probably belonging to
Ramesses III. Dr. Demarée kindly informed me on the ongoing studies in Turin; a publication is expected soon.
130
III pr.t day 23; I Smw Lopez 1978, 23, pl. 12-12a; KRI V, excavations
day 5 461; Helck 2002, 234; Černý, Note- Schiaparelli 1903-
book 20, 1; Černý, MSS. 1. 481; 1905.
Schiaparelli 1923, 170 and fig. 125.
-Year 18, O. Varille 36 no indication
I pr.t day 21; I pr.t KRI VII, 287; Helck 2002, 237.
ostracon
day [...]; I pr.t day
20, 25
-Year 18176, O.DM 422 Deir el-Medina;
IV Ax.t day 13, 22; I Černý 1951, 22, pl. 21; Helck 2002, found in Grand
pr.t day 13; IV pr.t 237; KRI V, 468-469. ostracon Puits to the north
day 3 of the temple, 07-
01-1950.
II Smw day 4-8; 11- Lopez 1978, 27, pl. 23-23a; Helck Queens;
17, 21-28 2002, 244. Černý, Notebook 20, 26a; ostracon excavations
Schiaparelli 1923, 172 and fig. 128. Schiaparelli 1903-
1905.
III Ax.t day 25-30; IV Lopez 1978, 32, pl. 30-30a; KRI V, Queens;
Ax.t day 1-14; III Ax.t 483; Helck 2002, 246-247. Černý, ostracon excavations
day 20; IV Ax.t day Notebook 20, 17; Schiaparelli 1923, Schiaparelli 1903-
12,15-18 172-3 and fig. 129; Černý 1962, 143. 1905.
[…] day 28; II Ax.t Lopez 1978, 24-25, pl. 15-15a; KRI V, Queens;
day 1-5, 7-8 487-488; Helck 2002, 249. Černý, excavations
ostracon
Notebook 20, p.3; Černý, MSS 1. 484 Schiaparelli 1903-
and 1. 485; Schiaparelli 1923, 170-1 1905.
and fig. 126; Bruyère 1930, 42.
I pr.t day 11; III pr.t Černý 1970, 1, pl. 2; Helck 2002, 251 Kom du Grand
day 2 and 252; KRI V, 486. ostracon Puits, 13 March
1950, 15-03-1950
and 17-03-1950.
II pr.t day 11, 26-27, Lopez 1978, 25, pl. 16-16a; KRI V, Queens,
23, 25; [...] pr.t day 486; Helck 2002, 251; Černý, ostracon excavations
30 Notebook 20, 4; Černý, MSS 1. 481. Schiaparelli 1903-
1905.
III Smw day 18 Lopez 1978, 31, pl. 29-29a; KRI V, Queens,
491-492; Helck 2002, 253; Černý, ostracon excavations
Notebook 20, 25. Schiaparelli 1903-
1905.
IV Smw day 23-24 Lopez 1978, 29, pl. 25-25a; KRI V, Queens;
491; Helck 2002, 254; Černý, ostracon excavations
Notebook 20, 20; Bruyère 1937, 55, Schiaparelli 1903-
119. 1905.
-Year 24, O.DM 164 no indication
epagomenal day 1- Černý 1937a, 15 and 16, pl. 41; KRI V,
ostracon
5; I Ax.t, day 1, 18- 488 and 489; Helck 2002, 254 and
22 255.
176
O. Berlin P 11254, dated to year 19 of Ramesses III, III Ax.t, day 12, is a short note on the delivery of beer
to the Place of Pharaoh by Nxw-m-mwt, probably also to be considered as journal, but not included here for its
brevity.
177
A papyrus in Turin Museum (unpublished) inside “cartella F 370 b”, with no number, also belongs to year
23 of Ramesses III.
131

I Ax.t day 5-7 Lopez 1978, 26, pl. 16-16a; KRI V, Queens,
492; Helck 2002, 255. Černý, excavations
ostracon
Notebook 20, 7; Černý, MSS 1. 481 Schiaparelli 1903-
and 1. 482; Schiaparelli 1923, 174 and 1905.
fig. 131; Bruyère 1937, 119.
-Year 24, O. IFAO [unnumbered]+O. Varille 06 Bought at Luxor in
III Ax.t day 4-7, 11- Unpublished; Černý Notebook 107.47; January 1934 (01-
13,15-17 Helck 2002, 257-258. 1934) and found at
ostracon
Deir el-Medina
during season
1933-1934.
I pr.t day 26-30; II Lopez 1978, 25, pl. 17-17a and 18- Queens;
pr.t day 1-8, 14-18, 18a; Helck 2002, 260; KRI V, 493-494. excavations
22 Černý, Notebook 20, 5-6; Černý, MSS ostracon Schiaparelli 1903-
1. 486 and 1. 487; Schiaparelli 1923, 1905.
174 and fig. 132; Bruyère 1930, 42;
Bruyère 1937, 57, 119.
II pr.t day 26-27; III Lopez 1978, 34, pl. 34-34a; KRI V, Queens;
pr.t day 1-2, 22-23, 494-495; Helck 2002, 259, 261. Černý, excavations
ostracon
25-26 Notebook 20, 18; Černý, MSS 1. 491 Schiaparelli 1903-
and 1. 492; Bruyère 1930, 42; Bruyère 1905.
1937, 55, 57, 119.
-Year 24, O. Gardiner AG 139 no indication
ostracon
IV pr.t day 9, 11 KRI VII, 291; Helck 2002, p. 262.
I Smw day 18, 20-25 Lopez 1978 34, pl. 34-34a; KRI V, 495; Queens,
Helck 2002, 263-264; Černý, ostracon excavations
Notebook 20, 12; Černý, MSS 1. 490; Schiaparelli 1903-
Schiaparelli 1923, 174 and fig. 130. 1905.
I Smw day 25-28; II Allam 1973, 247-249 no. 251 and pl. Queens,
Smw day 1-8, 11-18, 62-63 (published as O. Turin 5656); excavations
21-26 Lopez 1978, 27, pl. 22-22a; KRI V, ostracon Schiaparelli 1903-
[...] Smw day 27, 28; 496-497; Helck 2002, 265; Černý, 1905.
III Smw day 1-8 Notebook 20, 22; Schiaparelli 1923,
178 and fig. 135.
-Year 25, O.DM 32 No indication
IV Smw day 1-4, 6-8, Černý 1935a, 7-8, pl. IX-XI; KRI V,
10-24, 25-26, 27- 497-499; Helck 2002, 266-267.
ostracon
30, epagomenal
days, epagomenal
day 1, day 30
-Year 25, O. UC 39648 no indication
I Ax.t day 1-10, 13- Černý 1957, 6 and pl. 19-19A no. 1;
ostracon
25 KRI V, 499-500; Helck 2002, 267-268;
www.petrie.ucl.ac.uk
-Year 25, O. UC 39626 no indication
II Ax.t day 22-26 Černý 1957, 10 and pl. 34-34A no. 1;
ostracon
KRI V, 501-502; Helck 2002, 269;
www.petrie.ucl.ac.uk
I pr.t day 25-30; II Lopez 1978, 26, pl. 20-20a; KRI V, Queens,
pr.t day 1-8, 12, 18- 502-503; McDowell 1999, 193 no. excavations
ostracon
24 148B; Helck 2002, 270-271; Černý, Schiaparelli 1903-
Notebook 20, 8-9; Černý, MSS 1. 488; 1905.
Schiaparelli 1923, 175 and fig. 133.
132
-Year 25, O. Glasgow D.1925.67 Probably bought by

II pr.t day 1-19 McDowell 1993, 4-5, pls. II-IIa, III-IIIa; Colin Campbell in
KRI VII, 292-293. Luxor and given by
ostracon him to the
Hunterian
Museum-
Glasgow- in 1925.
-Year 25, O. Ashmolean Museum 0221 no indication
II pr.t day 14; II pr.t Unpublished; Černý Notebook 31.24; ostracon
day 29 Černý 1973a, 90; Helck 2002, 271.
-Year 25, O. Glasgow D.1925.76 ostracon Probably bought by
III pr.t day 18-30; IV McDowell 1993, 15-16, pl. XIV-XIVa, Colin Campbell in
pr.t day 1-16 XV-XVa; KRI VII, 293-295; Helck Luxor and given by
2002, 272-273. him to the
Hunterian
Museum-Glasgow-
in 1925.
-Year 25, O. Berlin P 12295 Acquired at
III pr.t day 23-25; Deir el Medine online, URL: Thebes. Donated
ostracon
day 10, 14-23 http://dem-online.gwi.uni- to the Museum by
muenchen.de W. Wreszinski, 01-
1910.
Regnal year must O. Turin 57475 Deir el-Medina;
be year 25 Lopez 1984, 17, pl. 162-162a. excavations
Ramesses III in Schiaparelli 1909.
view of the names ostracon
in the turnus list
(Demarée)
III Ax.t day 8, 10-11
[...] day 12 + x; [...] Černý 1970, 7, pl. 14; KRI V, 616; ostracon Grand Puits, 15-
Smw day 19-27 Helck 2002, 275. 04-1949
-Year 26, O. Hildesheim 5464 no indication
I Smw day 10 (+ X); I Gutgesell 1984, 227-229 with pl. 11;
ostracon
Smw day 16-19; I Gutgesell 1989, 18.
Smw day X
II Smw day 11-21; Lopez 1978, 31, pl. 28-28a; KRI V, Queens,
22-28 510; Helck 2002, 275. Černý, ostracon excavations
Notebook 20, 16; Černý, MSS 1. 488; Schiaparelli 1903-
Schiaparelli 1923, 175 and fig. 139. 1905.
III Ax.t …, day 14-15, Černý 1937a, 10, pls. 21-23A; Kom de
16-30 Christophe 1953, 113-144; Helck ostracon decombres au sud
2002, 277-278; KRI V, 505-506. du village 19-01-
1930.
-Year 26, O. IFAO 00284 + O. IFAO 00285 + O. Deir el-Medina;
IV Ax.t day 21, 29 IFAO 00286 + O. IFAO 00287 belonging to the
ostracon
Unpublished; Černý Notebook series found in
103.115; Helck 2002, 280. January 1930.
-Year 26, O. Turin 57153 Deir el-Medina;
IV pr.t day 25-30; IV Lopez 1980, 26, pl. 68-68a; Lopez excavations
ostracon
pr.t day 20; I Smw 1984, pl. 198; Helck 2002, 231, 282; Schiaparelli 1905.
day 9-15 Černý, Notebook 18, 65.
Year 26, 27 O. DM 911 Deir el-Medina,
-Year 26 Grandet 2003, 4, 86-88, 333-339; Grand Puits, 14-
III pr.t day 11, 22; III Janssen 1984, 303-306, pl. 18-19 (O. 03-1949 (O. IFAO
ostracon
pr.t day 5-6, 14-15; IFAO 01254). 0 1254 fragment
IV [...]; day 22; IV (a)), 16-03-1949
pr.t day 28; (O. IFAO 1254
133
-Year 27 fragment (b)), 28-

I Smw day 13, 14-1 02-1949 (O. IFAO
6, 22, 24-25; II Smw 0 1904 fragment
day 22, 25-26, 22; (a)), 14-03-1949
day 28; III Smw day (O. IFAO 0 1904
2-3, 8, 18, 21-22, fragment (b)), 28-
25; IV Smw [...]; day 04-1949 (O. IFAO
14; I Ax.t day 11-13; 0 1904 fragment
II Ax.t day 12; [...]Ax.t (c)); marks:
day 12, 24, 27 14.3.49 (GP);
16.3.49 (GP).
day 10 + x; IV Smw Černý VII, 7, pl. 13; KRI V, 615; Helck Grand Puits, 13-
day 10 + x; day 17; 2002, p. 283 and 284. 03-1949
ostracon
[...]Smw day 15;
[...]Smw day 17, 18; I
Ax.t day 4-8
I Ax.t day 17, 19-23, Černý 1970, 3, pl. 5; Helck 2002, 284. ostracon Grand Puits, 26-
29; day 7, 8 03-1949
IV Ax.t day 1-9, 26- Černý 1935a, 8, pl 11-12; KRI V, 511- Kom de
30 512; Helck 2002, 286-287. ostracon decombres au sud
du village (20-01-
1930)
-Year 27, O. IFAO 00253 Deir el-Medina;
IV Ax.t day 10-11; IV Unpublished; Černý Notebook found 17.1.30 (17-
Ax.t day [...]; IV Ax.t 103.114; Helck 2002, 286. 01-1930), KS (Kom
day 25(?)-26 ostracon de decombres au
sud du village,
according to Clere
MSS)
-Year 27, O. DeM 00034+O.Heidelberg Inv.Nr. Deir el-Medina,
IV pr.t day 4-20; IV 567 Kom de
pr.t day 22-30 Demarée 2002b, 109-114, tafel XVII- decombres au sud
XIX; Černý 1935a, 8, pl. 13-14; KRI V, du village
512-513; Helck 2002, 289-290. (according to Clere
MSS.); mark: KS
17.1.30 (17-01-
ostracon
1930). Heidelberg
fragment bought by
U. Hölscher in
1930/31 and later
given to the
Ägyptologisches
Institut.
III pr.t [...]; day 2-5, Unpublished; Černý Notebook 31.58;
ostracon
8-9, 14, 19, 21, 24, Helck 2002, 289.
26-27
-Year 28, O. DM 427 Deir el-Medina;
year 18 + x (Černý, Černý 1951, 23, pl. 22; KRI V, 521- found in Grand
Kitchen: year 28) 523; Helck 2002, 293-295. Puits to the north
III Smw day 8-11, of the temple, 26-
15-17, 19, 21-27, 03-1949.
ostracon
29; day 10 + x; day
25-28; epagomenal
day 1-5; year 10 + x
I Ax.t day 1-5,7-8; IV
Smw; I Ax.t
134

III Smw day 1, 2-6; Černý 1937a, 13, pl. 33; KRI V, 519- Kom de
IV [...]; IV Smw [...]; 520; Helck 2002, 294-295. decombres au sud
ostracon
epagomenal day 2- du village, 02-01-
5; day 30 1930 and 09-01-
1930.
-Year 28, O. Berlin P 10663 Deir el-Bahari;
I Ax.t day 17 Wente 1973, 223-234; Endesfelder acquired by the
1967, 65-66, pl. 21; KRI V, 558-559; Egyptian Museum
ostracon
Helck 2002, 296, 304; Deir el Medine in Berlin from K.
online, URL: http://dem-online.gwi.uni- Sethe in 1905.
muenchen.de
-Year 28, II pr.t day O. Turin 57007 r° Drovetti collection.
17-18 Lopez 1978, 19, pl. 8-8a; Lopez 1984,
ostracon
pl. 194; KRI V, 533-534; Helck 2002,
299, 307. Černý, MSS 1. 420 A.
[end of I Ax.t]; II Ax.t Černý 1939, 11, pl. 12; Helck 2002, Kom de
ostracon
day 4 303; KRI V, 529. decombres au sud
du village, 18-01-
1930.
-Year 29, O. Berlin P 10633 Bought on the
II Ax.t day 21 and 23 Deir el Medine online, URL: West Bank of
http://dem-online.gwi.uni- Thebes.
muenchen.de; Allam 1973, 29 no. 8; ostracon
Edgerton 1951, 137-138; Helck 2002,
304; Helck 1963b, (582); Herman
1911, pls. XXXVI-XXXVIa; KRI V, 529-
530; Warnemünde 2007, 34.
-Year 29, O. Berlin P 14689 No indication
III Ax.t day x and day Deir el Medine online, URL:
ostracon
1 http://dem-online.gwi.uni-
muenchen.de
-Year 29, O. DM 604 Deir el-Medina;
IV Ax.t day 15, 18, Sauneron 1959, 11, pls. 25 and 25a; Grand Puits, 07-
ostracon
16 Helck 2002, 305; Helck 1963b, (651); 01-1951
KRI V, 615.
-Year 29, O. Turin 57007 v° Drovetti collection.
I pr.t day 26, 27-30; Lopez 1978, 19, pl. 8-8a; Lopez 1984,
ostracon
II pr.t day 1-5 pl. 194; KRI V, 533-534; Helck 2002,
299, 307; Černý, MSS 1.420.
II pr.t day 10-13 Černý 1935b, 14, 30*, pl. XX; KRI V, ostracon excavations Th.
542; Helck 2002, 308. Davis.
-Year 29, O. IFAO 1255+O.Varille 39 Grand Puits (IFAO
II pr.t day 10-13, 15- KRI VII, 300-302; Helck 2002, 309- 1255)
ostracon
17, 18 310; Frandsen 1989, 117-122;
Grandet 2016.
-Year 29, O. Brussel E. 7359 verso no indication
II pr.t day 15, 16, 17 Verso unpublished. Notebook of R. J. ostracon
(?). Demarée.
-Year 29, O. DM 330 no indication
II pr.t day 10, 20, Černý 1939, 24, pl. 30; Helck 2002,
ostracon
30; III pr.t day 6 308, 310-311; Helck 1969, (1009) and
(1010); KRI V, 534.
-Year 29 P. Turin 2006+1961 Presumably
(Černý, Community Pleyte-Rossi 1869, 134-135 pls. 98-99 acquired by the
of Workmen, (description and facsimile of Cat. government of
papyrus
proposes a date 2006, commentary); other fragments Piedmont for the
between year 16 unpublished; Černý Mss 3.551 and Turin museum
and 29 of 552 (transcription of Cat. 1961); Černý from Bernardino
135
Ramesses III, but Notebook 15.82 (transcription of a Drovetti in 1823

on p. 344 he opts fragment at the left of the recto, added (see e.g. S. Curto,
for a date in the by G. Botti); Helck 2002, 311-314. Storia del Museo
reign of Ramesses Egizio di Torino,
VI; Valbelle, 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
Ouvriers, prefers 45).
year 29 of
Ramesses III;
Gutgesell,
Datierung, year 29).
Day 19-20; III pr.t
day 2-5; III pr.t
day 11-18; III pr.t
day 14; rnp.t-
sp 16; IV pr.t day 30;
IV pr.t day [...];
IV pr.t day 16-19
Year 29, 30, P. Turin Cat. 1880 Presumably
-Year 29 Gardiner 1948, xiv-xvii, 45-58, no. acquired by the
III Ax.t day 2; IV Ax.t XVIII; Allam 1973, 310-312, no. 276; government of
day 30; I pr.t day 2; Baer 1965, 431; Černý 1973a, 185, Piedmont for the
I pr.t; II pr.t day 10, 186, 188, 189; Demichelis 2002, 208 Turin museum
11, 12, 13, 17; II pr.t and 209, no. 162; Donadoni Roveri from Bernardino
[...]; III pr.t; year 29 1988, 170; Edgerton 1951, 137-145; Drovetti in 1823
IV pr.t day 28; I Smw Frandsen 1989), 117; Frandsen 1990, (see e.g. S. Curto,
papyrus
day 2; I Smw; I Smw 166-199; Helck 2002, 304, 308-310, Storia del Museo
day 13, 16, 25; 313-315, 318; see also ibid., 306; Egizio di Torino,
-Year 30 McDowell 1999, 36 no. 12, 192-193 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
II Ax.t day 10; II pr.t no. 147, 235-236 no. 187; Müller 2004, 45).
[...]; III Ax.t day 10 + 165-184; Pleyte-Rossi 1869, 50-65,
x; IV Ax.t [...]; I pr.t pls. 35-48; Polis 2011, 387-401;
day 3 + x Ventura 1986, 90, 101, 121-123, 139
and 140; Vernus 1980, 121-124.
IV Ax.t day 27 Černý 1935a, 26, pl. 57; KRI V, 541. Kom de
decombres au sud
ostracon
du village
(according to Clere
MSS).
-Year 31, O. Prague H 14 Fragment (a)
III Ax.t day 1; II Ax.t KRI VII, 302-303; Helck 2002, 352- acquired at Luxor
day 30; III Ax.t day 354. 01-1930. Fragment
2-11; I Ax.t day 10, ostracon (c) Deir el-Medina,
12-18, 20; III Ax.t Kom Sud (cf. Clère
day 21; III [...] day Mss), found 19-01-
30; III Ax.t day 22 1930.
I Smw day 26, 28-29 Černý 1935a, 15, pl. 45-45a; KRI V, Kom a l'est de la
557; Helck 2002, 321-322. chapelle votive no.
1213: Chapelle du
ostracon
Gebel (according
to Clere MSS.);
mark: K2 14.1.29
(14-01-1929)
178
Dr. Demarée kindly informed me on some fragments of papyrus held in Turin Museum (no number, inside
“Cartella F 47”) dating to year 30 of Ramesses III. From the few fragments it is nonetheless understandable
the general outile of the documents: the columns are narrow, similar to the contemporary ostraca, and the
information provided not too much detailed.
136

epagomenal day 1- Černý 1937a, 13 and 14, pl. 35; KRI V, Kom de
5; IV Smw day 30; I 555; Helck 2002, 324. decombres au sud
Ax.t day 1-4, 7 ostracon du village
(according to Clere
MSS.), 01-01-1930
and 02-01-1930.
I pr.t day 19, 29, 30 Černý 1935a, 9, pl. 16, 29; KRI V, 547- Kom de
II pr.t day 1-4,14-18 548; Helck 2002, 330-331. decombres au sud
IV Ax.t; I pr.t day 10, du village
ostracon
20; I pr.t day 30; II (according to Clere
pr.t; II pr.t day 5 (?); MSS.); mark:
II pr.t day 12, 20 18.1.30 KS /
19.1.30 KS
II pr.t day 30 Sauneron 1959, 6, pls. 13 and 13a; ostracon Grand Puits, 04-
Helck 2002, 331; KRI III, 512. 01-1951
-Year 31, O.DM 37 No indication
III pr.t day 1-19 Černý 1935a, 9, pl. 17; KRI V, 548- ostracon
549; Helck 2002, 331-332.
-Year 31, O. Michaelides 073 No indication
III pr.t day 10 [+X]; Goedicke-Wente 1962, 19, pl. LXV;
ostracon
day 16 [or day 26]; Helck 2002, 332; KRI V, 556.
III pr.t
II Smw day 1-30; I Černý 1935a, 10, pl. 18-19; KRI V, Kom de
Smw day 30; I Smw 551-552; Helck 2002, 334-335. decombres au sud
du village
(according to Clere
ostracon
MSS.); mark:
19.1.30 KS /
20.1.30 KS (19-01-
1930 and 20-01-
1930)
-Year 32, O.DM 39+174 Deir el-Medina,
III Smw day 1-29; II Černý 1935a, 10; pl. 20-21 [O. DM 00 Kom de
Smw day 30; II Smw 039]; Černý 1937a, 18-19, pl. 46 [O. decombres au sud
day 20, 30 DM 00174]; KRI V, 552-553; Helck du village
2002, 335, 351. (according to Clere
Maybe year 1 of MSS.); mark:
Ramesses IV in 18.1.30 KS /
view of the ostracon 19.1.30 KS /
announcement of 11.1.31 KS (O.
the death of the DeM 39 (18-01-
king. 1930, 19-01-1930
and 11-01-1931));
19.1.30 KS (O.
DeM 174 (19-01-
1930))
-Year 32, IV Ax.t 1- P. Turin 1949+1946 Presumably
16; III Smw […] Černý 1936, 110-111; Helck 2002, 335 acquired by the
and 351; KRI V, 557-558; KRI VI, 880; government of
Maybe year 1 of recto unpublished except for a note in Piedmont for the
Ramesses IV in Černý Notebook 16.94. Turin museum
papyrus
view of the from Bernardino
announcement of Drovetti in 1823
the death of the (see e.g. S. Curto,
king. Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
137
2nd ed., Turin 1976,

45).
Between year 10 O. Turin 57432 Deir el-Medina;
Ramesses III and Lopez 1982, 41-42, pl. 139-139a and excavations
year 20 Ramesses 140-140a; KRI VII, 317-318; Helck Schiaparelli 1909.
III (Lopez); 2002, 241-242.
Ramesses III
(Kitchen); year 20
ostracon
Ramesses III
(Helck)
II pr.t day 11-30; III
pr.t day 1-14; II pr.t
day 11-22; day 22-
30; III pr.t day 1
- O. IFAO 00268 + O. IFAO 00278 Deir el-Medina; O.
day 24-25, 27 (O. Unpublished; Černý Notebook IFAO 0268 found
IFAO 0268); day 28 103.115. 19-01-1930 Kom
(O. IFAO 0278) de decombres au
sud du village,
ostracon
according to Clere
MSS; O. IFAO
0278 belongs to
the series found in
January 1930.
- O. Turin 57156 Deir el-Medina,
day 4-5; day 16-23 Lopez 1980, 27, pl. 70-70a. ostracon excavations
Schiaparelli 1905.
- O. Berlin P 14255 Deir el-Medina;
II Smw day 15 S. Allam 1982, 57, pl. 5 n.2; KRI VII, excavations G.
316. Deir el Medine online, URL: ostracon Moller
http://dem-online.gwi.uni-
muenchen.de
- O. Louvre E 13160 No indication
III Smw day 14, 15; Caillaud 1821-1862, [ii], pl. 25 nos 3-4;
IV Smw day 8 Chabas 1867, 37-40; Černý 1957, 19 ostracon
and pl. 65-65A no. 1; KRI V, 618; Helck
2002, 336.
- O. Louvre E 25325 No indication
day 10 + X; day 14; Grandet 2002, 204 no. 154; Keimer
day 10 + X; day 14- 1941, 13 and pl. 11 no. 33; Černý ostracon
15 1957, 21 and pl. 72-72A no. 4; Letellier
1978, 76-77 no.113; KRI V, 604-605.
RAMESSES IV
-Year 1, O.DM 39+174 Deir el-Medina,
Černý 1935a, 10; pl. 20-21 [O. DM 00 Kom de
Maybe year 1 of 039]; Černý 1937a, 18-19, pl. 46 [O. decombres au sud
Ramesses IV in DM 00174]; KRI V, 552-553; Helck du village; mark:
view of the 2002, 335, 351. 18.1.30 KS /
announcement of 19.1.30 KS /
the death of the ostracon 11.1.31 KS (O.
king. DeM 39 (18-01-
1930, 19-01-1930
and 11-01-1931));
19.1.30 KS (O.
DeM 174 (19-01-
1930))
-Year 1, P. Turin 1949+1946 Presumably
Černý 1936, 110-111; Helck 2002, 335 acquired by the
Maybe year 1 of and 351; KRI V, 557-558; KRI VI, 880; papyrus government of
Ramesses IV in recto unpublished except for a note in Piedmont for the
view of the Černý Notebook 16.94. Turin museum
138
announcement of from Bernardino

the death of the Drovetti in 1823
king. (see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 1, O. Berlin P 12631 Deir el-Medina.
IV Smw day 1- Deir el Medine online; Černý, Excavation Möller
ostracon
epagomenal days Notebook 32.51-6; Gutgessel, 1983, 1911.
41; Helck 2002, 352f.
-Year 1, O.DM 40+O.Strasbourg H. 042 Deir el-Medina,
I Ax.t day 1 (O. Černý 1935a, 10, pls. 22-22 A and 23; Kom de
Strasbourg H 42, 2); KRI VI, 106 and 107 and VII, 329 and decombres au sud
I Ax.t day 3-30 (O. 330; McDowell 1999, 225 no. 174, du village
ostracon
DM 40); Koenig 1997, 3, pl s. 13 and 105; Helck (according to Clere
epagomenal days 2002, 354-355. MSS.); mark:
(O. DM 40) 19.1.30 KS (19-01-
1930)
-Year 1, O.DM 41+ O. Berlin P 12626 Deir el-Medina,
II Ax.t day 1-17, 18- Černý 1935a, 11, pl. 23-25; KRI VI, Kom de
30 107-109; Helck 2002, 355-356. decombres au sud
du village
(according to Clere
ostracon MSS.); mark:
18.1.30 KS /
19.1.30 KS /
20.1.30 KS (18-01-
1930, 19-01-1930
and 20-01-1930)
III Ax.t day 1-21 Černý 1935a, 11, pl. 26-26 A, pl. 27; Kom de
KRI VI, 109-110; Helck 2002, 357-358. decombres au sud
ostracon du village
(according to Clere
MSS.); mark:
20.1.30 KS
IV Ax.t day 1-9, 10, Černý 1935a, 11, pl. 28-29; KRI VI, Kom de
11, 14; 5-6, 7-17; I 110-111; Helck 2002, 358-359. decombres au sud
pr.t day 10; IV Ax.t; I ostracon du village
pr.t (according to Clere
MSS.); mark:
20.1.30 KS
I pr.t day 18-30 (?); Černý 1935a, 13, pl. 39-41; KRI VI, Kom de
II pr.t day 1 (?)-30; 111-113; Helck 2002, 360-361. decombres au sud
III pr.t day 1-4 du village
(according to Clere
ostracon
MSS.); mark:
19.1.30 KS /
20.1.30 KS (19-01-
1930 and 20-01-
1930)
-Year 1, O. Berlin P 12641+12628 Excavation Moller
III pr.t day 1-4, 11-30Deir el Medine online; Černý, 1911. Deir el-
ostracon
Notebook 32.64-66; Gutgessel, 1983, Medina.
45; Helck 2002, 362.
-Year 1, O.DM 161+O.Berlin P 12640+ O. DM 161, Deir el-
II Smw day 13; III Smw Strasbourg H82 ostracon Medina.
day 3 Excavation Moller
139
Černý 1937a, 14-15, pls. 37-38; KRI 1911. O.Berlin P

VI, 114 and 115; Koenig 1997, 7, pls. 12640 and O.
26, 27 and 110. Helck 2002, 363, 365- Strasbourg H82 no
366; Černý Notebook 35.64 provenance.
III Smw day 1-30 Černý 1935a, 12, pl. 30-33, 30A-33A; Kom de
KRI VI, 116-118; McDowell 1999, 238 decombres au sud
no. 189B; Helck 2002, 366-370. du village
ostracon (according to Clere
MSS.); mark:
19.1.30 KS /
20.1.30 KS (19-01-
1930 and 20-01-
1930)
-Year 2,
III Smw day 15; IV
Smw day 1-2, 7-30;
epagomenal day 1-
4; I Smw day 18; IV
Smw day 3-6, 14, 16
-Year 1, 2 O. IFAO 00295 Deir el-Medina;
year 2 I Ax.t day 20; Unpublished; Černý Notebook found 22.1.32 (22-
II Ax.t day 19 103.123; Helck 2002, 356, 370. 01-1932) S 268
ostracon
(Tomb no. 268,
according to Clere
MSS)
II Ax.t day 1-20, 22 Černý 1935a, 12, pl. 3-35, 34A-35A; Kom de
(?)-30; III Ax.t day 1- KRI VI, 119-121; McDowell 1999, 207 decombres au sud
5; I Ax.t day 30; II Ax.t; no. 156; Helck 2002, 370-372. du village
III Ax.t; II Ax.t day 30 (according to Clere
MSS.); mark:
ostracon
20.1.30 KS (20-01-
1930). Provenance
of O. Berlin P
12651 and O.
Vienna H 4: no
indication.
III Ax.t day 1-23, 24- Černý 1935a, 12-13, pl. 36-36 A and Kom de
30; II Ax.t day 30 37-38; KRI VI, 121-124; Helck 2002, decombres au sud
ostracon
372-374. du village
(according to Clere
MSS.).
-Year 2, III Ax.t, day P. Turin 1891 r° Presumably
28 KRI VI, 76-77; Černý 1973a, 103; acquired by the
Helck 2002, 374; Pleyte-Rossi 1869, government of
66-67, pl. XLIX; Ziegler 2002, 477 cat. Piedmont for the
n. 234; recto line 13 is not given in the Turin museum
published facsimile, but was from Bernardino
papyrus
transcribed by Gardiner in his Drovetti in 1823
Notebook 149.48. Text collated with (see e.g. S. Curto,
Černý's transcription in Mss 3.535 by Storia del Museo
R.J. Demarée, May 9, 1990. Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 2, HO 73, 1 (O. Ashmolean Museum no indication
I pr.t day 1-30 0113) ostracon
Černý 1957, 21 and pl. 73-73A no. 1;
KRI VI, 124-125; Helck 2002, 376-377.
140

III pr.t day 4-9 Černý 1951, 17, pl. 16; KRI VI, 125; found in Grand
ostracon
Helck 2002, 379-380. Puits to the north
of the temple, 14-
03-1949.
-Year 3, O. MMA 14.6.216 Found by Harold
III Smw day 15-24 Demarée 2017, 101-106. Jones while
working for
ostracon
Theodore Davis in
1908-1909 in front
of KV 57.
IV Smw day 7, 8; Daressy 1901, 68, pl. LV; Helck 2002, Piacentini,
[...]Smw day 11; 384-385; Černý, Notebook 101.54. Orsenigo, La Valle
[...]day 12; IV Smw dei Re riscoperta,
day 14-18, 21-28; I 282, note 11:
ostracon
Ax.t day 4-7; [...]Ax.t possibly from
day 13, 14 excavations V.
Loret 1899, KV 37;
Orsenigo, GM 216
(2008), 71.
IV pr.t day 7 Černý 1951, 16, pl. 16; Helck 2002, found in Grand
ostracon
388; KRI VI, 251. Puits to the north
of the temple, 24-
02-1949.
IV Ax.t day [...]; I pr.t Černý 1957, 14 and pl. 48-48A no. 1; ostracon
day 1-3 Helck 2002, 391.
-Year 4, O. Cairo CG 25271 Valley of the Kings
IV Ax.t day 10 KRI VI, 151; KRI VII, 455; Daressy
ostracon
1901, 69, pl. LVI; Helck 2002, 391;
Černý Notebook 101.24.
-Year 4, O. IFAO 00383 Bought at Luxor by
III pr.t day 3, 13 Unpublished; Černý Notebook ostracon the IFAO on 24-01-
104.108; Helck 2002, 393. 1933.
-Year 4 (Ramesses O. Cairo CG 25272 Valley of the Kings
IV?) Daressy 1901, 70, pl. LVI; Černý ostracon
II Smw day 12,13 Notebook 101.33.
-Year 5, O. Berlin P 09897 Acquired by G.
IV Ax.t day 24, 25 Deir el Medine online, URL: http://dem- ostracon Möller
online.gwi.uni-muenchen.de
-Year 6, O. Cairo CG 25274 Valley of the Kings
I Ax.t day 12 Daressy 1901, 7; KRI VI, 145;
ostracon
Spiegelberg 1898b 13 no. III; Helck
2002, 399. Černý, Notebook 101.44.
-Year 6 (Ramesses O. Berlin P 09906 (a graffito) Bought in Luxor
IV?) Deir el Medine online, URL: (from Todrus, a
ostracon
I Ax.t day 15 http://dem-online.gwi.uni- dealer).
muenchen.de
I Ax.t day 10, 16; IV Černý 1970, 8, pl. 15; Helck 2002, 405; ostracon Grand Puits, 12-
[...] KRI VI, 158. 04-1949
179
According to Soliman D. M., unpublished PhD Thesis 2016, 268, “…after year 2 of Ramesses IV hieratic
journal texts on ostraca recording the duty roster and daily deliveries ceased to be produced on a regular
basis. During the reign of Ramesses V, such documents were predominantly created by the scribe of the
ostraca with marks, and […] no longer by hieratic scribes”. In reality, we think that this feature is not that
strongly marked. There was not a neat end for the production of such documents, instead, their number simply
declined.
141
-Year 7, P. Turin PN 109 (Provv. 6258) Presumably

[...] Smw day 26; Helck 2002, 404; Černý Notebook acquired by the
IV Smw; III Smw day 152.19 and 20. government of
18; II Smw day 23 + Piedmont for the
x; II pr.t day 21 Turin museum
from Bernardino
papyrus
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S.
Curto, Storia del
Museo Egizio di
Torino, 2nd ed.,
Turin 1976, 45).
- O. DM 393 Deir el-Medina;
IV Ax.t day 23, day Černý 1951, 15, pl. 14; KRI VI, 175. found in Grand
21 ostracon Puits to the north
of the temple, 16-
04-1949.
- O. DM 617 Deir el-Medina;
I pr.t day 1-4, 9-16 Sauneron 1959, 13, pls. 29 and 29a; ostracon Kom du Grand
KRI VI, 179. Puits, 30-12-1950.
day 27-30; III pr.t Grandet 2006, 53, 239.
ostracon
- O. Cairo CG 25303 Valley of the Kings.

[...] pr.t day 22; KRI VI, 150; KRI VII, 455 (revised ostracon
[...]pr.t day 23 transcription); Daressy 1901, 78.
RAMESSES V
III Smw day 18-23 Černý 1927c, 207-208; Černý 1935b, Davis/Ayrton
(?); III Smw day 28- 37, 60*, pl. LIII; KRI VI, 245-246; Helck excavations 1907-
30; IV Smw day 1-2, 2002, 419. 1908; mark: House
ostracon
5, 7-26 lambda 4
(workmen's houses
between KV 17
Seti I and KV 21).
-Year 1, I Smw day P. Turin 2044 Presumably
24- 25, 30, I pr.t, day KRI VI, 340-343; Helck 2002, 417, acquired by the
11-13, 27 418, 420 and 421; McDowell 1999, government of
221, 227 and 228, nos. 170 and 178; Piedmont for the
for additional (unpublished) fragments Turin museum
Demarée 1993, 144. papyrus from Bernardino
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 1, I Smw, day 7 P. Turin 2002 r° Presumably
Pleyte-Rossi 1869, 137-141, pls. CII- acquired by the
CXI; Allam 1973, pls. 132 and 133; government of
Bruyère 1930b, 235; Helck 2002, 418 Piedmont for the
and 481; Helck 1969, (60) and (961); Turin museum
KRI VI, 244 and 245; McDowell 1999, from Bernardino
222 and 223, no.172; transcription of papyrus Drovetti in 1823
the entire text, including some small (see e.g. S. Curto,
fragments added after the publication Storia del Museo
by Pleyte-Rossi, in Cern MSS.3.571, Egizio di Torino,
723-731. 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
45).
142
RAMESSES VI
-Year 1, HO 68, 1 (O. BM EA 50722 + O. Cairo BM fragment
II pr.t day 22 CG 25726 + 660) purchased from M.
Černý 1957, 20, pls. LXVIII and Mohassib, Luxor,
LXVIIIA, no. 1; Bierbrier 1982, 44, fig. 1912. Cairo
25; Černý 1935b, 70 and 71, 89*, pl. fragment: Valley of
LXXXVI; Demarée 2002a, 33, pl. 115; the Kings,
ostracon
KRI VI, 364; McDowell 1999, 206, no. workmen's houses
155; Dorn 2011, 153, 215, 412, pl. between KV 17
535-537. and KV 21;
Davis/Ayrton
excavations 1907-
1908.
-Year 2, O. Cairo 25254 Valley of the Kings.
II Ax.t day 1-2 KRI VI, 343; Daressy 1901, 66, pl. LIV;
Helck 2002, 447; McDowell 1999, 225-
ostracon
226 no. 175; Peden 2001, 83-88;
Spiegelberg 1898b, 13 no. IV; Wimmer
1995, I, 39-40.
-Year 2, O. Cairo 25256 Valley of the Kings.
II Ax.t day 6 KRI VII, 331, Daressy 1901, 66; Helck ostracon
2002, 371.
-Year 2, O. BtdK 659 Valley of the Kings.
II Ax.t day 22 Dorn 2011, vol. I, 410-411, vol. III pl. ostracon
529-534.
-Year 2, O. Ashmolean Museum 0160 no indication
IV pr.t day 7-11, 13- KRI VII, 362-363; Helck 2002, 442. ostracon
14
-Year 2, O. Ashmolean Museum 0302+O. no indication
day 24; II Smw day Ashmolean Museum 0342 rev.
ostracon
18-19; day 20 + X; Černý 1957, 28 and pl. 106 no.1; Helck
day 21 2002, 445.
-Year 3, P. Bibliotheque Nationale 237, no indication
II Ax.t day 14; II Ax.t; Carton 1
papyrus
I Ax.t day 18 KRI VI, 339 and 340; Helck 2002, 447
and 448.
III Ax.t day lost Černý 1935b, 24-25, 47*, pl. XXXIII; Davis/Ayrton
KRI VI, 369; Helck 2002, 448. excavations 1907-
ostracon 1908; mark: House
HO (workmen's
houses between
KV 17 and KV 21).
III Ax.t day 18 Daressy 1901, 69, pl. LV; Spiegelberg excavations V.
1902, 325; Helck 2002, 448; a revised Loret 04-04-1899, t
transcription by Černý, Notebook omb KV 37, mark:
101.44. 33857. Piacentini,
ostracon Orsenigo, La Valle
dei Re riscoperta,
282 and 283, notes
10 and 17;
Orsenigo, GM 216
(2008), 65 and 71.
-Year 7, II Smw day 4 P. Turin 1885 v° Presumably
Carter-Gardiner 1917, 130-158, pls. acquired by the
XXIX and XXX; Badawy 1948, 235- government of
241; Helck 2002, 450 and 455; KRI VI, papyrus Piedmont for the
58-60, 223, 224, 371 and 424; Turin museum
McDowell 1999, 202-205, no. 153 and from Bernardino
fig. 23; Pleyte-Rossi 1869, 100-102, pl. Drovetti in 1823
143
LXXI and LXXII; Scamuzzi 1965, pl. (see e.g. S. Curto,

LXXXVII; Von Beckerath 2000, 1-7. Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45). Papyrus
fragments found in
tombs 1336, 1337
and 1340 at Deir
el-Medina belong
to the same
document
according to J.
Cern and G. Botti:
Bruyère, Rapport
sur les fouilles de
Deir El Medineh
1933-1934, 79 and
80.
RAMESSES VII
-Year 1, I Ax.t day 18, P. Turin 1885 v° col. III, l. 3-8 Presumably
21, 25; II Ax.t day 5? Carter-Gardiner 1917, 130-158, pls. acquired by the
XXIX and XXX; Badawy 1948, 235- government of
241; Helck 2002, 450 and 455; KRI VI, Piedmont for the
58-60, 223, 224, 371 and 424; Turin museum
McDowell 1999, 202-205, no. 153 and from Bernardino
fig. 23; Pleyte-Rossi 1869, 100-102, pl. Drovetti in 1823
LXXI and LXXII; Scamuzzi 1965, pl. (see e.g. S. Curto,
LXXXVII; Von Beckerath 2000, 1-7. Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45). Papyrus
papyrus fragments found in
tombs 1336, 1337
and 1340 at Deir
el-Medina belong
to the same
document
according to J.
Cern and G. Botti:
Bruyère, Rapport
sur les fouilles de
Deir El Medineh
1933-1934, 79 and
80.
-Year 2, P. Turin 2070/154 Presumably
IV Smw day 30; Muszynski 1977, 183-200, pls. IX and acquired by the
epagomenal days; I X; Allam 1973, 327 and 328, no. 281, government of
Ax.t day 1 pls. 120 and 121; Helck 2002, 405, 472 Piedmont for the
-Year 7, III Ax.t day and 473; KRI VI, 426-428. Turin museum
9 from Bernardino
papyrus
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 8, IV Smw, P. Turin 1883+2095 Presumably
day 25 KRI VI, 431 and 432; Helck 2002, 461; acquired by the
papyrus
Valbelle, Ouvriers, Helck 1969, (981); Pleyte-Rossi 1869, government of
39: Ramesses IX 41 and 42, pl. XXIX. Piedmont for the
144
Turin museum
from Bernardino
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
- O. Cairo CG 25297 Valley of the Kings,
III Ax.t day [...]; III KRI VI, 434; KRI VII, 457 (revised excavations V.
Ax.t day 26-30 transcription); Daressy 1901, 75-76, Loret 1899, tomb
pl. LVIII; Helck 2002, 455. KV 37, mark: 37.
ostracon
Piacentini,
Orsenigo, La Valle
dei Re riscoperta,
282, note 10.
RAMESSES IX180
-Year 1-2 O. Ashmolean Museum 0187 rev. Bought in Luxor
Year 1, I Ax.t day Unpublished; Černý Notebook 45.89 20-02-1934.
ostracon
10; year 2 II Ax.t day and 107.23; Helck 2002, 472.
8; I Ax.t day 11
-Year 4 (might be of P. Milan E 0.9.40126 + P. Milan E Presumably
Ramesses XI), 9 0.9.40128 acquired by the
Year 4 II pr.t, day 3, Demarée 2010, 55-78, pl. I-II, Ia-IIa; government of
8; year 4, III Smw, KRI VI, 608-609; Helck 2002, 488; Piedmont for the
day 14; year 4, IV Tiradritti 1999, 133; Cerny Notebook Turin museum
Smw …;… pr.t, day 17.21-24 from Bernardino
17; year 4, IV pr.t, Drovetti in 1823
papyrus
day 3; year 4, II (see e.g. S. Curto,
Smw, day 19; year 4, Storia del Museo
IV Smw, day 3; I Ax.t, Egizio di Torino,
day 3-15; II Ax.t, day 2nd ed., Turin
10. 1976, 45).
Year 9, II Ax.t, day
11-15, 22-27.
-Year 4, 5, 6, 7 (?), P. Turin 2013 + P. Turin 2050 + P. Presumably
8, Turin 2061 acquired by the
IV Smw; I Ax.t; III KRI VI, 599-603 (transcription of recto government of
Smw; II Ax.t I 1-13, x + 1-7, recto II 1-13, recto x + Piedmont for the
Year 4 II Smw day 1; III and verso I x + 1-8); rest of text on Turin museum
[...] Ax.t day 4; III recto and verso unpublished; see from Bernardino
Ax.t; Černý Notebook 16.34-40, 52-57; Drovetti in 1823
Year 5 II Ax.t day 1; Helck 2002, 478-480. (see e.g. S. Curto,
[...] day 1 r III Smw Storia del Museo
day 30; III Smw r I Egizio di Torino,
papyrus
Ax.t, II Ax.t; [...] day 4 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
Year 6 II Ax.t day 4; 45).
III Ax.t;
II Ax.t day 10+x; II
Ax.t; II Ax.t day 30;
[...] III Ax.t day 16; IV
Smw;
Year 3+x I pr.t day
19; IV Ax.t day 27
Year 8 IV Ax.t day 8
180
Dr. Rob Demarée kindly informed me on some unpublished documents (not included here) in Turin
(Egyptian Museum) concerning year 2, 3, 8 and 14 of Ramesses IX. The documents/fragments are being
investigated and conserved at the moment. Dated to year 13 of Ramesses IX is also the verso of papyrus
Provv. 6289, according to the words of Demichelis (Demichelis 2016, 38).
145
Year 5, 6, 7, 8, 18 P. Turin 1881 + P. Turin 2080 + P. Presumably

Year 5 Turin 2092 acquired by the
I pr.t day 30 KRI VI, 609-619; Allam 1973, 313-317, government of
Year 6 no. 277, pls. 108-110; Caminos, 1954, Piedmont for the
I Smw day 29 465-474; Gardiner 1937, xx, 125-128, Turin museum
Year 7 no. XIII; Helck 2002, 483-490, 492; from Bernardino
I pr.t day 21; IV Ax.t Helck 1963a, (500) and (501); Drovetti in 1823
day 8, 24; Janssen 2005a, 42-43; Menu 1973, (see e.g. S. Curto,
I pr.t day 20; I [...] 85-89, no. 6; republished in: Menu Storia del Museo
day 10 + x; 1982, 241-245, no. 6; Pleyte-Rossi Egizio di Torino,
II pr.t day 30; IV pr.t 1869, 9-21, pls. II (B), III-X; Donadoni 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
day 23; I Ax.t day 8; Roveri 1989, 127 and 128. 45).
I pr.t day 14; II Smw
day 3 + x; IV Ax.t papyrus
day 10, 29; I pr.t
day 10, 23, 26, 29;
II pr.t day 2; III pr.t
day 18;
III pr.t day 23;
IV pr.t day 10
Year 8 III Ax.t day
29; IV Ax.t day 9; IV
Ax.t day 3, 5; II pr.t
day 3
Year 18 IV Ax.t day
6
-Year 7-8, P. Turin 2002 r° (col. IV end of line Presumably

21 and lines 22-23) + P. Turin 2002 acquired by the
Year 7 I Ax.t day 2; II v° government of
Smw day 24; I Ax.t Pleyte-Rossi 1869, 137-141, pls. CII- Piedmont for the
day 4. CXI; Allam 1973, pls. 132 and 133; Turin museum
Year 8: I pr.t day 15; Bruyère 1930b, 235; Helck 2002, 418 from Bernardino
I Ax.t day 4; III pr.t and 481; Helck 1969, (60) and (961); papyrus Drovetti in 1823
day 13; I pr.t day 15, KRI VI, 244 and 245; McDowell 1999, (see e.g. S. Curto,
23 222 and 223, no.172. Transcription of Storia del Museo
the entire text, including some small Egizio di Torino,
fragments added after the publication 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
by Pleyte-Rossi, in Černý MSS.3.571, 45).
723-731.
Year 7, 8, 9 P. Turin 1906 + P. Turin 1939 + P. Presumably
Year 7 III Ax.t day 8, Turin 2047 acquired by the
25; KRI VI, 624-630; Helck 2002, 481, government of
III pr.t day 13; year 482, 486-491, 494-497. Piedmont for the
[...]; Turin museum
IV Smw day 24, 30; I from Bernardino
Ax.t day 16; [...] day Drovetti in 1823
5; II Ax.t day 9; III (see e.g. S. Curto,
Ax.t day 2; IV Ax.t Storia del Museo
[...]; IV Ax.t day 12; papyrus Egizio di Torino,
Year 8 I pr.t day 7, 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
15; I pr.t day 10 + x; 45).
II pr.t day 10, 20 +
x; I Smw [...]; III Smw
[...]
Year 9 I Ax.t day 1;
II Ax.t day 20; III Ax.t
[...]; IV Ax.t day ...; IV
Ax.t day 30.
146
-Year 8, I Ax.t, day P. Milan E 0.9.40127 + P. Turin Turin fragments

27-30 II Ax.t, day 1-7, fragment gamma + P. Turin 2074 presumably
14-18 Recto: Demarée 2010, 55-78. acquired by the
KRI VI, 608 and 609; Helck 2002, p. government of
488. Data from unpublished fragments Piedmont for the
based on Černý Notebook 17.11-2 and Turin museum
notes by R.J. Demarée and B.J.J. from Bernardino
Haring. For the Milan and Turin Drovetti in 1823
fragments as part of the same (see e.g. S. Curto,
documents, see Demarée 1993, 105. Storia del Museo
papyrus
Verso: Demarée 2010, 55-78. Egizio di Torino,
Tiradritti 1999, 133; verso of Turin 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
fragments unpublished; Černý 45).
Notebook 17.21-24. Data from
unpublished fragments based on
Černý Notebook 17.21-24 and notes
by R.J. Demarée; see also Černý
1955, 29. For the Milan and Turin
fragments as part of the same
documents, see Demarée 1993 105.
-Year 9, I Ax.t, day 6- P. Turin 2072/142 Presumably
11 Allam 1973, 330, no. 283, pls. 128- acquired by the
-Year 10, II Smw, 130; Helck 2002, 497, 499-501; KRI government of
day 10+x… VI, 630-633. Piedmont for the
Turin museum
from Bernardino
papyrus
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 4, 9 P. Turin 1900 + P. Turin 2048 + P. Presumably
Year 3 + x [...] day Turin 2088 + P. Turin 2093 + P. Turin acquired by the
25; Year 2 + x [...] 2097 + P. Turin 2101 government of
day 26; KRI VI, 619-624 and 684; Harris 1961, Piedmont for the
Year 4 IV [...] [...] IV 124, 231 and [266]; Helck 1984, 242- Turin museum
pr.t day 21; IV pr.t 247; Helck 2002, 477, 495, 496 and from Bernardino
day 30; […] Smw day 540. Drovetti in 1823
[...]; I Smw day 13; I (see e.g. S. Curto,
Smw day 25; I Ax.t Storia del Museo
[...]; I Ax.t day 6; [...] Egizio di Torino,
IV Smw day 2; [...] IV 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
papyrus
Smw day 14; 45).
epagomenal day 1; I
Ax.t day 16; IV Ax.t
[...];
Year 9 IV Ax.t day
12; III Ax.t day 12; II
Ax.t day 10; II Ax.t day
13; II Ax.t day 15; II
Ax.t day 17-19; III Ax.t
day 2; III Ax.t day 15;
III Ax.t [...]
-Year 10 P. Turin [unnumbered 1]181 Presumably
papyrus
acquired by the
181
Dr. Demarée kindly informed me on some more fragments belonging to this papyrus and held in Turin
Museum inside “Cartella F 103” (unnumbered and unpublished).
147
day 3 + x; day 10 + Helck 2002, 502-503; partial government of

x; day 21; day 23; transcription (without beginnings of Piedmont for the
-Year 12 II Ax.t day recto 3-5 and 2nd column on verso) in Turin museum
10 + x Černý Notebook 16.68; additional data from Bernardino
from notes R.J. Demarée. Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 10, P. Turin 54021 Presumably
IV pr.t day 9; II Smw KRI VI, 633-636; Demichelis 2002a; acquired by the
day 24; II Smw [...];II Helck 2002, 498, 499 and 501; government of
Smw day 1; IV Smw Janssen 2005a, 59-60. Piedmont for the
day 27; I pr.t day Turin museum
16; III Ax.t day 12; IV from Bernardino
papyrus
Ax.t day 7; IV pr.t Drovetti in 1823
day 19; II Smw day (see e.g. S. Curto,
26, 28 Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 10, O. Cairo CG 25305 Valley of the Kings.
IV Smw day 13-18; Daressy 1901, 78; Helck 2002, 502. ostracon
[...] Smw day 21
-Year 10, P. Turin 2071/224 [140]+frgt Presumably
IV Smw day 26-30 KRI VI, 637-638; Helck 2002, 503-504; acquired by the
epagomenal day 1; McDowell 1999, 226-227, no. 176. government of
I Ax.t day 2-7 Piedmont for the
Turin museum
-Year 11, from Bernardino
[...] Smw day 29; [...] papyrus Drovetti in 1823
Smw day 2 (see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 11 P. Turin 1891 v° Presumably

II Ax.t day 29 KRI VI, 636-637; Helck 2002, 503; acquired by the
Pleyte-Rossi 1869, 67, pl. L; Ziegler government of
2002, 477 cat. n. 234; text collated with Piedmont for the
Černý's transcription in Mss 3.535 by Turin museum
R.J. Demarée, May 9, 1990. from Bernardino
papyrus
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 13 P. Turin 2087 v° Presumably
III pr.t day 9; III pr.t Allam 1973, 309, no. 275, pl. 107; acquired by the
day [...] Helck 2002, 504; KRI VI, 640. government of
Piedmont for the
Turin museum
papyrus
from Bernardino
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
148

45).
-Year 13, Giornale, pl. 4-7 (P. Turin 1999 + P. Presumably
epagomenal days; Turin 2009 v°) acquired by the
[IV] Smw day 30; Botti, Peet 1928, 8-10, 12, 13, pls. a government of
epagomenal day 1; and 4-7; Helck 2002, 504-506; Pleyte- Piedmont for the
III Smw; IV Smw; Rossi 1869, 113-114, pls. CLII and Turin museum
epagomenal days; I CLIII; KRI VI, 563-566. from Bernardino
papyrus
Ax.t; epagomenal Drovetti in 1823
day 2-5; I Ax.t day 1- (see e.g. S. Curto,
6, 9-20 Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
-Year 14, 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
I Ax.t day 24 45).
-Year 14, O. Léningrad 2973 r° J. Černý's fragment
III Ax.t day 14-15 Černý 1931, 395-399, pl.III; KRI VI, purchased by J.
659-660; Bogoslovsky 1973, 88-93, Černý in Luxor
fig.4; Wimmer 1995, I, 92-93; Helck from M. Mohasseb
ostracon
2002, 506. in 1930. Leningrad
fragment bought by
Turajev in Luxor in
1909.
IV Ax.t day 1-4 Daressy 1901, 76, pl. LV; KRI VI, 666; ostracon Tomb KV 6.
Helck 2002, 507.
-Year 14, HO 69, 1 (O. BM EA 05672 + O. Cairo O. BM 5672: Valley
III Ax.t day 20-24 CG 25649) of the Kings; O.
O.BM 5672 + O. Cairo CG 25649: Cairo CG 25649:
Černý 1957, p. 20, pl. LXIX-LXIXA.1; Valley of the Kings;
O. Cairo CG 25649: Černý 1935b, p. Carnarvon/Carter
49, 69*, pl. LXIV; O. BM 5672+O. excavations 1915;
ostracon
Cairo CG 25649: KRI VI, 660-661; mark: 138 (WV 22
Demarée 2002a, 20 and pl. 43-44; Amenhotep III
Helck 2002, 507. 'upper stratum'
burial chamber J).
-Year 14, IV Ax.t, P. Turin 2071/224+1960 Presumably

day 25-27 Allam 1973, 329, no. 282, pls. 122- acquired by the
-Year 15, II Ax.t, day 127; Helck 2002, 508-510; KRI VI, government of
16, 24 641-644. Piedmont for the
Turin museum
from Bernardino
papyrus
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year [15] P. Turin Cat. 1884 + P. Turin Cat. Presumably
epagomenal day 5; 2067 + P. Turin Cat. 2071 + P. Turin acquired by the
I Ax.t day 1 Cat. 2105 government of
KRI VI, 644-650; Helck 2002, 511-514; Piedmont for the
-Year 16, Pleyte-Rossi 1869, 112, 113, pl. 76. Turin museum
I Ax.t day 21-27; II from Bernardino
papyrus
Ax.t day 11, 19; III Drovetti in 1823
pr.t day 13 (see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
149
-Year 15 P. Turin Cat. 1945 + P. Turin Cat. Presumably

I Smw day 24, 30; II 2073 + P. Turin Cat. 2076 + P. Turin acquired by the
Smw day 7, 18; IV Cat. 2082 + P. Turin Cat. 2083 verso government of
Smw day 14; I Ax.t (Giornale year 17B) Piedmont for the
[...]; II pr.t day 30 Botti, Peet 1928, 15-18 and 27-39, pls. Turin museum
-Year 16 b and 27-43; Allam 1973, 331-335; from Bernardino
I Smw [...]; III Smw Helck 2002, 510, 511, 516-521; KRI Drovetti in 1823
day 20; IV Ax.t day VI, 581-594; McDowell 1999, 211, no (see e.g. S. Curto,
1; I Ax.t day 1; IV Ax.t 160. Storia del Museo
day 30; I Ax.t day 17 Egizio di Torino,
-Year 17 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
I Ax.t day 1; IV pr.t 45).
papyrus
[...]; I Ax.t [...]¸I Ax.t
day 23; II Ax.t day 1;
III Ax.t day 11; IV Ax.t
day 3 + x; I Smw [...];
II pr.t; III pr.t; IV pr.t;
I Smw day 1; II Smw
day 1;
II pr.t day 1; IV Ax.t
day 24; III Smw; IV
Sm; IV Ax.t day 30; I
Ax.t; IV Ax.t; IV pr.t
day 2
I pr.t day 14-17 2005 + P. Turin Cat. 2029 + P. Turin acquired by the
Cat. 2078 recto (Giornale year 17A) government of
Botti, Peet 1928, 14 and 15, 19-21, pls. Piedmont for the
b and 8-13; Helck 2002, 521-523; Turin museum
Pleyte-Rossi 1869, 128-131, pls. XCII from Bernardino
papyrus
and XCIV; KRI VI, 567-570. Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 17, P. Turin Cat. 1945 + P. Turin Cat. Presumably
II pr.t day 6-14, 15- 2073 + P. Turin Cat. 2076 + P. Turin acquired by the
30; III pr.t day 1-5, Cat. 2082 + P. Turin Cat. 2083 recto government of
7-14; II [...]day 3; (Giornale year 17B) Piedmont for the
[...]day 15; II pr.t Botti, Peet 1928, 15-18 and 22-27, pls. Turin museum
day 25; III pr.t day b and 14-26; Helck 2002, p. 523-529; from Bernardino
papyrus
15-21, 23 KRI VI, 570-581; McDowell 1999, 198, Drovetti in 1823
no 151 A. (see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
II pr.t day 20 2005 + P. Turin Cat. 2029 + P. Turin acquired by the
Cat. 2078 verso (Giornale year 17A) government of
Botti-Peet 1928, 27-29, 39-41, pls. b Piedmont for the
and 44-48; Helck 2002, 525, 527 and Turin museum
528; KRI VI, 595-598; Pleyte-Rossi from Bernardino
papyrus
1869, 128-131, pls. XCIII and XCV. Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
150

(Botti-Peet, Helck, 2107 acquired by the
Kitchen) Botti-Peet 1928, 41 and 42, pl. 49; government of
Helck 2002, 528; KRI VI, 598, 868 and Piedmont for the
869; McDowell 1999, 198 and 199, no Turin museum
151 B. from Bernardino
papyrus
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
KRI VI, 666; KRI VII, 459 (revised excavations V.
transcription); Daressy 1901, 81. Loret 1899, tomb
KV 37. Piacentini,
ostracon Orsenigo, La Valle
dei Re riscoperta,
282, note 10;
Orsenigo, GM 216
(2008), 73.
RAMESSES X182
-Year 3183, Giornale, pl. 50-63 (P. Turin 1898 + Presumably
II pr.t, day 24; II Ax.t, P. Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P. acquired by the
day 2; [...]pr.t day Turin 2094) government of
24; III pr.t day 13 + Botti-Peet 1928, 42-55 and 27-39, pls. Piedmont for the
x; [...]pr.t day 26; c and 50-63; Von Beckerath, 1994, 29- Turin museum
[...]pr.t day 17; III 33; Helck 2002, 541-554, 561; KRI VI, from Bernardino
pr.t day 1-21, 23-24, 687-699, 850 and 851; Lieblein- Drovetti in 1823
26-30; IV pr.t day 1- Chabas 1868, 4-41, pls. I-IV; (see e.g. S. Curto,
2, 4-5, 9-10, 12, 16- Schneider 2000, 88-104. Storia del Museo
30; I Smw day 2-30; Egizio di Torino,
II Smw day 1-30; III 2nd ed., Turin 1976,
Smw day 1-10; I Ax.t 45).
day 1; II Ax.t; III Smw
papyrus
day 11-22, 24-30;
IV Smw day 1-6, 8;
III [...]; IV Smw day
11, 16; IV Smw [...];
IV Smw day 30;
epagomenal day 1
epagomenal day 3-
5; I Ax.t day 1-2, 6,
10 + x,19-20, 22-24,
26, 28-29; II Ax.t day
2
- O. Cairo CG 25244 Valley of the Kings.

day 10+x; day 23- KRI VII, 385; Daressy 1901, 63, pl. LI. ostracon
30
182
Dr. Rob Demarée kindly informed me on some unpublished documents (not included here) in Turin
(Egyptian Museum) concerning year 2 and 3 of Ramesses X. The documents/fragments are being investigated
and conserved at the moment.
183
A papyrus preserved in Turin Museum, inside “cartella F 351”, without number, belongs to year 1 of
Ramesses X, speciphically to month IV of Ax.t. Furthermore, an unpublished ostracon found by Davies in the
Valley of Kings in 1907/08 (O. MMA 09.184.733, kindly mentioned to me by Dr. Demarée) is probably dated
to year 1 of Ramesses X.
151
RAMESSES XI184
-Year 1 Giornale, pl. 50-63 (P. Turin 1898 + Presumably
I Ax.t day 20 + x; III P. Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P. acquired by the
Ax.t day 30 Turin 2094) government of
Botti-Peet 1928, 42-55 and 27-39, pls. Piedmont for the
c and 50-63; Von Beckerath 1994, 29- Turin museum
33; Helck 2002, 541-554, 561; KRI VI, from Bernardino
papyrus
687-699, 850 and 851; Lieblein- Drovetti in 1823
Chabas 1868, 4-41, pls. I-IV; (see e.g. S. Curto,
Schneider 2000, 88-104. Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
Year 12 and year P. Turin 1895 + P. Turin 2006 Presumably
14 Gardiner 1948, xiii and xiv, 35-44, no. acquired by the
-Year 12 XVII; Gardiner 1941, 22-37); Lieblein government of
II Ax.t day 16, 21; III 1870, 141-152; Pleyte-Rossi 1869, Piedmont for the
Ax.t day 19, 23, 28- 83, 84, 132, 133, 135, 136, 216-218, Turin museum
29; IV Ax.t day 12- pls. 65 (c), 96, 97, 100, 101, 155-157. from Bernardino
14; IV Ax.t day 12, Drovetti in 1823
18, 20, 24; IV pr.t papyrus (see e.g. S. Curto,
day 5; I Smw day 9; Storia del Museo
IV pr.t day 13 Egizio di Torino,
-Year 14 45).
I Ax.t day 10-11, 25;
II Ax.t day 7; II Ax.t
day [...].
Year 14, 15, P. BM EA 09997 From the Henry
IV Smw; day 16, 17, KRI VII, 389-394; Demarée 2015, 335- Salt Collection
18; 340. (Černý Notebook
year 10 [+ x] IV Smw 50.44).
day 1;
year 14 III Smw day
26, 28-30; IV Smw
day 1, 5-7, 27-30;
epagomenal day 1-
4; year 10 [+ x x +] papyrus
III Smw day 4 [+ x];
III Smw day 10; III
pr.t day 29;
II Smw day 12
year 15 I Ax.t day
10; II Ax.t day 7;
[...]Smw day 10 [+ x];
II Ax.t day 10 [+ x]
-Year [17] Gardiner, RAD, 64-68 (P. Turin 1888 Presumably

III pr.t day 11; IV + P. Turin 2085) acquired by the
Smw day 24; III pr.t Gardiner 1948, xx and xxi, 64-68, no. government of
day 11; IV pr.t day XXII; Helck 2002, 565 and 566; Pleyte- Piedmont for the
10 + x; I Smw day Rossi 1869, 77 and 78, pl. 61. papyrus Turin museum
20, 22, 28, 29; II from Bernardino
Smw day 7, 10,15; III Drovetti in 1823
Smw day 10, 13, 19 (see e.g. S. Curto,
-Year 18 Storia del Museo
184
A new document written by the scribe of the Tomb ©Hwty-ms, belonging to year 9 of Ramesses XI, month
IV of Ax.t, and concerning the collection of grain for the Tomb (recto, while the verso contains a ship’s log), was
found in Turin Museum with the number 2098+2100/306. The document is unpublished but a forthcoming
article by R. J. Demarée is expected soon.
152
IV Smw day 24 Egizio di Torino,

45).
-Year 2 of wHm P. Turin 2094 [1] Presumably
ms.w.t KRI VI, 865-868; Helck 2002, 568-570. acquired by the
I pr.t day 2; II pr.t government of
day 18, 19, 23; IV Piedmont for the
Smw day 19, 21; Turin museum
year 2 m wHm ms.w.t from Bernardino
papyrus
I pr.t day 19; II pr.t Drovetti in 1823
day 29; I pr.t day 9, (see e.g. S. Curto,
10, 19; III pr.t day 3; Storia del Museo
II pr.t day 29 Egizio di Torino,
45).
day 7-30; day 3-23. KRI VI, 870-872; KRI VII, 462-463 Tomb KV 6,
(revised transcription); Daressy 1901, ostracon excavation in 1890.
62-63, pl. LII; Wimmer 1995, I, 38-39;
Helck 2002, 572-573.
5.2.b Second section: documents not dated with certainty
Even if these documents will not be analized in detail, they will be here listed for completeness.
Dyn.18 or 19
First half dyn. 19 O. Cairo CG 25501 Valley of Kings;
(Černý); Seti I Černý 1935b, 1, 1*, pl. I; KRI I, 370. excavations Th.
(Kitchen), perhaps Davis; Reeves,
rather dyn. 18 (R.J. Valley of the Kings,
Demarée). 292-321, with figs.
ostracon
96-97 on p. 300
and 302, showing
some of the site
designations used
by Davis.
Dyn. 19 or 20
Ramesses II O. BM EA 50733 + O. UC 32067 Deir el-Medina,
(Černý-Gardiner; Černý 1957, 6, pl. 19-19A, no.2; based on internal
Kitchen, Demarèe 2002a, 34-35 and pl. 131- evidence
Ramesside 132; Helck 2002, 380, 386; (Demarée,
Inscriptions III); www.petrie.ucl.ac.uk; Janssen 1992, Ramesside
Year 2 Ramesses 117-122, pl.2; KRI III, 573 and VII, 333- Ostraca, 34).
IV and year 3 334.
Ramesses IV
(Helck); year 3
Ramesses IV ostracon
(Demarée); year 3
Ramesses IV and
year 4 Ramesses
IV (Janssen;
Kitchen,
Ramesside
Inscriptions VII)
[...] + I pr.t day 5;
year 3 II Ax.t day 14
Dyn. 19, year 9 O. Ashmolean Museum 0115 No indication
ostracon
Merenptah; KRI VII, 283; Helck 2002, 226.
153
dyn. 20, year 9

Ramesses III
(Kitchen, Helck)
II Ax.t day 10, 20
Dyn. 19 or dyn. 20 O. Strasbourg H. 026 No indication; note
(Koenig), year 28 Koenig 1997, 4, pl. 7, 8, pl. 103; KRI that many of the
Ramesses III and VII, 298; Helck 2002, 301, 302 and Strasbourg ostraca
year 29 Ramesses 306. were excavated by
III (Helck); year 29 J.E. Quibell in the
Ramesses III Ramesseum in
(Kitchen) 1895-1896 and
I Smw day 10+x; I given to the
Smw day 20, 30; II ostracon Bibliothèque
Smw day 10, 13, 20, Nationale et
30; III Smw day 1 Universitaire by
-Year 29 W.M. Flinders
I pr.t x; epagomenal Petrie in 1918
days; II Ax.t; IV Ax.t (Koenig 1997, 1;
Spiegelberg, ZÄS
58 (1923), 25, note
4).
End dyn. 19 - O. Cairo CG 25654 Deir el-Medina;
beginning dyn. 20 Černý 1935b, 50, 70*, pl. LXVIII; KRI excavation of
(Černý); dyn. 20, VI, 364-365; Helck 2002, 441. temple by Baraize
year 1 Ramesses ostracon in 1912; mark: DM
VI (Kitchen, Helck)
II Ax.t day 12, 15;
year 1 I Ax.t day 22
End Dyn. 19 or O. Cairo CG 25794 Valley of Kings,
beginning Dyn. 20 Černý 1935b, 90, 112; Altenmüller undisturbed
(Černý); year 4 1996, 6); Helck 2002, 182 and 183; stratum east of KV
Siptah-Tausert KRI IV, 361. 47 (Siptah);
(Helck, Kitchen) ostracon Carnarvon/Carter
II Smw day 9; III Smw excavations 1922;
day 16, 25; IV Ax.t mark: 381 A;
day 10 Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 330.
End dyn. 19 or O. Turin 57388 Deir el-Medina;
beginning dyn. 20 Lopez 1982, 29, pl. 125-125a; KRI VII, excavations
(Lopez); Siptah- 255-256; Helck 2002, 180; Collier Schiaparelli 1909.
Tausert (Kitchen); 2004, 52-53, 160.
year 3 Siptah
(Helck); late years
ostracon
Seti II to early
years Siptah
(Collier)
II pr.t day 12-14, 16-
17, 23; II pr.t day 10
+X
Late dyn. 19 or O. DM 733 Deir el-Medina,
early dyn. 20 Grandet 2000, 5, 30-31, 135. Kom du Grand
(Grandet) Puits, 17-12-1950,
ostracon
I Ax.t day 10, 22; II mark: KGP
Ax.t day 14; [...] day 17.12.50.
6+x
Dyn. 19 or Dyn. 20 O. Berlin P 10644 Bought by K. Sethe
[...] pr.t day 24+x Deir el Medine online, URL: http://dem- ostracon at Deir el-Bahari
online.gwi.uni-muenchen.de
III Ax.t day 29; I pr.t Koenig 1997, 3, pl. 5, pl. 102. ostracon that many of the
day 30; day 23-25 Strasbourg ostraca
154
were excavated by
J.E. Quibell in the
Ramesseum in
1895-1896 and
given to the
Bibliothèque
Nationale et
Universitaire by
W.M. Flinders
Petrie in 1918
(Koenig, Ostraca
Strasbourg , 1;
Spiegelberg, ZÄS
58 (1923), 25, note
4).
I pr.t day 11-13 Koenig 1997, 4, pl. 6, pl. 103. that many of the
Strasbourg ostraca
were excavated by
J.E. Quibell in the
Ramesseum in
1895-1896 and
given to the
Bibliothèque
ostracon
Nationale et
Universitaire by
W.M. Flinders
Petrie in 1918
(Koenig, Ostraca
Strasbourg , 1;
Spiegelberg, ZÄS
58 (1923), 25, note
4).
day 25; day 20+x; Koenig 1997, 4, pl. 9, pl. 103. that many of the
day 20+x Strasbourg ostraca
were excavated by
J.E. Quibell in the
Ramesseum in
1895-1896 and
given to the
Bibliothèque
ostracon
Nationale et
Universitaire by
W.M. Flinders
Petrie in 1918
(Koenig, Ostraca
Strasbourg , 1;
Spiegelberg, ZÄS
58 (1923), 25, note
4).
Dyn. 19 or dyn. 20 O. Valley of Queens 03 Valley of Queens,
day 16-24, 27 Koenig 1988, 116, Document III. found 03-1986 or
ostracon
04-1986 near tomb
48
Dyn. 19 or dyn. 20 O. Turin 57247 Deir el-Medina;
II Smw day 27; IV Lopez 1980, 54, pl. 86. excavations
ostracon
[...]; epagomenal Schiaparelli 1905.
days
155
Dyn. 19 or dyn. 20 O. Turin 57152 Deir el-Medina;

IV pr.t [...]; I Smw day Lopez 1980, 25-26, pl. 67. excavations
ostracon
5 Schiaparelli 1905.
Dyn. 19 or dyn. 20 O. Qurna 630/3 Qurna; excavated

Deir el Medine online, URL: http://dem- 1983 immediately
ostracon
online.gwi.uni-muenchen.de in front of the
German House.
Dyn. 19 or dyn. 20 O. Michaelides 088 no indication
day 24; day 26 Goedicke-Wente 1962, 23, pl. ostracon
LXXXVIII.
Dyn. 19 or dyn. 20 O. Medelhavsmuseet MM 14127 rev. Luxor or Deir el-
IV Smw day 8; year Peterson1973, 84 no. 52, pl. 31. Medina. Presented
8 IV Smw day 20 to the
Medelhavsmuseet
by R. G. Gayer-
ostracon Anderson in 1935.
Mark: "E 4127",
and mark: "127 R.
G. Gayer-
Anderson
Collection".
Dyn. 19 or dyn. 20 O. DM 946 Deir el-Medina,
I pr.t [...]; day 15-17 Grandet 2003, 4, 119-120, 387. ostracon Grand Puits, 07-
01-1950.
Dyn. 19 or dyn. 20 O. DM 456 Deir el-Medina,
I Smw [...]; [...] pr.t Černý 1951, 31, pl. 30. Trou creuse par
day 21; I Smw day Schiaparelli a l'est
21-24 du no. 290
ostracon
(according to Clere
MSS.), 09-03-
1929; mark: TS NO
9.3.29
year [...]; day 2-4; I Koenig 1997, 6, pl. 16, 17, pl. 106. that many of the
Smw day 6, 7 Strasbourg ostraca
were excavated by
J.E. Quibell in the
Ramesseum in
1895-1896 and
given to the
Bibliothèque
ostracon
Nationale et
Universitaire by
W.M. Flinders
Petrie in 1918
(Koenig, Ostraca
Strasbourg , 1;
Spiegelberg, ZÄS
58 (1923), 25, note
4).
day 12 or day 17, Koenig 1997, 6, pl. 19, pl. 107. that many of the
day 18, 24 Strasbourg ostraca
were excavated by
J.E. Quibell in the
ostracon
Ramesseum in
1895-1896 and
given to the
Bibliothèque
Nationale et
156
Universitaire by
W.M. Flinders
Petrie in 1918
(Koenig, Ostraca
Strasbourg , 1;
Spiegelberg, ZÄS
58 (1923), 25, note
4).
III Smw day 20, 27; Koenig 1997, 7, pl. 23, pl. 109. that many of the
IV Smw day 10; I Ax.t Strasbourg ostraca
day 10, 18, 30; were excavated by
[...]Ax.t day 6+x J.E. Quibell in the
Ramesseum in
1895-1896 and
given to the
Bibliothèque
ostracon Nationale et
Universitaire by
W.M. Flinders
Petrie in 1918
(Koenig, Ostraca
Strasbourg , 1;
Spiegelberg, ZÄS
58 (1923), 25, note
4).
Dynasty 19
Dyn. 19 (Černý); O. Cairo CG 25505 Valley of Kings;
Amenmesse Černý 1935b, 3, 4*, pl. IV; KRI IV, 233- excavations Th.
(Kitchen); year 3 234; Helck 2002, 114; Collier 2004, Davis; Reeves,
Amenmesse (?) 112-113, 155. Valley of the Kings,
(Helck); late Seti II 292-321, with figs.
ostracon
- Siptah (Collier) 96-97 on p. 300
[...] pr.t day 8; III pr.t and 302, showing
day 12. some of the site
designations used
by Davis.
Dyn. 19, Siptah O. Cairo CG 25520 Valley of Kings;
(Černý, Kitchen); Černý 1935b, 10, 20*-21*, pl. XIV; KRI excavations Th.
year 2 IV, 392-394; Helck 2002, 106-107. Davis; Reeves,
Amenmesse Valley of the Kings,
(Helck) 292-321, with figs.
II Ax.t day [...]; III Ax.t 96-97 on p. 300
day day 13, 10 + X; ostracon and 302, showing
III Ax.t day day [...]; some of the site
III Ax.t day day 16- designations used
17; IV Ax.t day day by Davis.
2-5, 7; III Ax.t day
12, 23, 25-28, IV
Ax.t day 2-3,4, 6-8.
Merenptah Černý 1935b, 12, 27*, pl. XVII; KRI IV, Carnarvon/Carter
(Kitchen); year 3 174; Helck 2002, 49. excavations1917-
Ramesses II 1918; mark: 151
(Helck) (valley between KV
ostracon
IV Smw day 21-25; 7 Ramesses II and
IV Smw day 21-28; KV 9 Ramesses
IV Smw day 20-25. VI); see Reeves,
Valley of the Kings,
325.
157
Dyn. 19 (Černý); O. Cairo CG 25793 Valley of Kings,

Siptah-Tausert Černý 1935b, 90, 112*, pl. CVII; KRI lower stratum east
(Kitchen); year 1 IV, 361; Helck 2002, 165; Collier 2004 of KV 47 (Siptah);
Siptah (Helck); 92-93, 157. Carnarvon/Carter
ostracon
mid-late years excavations 1922;
Siptah (Collier) mark: 416;
II Ax.t day 2; II Ax.t Reeves, Valley of
day 4 the Kings, 331.
Dyn. 19, year 2 O. Cairo JE 72452 Valley of Kings;
Seti II (Helck); Dyn. KRI IV, 404; Helck 2002, 131-132. Davis/Ayrton
19, year 2 Siptah excavations in
(Kitchen) 1905-1906 north-
I pr.t day 8-27, 30; II east of KV 13 at
pr.t day 1-2 ostracon base of cliffs;
marks on two of
the six fragments:
X. 6; X 60; Reeves,
298-299.
Dyn. 19, year 6 O. Cairo JE 72461 Valley of Kings,
Siptah (Helck); Helck 2002, 188; Collier 2004, 114- Davis excavation;
year 6 Seti II or 115, 157. according to
ostracon
Siptah (Collier) Journal d'Entree.
IV Ax.t day 4 + x; III
pr.t day 7, 8, 12
Dyn. 19, O. Černý 07 Donated by J.
Amenmesse KRI VII, 243; Helck 2002, 113. Clere to J. Černý.
(Kitchen); dyn. 19,
year 3?
ostracon
Amenmesse
(Helck).
I pr.t [...]; I pr.t day
15, 17-18, 21
Černý: dyn. 19; O. DM 209 No indication
Kitchen: dyn. 19 Černý 1937b, 5, pl. 7-8; KRI IV, 217-
(Amenmesse); 219; Krauss 1997, 165-169; Helck
Krauss: year 2 Seti 2002, 103-105.
II; Helck: year 2
Amenmesse
year 2 III Smw day
25-30; year 2 IV
Smw day 1, 4, 18, ostracon
23; IV Smw day 21-
23, 24; III Smw day
28, 29-30; year 2 IV
Smw day 1-2, 6, 10,
20,, 22, 24, 25, 29-
30; epagomenal
days; year 2 I Ax.t 1-
3
Dyn. 19 (Černý); O. DM 353 no indication
Amenmesse Černý 1951, 4, pl. 4; KRI IV, 236 and
(Kitchen); year 3 237; Helck 2002, 111.
Amenmesse(?) ostracon
(Helck)
II Ax.t day 3, 26; III
Ax.t [...]
Dyn. 19 (Černý); O. DM 389 Deir el-Medina, 10-
Amenmesse Černý 1951, 14, pl. 13; KRI IV, 237 and 03-1940.
ostracon
(Kitchen); year 2 238; Helck 2002, 108 and 109. Provenance is
probably area east
158
Amenmesse(?) of Hathor temple

(Helck) precinct; cf.
I Smw day 15-18; II Bruyere, Rapport
Smw day 1-5 sur les fouilles de
Deir El Medineh
1935-1940, fasc. I,
p.11; fasc. II, pp.
151 and 152.
Dyn. 19, Seti II or P. Berlin P 14449i + P. Berlin P no indication
Siptah (Burkard, 14485d
Fischer-Elfert) Fischer-Elfert 2000, 101, 104, 106 and
107, pls. XX and XXI; Burkard-Fischer-
papyrus
Elfert 1994, 75-76, no. 104;
Lüddeckens-Kaplony-Heckel 1986,
70, no. 210.
Dyn. 19, Seti II or P. Berlin P 14485a no indication

Siptah (Burkard, Fischer-Elfert 2000, 101, 102, 106 and
Fischer-Elfert) 107, pls. XX and XXI; Burkard-Fischer- papyrus
IV Smw [...]; IV Smw Elfert 1994, 75-76, no. 104.
day 11
Dyn. 19; late years P. DM 32 Fragments
Seti II to Siptah Černý 1986, 6, pl. 22; Collier 2004, formerly in Černý's
(Collier) 118-119, 159. possession,
[...] day 10 + x; [...] together with a
Smw day 16-17; [...] number of
day 4 + x fragments of Greek
papyri and found
back by him 08-10-
papyrus 1943 according to
a note of his. He
did not remember
the provenance,
but he thought it
likely that this was
Deir el-Medina.
Now in the Griffith
Institute, Oxford?
Dyn. 19 O. Cairo CG 25528 Valley of Kings;
IV Smw day 26-30. Černý 1935b, 13, 28*, pl. XIX. Davis/Ayrton
excavations 1907-
1908; mark: House
omega 7
ostracon
(workmen's houses
between KV 17
Sety I and KV 21);
see Reeves, Valley
of the Kings, 307.
Dyn. 19 O. DM 340 no indication
IV Ax.t day 25-30; I Černý 1951, 1, pl. 1.
pr.t day 3-6; day
[...]; I pr.t day 10-13;
day 4-6; day [...]; I
pr.t day 19-25; day
ostracon
10 + x; I pr.t day 29-
30; II [...]; II pr.t day
3-8, 11-14; day 5,
16; day 10 + x; II
pr.t day 19-24, 30;
III pr.t day 1
159
Dyn. 19 O. Louvre N 0694, 3 no indication

I Smw day 5, 6, 8, Koenig 1991, 96-97. ostracon
11, 14
Dyn. 19 O. Michaelides 021 no indication
ostracon
III pr.t day 24, 25 Goedicke-Wente 1962, 21, pl. LXXVI.
Mid Dyn. 19
Mid Dyn. 19 O. Ashmolean Museum 0219 + O. O. BM EA 25289
(Demarée), BM EA 25289 probably bought by
Ramesses II Haring 2004, 216-219; Demarée Reverend W.H. Mill
(Haring) 2002a, 24, pl. 69. in Luxor in 1838,
III pr.t day 2-7 passed on to Mrs
M.E. Webb and
presented by her to
the British Museum
in 1894; note in
pencil: "from
Thebes March
1838". O.
ostracon Ashmolean
Museum 219
probably acquired
by R. Curzon,
Baron Zouche, in
Luxor in 1838, then
bought by Sir A.H.
Gardiner at
Sotheby's in 1922
and presented by
him to the
Ashmolean
Museum.
Second half Dyn.
19
Late dyn. 19 O. Michaelides 071 no indication
(Goedicke-Wente Goedicke-Wente 1962, 20, pl. LXIX;
1962), Siptah- Helck 2002, 176 and 178; KRI IV, 424-
Tausert (Kitchen); 425; Collier 2004, 119-120, 160.
year 2 Siptah
(Helck); late years ostracon
Seti II to Siptah
(Collier)
[..] Smw day 15; II
Smw day 4; II Ax.t
day 13, 14; day 5
Second half Dyn. O. Cairo CG 25796 Valley of Kings,
19 (Černý); Siptah- Černý 1935b, 91, 113*; KRI IV, 431 lower stratum east
Tausert (Kitchen); and 432; Collier 2004, 58, 61-64, 157. of KV 47 (Siptah);
year 2 Siptah Helck 2002, 175. Carnarvon/Carter
ostracon
(Helck); after year excavations 1922;
5 Siptah (Collier) mark: 409;
day 3-7, 6-20; day 3 Reeves, Valley of
+x the Kings, 331.
Second half dyn. O. Cairo CG 25507 Mark: DM;
19 (Černý); Siptah Černý 1935b, 3-4, 5*, pl. III; KRI IV, excavation of
- Tausert 427-428; Helck 2002, 179; Collier temple by Baraize
(Kitchen); year 2 2002, 84-86, 155. ostracon in 1912
Siptah (Helck);
year 5 Siptah
(Collier)
160
day 28; day 24, 25,

26; IV Ax.t day 11;
day 10 + X; day 11
Second half Dyn. O. Cairo JE 72456 obverse Valley of Kings;
19 (Černý) Černý, Notebook 106.8. Davis excavation;
ostracon
[...] pr.t day 11 + x according to
Journal d'Entree.
Seti II or Siptah P. Berlin P 14485b+c no indication
(Burkard, Fischer- Fischer-Elfert 2000, 101-104, 106 and
Elfert); mid to late 107, pls. XX and XXI; Burkard-Fischer-
years Siptah Elfert 1994, 75-76, no. 104; Collier
(Collier) 2004, 120-121, 154. papyrus
I Smw day 24, 25;
[...] day 4; [...] day
5; III Smw [...]; day
11; day 10 + x
Seti II - Siptah O. DM 10054 no indication
ostracon
[...] pr.t day 21 Grandet 2006, 59, 245.
Seti II, year 6 - O. DM 10055 no indication
ostracon
Siptah Grandet 2006, 60, 245.
Year 6 Seti II, or O. DM 904 Deir el-Medina,
Siptah Grandet 2003, 3, 77-78, 322-323. Kom du Grand
IV Smw day 1+x ostracon Puits, 18-12-1950;
mark: KGP 18 12
50.
Siptah Grandet 2003, 3, 78-79, 324. Kom du Grand
III Ax.t day 15 ostracon Puits, 25-12-1950;
mark: KGP 25 12
50.
Siptah Grandet 2003, 3-4, 79, 325. Kom du Grand
[...] Smw day 2; III ostracon Puits, 21-03-195 0
Smw day 2; IV Smw .
day 7
Year 6 Seti II, or O. DM 907 No indication,
Siptah Grandet 2003, 3-4, 80-81, 326-327. mark: 3 .
ostracon
I pr.t day 22-23; I
pr.t [...]; II pr.t day 5
Year 4 Seti II or O. DM 876 Deir el-Medina,
year 5 Seti II Grandet 2003, 2, 51-5 3, 272-273; Kom du Grand
(Grandet); year 3 Collier 2002, 104-105, 158. Puits, 17-12-1950;
Siptah or year 4 ostracon mark: ... 17.12.50.
Siptah(?) (Collier)
III pr.t [...]; IV pr.t
[...]; IV Ax.t day 26
Amenmesse - O. DM 10053 no indication
Siptah Grandet 2006, 58-59, 244.
day 24; day 20 + x; ostracon
III Smw day 28, 29-
30; day 1, 2; day x
Amenmesse, or O. DM 902 Deir el-Medina,
Seti II, or Siptah II Grandet 2003, 3, 75-76, 320. Kom du Grand
Smw day 14; II Smw ostracon Puits, 03-02-1950,
[...]; [...]Smw day 7; mark: KGP 3.2.50.
[...]Smw day 8
Seti II, or Siptah Grandet 2003, 3-4, 76-77, 321. Kom du Grand
ostracon
[...]Smw day 9-10; III Puits, 20(?)-03-
Smw day 22 1950.
161
Amenmesse, Seti O. DM 900 Deir el-Medina,

II, or Siptah Grandet 2003, 3, 73-74, 319-319. Kom du Grand
[...] pr.t day 17; III Puits, 29-12-1950,
pr.t day 20-24; IV ostracon mark: KGP 29 12
pr.t day 19-21; IV 50.
pr.t; IV pr.t day 24-
25
Seti II, or Siptah Grandet 2003, 3, 75, 319. Kom du Grand
I pr.t day 15; [...]pr.t ostracon Puits, 24-03-1950,
day 18; I pr.t day 21 mark: KGP 24 3
50.
Amenmesse O. BM EA 05635 Deir el-Medina,
(Kitchen); Birch 1868, pl. 16; Černý 1957, 23 and based on internal
Demarée: late dyn. pl. 87 no. 1; Helck 1965, 846; KRI VII, evidence
19 (Seti II-Siptah); 238-239; Demarèe 2002a, 18 and pl. (Demarée,
year 4 Merenptah 29; Helck 2002, 86-87. Ramesside
(Helck) Ostraca, 18).
ostracon
Year X+4 III pr.t day
5, 8, 13; IV pr.t day
7, 9, 13; I Smw day
18, 23; II Smw day 9,
14, 21; III Smw day
4; II Smw day 7
Siptah-Tausert O. Gardiner AG 032 no indication
(Kitchen); dyn. 19, KRI VII, 254-255; Collier 2004, 82,
year 3(?) Siptah 159; Helck 2002, 180.
(Helck); early-mid
years Siptah ostracon
(Collier)
I pr.t day 22-23; I
pr.t [...]; I pr.t [...]; II
pr.t day 5
Siptah-Tausert O. Ashmolean Museum 0037 no indication
(Kitchen); year 4 Černý 1957, 8 and pl. 26-26A no.3;
Siptah (Helck); KRI IV, 446-447; Helck 2002, 181-182;
early-mid years Collier 2004, 78-79, 154.
Siptah (Collier) ostracon
I pr.t day 10+X,
15+X, 26-27; II pr.t
day 5, 6, 7, 10, 11,
13-14
Mid/End Dyn.19
End Dyn. 19 O. Cairo CG 25785 Valley of Kings,
(Černý); Černý 1935b, 88, 110*, pl. CV; KRI IV, undisturbed
Amenmesse 234 and 235; McDowell 1999, 219 and stratum east of KV
(Kitchen); year 3 220, no. 169; Helck 2002, 112. 47 (Siptah) ("This
Amenmesse? group in small shelf
(Helck) in rock over hut ...
ostracon
IV Ax.t day 7-8, 11- Wrapped in mat");
18, 21-24 Carnarvon/Carter
excavations 1922;
mark: 405; see
Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 331.
(Černý); Černý 1935b, 88, 111*, pl. CVI; KRI IV, undisturbed
Amenmesse 235; Helck 2002, 108. stratum east of KV
ostracon
(Kitchen); year 2 47 (Siptah);
Amenmesse Carnarvon/Carter
(Helck) excavations 1922;
162
III pr.t day 28; IV pr.t mark: 391; see

day 2 Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 330.
(Černý); Černý 1935b, 89, 111*, pl. CVI; Helck valley between KV
Amenmesse 2002, 122; KRI IV, 235. 7 (Ramesses II)
(Helck, Kitchen) and KV 9
I pr.t day 5; I pr.t (Ramesses VI);
ostracon
day 10; I pr.t day Carnarvon/Carter
12; I pr.t day 24 excavations 1920-
1921; mark: 279;
see Reeves, Valley
of the Kings, 328.
(Černý); Černý 1935b, 89, 111*, pl. CVII; KRI undisturbed
Amenmesse IV, 236; Helck 2002, 131. stratum east of KV
(Kitchen); year 2 47 (Siptah);
Seti II (Helck) ostracon Carnarvon/Carter
I Smw day 20 + x; I excavations 1922;
Smw day 23-24; I mark: 390;
Smw day 24 + x Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 330.
(Černý); Černý 1935b, 89, 111*, pl. CVII; KRI lower stratum east
Amenmesse IV, 235 and 236; Helck 2002, 131. of KV 47 (Siptah);
(Kitchen); year 2 Carnarvon/Carter
ostracon
Seti II (Helck) excavations 1922;
mark: 417;
Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 331.
End dyn. 19 O. Cairo CG 25506 Valley of Kings;
(Černý); Siptah - Černý 1935b, 3, 4*, pl. III; KRI IV, 425- Davis/Ayrton
Tausert (Kitchen); 426; Wimmer 1995, 1, 42-43; Helck excavations 1905-
Amenmesse 2002, 111. 1906; mark: Np (80
(Wimmer); year 3 metres northeast of
Amenmesse (?) KV 47); Černý,
(Helck) [...] Smw day Ostraca
27; I Ax.t day 7-8 hieratiques, 3,
ostracon remarked that
there is also a
pencil mark saying
Ep 1, which would
correspond to a
findspot 80 metres
northeast of KV 29;
cf. Reeves, Valley
of the Kings, 298.
(Černý); Seti II Černý 1935b, 6-7, 10*, pl. VII; KRI IV, excavations Th.
(Kitchen); 333-334; Wimmer 1995, 1, 47-48; Davis; Reeves,
Amenmesse Helck 2002, 107-108. Valley of the Kings,
(Wimmer); year 2 292-321, with figs.
ostracon
Amenmesse 96-97 on p. 300
(Helck) and 302, showing
I pr.t day 1-8, 21-25 some of the site
designations used
by Davis.
End dyn. 19, year 3 O. BM EA 66409 Acquired by the
Merenptah or year Demarèe 2002a, 45, pls. 211-212. British Museum in
ostracon
3 Seti II (Demarée) 1979; mark: 1979
IV pr.t day 14-23 1-8 38 66409 Z.
163
End Dyn. 19
(Černý); Siptah Černý 1935b, 86, 102*, pl. CVI; Helck rubbish of Davis
(Helck); Siptah- 2002, 194; KRI IV, 426 and 427; Collier excavation east of
Tausert (Kitchen); 2002, 65-66, 157. KV 47 (Siptah);
after year 5 Siptah ostracon Carnarvon/Carter
(Collier) excavations 1922;
day 26-27 mark: 361a; see
Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 330.
(Černý); Černý 1935b, 88, 111*, pl. CVI; Helck valley between KV
Merenptah 2002, 87; KRI IV, 158 and 159. 7 (Ramesses II)
(Kitchen); year 6 and KV 9
Merenptah (Helck) (Ramesses VI) ;
ostracon
epagomenal day 3; Carnarvon/Carter
epagomenal day 4 excavations 1920-
or epagomenal day 1921; mark: 278;
5; see Reeves, Valley
I Ax.t day 1-4. of the Kings, 328.
(Černý); Siptah- Černý 1935b, 89 and 90, 112*, pl. lower stratum east
Tausert (Kitchen); CVIII; Altenmüller 1999, 13-18; of KV 47 (Siptah);
year 4 Siptah Altenmüller 1996, 1-9; Helck 2002, Carnarvon/Carter
(Altenmüller ); 192 and 193; Helck 1992, 270; Krauss ostracon excavations 1922;
year 7 Siptah- 1977, 150 and 151; KRI IV, 414 and mark: 415;
Tausert (Helck) 415; Ventura 1986, 147. Reeves, Valley of
II Ax.t day 24; IV Ax.t the Kings, 331.
day 19-22
(Černý); Siptah or Černý 1935b, 1-2, 1*, pl. I; KRI IV, 425; Davis/Ayrton
Tausert (Kitchen); Helck 2002, 164. excavations 1905-
year 1 Siptah ostracon 1906; mark: N.Tb.
(Helck) 7 (KV 47 Siptah);
III Smw [...]; III Smw Reeves, Valley of
day 12, 16, 20 the Kings, 298.
(Černý); year 3 Černý 1935b, 4, 5*, pl. V; KRI IV, 426; excavations Th.
Siptah - Tausert Helck 2002, 181; Collier 2004, 93, 155. Davis; Reeves,
(Kitchen); year 3 Valley of the Kings,
Siptah (Helck) 292-321, with figs.
ostracon
IV Ax.t day 11-14 (?) 96-97 on p. 300
and 302, showing
some of the site
designations used
by Davis.
(Černý); Siptah- Černý 1935b, 6, 10*, pl. VI; KRI IV, Davis/Ayrton
Tausert (Kitchen); 433; Helck 2002, 193; Collier 2004, excavations 1905-
possibly Siptah 113-114, 155. 1906; mark: Np?
(Helck); Siptah ostracon (80 metres
(Collier) northeast of KV
47); see Reeves,
298.
End dyn. 19 O. DM 103 Deir el-Medina,
beginning dyn. 20 Černý 1935a, 27, pl. 58. Kom de
I Ax.t day 6-8, 10-12 decombres au sud
ostracon
du village
(according to Clere
MSS.); mark:
164
23.1.30 KS (23-01-
1930)
(Černý); year 1 Černý 1935b, 16, 34*, pl. XXII; Davis/Ayrton
Siptah (Kitchen, Daressy 1927, 175-176; KRI IV, 396; excavations 1905-
Wimmer); year 1 Wimmer 1995 1, 57-58; Helck 2002, 1906; mark: X.27,
Siptah, year 2 171, 166-169. X.34 and X.43
Siptah (Helck) (northeast of KV 13
year 1 II Ax.t day 12; ostracon at base of cliffs);
III Ax.t day 12; year see Reeves, Valley
2 IV Ax.t day 28; I of the Kings, 299.
pr.t day 11; year 6 II
Smw day 6 (older
text, 1); I Smw (older
text, 2)
(Černý); Siptah- Černý 1935b, 92, 113*, pl. CVIII; KRI loose rubbish
Tausert (Kitchen); IV, 432 and 433; Collier 2004, 58, 61- before and on both
year 2 Siptah 64, 157; Helck 2002, 177 and 178. sides of KV 47
(Helck); after year (Siptah);
ostracon
5 Siptah (Collier) Carnarvon/Carter
day 2, 30; IV Smw excavations 1922;
day 1-10 mark: 429; see
Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 331.
day 28; II pr.t day 6 Černý 1935b, 20, 41*. excavations Th.
Davis; Reeves,
292-321, with figs.
ostracon
96-97 on p. 300
and 302, showing
some of the site
designations used
by Davis.
End dyn. 19 O. Cairo JE 72469 Valley of Kings.
[I] Ax.t nfr.y.t r II Ax.t Černý, Notebook 106.17. Davis excavation;
day 18; II Ax.t day according to
[...]; [...]Ax.t day 22; I Journal d'entrée.
Ax.t day [...]; [...] day
3; III Ax.t day 13, 15; ostracon
[...]Ax.t day 7; [...]
day 28; III Ax.t day
3; III Ax.t day 11; III
[...]
End dyn. 19 Ashmolean HO 679 no indication

I pr.t, day 8 Hudson 2015, 45-54. ostracon
End dyn. 19 Ashmolean HO 808 Probably Valley of

…day 16; II Ax.t day Hudson 2015, 45-54. Kings
ostracon
17
End dyn. 19 P. Berlin P 14448 no indication
Fischer-Elfert 2000, 101, 105-107, pl.
papyrus
XXII; Lüddeckens- Kaplony-Heckel
1986, 78-79, no. 209.
End dyn. 19 P. Berlin P 14449c+g no indication
Fischer-Elfert 2000, 101, 105-107, pls.
papyrus
XX and XXI; Lüddeckens- Kaplony-
Heckel 1986, 79, no. 210.
165
Beginning Dyn. 20
Beginning Dyn. 20 O. Cairo CG 25686 Probably Valley of
(Černý); year 31 Černý 1935b, 60, 83*, pl. LXXX; Helck Kings, Davis
Ramesses III 2002, 333; KRI V, 557. excavations; for
ostracon
(Helck, Kitchen) site, cf. Reeves,
day 20 Valley of the Kings,
292-321.
Beginning Dyn. 20 O. DM 320 no indication
ostracon
IV Smw day 19, 24 Černý 1939, 21, pl. 24.
Dynasty 20
Ramesses III (end O. DM 856 v° no indication
of reign) or Grandet 2003, 2, 36, 236.
Ramesses IV
(Grandet) ostracon
day 21; II Ax.t day
12; III Ax.t day 15,
24; day 16; day 18
Ramesses III O. UC 39624 no indication
(Kitchen); year 2 Černý 1957, 14 and pl. 45-45A no. 2;
Ramesses VI KRI V, 598-599; Helck 2002, 443, 445;
(Helck) www.petrie.ucl.ac.uk ostracon
day 21-27, 29; year
2 IV Smw day 1, 25-
30; III Smw day 1-4
Ramesses III O. Ashmolean Museum 0016 No indication
(Kitchen); year 3 Černý 1957, 8 and pl. 24-24A no.2;
Ramesses V KRI V, 597-598; Helck 2002, 429-430.
(Helck) V Smw day
10-11; IV Smw day
14, 24, 26-29; ostracon
epagomenal day 1;
epagomenal day 4;
I Ax.t day 3, 5, 26;
[...] day 2; II Ax.t day
6, 26, 21
Ramesses III O. DM 655 Deir el-Medina,
(Kitchen); year 5 Černý 1970, 7-8, pl. 14; KRI V, 616- Grand Puits, 13-
Ramesses IV 617; Helck 2002, 395 and 396. 03-1949 and 17-
(Helck) ostracon 03-1949
I pr.t day [...]; day
14, 18, 26-30; day
[...]; day [...]
Ramesses III O. DM 656 Deir el-Medina,
(Kitchen); year 5 Černý 1970, 8, pl. 14; KRI V, 617; Grand Puits
Ramesses IV Helck 2002, 395 and 396. ostracon
(Helck)
day 16-17; day [...]
Ramesses III or O. DM 10012 Deir el-Medina,
Ramesses IV Grandet 2006, 18-20, 197-198. Grand Puits, 16-
(Grandet) 03-1949 and 16-
II pr.t day 27; III pr.t ostracon 04-1949
day 1, 13; III Ax.t day
16-19, 21, 25-26,
28, 30
Ramesses III or O. DM 10047 No indication;
Ramesses IV Grandet 2006, 52, 238. mark: '69'
(Grandet) ostracon
day x; day 11-13,
15-16
Ramesses III or O. DM 10009 Deir el-Medina,
ostracon
Ramesses IV Grand Puits, 14-
166
(Grandet); year 31 Grandet 2006, 15-16, 193-194; Helck 03-1949; mark:

Ramesses III 2002, 328 and 330. 14.3.49 (GP)
(Helck)
III Ax.t day 27; I pr.t
day 25-29
year 3 Ramesses Černý 1935b, 23-24, 46*, pl. XXXII; Davis/Ayrton
IV (Kitchen, Helck) KRI VI, 136; Helck 2002, 389. excavations 1907-
IV pr.t day 22; IV 1908; mark: House
pr.t day 12, 13 delta 1 (workmen's
ostracon
houses between
KV 17 Seti I and
KV 21); see
Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 307.
Ramesses IV Černý 1935b, 24, 47*, pl. XXXII; KRI Davis/Jones
(Kitchen); year 5 VI, 142-143; Helck 2002, 394, 395. excavations 1908-
Ramesses IV 1909; mark: House
(Helck) ostracon J.2 (in front of
III Ax.t day 21; IV Ax.t Horemheb KV
day 7 57?); Reeves,
309.
Ramesses IV Černý 1935b, 51, 71*, pl. LXVII, Davis/Ayrton
(Kitchen); year 5 LXVIII; KRI VI, 177-178; Helck 2002, excavations 1907-
Ramesses IV, year 397, 399. 1908; mark: House
6 Ramesses IV theta 7 (workmen's
ostracon
(Helck) houses between
II Smw day 1; day KV 17 Seti I and
22; day 17; day 1; KV 21); see
day 26; day 13; day Reeves, Valley of
24 the Kings, 307.
Dyn. 20 (Černý); O. Cairo CG 25709 Probably Valley of
Ramesses III Černý 1935b, 65, 86*, pl. LXXXIII; KRI Kings, Davis
(Kitchen) V, 622. excavations; for
ostracon
day 13, 14 site, cf. Reeves,
292-321.
Dyn. 20 (Černý); O. DM 153 Deir el-Medina,
year 31 Ramesses Černý 1937a, 11 and 12, pls. 28 and Kom de
III and year 32 30; Helck 2002, 332 and 333; KRI V, decombres au sud
Ramesses III 549 and 550. du village
ostracon
(Helck, Kitchen) (according to Clere
IV pr.t day 30; IV MSS.), 19-01-
pr.t; I Smw day 4-17, 1930; mark:
21-30 19.1.30 KS
Dyn. 20 (Černý); O. DM 339 Deir el-Medina;
year 22 Ramesses Černý 1939, 26, pl. 33; Helck 2002, excavations
III (Helck); 246 and 247; KRI V, 618 and 619. Bruyere 1921-1922
Ramesses III
(Kitchen)
III Ax.t day 6, 8; IV ostracon
Ax.t day 1, 3, 5-6, 8,
21, 23, 25, 26, 28; I
pr.t day 3-7; I pr.t
day 4 + x, 11; I pr.t
[...]; I pr.t day 14
Dyn. 20, O. Michaelides 033 no indication
ostracon
Ramesses III
167
(Goedicke-Wente, Goedicke-Wente 1962, 20, pls. LXVII

Kitchen); year 2 and LXVIII; KRI V, 612-613; Helck
Ramesses IV 2002, 374 and 375.
(Helck)
[III Ax.t ] day 30; IV
Ax.t ] day 1-2, 3, 4,
5, 6-7, 9; III Ax.t ]
day x
Dyn. 20, O. Turin 57024 Valley of Queens,
Ramesses III Lopez I, 24, pl. 14-14a; KRI V, 458; excavations
(Lopez); year 14 Helck 2002, 229 and 230. Schiaparelli 1903-
Ramesses III 1905.
(Kitchen); year 13
ostracon
Ramesses III
(Helck)
III Smw day 30 (1);
IV Ax.t day 3; year
14 III Smw day 19
Dyn. 20, prob. O. Turin 57025 Valley of Queens,
Ramesses III Lopez I, 24, pl. 14-14a; Helck 2002, excavations
(Lopez); year 26 276-278, 281. Schiaparelli 1903-
Ramesses III 1905.
ostracon
(Helck)
II Ax.t day 1-8, 13-
14,18; III Ax.t day
16-18 [...] pr.t day 6
Ramesses III Lopez I, 26, pl. 19-19a; KRI V, 619- excavations
(Lopez, Kitchen); 620; Helck 2002, 261-262. Schiaparelli 1903-
ostracon
year 24 Ramesses 1905.
III (Helck)
day 3; day 1
Ramesses III Lopez I, 27, pl. 21-21a; KRI V, 620- excavations
(Lopez, Kitchen); 621; Helck 2002, 255-257. Schiaparelli 1903-
year 24 Ramesses 1905.
III (Helck) ostracon
I Ax.t day 1-6, 8, 11-
14; day 10 + x; day
18, 28; II Ax.t day 4-
8, 11-17
Dyn. 20, year 10, O. Turin N. 57035 Valley of Queens,
20 or 30 Ramesses Lopez I, 29, pl. 19-19a; KRI V, 454; excavations
III (Lopez); year 11 Helck 2002, 228. Schiaparelli 1903-
Ramesses III (?) 1905.
(Kitchen); year 11 ostracon
Ramesses III
(Helck)
year 10 + x [...] Smw
day 6-12
Dyn. 20, O. Turin N. 57125 Deir el-Medina;
Ramesses III (?) Lopez 1980, 18, pl. 58-58a; KRI V, excavations
(Lopez); 599; Helck 2002, 381. Schiaparelli 1905.
Ramesses III
ostracon
(Kitchen); year 2
Ramesses IV
(Helck)
I Smw day 5
Dyn. 20, probably O. Turin N. 57282 Deir el-Medina;
Ramesses III Lopez 1980, 64, pl. 90-90a; Helck ostracon excavations
(Lopez); year 24 2002, 264. Schiaparelli 1905.
168
Ramesses III
(Helck)
[...] Ax.t day 7
(Černý); Ramesses Černý 1935b, 14, 30*, pl. XX; KRI VI, Davis/Ayrton
IV (Kitchen, Helck) 178-179; Helck 2002, 410. excavations 1905-
1906; mark: Ep (80
ostracon
metres northeast of
KV 29); see
Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 298.
(Černý); Ramesses Černý 1935b, 15, 31*, pl. XXI); Dorn excavations Th.
IV (Kitchen); year 3 2006, 80 and 81; KRI VI, 175-177; Davis; Reeves,
Ramesses IV Helck 2002, 384, 385, 386. Valley of the Kings,
(Helck) 292-321, with figs.
ostracon
III Smw day 21 - I Ax.t 96-97 on p. 300
day 3 and 302, showing
some of the site
designations used
by Davis.
First half Dyn. 20 O. DM 160+O. Strasbourg H. 005 DeM 0160: Deir el-
(Černý); year 2 Černý 1937a, 14, pl. 36; KRI VI, 119; Medina, Kom de
Ramesses IV? Koenig 1997, 3, pls. 1 and 100; Helck decombres au sud
(Kitchen); year 1 2002, 364. du village
Ramesses IV (according to Clere
ostracon
(Helck) MSS.), 17-01-1930
[...] Smw day 1, 22- and 18-01-1930;
30; II Smw day 2-11; marks: 17.1.30 KS
II Ax.t day 2; III Ax.t; and 18.1.30.
III Ax.t day 15
First half Dyn. 20 O. DM 162 Deir el-Medina,
(Černý); year 1 Černý 1937a, 15, pl. 40; KRI V, 489; Kom de
Ramesses IV Helck 2002, 362 and 363. decombres au sud
(Helck, Kitchen) du village
day 20, 28; IV pr.t ostracon (according to Clere
day 29, 30; I Smw MSS.), 18-01-1930
and 19-01-1930;
marks: 18.1.30 KS;
19.1.30 KS; SK
(Černý); year 24 Černý 1937a, 20 and 21, pl. 50; KRI VI, Region basse au
Ramesses III 174; Helck 2002, 259. sud du temple
(Helck); Ramesses (Campagne 1931),
IV (Kitchen) IV Ax.t ostracon Region au sud du
day 9, 10 temple (Campagne
1934-1935)
(according to Clere
MSS.); mark: ST
Either Ramesses III O. IFAO 00276 Deir el-Medina;
or Ramesses IV Unpublished, Černý Notebook found together with
103.111. similar fragments
in January 1930,
ostracon KS (Kom de
decombres au sud
du village,
according to Clere
MSS)
Either Ramesses O. Qurna 625/5 Qurna; excavated
III or Ramesses IV Deir el Medine online, URL: http://dem- ostracon 1983 immediately
(Burkard) online.gwi.uni-muenchen.de
169
III pr.t day 11, 13 in front of the

German House.
Dyn. 20 O. DM 365 Deir el-Medina;
III pr.t day 1; IV pr.t Černý 1951, 7, pl. 6; Helck 1965, 'Kom de
day 1; I Smw day 1 (921). decombres au sud
du village'
ostracon
(according to Clere
MSS.), 27-01-
1930; mark:
27.1.30 KS.
Dyn. 20 O. IFAO 00252 Deir el-Medina;
II pr.t day 1-3 Unpublished; Černý Notebook belonging to the
ostracon
103.114. series found in
January 1930.
Dyn. 20 O. Michaelides 040 no indication
ostracon
III Ax.t day 21-23 Goedicke-Wente 1962, 19, pl. LIX.
Dyn. 20 O. Turin N. 57103 Deir el-Medina;
day 10 + x; day 19- Lopez 1980, 11-12, pl. 54-54a. ostracon excavations
24 Schiaparelli 1905.
Dyn. 20 O. Valley of Queens 06 Valley of Queens,
year 22 III Smw day Koenig 1988, 120-121, Document VI. found 03-1986 or
1-5; III Smw day x; ostracon 04-1986 near tomb
day 11; day 12(?), 48
16-18, 20(?), 22-23
Dyn. 20 P. Florence 10063 Presented to the
Botti 1964, 224, no. 7, pls. CVI and Egyptian Museum
CVII. papyrus of Florence by E.
Schiaparelli in
1884 or 1885.
Dyn. 20 (?) O. Berlin P 10672 Bought at Deir el-
[...] day 19; IV Smw; Deir el Medine online, URL: http://dem- Bahari by K. Sethe
ostracon
IV Smw day 20, 22- online.gwi.uni-muenchen.de
24
First half Dyn. 20
(Černý); year 6 Černý 1935b, 14, 30*, pl. XX; KRI IV, Davis/Ayrton
Ramesses III 437; Helck 2002, 401. excavations 1905-
ostracon
(Kitchen, Helck) 1906; mark: G.8;
year 6 III Ax.t day 4 see Reeves, Valley
of the Kings, 298.
First half Dyn. 20 O. Berlin P 12633 + O. DM 00169 Deir el-Medina;
(Černý); year 25 Černý 1937a, 17, pl. 44; KRI V, 500 excavations G.
Ramesses III and 501; electronic publication of O. Möller
(Helck, Kitchen) Berlin P 12633 at Deir el Medine
IV pr.t day 17-30 (O. online, see Deir el Medine online;
Berlin P 12633); I Helck 2002, 273.
Smw day 2, 4 (O. ostracon
DM 0169); day 2 + x
(O. DM 0169); I Smw
day 11-25 (O. Berlin
P 12633, O. DM
0169); I Smw day 27,
30 (O. DM 0169)
First half dyn. 20 O.DM 35 Deir el-Medina,
(Černý); Ramesses Černý 1937a, 9, pl. 15-15 A; KRI V, Kom de
III (Kitchen); year 520-521; Helck 2002, 299-300. decombres au sud
28 Ramesses III du village
ostracon
(Helck) (according to Clere
II pr.t day 1-30; III MSS.); mark: KS
pr.t day 20, 30; IV janvier 1930
pr.t day 1-3
170

(Černý); year 26 Černý 1937a, 8, pls. 15 and 15*. Kom de
Ramesses III decombres au sud
IV Ax.t day 4, 6-8, du village
ostracon
18, 22, 27; I pr.t day (according to Clere
2; IV Ax.t; I pr.t; III MSS.), 20-01-
Ax.t; IV Ax.t day 29 1930; mark:
20.1.30 KS
(Černý); year 31 Černý 1937a, 12, pls. 29 and 30; KRI Kom de
Ramesses III V, 542 and 543; Helck 2002, 322 and decombres au sud
(Helck, Kitchen) 323. du village
day 16; day 10 + x; ostracon (according to Clere
[…] Smw day 10 + x; MSS.), 17-01-1930
II Smw day 20-22, and 19-01-1930;
24-30 marks: 17.1.30 KS
and 19.1.30 KS
First half Dyn. 20 O. DM 155 no indication
(Černý); year 31 Černý 1937a, 12, pls. 31 and 32; KRI
ostracon
Ramesses III V, 544 and 545 (transcription); Helck
(Helck, Kitchen) 2002, 324 and 325.
II Ax.t day 4-30; III
Ax.t [...]; day 10
(Černý); year 31 Černý 1937a, 13, pl. 34; KRI V, 546 Kom de
Ramesses III and 547; Helck 2002, 328 and 329. decombres au sud
ostracon
IV Ax.t day 5-10, 11; (according to Clere
III Ax.t [...]; IV Ax.t MSS.), 18-01-
day 10, 12, 13, 14- 1930; mark:
24 18.1.30 KS
Ramesses III Helck 2002, 259. decombres au sud
ostracon
III Ax.t; IV Ax.t day (according to Clere
24-27,30; III Ax.t day MSS.), 19-01-
10, 20, 30; IV Ax.t 1930; mark:
[...] 19.1.30 KS
First half Dyn. 20 O. DM 166 no indication
(Černý); Ramesses Černý 1937a, 16, pl. 42; KRI VI, 173.
ostracon
III (Kitchen)
day 14; day 10 + x
(Černý); year 27 Černý 1937a, 16 and 17, pl. 43; KRI V, Kom de
Ramesses III 510 and 511; Helck 2002, 285. decombres au sud
day 30; II Ax.t day (according to Clere
12, 13, 15-18 MSS.), 08-01-
1930; marks:
8.1.30 KS; P 1230;
ostracon "P 1230" refers to
one of the pits
excavated in 1930
according to Clere
MSS.; see
Bruyere, Rapport
sur les fouilles de
Deir El Medineh
1930 , pl. I.
171

(Černý); year 31 Černý 1937a, 17 and 18, pl. 44; KRI V, Kom de
Ramesses III 544; Helck 2002, 324. decombres au sud
ostracon
day 10 + x; I Ax.t day (according to Clere
15-18; day 10 MSS.), 08-01-
1930; mark: 8.1.30
KS
IV pr.t day 13-22; IV ostracon (according to Clere
pr.t [...] MSS.), 10-01-
1930; mark:
10.1.30 KS

(Černý); year 31 Černý 1937a, 18, pls. 45 and 46; KRI Kom de
Ramesses III V, 543 and 544; Helck 2002, 323. decombres au sud
ostracon
III Smw day 11-22 (according to Clere
MSS.), 01-01-
1930; mark: KS
1.1.30
ostracon
III pr.t day 15-18 (according to Clere
MSS.), 06-01-
1930; mark: 6.1.30
KS
(Černý); year 30 Černý 1937a, 19, pl. 47; KRI V, 538 Kom de
Ramesses III and 539; Helck 2002, 320 and 321. decombres au sud
ostracon
day 13, 15; IV pr.t (according to Clere
day 17; IV [...]; I Smw MSS.), 02-01-
day 10 + x 1930; mark: KS
2.1.30
First half Dyn. 20 O. DM 325 Deir el-Medina;
(Černý); Ramesses Černý 1939, 23, pl. 27; KRI V, 614. 'Region basse au
III (Kitchen) sud du temple'
day 3; III Ax.t day 4; ostracon (according to Clere
day 10 + x MSS.), 11-01-
1931; mark: ST
11.1.31
day 22-23, 26, 27 Černý 1935b, 47, 67*, pl. LXII. Davis/Ayrton
excavations 1907-
1908; mark: House
pi 5 (workmen's
ostracon
houses between
KV 17 Seti I and
KV 21); see
Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 307.
172
Mid Dynasty 20185

Ramesses IV-VI or P. Turin Cat.1927 verso no indication
papyrus
VII Unpublished
Mid dyn. 20 P. SC 5 verso (part of the Stato Deir el Medina
Month x, day 5; year Civile)
papyrus
2, III pr.t, day 29 Demarée-Valbelle 2011, 105-109, Pl.
8-8A.
Ramesses V O. Ashmolean Museum 0011 no indication
(Kitchen); year 2 Černý 1957, 8 and pl. 25-25A no. 2;
Ramesses VI KRI VI, 248-249; Helck 2002, 445-446.
(Helck) II Smw day
ostracon
13-18; 21-28; III
Smw day 1-3, 14-18,
21-25; IV Smw day
22-28; I Ax.t day 3-6
Ramesses IV or O. DM 10019 Deir el-Medina,
Ramesses V Grandet 2006, 27-28, 208-209; Helck Grand Puits, 14-
(Grandet) 2002, 406. 03-1949 and 21-
ostracon
year 7 Ramesses 03-1949
IV (Helck)
IV Ax.t day 8-14
Ramesses IV, year O. IFAO 00384 Bought at Luxor by
1 (?); year 2 Unpublished; Černý Notebook the IFAO on 24-01-
Ramesses V 104.109; Helck 2002, 426, 427. 1933.
(Helck) ostracon
Year 1 I Ax.t day 16,
17; I Ax.t [...]; II Ax.t
[...]
Ramesses IV, year O. Ashmolean Museum 0145 No indication
1 or year 1 Unpublished; Černý Notebook 45.47;
Ramesses V Helck 2002, 441-442.
(Demarée); year 1 ostracon
Ramesses VI
(Helck)
I pr.t day 20-25
Ramesses IV, year O. Ashmolean Museum 0131 No indication
2 (Kitchen, Helck); KRI VII, 331-332; Janssen 1997, 131-
year 2 Ramesses 133; Helck 2002, 378, 379.
VI (Janssen)
II pr.t day 9-13, 28- ostracon
30; II pr.t day 5; IV
Ax.t; II pr.t day [...];
III pr.t; II pr.t day 8,
9
Ramesses IV, year O. Turin 57441 Deir el-Medina;
2 (Lopez) or year 2 Lopez 1982, 44-45, pl. 147-147a and excavations
Ramesses V 148-148a; KRI VII, 356-357; Helck Schiaparelli 1909.
(Lopez, Kitchen, 2002, 428.
ostracon
Helck)
IV [...] day X + 10;
day X + 10; day 21;
day 26
Ramesses IV, year O. DM 894 Deir el-Medina,
ostracon
2, or year 2 Grandet 2003, 3, 67-68, 305. Grand Puits, 13-
185
Some unpublished fragments of papyri held in the Bibliothèque nationale de France (P. B.N. 237, carton 3,
5, 7, 16, 22 and 27), and which cannot be connected to any specific Pharaoh, seems to date to the mid dynasty
20. These fragments of necropolis journal contain lists of absent workmen and deliveries to the community.
The outline of the text, narrow columns with few, basic information, is clear even from the poor preservation of
the fragments.
173
Ramesses V (?) 03-1950 (O. IFAO

(Grandet) inv. no. SA 00420)
[...]; II Ax.t day 25; and 15-04-1949
[...]Ax.t day 26; (O. IFAO inv. no.
[...]Ax.t day 1 SA 04302).
Ramesses IV, year O. DM 895 Deir el-Medina,
2, or year 2 Grandet 2003, 3, 68-69, 306-307. Grand Puits, 15-
Ramesses V 04-1949 (left
(Grandet) ostracon fragment), 27-02-
[...] pr.t day 20; year 1949 (right
2 III Ax.t [...]; III Ax.t fragment).
[...]
Ramesses IV-VII O. Ashmolean HO 563 no indication
(?) Hudson 2015, 45-54. ostracon
-
Mid dyn. 20 O. IFAO 00245 Deir el-Medina;
day 10 Unpublished; Černý Notebook found 18.1.30 (18-
103.113. 01-1930), KS (Kom
ostracon de decombres au
sud du village,
according to Clere
MSS)
Mid dyn. 20 O. IFAO 00250 Deir el-Medina; no
III Ax.t day 30 Unpublished; Černý Notebook precise information
103.114. on place and/or
date of find
ostracon
available.Belongin
g to the series of
fragments found in
January 1930.
Mid dyn. 20 O. IFAO 00277 Deir el-Medina;
Unpublished; Černý Notebook found 17.1.30 (17-
103.114. 01-1930), KS (Kom
ostracon de decombres au
sud du village,
according to Clere
MSS)
Second half Dyn.
20
Ramesses IV, year O. DM 10005 no indication
4 - year 5 Grandet 2006, 11-12, 187-188; Helck
Ramesses IV 2002, 476.
(Grandet); year 4
Ramesses IX -
ostracon
year 5 Ramesses
IX (Helck)
I Smw; III Smw day 8;
I Ax.t day 19; year 5
III Ax.t day 29
Ramesses IV, year O. Cairo CG 25247 Valley of Kings.
4 (Kitchen); year 4 KRI VII, 334-335; Daressy 1901, 64-
Ramesses IX 65, pl.LII; Helck 2002, 475-476;
(Helck) McDowell 1999, 212-213 no. 163 B;
II Smw day 23-25; III Spiegelberg 1902, 321-324.
ostracon
Smw day 16; year 4
III Smw day 22; year
4 III Smw day
23;year 4 IV Smw
day 3-5, 7
Second half dyn. O. Cairo CG 25564 Valley of Kings;
ostracon
20 Černý 1935b, 24, 46*, pl. XXX. Davis/Ayrton
174
II pr.t excavations 1905-

1906; mark: P.M.
(KV 53); Reeves,
297.
End Dyn. 20
(Černý); year 10 Černý 1935b, 48, 69*, pl. LXIII; KRI VI, Davis/Ayrton
Ramesses IX 659; Helck 2002, 499-501. excavations 1905-
(Kitchen, Helck) ostracon 1906; mark: PM
I Smw day [ ... ]; II (KV 53); see
Smw day 1, 4, 7, 11, Reeves, Valley of
13, 15-16, 19, 22 the Kings, 297.
(Černý); year 10 Černý 1935b, 48, 69*, pl. LXV; Helck very probably
Ramesses IX 2002, 500-501. excavations Th.
(Helck) Davis; mark: beta;
I + x Smw day 8; II Reeves, Valley of
Smw day 16 the Kings, 292-
ostracon
321, with figs. 96-
97 on p. 300 and
302, showing some
of the site
designations used
by Davis.
IV pr.t day 10 + X; Černý 1935b, 15, 32*, pl. XXII. Davis/Ayrton
IV pr.t day 20 + X; I excavations 1905-
Smw day 4, 5 ostracon 1906; mark: P.M.
(KV 53); see
Reeves, Valley of
the Kings, 297.
End Dyn. 20 P. Turin frgt. Delta Presumably
Unpublished, Černý Notebook 152.4. acquired by the
government of
Piedmont for the
Turin museum
from Bernardino
papyrus
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
End Dyn. 20 or
beginning Dyn. 21
-Year 6 P. Turin 2089 Presumably
Unpublished; Černý MSS.3.628. acquired by the
government of
Piedmont for the
Turin museum
from Bernardino
papyrus
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
-Year 6 O. Cairo JE 49557 Valley of Kings.
I Ax.t 16 Černý Notebook 101.21. ostracon According to Černý
Nb 101.21 and
175
additional data
collected during a
survey visit in
February 2003 by
R.J. Demarée and
J. Toivari.
-Year 12 O. Ashmolean Museum 0281 No indication
ostracon
III Ax.t [...] Unpublished; Černý Notebook 81.3.
-Year 31 O. DM 10023 Deir el-Medina,
IV pr.t [...]; IV pr.t day Grandet 2006, 31, 212. Grand Puits, 17-
ostracon
12, 14 03-1949; mark:
17.3.49 (GP)
- Ashmolean Museum 0048 No indication
Day 20+X; day 24- Černý 1957, 8 and pl.26-26A no. 1. ostracon
28; day 29; IV Smw
- O. Ashmolean Museum 0124 No indication
III Smw day 12; I Ax.t Černý 1957, 20, pl. 68-68A no. 4.
ostracon
day 22; IV Smw day
10
II Ax.t day 5-6, 11- Unpublished; Černý Notebook 31.27.
ostracon
12; II Ax.t day 11+x;
[...]Ax.t day 2
I pr.t day 17-23; I Unpublished; Černý Notebook 31.72. ostracon
Smw [...]
- O. Cairo CG 25245 Valley of Kings.
II pr.t day 30; II pr.t Daressy 1901, 63-64, pl LI.
day [...]; III pr.t day
25; III pr.t day [...]; ostracon
IV pr.t day [...];day
20; [...]Smw day 1; I
Smw day 5, 9
II Ax.t day 14, 15; Daressy 1901, 68; Černý 1927a, 186
year 5 IV Smw day note 1; Donker van Heel 1992, 20; ostracon
1; IV Smw [...];day McDowell 1999, 96-97 no. 67.
10+x
- O. Cairo CG 25298 Valley of Kings,
[...] Ax.t day 4-12 Daressy 1901, 76. excavations V.
Loret 1899, t omb
ostracon KV 37. Piacentini,
Orsenigo, La Valle
dei Re riscoperta,
282, note 10.
[...] day 8; day 11; II Daressy 1901, 77, pl. LVIII; a revised
ostracon
pr.t day 13; IV pr.t transcription by Černý, Notebook
day 6 101.41.
[...] pr.t day 3; III pr.t Daressy 1901, 77-78; Černý 1973a, ostracon
day 10 93.
IV pr.t day 7, 16, 20, Černý 1970, 18, pl. 28. found on the slope
24; day [...]; day 29; ostracon of Qurnet Murai,
I Smw day 3; [...]Smw 16-03-1940
day 3
- O. DM 00712 Frgts. 1 and 3: Deir
IV Smw day 30; I Ax.t Grandet 2000, 5, 16, 111. ostracon el-Medina, Grand
day 5, 13; day 25; Puits, 12-04-1949,
176
[...]Ax.t day 10; [...] frgt. 2: Deir el-

Ax.t day 15, 16, 24; Medina, Grand
day [...] Puits, 13-03-1949.
II Smw day 1; year 8 I Grandet 2000, 6, 44, 158. ostracon Kom du Grand
Smw day 30 Puits, 28-12-1950.
III pr.t day 21; III pr.t Grandet 2000, 6, 46, 161. Grand Puits, 12-
ostracon
day 23; III pr.t day 04-1949, mark:
24 12.4.49 (GP).
- O. DM 896 Donated by A. H.
III pr.t [...] (1); III pr.t Grandet 2003, 3, 69, 308. ostracon Gardiner to the
day 6; III pr.t day 7 IFAO.
- O. DM 897 Donated by A. H.
III Ax.t [...]; III Ax.t Grandet 2003, 3, 69, 309. ostracon Gardiner to the
day 30 IFAO.
IV Ax.t day 5-7 Grandet 2006, 15, 192. ostracon Kôm du grand
puits, 14-12-1950
day 9, 13, 10, 16- Grandet 2006, 22-23, 202-203. ostracon
17, 21-22; day 4
day 8-19, 21-26; Grandet 2006, 33-34, 216-217. Grand Puits, 27-
ostracon
day 20 + x; day 23 02-1949; mark:
+x 27.2.49 (GP)
day 13-14; day 10 + Grandet 2006, 53-54, 240. Grand Puits, 13-
ostracon
x; day 17; day 9; 03-1949
day x
- O. IFAO 00009 Seen at M. Aboul
III pr.t day 1-5; IV Unpublished; Černý Notebook 102.10. Haggag (Mohamed
pr.t day 1-12; I Smw ostracon Abou el-Haggag),
day 1-5 16.4.33 (16-04-
1933)
- O. UC 31937 no indication
day 10 + x; day 17- www.petrie.ucl.ac.uk
26; day 5-7; [...] II ostracon
Ax.t day 13; [...] day
16
- P. Turin [unnumbered 3] Presumably
day 10 + x Unpublished; Černý Notebook 17.20. acquired by the
government of
Piedmont for the
Turin museum
from Bernardino
papyrus
Drovetti in 1823
(see e.g. S. Curto,
Storia del Museo
Egizio di Torino,
45).
- O. Ashmolean Museum 0117 no indication
ostracon
Černý 1957, 15 and pl. 50-50A no. 3.
- P. Turin [unnumbered 4] Presumably
Unpublished; Černý MSS.3.629. acquired by the
government of
papyrus
Piedmont for the
Turin museum from
Bernardino Drovetti
177
in 1823 (see e.g. S.

Curto, Storia del
Museo Egizio di
Torino, 2nd ed.,
Turin 1976, 45).
178
6. The study of the journals

See separate Appendix
In this chapter/appendix, the relevant documents, both on papyri and ostraca, belonging
to the first part of the list (documents dated with certainty), will be investigated. Photos
(when available) or facsimiles, together with a transcription from hieratic to hieroglyphic
and a translation in English will be provided. The purpose of the present work is not a
philological study and therefore no transliterations or notes to the translations are
provided. The aim is to create a workable and searchable tool as an indispensable
service to the reader, so he/she can quickly check any query or text passage without
having to load his/her desk with a pile of publications.
Much effort was invested in the production of this comprehensive chapter, even if
previous publications, including commentary and translations, offered mainly by Allam
1973, Kitchen (Ramesside Inscriptions Translated & Annotated: Translations = RITA and
Ramesside Inscriptions Translated & Annotated: Notes & Comments = RITANC), and
Helck 2002 were often available. In order to have easy access to the various texts to be
analyzed, we needed to be able to consult the documents - photos, transcriptions and
translations - quickly. Constantly looking for the different translations in publications was
not convenient. Many existing translations of texts are in fact often fragmentary or
selective (only the recto or the verso of the document, or only some columns, considered
useful for the purpose of the author). It was necessary to make transcriptions (in
VisualGlyph) and translations in order to be able to appreciate the material in its entirety.
Also, some of the texts were hitherto completely unpublished.
The Deir el-Medina database is definitely a much appreciated tool, which allows to
search according to preferred keywords, nonetheless these do not cover all possible
search terms that one might want and of course in the end one always has to refer to
and consult a publication.
For each document in the appendix (listed in chronological order) is indicated:
 Name of document
 Date written in the document
 Photo or facsimile (when available)
 A clear transcription (made in VisualGlyph 2.0)
 A translation
 The indication of the provenance
 The principal bibliography
179
PART III
180
7. Discussion
7.1 The concept of a Necropolis journal
In view of the definition of an events journal given above186, the criteria formulated in
Chapter 5.1., and our open and preliminary list in Chapter 5.2, we may conclude that the
daily notes on activities kept by the scribe of the Necropolis can be considered as such.
The concept of a journal did exist in the mind of the scribes of Deir el-Medina. The day-
to-day notation in these documents is indeed mostly respected, the entries are ordered
following calendrical notations, not necessarily consecutive, but showing that the
intention was that of recording a series of daily activities concerning the artisan
community of Deir el-Medina and their work in the tomb of Pharaoh. An events journal
may contain notes on deliveries, for example the distribution of grain rations, but in these
cases only the activity of the distribution is recorded187.
The style in which these documents are drawn up is generally simple, brief and concise,
with basic grammatical constructions, and recurrent formulas and terms. Immediately
after the date (year, month and day), frequently follows a verbal construction (usually a
narrative infinitive) stressing the event, the action which is considered relevant to record,
at the beginning of the sentence.
We need to stress once again that classifying a document as belonging exclusively
to the genre of journal or not is extremely difficult. The division between journal/not
journal is not a clear-cut line and, above all, is partly subjective and debatable. What is
more, sometimes we are dealing with only a fragment of text and the decision is then
inevitably subjective. Finally, we should not forget that identifying genres in Egyptian
texts is an unsolved long vexing problem188 (see Chapter 4.1). Even if we are stating that
there was a Necropolis journal, that it existed as a concept, this does not mean that it
was a fixed genre. “The system of genre is not an aggregate of fixed categories, but can
be understood through relations between different types of texts. Genres are fluid and
flexible189”. As we have seen, some texts can be clearly defined, like letters, oracles,
oaths, while others like accounts, lists and journals, are less clearly identifiable (see
chapter 5, Criteria). All these texts overlap in content and it is necessary to keep in mind
186
A series of day-by-day records of daily activities of the Necropolis including details about work,
supplies and administrative matters, but also including notes on official important events like the
death of the sovereign.
187
See Mandeville 2014.
188
189
181
both their mutual belonging and their diversity in order to comprehend the concept of
Necropolis journal in Deir el-Medina. Knowing the differences does not prevent us from
undertaking a broader study in order to understand that at Deir el-Medina the concept of
journal existed, even if the dividing line between accounts journal and events journal was
not fixed and the Egyptian scribes most probably did not bother to make a sharp division.
The same argument applies to the subtypes A-D we try to define further in 7.3.a. As it
will be stressed, this is only for study reasons, in order to be able to handle the extremely
large amount of documents, and NOT with the intention to produce strict classifications.
Concerning the audience of the day-books, the matter intertwines with the debate
concerning the opposition between documents written on ostraca and those written on
papyrus, and the question of whether the ostraca were actually official documents or
merely temporary drafts to store information, which would then be transferred in more
presentable form onto papyrus. It is not our intention, however, to investigate whether
the ostraca were drafts or not (we think that one should not regard every ostracon as a
draft, and consider instead a number of uses of ostraca texts, that of serving as a drafts
being only one of these. See note 48). Understanding for what purpose and for whom
they were written is the main goal, even if this again is a debated matter190. Moreover,
the difference in chronological distribution apparently seen between ostraca and papyri
could be due to find circumstances, the different conditions under which these records
have been found and preserved, and the publication record, especially if we consider the
last “re-discoveries” in the archives of the Turin Museum (see Chapter 2.3).
Leaving thus aside the long-vexing debate ‘ostraca vs papyrus’, we must attempt to
understand for whom the journals were written, since such a variety of events and
activities was obviously considered important to document and therefore to be kept. Who
was the intended readership of the day-books?
7.2 Readership of the day-books
A text, any text, can be written for different purposes: silent reading, public reading,
teaching, copy, consultation, checking, inventory, accounts, archiving, etc. According to
Eyre191, “The texts (i.e. day-books)…belong to the realm of process, not record. […] The
writing of a document can often be an end in itself and not a means to an end”. It is true
that writing in ancient Egypt meant power and control: pen, palette and papyrus were
190
See Allam 1968, Donker van Heel-Haring 2003, Dorn 2011 and Haring “Material matters.
Documentary Papyri and Ostraca in Late Ramesside Thebes” forthcoming, for a general view.
191
Eyre 2013, 251-252.
182
themselves symbols of authority and writing was itself a sign of authority. Nonetheless,
it is hard to see bureaucracy only as a process and not as a record and to believe that a
journal was simply used to “control people at work” and not intended to be submitted to
anyone. In support of this, we can consider i.a. five journal texts: the three unnumbered
and unpublished fragments of papyri in Turin held in “Cartella F 495” (most probably last
years of Ramesses III), in “Cartella F103” (year 10, 12 of Ramesses IX), and in “Cartella
F 245, verso” (year 5 of either Ramesses VI or a successor. On the recto a plan of the
necropolis is present), a fragment, also in Turin, with the provisional number 6290 and
probably belonging to P. Turin 1900 + P. Turin 2048 + P. Turin 2088 + P. Turin 2093 +
P. Turin 2097 + P. Turin 2101 of Ramesses IX, and finally P. Turin Cat. 1880, recto III,
20 (the well-known “Strike Papyrus” of Ramesses III). On the five documents, we see a
control mark (appearing twice in Cartella F 245 and in red before dates also in red in
Cartella F 495) indicated as a large man with hand to mouth (snhi = to check, to
192
verify ) at the right of the column.
A different control mark is found on a journal fragment in “Cartella F 101” (also

unnumbered, unpublished and in Turin). The papyrus is dated to year 13 of Ramesses
IX and in front of a column there is an abbreviation for the sign smtr , also meaning
“examined, checked” (see Helck 1974, 62: “prüfen”). Further, on Papyrus Turin
1932+1939, an account journal of the time of Ramesses IX (year 19) containing a list of
grain rations distribution, in front of all names more than one type of control mark is
present (ticks and dots), again proving that documents were read and consulted.
192
See Helck 1974, 62 and 131.
183
Illustration with examples of check or control marks
Dots and other check marks snhi smtr

(Papyrus Turin 1932+1939) (Turin Provv. 6290) (Turin ‘Cartella F 101’)
The presence of such control marks as traces of the act of accessing and retrieving
information in the material, suggests that the scribes did not write simply for the sake of
writing, but instead these texts, at least some of them, were somehow used and
“checked”.
Based on their layout, can the intended readership of the so-called Necropolis journals
be determined? In order to do this, we can first look at the photos or facsimiles available
for the documents, both ostraca and papyri, and consider the layout of their columns or
sections. The way the content of the notes is organised may indeed help us understand
if they were written for someone else to check, and perhaps give us information about
the use of such documents. Examining how the records are arranged can tell us if they
were meant for internal use or instead to be submitted to a higher authority or simply to
be audited. We can indeed imagine that, if a document was written to be submitted to
someone, the scribe would try to write it and present it in order: neat and clear, with the
intention of facilitating its reading. If, on the other hand, the document shows a sloppy
appearance or the notes are written randomly on the page and occupy all the available
small spaces, it is quite improbable that such a document would end up in the hands of
someone else to be checked.
To this end, we will make use of a few examples, since it would be impossible to examine
every single document. Instead of a mere list of documents labelled “most likely to be
184
checked by someone” and “most likely for internal use”, we will consider a number of
documents particularly interesting for their features.
Looking at the available inventory of dated documents, we can identify two main
types according to their layout: on the one hand, sloppy and careless documents that
seem to have been hastily written and on the other hand, a group of more precise day-
books which are well-organised and written in neat and compact business-like
handwriting.
Whether this distinction was deliberate is a possibility we will investigate in the following
paragraphs (7.1.a and 7.1.b). The uncertainty about the purpose of the administrative
texts poses an impediment to the understanding of their readership. If the documents
were supposed to be submitted to officials, we would expect to find these documents, or
their copy, in the “office” of the superior authority, but the archaeology so far shows us
that all journals were found in the place where they were produced, and therefore never
sent to a central administration. Yet, we can imagine that copies or extracts were sent
although those documents have not yet been found.
We have evidence of correspondence between the administrators of the Tomb and

higher dignitaries, first of all the man who founded the institution, the vizier193. References
to documents being sent to him are present (e.g. in P. DM 28194, a letter in which the
vizier Neferronpet several times mentions documents (r-a-sS.w) and tells the foremen to
send him every memorandum (sxA) regarding the Place of Pharaoh, and in O. Cairo CG
25831 recto 6195, a letter to the vizier Hori by a guardian who writes that he is working all
according to the Dri r sS n = “written instructions of…”, implying that sS.w were sent), as
well as documents being given to officials (Giornale of Ramesses X, recto 5, 15-
16196:…di.t tA afd.t pa r-a-sS.w = “…giving the box…(with) the documents (to) the deputy”).
Documents were also requested from local administrators, indicating that information
kept in the records of the village administration could be asked for (Giornale 17-B, recto
9, 1-5, dated to Ramesses IX). Here in fact, the royal butler asks the chief workman
Nekhemmut to see the state of attendance at the Tomb. Even if we learn from the text
that the chief workman was not able to give the information required because “the two
registers197 are not present”, this document informs us on occasional control exercised
193
The scribe Hori is omnipresent is many documents dated to the second half of the 20th Dynasty
(Černý 1973a, 216-218). He is called ‘scribe Hori of the Tomb’, but he is not a member of the
workforce. He is deeply involved in all matters concerning rations and supplies. Could he be the
local representative of the vizier?
194
Černý 1986, 5, pls. 18-19a.
195
KRI IV 361, 6.
196
P. Turin 1898 + P. Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P. Turin 2094.
197
Probably referring to the right and left side of the gang.
185
by the external administration. A few references point to documents arriving from (O.
Cairo CG 25308 and O. Cairo CG 25515) or sent by the vizier (P. Louvre N 3169).
Although the idea that some administrative documents may have been prepared
to be presented to a superior cannot be proven, it seems more than likely that they were
written to inform authorities about events related to the community of tomb builders and
their progress of work. We will therefore proceed to investigate this possibility according
to the format and layout of the documents.
7.2.a Day-books for internal use?
Before discussing the first group of documents, the carelessly written ones with the texts
occupying every blank space in random order, containing many erasures, not well-
organised and confusing, we must question ourselves: are we sure that an ostracon, a
piece of stone or pottery, would have been handed over as an official document? It
seems unlikely and therefore, in our opinion, the two writing materials (papyrus and
ostracon) probably had different functions. We can indeed imagine that no ostracon,
even the most perfectly written one, would have been submitted to a higher authority,
while some papyri, that could be rolled up and sealed as a guarantee that the document
was authentic, could have been delivered for audit. Although both documents are
consistent with what we call “journal”, we can assume that the ostraca were most
probably meant for internal use; in view of their dimensions alone it is very unlikely to
imagine that the large absence ostraca from the reign of Amenmesse found in the Valley
of the Kings would be carried around and delivered to someone (see note 235).
As further proof for the internal use of some ostraca versus the possible official one of
the papyri, we may point out that on many ostraca the dates are not always written at
the beginning of the line, i.e. aligned one under the other. They often follow each other
in chain, while in the papyri the main trend is that each line begins with a new date. This
could be due to a more formal use of the papyrus document, since, aligning the dates at
the right edge of the pages of the document would have facilitated finding or checking
and retrieving the necessary information.
As we can see from several ostraca (but also some papyri) which were reused after
many years, they were nonetheless not discarded and probably stored somewhere198.
198
Here follow some examples which prove that they were not discarded but rather reused: O.
Cairo 25504 years 7 and 8 under Merenptah, O. Turin N. 57072 records notes from three different
years, 28, 29 and 30 of Ramesses III, to mention two ostraca, and P.Turin 2070/154 years 2 and
7 under Ramesses VII, P. Turin 1881 + P. Turin 2080 + P. Turin 2092 years 5, 6, 7, 8 and 18
under Ramesses IX, P. Turin 1895 + P. Turin 2006 year 12 and 14 under Ramesses XI to mention
some papyri. For the possibility of the existence of archives of ostraca, see Allam 1968, 124-128
and here note 53.
186
In order to imagine an internal use of some documents, we can look at their layout and
how some of them were written. Here some examples of those documents which most
probably were not intended to end up in the hands of someone else, since their level of
carelessness and inaccuracy definitely does not meet the expectations of an official
document.
Ostracon Ashmolean Museum 7, of the 18th Dynasty, concerns the work done
by stoneworkers. It has on both recto and verso a large spXr “copied” over the text. We
suggest therefore that this document was probably used as a draft and then discarded
(or better put back into a supposed “archive”; why otherwise bother to write that it was
copied?) after it had been copied, most likely onto a more official document. This
document was thus obviously not handed in and only used internally.
Ostracon Cairo 25779, Ostracon Cairo 25783, and Ostracon DM 898 (d.199
Amenmesse), list names of workmen present or absent, sometimes with a reason
specified. In the first two examples, the scribe tries to cover all possible space on the
ostracon, on the last one, a line is completely erased by the scribe (it was a mistake) and
another one is squeezed in between two lines in smaller writing. We cannot believe that
such a document was meant to be checked or considered to be an official document.
Another example is the well-known papyrus Turin Cat. 1880 (d. Ramesses III), the
“Strike Papyrus”. The scribe wrote the text columns scattered over the pages and without
a clear order in the notes. Most probably this document was not meant to be audited, but
instead, contained a collection of private notes.
On Ostracon Turin 57031 (d. Ramesses III), with notes concerning the
interrogation of a workman Nxw-m-Mw.t, the use of lamps, the work on the eastern
treasury-room and work in two princes' tombs, the scribe also found it necessary to write
some information perpendicular, on the edge of the ostracon, even though there was still
space to write in the main area.
The verso B of Ostracon IFAO 1255 + Ostracon Varille 39, concerning the
passing of the guard posts by the work gang with their grain rations under Ramesses III,
bears part of the Teaching of Amennakht200. This may be proof of the fact that the
document was for internal use.
Further, there are several documents on whose recto or verso we find a drawing,
such as Papyrus Turin 1885 (d. Ramesses VI), which shows on the recto the plan of
the royal tomb of Ramesses IV, while on the verso different texts are written (account of
199
Here and following, d. plus the name of the king, indicates “dated”.
200
There are not so many ostraca with both literary and administrative/journal text, but there are
some (i.a. O. Cairo 25517 -Sethi II-, O. MMA 14.6.216 -Ramesses IV-, and O. Ashmolean
Museum 0302+O. Ashmolean Museum 0342 verso -Ramesses VI-). What does that mean for the
“status” of these texts? Are they drafts or just quick notes?
187
measuring a royal tomb; a payment made; division of goods belonging to the scribe Imn-
nxt among his children and his wife; delivery of grain rations; the presence of the work
gang, etc.). The verso of Ostracon Cairo CG 25297 (d. Ramesses VII) shows a
cartouche with the name of the pharaoh written in hieroglyphs in red ink and the verso
of O. Leningrad 2973 (d. Ramesses IX), a drawing of a royal skirt. In both cases the
recto is used to write day-to-day journals.
Papyrus Turin CGT 54021 (d. Ramesses IX) bears on its verso a ritual text, a
calendar of festivals, with lists of offerings, while on its recto, accounts dealing with
emmer wheat, grain and donkey hire. The ritual text concerns the Calendar of the
Festivals of Montu and is unrelated to Necropolis matters on the recto.
The question is now if besides observing that the documents quoted above were
probably intended for internal use only, we can also determine for what purpose they
were written. Since their level of carelessness and inaccuracy does not seem to
correspond to the requirements of an official document, we have to ask ourselves for
whom the scribe wrote them. What if he simply needed those documents as an aide
memoire during the visit of high officials to the Tomb? The vizier indeed paid periodical
visits to ‘receive the work’ (Ssp bAk.w), possibly meaning to check the progress of the
project and supervise the ongoing work201. The scribe would eventually be the one who,
having the ostraca or the papyri as a sort of memorandum, would report to the vizier the
progress of the work, the problems and all related matters.
7.2.b Day-books to be audited?
Let us now focus on few examples of the other type of documents, those that from their
layout seem to have been written in such a neat way, probably meant to be handed in
and consulted by a local higher authority or ultimately by the highest superior of the
Tomb, i.e. the vizier. We have proof that journals were audited (see beginning Chapter
7.2). To prove that it was done by a superior or the vizier remains difficult, but likely (see
Chapter 7.2 for evidence of correspondence between the administrators of the Tomb
and Theban dignitaries, and the Duties of the Vizier where it is said that every leader of
any institution or the like in the country should report to the vizier - so we assume that it
could be the same for the Tomb202).
201
We have records of his visits or arrival of letters with instructions (O. Ashmolean Museum 0011,
0115, 0118, 0270; O. Cairo CG 25537, 25538; O. Turin 57032, 57047, to mention just a few). For
a more general outline of visits to the Necropolis by dignitaries, see Janssen 1997, 147-173.
202
Duties of the vizier R. 3-4, 15-19 see Van den Boorn 1988, 42-43, 133, 172.
188
We have to consider that among the examples discussed below, only of P. Berlin 23300
and 23301 we know the find spot (Deir el-Medina), while for the others we do not know
exactly where they have been found. We can suppose that if a document was found in
the village, it was never sent to the central administration, unless we want to suggest
that what was sent was a copy or an extract.
P. Berlin 23300 and 23301, dating to the reign of Merenptah, report on the king
founding a new offering to a god, inspection of guard posts, and the “passing of the
walls”. The style employed by the scribe on the recto is almost calligraphic and may
indicate that the text had more than just administrative relevance. A more rapid
documentary hand is seen on the verso.
P. Turin 1949+1946 (d. Ramesses III) records days of inactivity and work,
deliveries of supplies, and the announcement by chief policeman MnTw-ms of the death
of Ramesses III and the accession to the throne by Ramesses IV. The notes are written
in a neat, clear, professional hand. See instead Ostracon DM 39+174 covering the same
days but probably used for a different purpose, further p. 194-195.
The sections of Giornale year 17 and P. Milan E 0.9.40127 + P. Turin fragment
gamma + P. Turin 2074 (work and inactivity of the work gang, deliveries of fish and
firewood, collecting and redistributing copper tools and special events) are precise and
ordered, written in a professional hand, clear, and neat.
These papyri all bear the features of documents intended for an archive, but were
they ever delivered to a higher administration?
From the examples considered, both “day-books for internal use” and “day-books to be
audited”, it appears that the question “Who was the intended readership of the day-
books?” cannot be definitively answered. It is impossible to trace a real and clear-cut
distinction and place the documents into categories affirming with certainty that some
journals were for internal use and others were meant for a superior. We lack evidence
and can only guess and wait until new findings might throw light on the issue. Surely, we
can conclude that some documents, given their nature (papyri, therefore easily sealable
and deliverable to a higher authority), the clarity with which they were written, the dates
listed (written in one flow) and their contents, seem to have been submitted to (or at least
checked by) someone other than the scribe himself and entered the archives of the
village, while others were written and remained documents for an internal use in the
village.
Journals had different audiences and different purposes.
189
7.3 Different types of journal
As we have seen above in 7.1, Necropolis journal is not a fixed type of document. Within
the concept of journal fall many “faces” (i.e. types). We can therefore try to identify
smaller subgroups of this broad genre. For purposes of study only, one could make note
of and list the differences amongst the types of journals. The reader should be aware
that our intention is not to make a strict classification, our intention is to put some order
into the enormous amount of texts.
To keep things manageable we will only consider the corpus of Necropolis journal
documents dated with certainty, studied in the Appendix, in order to answer our next
research question: How many types of journal can we identify?
The classification of the documents into typology subgroups will be made according to
the type of information and content of the texts. Each subgroup will receive a name and
its features will be described203.
Before proceeding, we should first realize that there are different texts of Necropolis
journal which cover the same dates. Here are a few examples:
 O. Turin 57031 and O. Glasgow D.1925.67 both cover year 25 of Ramesses III,
II pr.t day 1-8. The first records the interrogation of Nxw-m-Mw.t, the use of lamps,
and the work in progress in the Valley of Queens, while the second is a duty
roster and a list of deliveries of various staples. The two documents are not
written by the same scribe204.
O. Turin 57031 recto O. Glasgow D.1925.67 recto
1-
7- Month II of pr.t, day 1, day 2, day 3, 2- 1- Year 25, month II of pr.t, day 1, ¡y-
day 4, day 5 they were absent nfr. Receiving from ¢nsw-ms x dbn of
8- Month II of pr.t, day 6, they worked. fish.
Lamps: 4, remaining… 3- 2- Right (side), month II of pr.t, day 2,
9- Day 7, lamps: 4. Of Wsr-mAa.t-Ra Mry- ¢a-m-nwn.
Imn
203 Again, only the documents of the corpus dated with certainty will be considered here.
204
See Donker van Heel-Haring 2003, 68.
190
10- Terminating the work on eastern 4- 3- Month II of pr.t, day 3, Nfr-Htp.

treasury of the charioteer Receiving as the work of Imn-xa 380
11- Day 8, work in the tomb of the dbn of fish.
12- Charioteer (Praherwenemef). 5- 4- Month II of pr.t, day 4, KAsA. 1 ps-jar,
right (side). Month II of pr.t, day 5, ¢a-
m-Was.t. 1 ps-jar, left (side).
5- Month II of pr.t, day 6, Nxt-mnw.
Month II of
pr.t, day 7, RSw-ptr=f. Month II of pr.t,
day 8, Imn-m-Ip.t.
6- 1 ps-jar, right (side). 1 portion of
dates, left (side).
These two sources, partly covering the same dates, are both considered to be “journals”,
and this strongly suggests that indeed there was more than one type of such record.
They record two different kinds of data: in the overlapping days, O. Turin 57031 focuses
on the absence and presence of the gang at work, together with the number of lamps
used, while O. Glasgow D.1925.67 records deliveries of various types.
 O. Cairo 25530; O. IFAO 1255 + O. Varille 39, Turin Cat. 1880 “Strike papyrus”
and O. Brussel E.7359 verso, all record “the passing of the guard posts” by the
gang because of the problems with their grain rations and cover year 29 of
Ramesses III, month II of pr.t.
O. Cairo O. IFAO 1255 + O. Varille 39 Turin Cat. 1880 (strike papyrus) O. Brussel
25530 recto E.7359 verso (on
recto recto King
Ramesses III
smiting his
enemies)
O. IFAO 1255+ O. Varille 39 RECTO Col. I
1- Year 29, Col. I
month II of 1- [Month II of pr.t, day 10, they] 1- Year 29, month II of pr.t, day 1- Month II of pr.t,
pr.t, day 10, passed the guard-post because 10. This day passing the 5 walls day 15, they did
in this day of their ration, of the Necropolis by the gang not work…
2- the gang 2- near the causeway of (king 2- saying: “we are hungry; 18 2- Month II of pr.t,
passes the Mn-xpr-Ra). Month II of pr.t, day days have elapsed in the month”. day 16, the
guard posts 11, likewise. And they sat down same…
because 3- Month II of pr.t, day 12, they 3- at the rear of the mansion of
passed (again the walls) and Mn-xpr-Ra. Arrival of the scribe of
191
3- of their they reached the temple of the the secret(?) tomb, the 2 foremen, 3- Year 29, month
grain king of Upper and Lower Egypt the 2 deputies, II of pr.t, day
rations. Day Wsr-mAa.t-Ra ¤tp.n-Ra. 4- and the 2 AT.w-officers. Calling 17(?)…
11, 4- The chief of police MnTw- to them saying: “come in! They 4-Holding back the
likewise. [ms]…to the gang: “Stop what swore great oaths gardeners…
4- Month II you are doing! 5- (saying): “may you (?) come! 5- Month II of pr.t,
of pr.t, day 5- Go back!” [Month II of pr.t, We have matter for Pharaoh day…
13, the day 1]3, likewise. They took l.p.h.”. Spending the day in this Col. II
chief of the their place, spending the night in the 1-…
police… 6- women. He made an oath to Necropolis. 2-…
5-…to the lord l.p.h., not to... ...then he 6- Year 29, month II of pr.t, day 3-…
provide came back to see them 11. They passed again. Reaching 4- The gang was
their… saying:… the gate of the southern boundary on the back of the
7- but they did not go. …PA-aA-X.t of the mansion of Wsr-mAa.t-Ra temple…
made them bring 9 goats…and ¤tp.n-Ra. 5- Wsr-mAa.t-Ra
1600 fish(?) 7- Year 29, month II of pr.t, day ¤tp.n-Ra
8- List of what came to them (in) 12. Reaching the mansion of Wsr- (Ramesses II)…
month II of pr.t, day 15:…10 mAa.t-Ra ¤tp.n-Ra, spending the 6-…
sacks of grain. night in disorder(?) in its gate.
Entering into its interior…
VERSO
Col. Ia
Year 29, month II of pr.t, day 11,
brought by the scribe Pn-¦A-wr.t of
the Tomb: sab-cakes 28,
Col. III
1- Year 29, month II of pr.t, day
10. Passing the 5 walls of the
Necropolis by the entire crew.
Reaching the innermost
chamber(?) of the mansion of
Pharaoh. Starting(?) by the 3
chiefs, the deputy and the 2 AT.w-
officers. Finding them seated at
the rear of the mansion of Mn-xpr-
Ra in the outer road of year 29,
month II of pr.t, day…
24- Year 29, month II of pr.t, day
17. Giving the rations of the
month II….
192
In this example, other than in the previous ones dealing with two different kind of texts
(i.e. recording two different kinds of data), the four documents report almost the same
information about an important event (“the passing of the walls” = the strike). Why? We
have three ostraca and one papyrus. Were the ostraca perhaps used as a draft and the
information later copied onto P. Turin Cat. 1880? Unfortunately, this question cannot be
answered, at least for the time being. What seems obvious is that each one was written
for a different purpose. At least for O. IFAO 1255 and Turin Cat. 1880, the scribe seems
to be the same, Amenakhte, son of Ipuy205. What then was the need to write two different
documents reporting the same event by the same scribe? Maybe the documents had
different use and purpose?
The same problem applies to the following example, where again one period is covered
by two different ostraca which record almost the same data:
 O. DM 47 and O. Berlin P 12641+12628 recording the deliveries of various

commodities and the duty roster, cover the same date of year 1 of Ramesses IV,
III pr.t day 1-4 and most likely were written by the same scribe206.
O. DM 47 records the second half of month I of pr.t and the whole month II of pr.t,
plus the day 1-4 of month III of pr.t, while O. Berlin P 12641 + 12628 is dedicated
to month III of pr.t only.
O. DM 47 verso O. Berlin P 12641 + 12628

recto
11- Month III of pr.t, day 1. From PtH-ms wood 1- Year 1, month III of pr.t, day 1,
312. 400 dbn of fish, of Imn-xa son of Imn-m- ¢a-m-Nwn. From the fisherman
In.t. Imn-xa
12- Day 2, ¡r. 2- …940. Month III of pr.t, day 2,
13- Day 3, Nfr-Htp. From Imn-Htp, wood 324. ¡r. Month III of pr.t, day 3, Nfr-
14- Day 4, Pn-ano.t. 2 ds-jugs, 1 portion of Htp, from the hand of Imn-Htp…
dates, right side. From Imn-Htp wood 200 to 3-…pr.t, day 4, Pn-ano.t. 2 ds-
fulfill 500, jugs, 1 portion of dates, right
15- of which 20 from ¢a-m-Nwn. side, wood 200 from Imn-Htp…
205
See Grandet 2016, 328.
206
See Donker van Heel 2003, 77-78.
193
 We consider now another example, provided by Janssen, of overlapping

documents, in this case a papyrus and an ostracon: Papyrus Turin 1949+1946,
verso Col. I line 5-16 indeed covers the same days as Ostracon DM 39+174,
recto lines 10-16207. Both are dated to year 32 of Ramesses III/year 1 of
Ramesses IV, month III of Smw (the death of Ramesses III is mentioned). The
papyrus records days of inactivity and work, deliveries of supplies, and the
announcement by the chief policeman MnTw-ms of the death of Ramesses III and
the accession to the throne by Ramesses IV; the ostracon records the delivery of
various commodities, the name of the watchman, and the mention of the death
of Ramesses III.
Papyrus Turin 1949+1946 v. Col. I, 5-16 Ostracon DM 39+174 r. 10-16
5-…day 11, they did not work. 10- Day 11, ¡r. From PtH-ms
6-…day 12, in this place, 2 ds-jars, 1 portion wood 340.
of dates. 11- Day 12, Wsr-HA.t. 270 from
7-…day 13 in this place. BAk-n-¢nsw.
8-…day 14, in this place, 2 ds-jars, 1 portion 12- Day 13, Mnw-xa.
of dates, x portions of vegetables. 13- Day 14, Ir.y-aA. 2 ds-jars,1
9-…day 15, they worked. 8 biA-loaves and x portion of dates, right side.
psn-loaves… 14- Day 15, ¡r-Sri. 8 psn-loaves,
10- [day 16], in this place… 8 bit-loaves. From MH.y fish 277.
11-…arrival of the chief of the police MnTw- From
ms… 15- the wood cutter Imn-Htp wood
12-…[to tell] those of the Tomb: “the Falcon 480.
has risen up [to the sky]… 16- Day 16, Ii-r-niw.t=f. 2 ds-jugs.
13-…the king Wsr-mAa.t-Ra Mry-Imn son of It was announced that the falcon
Ra Ra-ms-sw ¡oA-Iwn.w l.p.h. went to the sky (Ramesses III
14-…[and the king] Wsr-mAa.t-Ra ¤tp.n-Imn son died).
of Ra Ra-ms-sw Mry-Imn l.p.h.
15-…sits on the throne of Ra in His place.
16-…[the gang of ] the Tomb rejoices all day
until sunset.
According to Soliman, “it is possible that the scribe of the papyrus used the ostracon
while composing his text, choosing to include certain elements of the ostracon as he
207
Janssen 2005.
194
went along…208”. Our opinion is that it is more likely that the two documents were written
independently and used for two different purposes, since what they record are different
matters, and thus it seems unlikely that the scribe would need the ostracon in order to
write the data on the papyrus.
Interestingly, a third document of a different nature records the same days 11-16 of year
32 of Ramesses III/year 1 of Ramesses IV, month III of Smw: IFAO ONL 318+209. This
document is one of those bearing “identity marks”, i.e. workmen’s marks210, and records
deliveries of wood, psn-loaves, bit-loaves, dates and ds-jars. We have thus an ostracon
and a papyrus (both Necropolis journals) and an ostracon with “identity marks”, all
recording the same days, with the ostracon containing marks closely related to the
hieratic ostracon211.
According to Janssen, (he used this example to test the reliability of the accounts),
“the two texts [Papyrus Turin 1949+1946 and Ostracon DM 39+174] are of different
nature [...and] belong to different categories. The papyrus was perhaps based on notes
by the senior scribe, made in the Valley of the Queens where the crew was at work in
the year 32, while the ostracon would have been composed by a scribe of the smdt
(personnel) at the Enclosure of the Tomb212”.
In any case, this further example confirms that there were different types of documents,
all looking like journals, but they must have had different purposes.
We will now attempt to identify and describe the different types of journal encountered.
7.3.a Classification according to the type of information and contents
We will focus now on the classification of the different typologies of journals that are part
of the corpus of the ones dated with certainty, in order to answer the question: How
many types of journal can we identify?
In order to list the different categories of journals, we will use their content to distinguish
between them213.
208
Soliman, D. M., unpublished PhD Thesis 2016.
209
See Soliman, D. M., unpublished PhD Thesis 2016, 265-266 and Appendices 14 and 32.
210
For further information, see Haring 2000, Haring 2009a and 2009b, and Haring-Soliman 2014.
211
We have, therefore, not only examples of different types of journals recording the same dates,
but also different genres of documents (journals vs ostraca with marks). More examples of
Necropolis journals overlapping with ostraca with marks are known: O. DM 427 and IFAO ONL
338+ of year 28 of Ramesses III; DM 142 and IFAO ONL 317+ of year 26 of Ramesses III; O. DM
41 and O. Leiden F.2000/1.5 of year 1 of Ramesses IV, for example, prove that this is not an
isolated case. Unfortunately, the relation between the hieratic records and the ostraca with marks
is still unclear (see Soliman, D. M. unpublished PhD Thesis 2016, 251-266 and Haring-Soliman
2016, 73-93).
212
Janssen 2005, 156.
213
The group to which the document is assigned should not be considered as a fixed type. Some
of the documents fit in more than one group, but, for study purposes, we had to choose which
“type” was the predominant and more evident one.
195
We will divide all the documents in subtypes and list the differences. Note that it is not
our intention to make a strict classification of different types of journal as separate
genres. We do not intend to trace boundaries of a neat category or typology, but only to
notice and list the differences between the individual journal manuscripts which belong
to the same overall genre. As there are very many documents, it may be useful -only for
study purposes- to be able to identify smaller subtypes. We are fully aware of the fact
that it shall remain uncertain whether the differences in style and kind of the documents
in the corpus are a real reflection of administrative differences or only noticeable in the
documentation that by chance survived. This seems inevitable, however, since we want
to deal with the whole large corpus of documents.
Below, the four types into which we divided the whole corpus of documents with a brief
description of their respective content:
 Type A: DELIVERIES/PROVISIONS214
This type of document records both the delivery of different commodities as
“salary” to the community of Deir el-Medina (clothing, fish, beer, bread, dates,
cakes, meat, fruit, vegetables, grain, pottery, natron), and provisions in order to
carry out the work in the royal tomb (firewood, rags, yarn, plaster, lamps, dung,
tools, oil).
 Type B: ABSENCES/PRESENCES215
Another frequent type of journal lists of names of single workmen being idle or
absent with the dates on which they were inactive and sometimes even the
reasons for their absence. Among the reasons, the most common are: illness of
the workman or a member of his family, funerals, festivities, working for someone
else, brewing, and offering.
 Type C: WORK COMPLETED

These are documents reporting the work carried out: the work done by stone-
workers or carpenters, work completed in the royal tombs, transportation of
stones and tomb equipment, construction of a road, the production of bricks,
founding of a prince's tomb, preparation of wooden doors for the tomb, etc.
Sometimes the amount of the work done is expressed in cubits. Surprisingly not
214
See Mandeville 2014.
215
See Janssen 1980.
196
much of the ongoing work is recorded on journals. It is possible that the progress
of the work was marked on the walls of the tomb better than on a document.
 Type D: EVENTS CONCERNING THE COMMUNITY

Documents in this group records different kinds of events related or relevant to
the community of artisans and other inhabitants of Deir el-Medina: daily
notifications of working, being idle or absent, religious or memorial feasts, arrivals
of the vizier or other officials and announcements of grain rations or extra
payments, passing of the guard posts, sealing the royal tomb, etcetera.
In the following table, all the documents dated with certainty have been assigned
a letter from A to D to indicate the group they belong to.
DYNASTY 18 NAME OF DOCUMENT
C O. Ashmolean Museum 0007

DYNASTY 19
Ramesses II
A O. Cairo 25645
A O. Cairo 25803
B O. Cairo 25502
C O. Cairo CG 25815a
A O. Cairo CG 25815b
D O. University of Memphis Expedition n. 97
Merenptah
C O. Cairo 25581
D O. Cairo 25552
D O. Valley of Kings, Area A, Square G 0, between KV 62 and KV 7
C O. Cairo 25504
B O.DM 594
D P. Berlin 23300 and 23301
A P. Ashmolean Museum 1960.1283
Amenmesse
B O. Cairo 25779
B O. Varille 26
B O. Ashmolean Museum 0290
B O. Cairo 25780
B O. Cairo 25782
B O. Cairo 25783
197
B O. Cairo 25784
B O. DM 898
Sethi II
B HO 64, 1 (O. MMA 14.6.217)

B O. Cairo 25509
B O. Cairo 25510
A O. Berlin P 14842
B O. DM 889
B O. Cairo CG 25529
B O. Cairo 25512
A O. Cairo 25516
B O. Cairo 25517
D O. Cairo 25538
B O. Cairo 25515
Siptah
B O. Cairo 25515
C O. Cairo CG 25536
B O. Cairo 25516
B O. Cairo 25525
D O. Cairo 25518
B O. Cairo 25517
B O. Cairo 25519
B O. Cairo JE 72475 (old text)
B O. DM 908
B O. Cairo 25521
B O. DM 10052
C O. Cairo JE 72451
B O. DM 10051
A P. Greg P.UC 34336
B O. DM 899
B O. DM 909
B O. DM 910
DYNASTY 20
Ramesses III
B O.DM 99
B O.DM 253
B O. Turin 57020
A O. Varille 36
C O.DM 422
B O. Turin 57034
B O. Turin 57047
B O. Turin 57026
A O. DM 625
C O. Turin 57027
B O. Turin 57046
198
B O. Turin 57039
A O.DM 164
B O. Turin 57029
B O. IFAO [unnumbered]+O. Varille 06
B O. Turin 57028
B O. Turin 57056
A O. Gardiner AG 139
D O. Turin 57055
B O. Turin 57033
A O.DM 32
A O. UC 39648
A O. UC 39626
C O. Turin 57031
A O. Glasgow D.1925.67
A O. Glasgow D.1925.76
B O. Berlin P 12295
A O. Turin 57475
A O. DM 654
D O. Hildesheim 5464
A O. Turin 57044
A O. DM 148
A O. IFAO 00284 + O. IFAO 00285 + O. IFAO 00286 + O. IFAO 00287
A O. Turin 57153
B O. DM 911
A O. DM 653
A O. DM 633
A O.DM 33
A O. IFAO 00253
A O. Ashmolean Museum 0255
A O. DM 00034 + O. Heidelberg Inv. Nr. 567
A O. DM 427
A O.DM 156
C O. Berlin P 10663
C O. Turin 57007 r°
D O.DM 284
A O. Berlin P 10633
A O. Berlin P 14689
A O. DM 604
A O. Turin 57007 v°
D O. Cairo 25530
D O. IFAO 1255+O.Varille 39.
D O. Brussel E. 7359
A O. DM 330
A P. Turin 2006+1961
D P. Turin Cat. 1880
D O.DM 98
A O. Prague H 14
A O.DM 55
199
A O.DM 158
A O.DM 36
D O.DM 578
A O.DM 37
A O. Michaelides 073
A O.DM 38
A O.DM 39+174
A P. Turin 1949+1946
B O. Turin 57432
A O. IFAO 00268 + O. IFAO 00278
B O. Turin 57156
A O. Berlin P 14255
B O. Louvre E 13160
A O. Louvre E 25325
Ramesses IV
O. DM 39+174 See under Ramesses III

P. Turin 1949+1946 See under Ramesses III
A O. Berlin P 12631
A O.DM 40+O.Strasbourg H. 042
A O.DM 41+ O. Berlin P 12626
A O.DM 42
A O.DM 43
A O.DM 47
A O. Berlin P 12641+12628
A O.DM 161+O.Berlin P 12640+Strasbourg H82
A O.DM 44
A O. IFAO 00295
A O.DM 45
A O.DM 46
D P. Turin 1891 r°
A HO 73, 1 (O. Ashmolean Museum 0113)
A O.DM 401
D O. MMA 14.6.216
A O. Cairo CG 25266
B O.DM 398
A O. Cairo CG 25271
C O. IFAO 00383
D O. Cairo CG 25272
A O. Berlin P 09897
D O. Cairo CG 25274
D O. Berlin P 09906
D O. DM 657
A P. Turin PN 109 (Provv. 6258)
A O. DM 393
B O. DM 617
B O. DM 10049
D O. Cairo CG 25303
200
Ramesses V
B O. Cairo 25609
C P. Turin 2044
C P. Turin 2002 r°
Ramesses VI
D HO 68, 1 (O. BM EA 50722 + O. Cairo CG 25726+660)

D O. Cairo 25254
D O. Cairo 25256
D O. BtdK 659
A O. Ashmolean Museum 0160
A O. Ashmolean Museum 0302+O. Ashmolean Museum 0342 rev.
A P. Bibliotheque Nationale 237, Carton 1
D O. Cairo 25566
C O. Cairo 25269
A P. Turin 1885 v°
Ramesses VII
A P. Turin 1885 v° col. III, l. 3-8

A P. Turin 2070/154
A P. Turin 1883+2095.
B O. Cairo CG 25297
Ramesses IX
B O. Ashmolean Museum 0187 rev.

A P. Milan E 0.9.40126 + P. Milan E 0.9.40128
A P. Turin 2013 + P. Turin 2050 + P. Turin 2061
P. Turin 2002 r° (col. IV end of line 21 and lines 22-23) + P.Turin 2002
A v°
A P. Milan E 0.9.40127 + P. Turin fragment gamma + P. Turin 2074
B P. Turin 2072/142
P. Turin 1900 + P. Turin 2048 + P. Turin 2088 + P. Turin 2093 + P. Turin
A 2097 + P. Turin 2101
B P. Turin [unnumbered 1]
D P. Turin 54021
D O. Cairo CG 25305
B P. Turin 2071/224 [140]+frgt
A P. Turin 1891 v°
D P. Turin 2087 v°
B Giornale, pl. 4-7 (P. Turin 1999 + P. Turin 2009 v°)
A O. Léningrad 2973 r°
A O. Cairo 25299
B HO 69, 1 (O. BM EA 05672 + O. Cairo CG 25649)
A P. Turin 2071/224+1960
P. Turin Cat. 1884 + P. Turin Cat. 2067 + P. Turin Cat. 2071 + P. Turin
A Cat. 2105
A Cat. 2082 + P. Turin Cat. 2083 verso (Giornale year 17B)
201
D Cat. 2078 recto (Giornale year 17A)
B Cat. 2082 + P. Turin Cat. 2083 recto (Giornale year 17B)
A Cat. 2078 verso (Giornale year 17A)
D P. Turin Cat. 2106 + P. Turin Cat. 2107
A O. Cairo CG 25314
Ramesses X
Giornale, pl. 50-63 (P. Turin 1898 + P. Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P.
A Turin 2094)
B O. Cairo CG 25244
Ramesses XI
Giornale, pl. 50-63 (P. Turin 1898 + P. Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P.
A Turin 2094)
A P. Turin 1895 + P. Turin 2006 Turin taxation papyrus
A P. BM EA 09997
A Gardiner, RAD, 64-68 (P. Turin 1888 + P. Turin 2085)
D P. Turin 2094 [1]
A O. Cairo CG 25243
Before drawing some conclusions and presenting the charts of the data obtained, one
important remark has to be made: all the documents in the above table list are considered
journals, but, if we focus on the documents dated to Ramesses IX and his immediate
successors, it seems that these are the ones which most align with the definition we gave
of “(events) journal” and most closely meet the criteria given to identify such texts.
Journals of the late 20th Dynasty are closer to what is expected of a generalised
institutional day-book. In the course of time we can observe an evolution in the style and
contents in the available documents. The journal changes and one wonders whether this
is the sign of a change in the administration at Deir el-Medina216. From the earliest period
(18th Dynasty) there are almost no records available217, from the 19th Dynasty we have
ostraca and a few papyri gradually containing more and more information, and then from
the 20th Dynasty of course the vast amount of ostraca and extensive papyri.
In the earlier versions of journals on ostraca long, detailed notes and regular day-
to-day records of information are not yet standard. The columns of text are rather narrow
and contain little information. Some of these journals of the later years of Ramesses III
and the early years of Ramesses IV (from year 24 of Ramesses III until year 2 of
Ramesses IV) record deliveries to the workmen of Deir el-Medina and indicate the name
216
See Häggman 2002, 160 ff. and Valbelle 1985, 186 ff.
217
This in marked contrast to the substantial groups of mid-18th Dynasty ostraca from the work
especially on the temples of Thutmosis III at Deir el-Bahri and Qurna.
202
of the workman who was responsible for the receipt of supplies on a particular day. The
presentation of the data follows a quite standard model: first the date with the year and
the day, then the name of the man on duty on that specific day, and finally notices of any
deliveries made. Moreover, deliveries of supplies and goods were also included, such
as beer, vegetables, fish, dates, bread, pottery, wood, flowers and grain rations. If other
events of administrative interest such as workdays or not were noted, the description is
rather short and concise.
Also from some unpublished fragments of papyri kept in the Bibliothèque nationale de
France (P. B.N. 237, carton 3, 5, 7, 16, 22 and 27) dated to the middle of the 20th
Dynasty, it is clear that the Necropolis journal layout still consists of narrow columns of
text, with short lines like in the ostraca, and not yet the long lines of the documents from
later periods.
Some as yet unpublished journal fragments in the collection of the Turin Museum
dating to the later years of Ramesses III likewise show a general layout of the document
similar to that of the ostraca: the columns are narrow and the information provided is not
very detailed218.
With the beginning of the reign of Ramesses IX (or maybe a little earlier), when the
workforce of Deir el-Medina is still at its peak capacity, journals become more elaborate
than in previous periods; short and concise accounts are being replaced by more
extensive lists on papyrus, covering a wider range of subjects. We must bear in mind
that the apparent shift (see charts fig. 43-44) from ostraca to papyri might at least partly
be the result of the by chance surviving documents219. Anyhow, papyrus as writing
material evidently offered more space to be used for one document. The papyri show
lists of goods (vegetables, grain, wood, etc.) in a more detailed way, as well as the
provenance of the supplier and the names of the personnel and institutions involved in
the distribution system. In general the papyri are all rather long and inscribed either on
the recto or the verso with a minimum of two columns. The information on the papyrus
is usually presented listing the notes day by day, but in some documents the notes only
cover a few days.
Also during the reigns of Ramesses X and Ramesses XI journals were mostly
written on often rather long papyri, with the exception of (at the present state of our
knowledge) three ostraca220. The information we find now in the journals is much more
218
Information kindly provided by Dr. R.J. Demarée (personal communication).
219
Fragments of as yet unpublished papyri such as those in the Bibliothèque nationale in Paris
and those in the Turin Museum mentioned above may change the picture and prove that papyrus
was more widely used during earlier reigns.
220 O. Cairo CG 25244 (Ramesses X), O. Cairo CG 25243 (Ramesses XI) and the unpublished
O. MMA 09.184.733 (probably dated to year 1 of Ramesses X and kindly mentioned to me by Dr.
Demarée).
203
complete. They deal with a wider range of activities and the notes are now taken on a
daily basis and cover a longer time span. The Giornale of Ramesses X, for example,
covers the period from II pr.t day 24 until II Ax.t day 2 of regnal year 2. The account of
deliveries for the gang of workers on specified dates is more detailed and lists individual
names, and the description of specific events concerning members of the staff is more
comprehensive221. Accounts of individual portions of grain222 distributed are listed and
for the amount of grain received, the provenance223 is fully indicated (individual priests,
administrators, herdsmen, fishermen and farmers). During this period, the day-by-day
notes seem to become a more usual type of record.
Why did these changes in the content of the journal occur?224

Far from being able to give a definite answer, we can nonetheless try to suggest some
reasons for the variations in the records:
Was it on request from the higher authorities? Was it the zeal of the local scribes who
wanted to show in greater detail the progress of the work to the vizier who occasionally
came to visit? And, more specifically:
1- Was it because the vizier ¦A in year 29 of Ramesses III became vizier of the
whole country: “vizier of the land of Upper and Lower Egypt”?225 Was this part of a
restructure of the administration? We have to realise that the vizier’s extended area of
duty would have kept him away from Thebes and from Necropolis matters for some time,
which probably caused the need for the collection of additional data and details of the
work going on in the ‘Place of Truth’.
2- Was it because of all the problems caused by the strikes in year 29 of Ramesses
III226? Perhaps the administration became more and more interested in things such as
details of the deliveries to the community? (see chart fig. 38-39 which shows indeed that
in the second half of the 20th Dynasty, there are many more documents of group A, that
is, related to deliveries and provisions).
3- Was it because of the shift of power from the vizier to the high priest of Amun
when the latter’s influence started to grow around the middle of the 20th Dynasty? In
records from this period, in fact, an increased presence of the high priest of Amun in the
221 P. Turin 1898 + P. Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P. Turin 2094 (Ramesses X).
222 P. BM EA 09997 (Ramesses XI).
223 P. Turin 1895 + P. Turin 2006 (Ramesses XI).
224
As we have seen above, it was not simply a matter of writing material, since papyri are used
in earlier periods and the general outline of the documents, with narrow columns of short lines, is
similar to the contemporary ostraca.
225
O. Berlin P 10633, ll. 7-8.
226
See e.g. P. Turin Cat. 1880, the “Strike Papyrus”.
204
Necropolis administration can be noted, both in Necropolis journals and in other

contemporary documents227. It is clear that the high priest of Amun played a significant
role in the administration of the Necropolis since the middle of the 20th Dynasty, a time
when the boundaries between his areas of influence and those of the vizier were
blurred228.
In spite of the differences amongst the documents, it can nonetheless be
concluded that they all belong to the concept of journal, bearing in mind that “The system
of genre is not an aggregate of fixed categories…Genres are fluid and flexible”
(Parkinson 96, 299). We need to imagine a wider genre including different types of notes
and information. Every document gives us a pixel of a picture of the village
administration. For this administration it was necessary to note and list the incoming food,
tools and other goods, as well as to indicate day-to-day who was absent from work and
record all the events related to the life of the community. Listing and classifying the
differences is not intended to trace boundaries of a neat category. The same genre
changed its format and contents during the years, and shows therefore many “faces”.
7.3.b Charts of the data obtained
This section considers the distribution of the different groups (A, B, C and D) to see if
this provides some useful information. In order to do so, the following bar charts have
been produced from the above table list:
227
See e.g. P. Ashmolean Museum 1958.112, a letter recording the involvement of the high priest,
who became a reference for complaints; P. Turin 1879 verso A col. II, where the Necropolis
scribe ¡r is taken to the high priest of Amun, who orders that the copper tools of the Necropolis
are to be collected; P. Turin 2002 recto col. III, 13 a journal mentioning the arrival of the high
priest of Amun together with the vizier; P. Turin 2044 verso col. II, 11 where the high priest of
Amun is giving orders; P. Turin 1883+2095 recto col. I, 4 where we read the commissioning of
coppersmiths by the administrators of the Necropolis and the treasury scribe of the temple (of
Ramesses III) under the high priest of Amun; and P. BN 237 carton 1, 15-20 where the high priest
of Amun and other dignitaries arrive in Thebes to attend the appearance of a god).
228
Nonetheless, we still must be careful with the conclusions we may draw. Once again, we should
bear in mind that we can only build theories based on the documents we have, and we have to
take into consideration that there are others still undiscovered or unknown to us that might change
our hypothesis. Recently we were informed that in Turin there is a papyrus (labelled Provv. 6252),
belonging to year 1 probably of Ramesses IX, in which the vizier still plays a role in the
administration of the Necropolis, dealing with the complaints of the crew (Col. II, lines 7 and 12).
When the new Turin documents are studied and published, they will probably shed more light on
certain aspects of the Necropolis administration and modify our theories (personal communication
from Dr. R.J. Demarée).
205
GROUPS
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Ramesses II
Merenptah
Amenmesse
Sethi II
Siptah
Ramesses III
Ramesses IV
Ramesses V
Ramesses VI
Ramesses VII
Ramesses IX
Ramesses X
Ramesses XI
A B C D
Fig. 38 Chart representing the groups of documents divided per single pharaoh (the results are obviously limited to the fact that there are some short and some long reigns; the
chart does not give us firm statistics, but merely an indication)
206
100
GROUPS AND DYNASTIES
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Dynasty 18 Dynasty 19 Dynasty 20
A B C D
Fig. 39 Chart representing the groups of documents divided per dynasty
207
From the first chart, we can see that, until the beginning of the 20th Dynasty (Ramesses
III), there is a preponderance of documents belonging to Group B, the one concerning
absences and presences of the workmen, while afterwards Group A is the type most
commonly encountered, the group dealing with the delivery of different commodities229.
This trend is even more visible in the second bar chart, where we can also observe that
Groups C (work completed) is poorly represented, while Group D does not really change
its trend over the years.
229
Bearing in mind that we can only make conclusions based on what we have, i.e. the surviving
documents.
208
GROUPS PAPYRI
0 5 10 15 20 25
Ramesses II
Merenptah
Amenemesse
Sethi II
Siptah
Ramesses III
Ramesses IV
Ramesses V
Ramesses VI
Ramesses VII
Ramesses IX
Ramesses X
Ramesses XI
A B C D
Fig. 40 Chart representing the documents on papyri divided per group
209
GROUPS OSTRACA
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Ramesses II
Merenptah
Amenmesse
Sethi II
Siptah
Ramesses III
Ramesses IV
Ramesses V
Ramesses VI
Ramesses VII
Ramesses IX
Ramesses X
Ramesses XI
A B C D
Fig. 41 Chart representing the documents on ostraca divided per group
210
What happens when we divide the papyri and ostraca to see how the groups are
represented? If we analyse only journals written on papyri (in the first chart above, fig.
40), we see that the majority of the papyri record information concerning the deliveries
and provisions to the community. Considering that a papyrus could be submitted to a
higher authority (see above 7.2.b), this makes sense. The external administration would
be interested in the supplies necessary to carry out the work in the Valleys, more than in
the events or the distribution of payments to the workers.
The second chart above (fig. 41) concerns the other type of writing material, the ostracon.
In this case journals written on ostraca, especially those from before the reign of
Ramesses III, are more focused on recording absences and presences (Group B).
Different from the papyri, we can imagine (see above 7.2.a) that an ostracon was
intended for internal use, where it was therefore important to keep track of days off of
the entire gang and single absences of workmen.
We should not forget that all the observations we can make about types and format of
documents give us only a partial and limited picture, since the overlapping of the
documents and the difficulty in genre classification do not give us firm statistics, but
merely an indication. We are also strongly dependent on the type of texts that have been
preserved. Whether the differences in style and type of documents preserved are a real
reflection of administrative differences or simply the result of chance shall remain
uncertain. New finds in excavations or in some collections may have influence on any
conclusions made thus far.
7.4 The database
7.4.a The initial idea
When we started this study about the Necropolis journal, the approach taken was to
collect all the primary sources (i.e. all the documents written on ostraca and on papyri)
and make an inventory of all of them for an easier consultation. In view of the large
number of existing documents, the best idea was to enter all the useful data in a table-
list.
A chronological table-list of all the documents was thus created bearing the following
information:
 Date (Dynasty and if possible the name of the pharaoh and the days named in the
document)
 Inventory number of the document and related bibliography
211
 Type of writing support (papyrus/ostraca)

 Indication of the provenance of the document
The list created was obviously to be considered open and not definitive. The list now
includes 399 records.
7.4.b The website
Even chronologically ordered in a list, the material was still too much to be easily
consulted and studied. We therefore decided to create a database in the program
Access to facilitate any kind of search/research or comparative study.
Fig. 42 Example of a page of the database
The fields of the database are:

 number (name) of the document
 dynasty
 pharaoh
 specific date
 writing support (ostracon or papyrus)
 provenance
 bibliography
212
 group (A, B, C or D)230
The new database allowed us also to produce some charts from the data collected, in
order to understand more the general features of the documentation. Above (fig. 38-41)
we have already used examples of the charts created, now two more charts will be
presented, which show the distribution in time of journals written on ostraca versus
journals written on papyri (see 2.3 for the debate about this matter):
Ostraca VS Papyri
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Dynasty 18
Ramesses II
Merenptah
Amenmesse
Sethi II
Siptah
Ramesses III
Ramesses IV
Ramesses V
Ramesses VI
Ramesses VII
Ramesses IX
Ramesses X
Ramesses XI
Ostraca Papyri
Fig. 43 Chart representing distribution in time of journals written on ostraca vs journals written on
papyri (only documents dated with certainty). Considering what was stated on p. 28, that 40% of the
papyri is palimpsest, we can imagine that papyri with records now dated to R. IX, X or XI earlier may
have carried records dating to R. VI, VII or VIII. This would change the picture of the chart.
Ostraca VS Papyri
55
344
Ostracon Papyrus
Fig. 44 Chart representing the number of ostraca vs the number of papyri (the whole corpus)
230
See above 7.3.a.
213
Regarding the information about the provenance of ostraca and papyri, not much can be
said and bar-charts cannot help, since for most of the documents a precise find spot is
unknown231. Generally, the provenance of papyri is less well known than that of ostraca.
A large group of papyri now in the Museo Egizio of Turin for example, comes from the
Drovetti collection, acquired by the museum around 1824232. Unfortunately, their
archaeological context is lost and we ignore where they were discovered, although it
seems that they have been found together and their contents point to a Theban origin.
Concerning the material with a clear provenance, the ostraca, we can mainly distinguish
between documents found in the Valley of the Kings and the Valley of the Queens (i.e.
the working site), and those found in Deir el-Medina village, mainly during the
archaeological excavations of the IFAO (French Archaeological Institute). The material
found in the village unfortunately mostly comes from dump sites like the ‘koms’ (the
rubbish mounds to the north and the south of the village) or the ‘Grand Puits’, a deep
hole to the north of the site. The provenance of these documents is only relevant in so
far as that they most probably had been kept together before being discarded.
Documents found around the village are mostly related to guard duty and deliveries, but
not exclusively; many ostraca found in the Grand Puits record indeed absences or
presences of workmen. In contrast, and predictable, documents (only ostraca) found in
the Valley of the Kings233 and the Valley of the Queens234 mainly record the work in the
231
For general patterns of find distribution, see Valbelle 1985, 27-29; Eyre 2013, 233-240; Donker
van Heel-Haring 2003, 14-16; Dorn 2011.
232
P. Turin 2006+1961; P. Turin Cat. 1880; P. Turin 1949+1946; P. Turin 1891; P. Turin PN 109
(Provv. 6258); P. Turin 2044; P. Turin 2002; P. Turin 1885; P. Turin 2070/154 ; P. Turin
1883+2095; P. Milan E 0.9.40126 + P. Milan E 0.9.40128; P. Turin 2013 + P. Turin 2050 + P.
Turin 2061; P. Turin 1881 + P. Turin 2080 + P. Turin 2092; P. Turin 1906 + P. Turin 1939 + P.
Turin 2047; P. Milan E 0.9.40127 + P. Turin fragment gamma + P. Turin 2074; P. Turin 2072/142;
P. Turin 1900 + P. Turin 2048 + P. Turin 2088 + P. Turin 2093 + P. Turin 2097 + P. Turin 2101;
P. Turin [unnumbered 1]; P. Turin 54021; P. Turin 2071/224 [140]+frgt; P. Turin 1891; P. Turin
2087; P. Turin 1999 + P. Turin 2009; P. Turin 2071/224+1960; P. Turin Cat. 1884 + P. Turin Cat.
2067 + P. Turin Cat. 2071 + P. Turin Cat. 2105; P. Turin Cat. 1945 + P. Turin Cat. 2073 + P. Turin
Cat. 2076 + P. Turin Cat. 2082 + P. Turin Cat. 2083; P. Turin Cat. 2001 + P. Turin Cat. 2005 + P.
Turin Cat. 2029 + P. Turin Cat. 2078; P. Turin Cat. 2106 + P. Turin Cat. 2107; P. Turin 1898 + P.
Turin 1926 + P. Turin 1937 + P. Turin 2094; P. Turin 1895 + P. Turin 2006; P. Turin 1888 + P.
Turin 2085; P. Turin 2094 [1].
233
O. Cairo 25645; O. Cairo 25803; O. Cairo 25502; O. Cairo CG 25815; O. University of Memphis
Expedition n. 97; O. Cairo 25581; O. Cairo 25552; O. Valley of Kings, Area A, Square G 0,
between KV 62 and KV 7; O. Cairo 25504; O. MMA 14.6.217; O. Cairo 25509; O. Cairo 25510;
O. Cairo CG 25529; O. Cairo 25512; O. Cairo 25516; O. Cairo 25517; O. Cairo 25538; O. Cairo
25515; O. Cairo CG 25536; O. Cairo 25525; O. Cairo 25518; O. Cairo 25519; O. Cairo JE 72475
(old text); O. Cairo 25521; O. Cairo JE 72451; O. Cairo 25530; O. MMA 14.6.216; O. Cairo CG
25266; O. Cairo CG 25271; O. Cairo CG 25272; O. Cairo CG 25274; O. Cairo CG 25303; O.
Cairo 25609; O. Cairo 25254; O. Cairo 25256; O. BtdK 659; O. Cairo 25566; O. Cairo 25269; O.
Cairo CG 25297; O. Cairo CG 25305; O. Cairo 25299; O. BM EA 05672 + O. Cairo CG 25649;
O. Cairo CG 25314; O. Cairo CG 25244; O. Cairo CG 25243.
234
O. Turin 57020; O. Turin 57034; O. Turin 57047; O. Turin 57026; O. Turin 57027; O. Turin
57046; O. Turin 57039; O. Turin 57029; O. Turin 57028; O. Turin 57056; O. Turin 57055; O. Turin
214
tomb, the number of lamps used for such work, and the absences235. “Typically these
ostraca were found among the groups of workmen's huts scattered through the valley,
associated with the work on each tomb. It is a reasonable guess that they were kept in
the scribe's hut in current use, and left there when the work moved to the next tomb
project236”. Unfortunately, we cannot draw any more information from the provenance of
ostraca and papyri.
Concerning the database, our intention was to make this available online to all interested,
so that future studies can use the list to produce more detailed results, without losing any
more time in collecting the material, and anyone can add new records to the list provided.
We are aware of the fact that the ongoing project of the papyrus database of the Museo
Egizio of Turin (only for specialists so far), the available Deir el-Medina database and
Trismegistos, already provide much useful information237. Nonetheless, it is our aim to
offer a Necropolis journal database, i.e. only dedicated to this kind of records, with the
intention to facilitate the creation of a separate branch of texts amongst the vast number
of 4506 records present for example in the Deir el-Medina database (last consulted on
August 2018).
The fourth step and last objective of this study is therefore to make the research done,
not for its own sake, but share it with all Egyptologists interested, as a useful updatable
tool available to all scholars, and answering thus to our question: How can the list
become a useful updatable tool available to all scholars interested in the subject?
To this aim, the database has been published online as part of the website
https://www.edicionesadaegyptum.com/irenemorfini/ and it is accessible with a
password, given after a request to our personal mail address [email protected].
On the online database one can search for: document number, pharaoh, dynasty and
writing support (papyrus/ostracon).
57033; O. Turin 57031; O. Turin 57044. Some of them probably coming from the same cache.
See Van den Berg-Donker van Heel 2000.
235
A group of large ostraca from the reign of Amenmesse, all found in the Valley of the Kings in
an undisturbed stratum east of KV 47 during the Carnarvon and Carter excavations in 1922,
record labour activities and absences of workmen. These documents were obviously produced at
the work site and, considering the dimension of the stones, left in situ. These ostraca are: O. Cairo
25779; O. Cairo 25780; O. Cairo 25782; O. Cairo 25783; O. Cairo 25784. For the controversial
issue on dating and for matters on the handwriting of the scribe, see Donker van Heel-Haring
2003, 49-51.
236
Eyre 2013, 235.
237
The research project in Turin includes specialists of the Politecnico di Torino, and the
universities of Basel, Bologna, Copenhagen, Groningen, Leiden, Liège and Munich.
238
For the technical work done on publishing the database online, I am very gratefull to my friend
Maurizio Papalini for his patience and the time he devoted to this work.
215
Fig. 45 The homepage of the website
Originally the plan was to include in the online version of the database also the photos
of the documents but, given the copyright matters and the time necessary in order to
obtain all of them, we preferred to keep it for the future, when maybe the museums where
the papyri and ostraca are kept, will be willing to cooperate with this project and will allow
to make the photos available online.
For the time being, the Necropolis Journal database can be consulted online with
all the information listed above for every record. Moreover, after verification, one can add
new documents considered as journal to the list.
216
FINAL CONCLUSIONS
After having provided an introduction on the status quaestionis concerning the

Necropolis Journal as a label for certain documents described in publications by
Egyptologists since 1928, the research context has been outlined, and sets of research
questions and a methodology have been formulated.
In order to determine whether the notes of the so-called journals would be considered
as such according to an ancient Egyptian standpoint, this work examined the notion of
“journal” in earlier views and in a broader Egyptian perspective. An overview of annals
and day-books was presented in order to identify common features and differences
between these records and the so-called Necropolis journal. The common features
provided the guidelines to formulate the criteria for the distinction of a Necropolis journal.
A list of texts from Deir el-Medina was then created according to these criteria (see
Chapter 5.1), and it was divided into two sections: documents dated with certainty and
documents not dated with certainty (Chapter 5.2 a and b). All documents dated with
certainty were then collected and investigated (with photos, transcriptions and
translations when available). These documents all appear in a separate appendix for
reasons of space and in order to be consulted easily (an online database is also
available). The total number of documents dated with certainty is 211 of which 19 were
previously totally or partly unpublished.
We have demonstrated that in ancient Egyptian administration there were two main types
of journal, namely ‘accounts journal’ and ‘events journal’. Both types record the notes
daily, in a mostly respected chronological order, and both are journals, nonetheless they
describe different aspects. We have focused upon the latter type because that is the best
comparable with the so-called Necropolis journal documents known from publications
since 1928 (Botti-Peet). The event journal in Deir el-Medina was not an end product in
itself. The presence of control marks on the documents and internal references to
documents sent, received and requested, clearly show that the journals were used for
internal and external readership and were checked or accessed to retrieve information.
It has become also clear that most probably ostraca and papyri had different audiences
and different purposes.
Of course, we have seen that there is not a clear cut division line and account journals
and event journals slightly overlap from time to time, something that we nowadays would
not prefer. Yet, this is how the ancient Egyptian scribes created their administrative
records. This is not unsystematic, but only confusing to our mind. It seems that we have
217
to conclude and accept that there were no fixed rules or prescriptions on how to draw up
journals in ancient Egypt.
Some last considerations are needed:
“LA REALTÀ NON É COME CI APPARE”
In chapter 7.2 (Readership of the day-books) we tried to determine the intended

readership of journals based on their layout and in 7.2.a (Day-books for internal use?)
we tried to identify the features of those day-books most probably written for internal use.
When a document was used for various purposes, for example, we suggested that it
would be quite improbable that such a document would end up in the hands of an outside
authority. There are for example documents with both literary and administrative/journal
texts (i.a. O. IFAO 1255 + O. Varille 39, O. Cairo 25517, O. MMA 14.6.216, and O.
Ashmolean Museum 0302 + O. Ashmolean Museum 0342 verso, and see note 197) and
others with both journal and magical/ritual texts (e.g. P. Turin 54021 and P. BM EA 9997),
or even temple administration in between journal notes (P. Turin 1900 + P. Turin 2048
+ P. Turin 2088 + P. Turin 2093 + P. Turin 2097 + P. Turin 2101, recto III239) and religious
texts with journal notes (papyrus Turin Provv. 6289 mentioned in Demichelis 2016, 32-
38 bears a version of BD 168 on recto and on verso journal notes dated to year 13 of
Ramesses IX).
Why were these journals, just like the annals and day-books discussed in Chapter 4,
included in a broader collection of different texts such as letters, literary texts, hymns,
medical and mathematical fragments, legal documents, religious and magical texts? We
are tempted to conclude that those day-books were most probably written for internal
use and not intended as “official documents”. Why, otherwise, would the scribe place or
keep these documents together with other kinds of texts?
Let us consider the conclusions of Quack 2014, 111-135, who takes as an example
P. BM EA 9997, with medical/magical texts on the recto and accounts/journal on the
verso. Quack says that we should not be surprised by the double use of the papyrus,
since these kind of magical texts were certainly sacred but not holy. It was therefore
239
Does the fact that Necropolis texts have been added to temple accounts (which are the
originals on this papyrus) mean that the two closely cooperated? Is it maybe a proof that the
Necropolis workmen moved to Medinet Habu and the reason of the shift from ostraca to papyri
(this last material largely available in the temple archives)? It can be an attractive idea, but we
have to consider that this specific document was produced under Ramses IX, still too early for a
resettlement of the Community within the walls of Medinet Habu. Or was the administration of
Deir el-Medina directed from Medinet Habu already since mid 20th Dynasty?
218
perfectly acceptable to have other kinds of notes together with those texts. What then
about our observation in 7.2.a where we say that a journal was for internal use when the
recto or verso was already used for other kinds of note not related to the journal? This
sounds quite contrary to the idea of Quack about the ancient Egyptian mentality. But if
the ancient Egyptians did not care if magical texts were written on the same papyrus with
other kinds of notes, would they not take a similar view in relation to journal notes?
In reality, there is another point to take into consideration: from all the documents we
have seen recording the daily notes we can conclude that they seem to be the product
of a rather unsystematic administration, or at least we would call it like that. But that’s
the important point: we. It seems that there is not a single document which we can
“define” as the “perfect-looking Journal” according to our point of view (and from here the
difficulty of compiling the list of journals as stated in chapter 5.1). But this is how the
ancient administrators worked and our opinion is in fact irrelevant. We need to
understand both the commonalities and the diversity of the documents produced for the
administration of the Deir el-Medina community. This kind of unsystematic (for us)
administration was working for them, since they kept on using it for centuries, during
which the royal tombs were dug and decorated in the Valleys of Kings and the Queens
which we can still admire today.
219
Bibliography
Abbreviations
Aeg.Helv. = Aegyptiaca Helvetica (Basel)

ArOr = Archiv Orientální: Quarterly Journal of African and Asian Studies (Prague)
BdE = Bibliothèque d'étude (Le caire)
BiOr = Bibliotheca Orientalis (Leiden)
BSOAS = Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (London)
CdÉ = Chronique d’Égypte. Fond. Egyptol. Reine Elisabeth (Bruxelles)
CHM = Cahiers d'histoire mondiale (Paris)
CRIPEL = Cahier de Recherches de l'Institut de Papyrologie et d'Égyptologie de Lille
(Paris/Lille)
BIFAO = Bulletin de l'Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale (IFAO) (Cairo)
BSAK = Beihefte SAK (Hamburg)
DFIFAO = Documents de fouilles de l'Inst. Français d'archéologie orientale (Le Caire)
EgUit = Egyptologische Uitgaven (Leiden)
FuB = Forschungen und Berichte der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin (Berlin)
HÄB = Hildesheimer Ägyptologische Beiträge (Hildesheim)
JAOS = Journal of the American Oriental Society (Baltimore/Boston/New Haven)
JARCE= Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, (Boston, New York)
JEA = Journal of Egyptian Archaeology (London)
JEH = Journal of Egyptian History (Swansea)
JESHO = Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient (Leiden)
JEOL = Jaarbericht van het Vooraziatisch-egyptisch Genootschap Ex Oriente Lux
(Leiden)
JNES = Journal of Near Eastern Studies (Chicago)
KRI = Kitchen, K.A., Ramesside Inscriptions. Historical and Biographical, Vol. I, Oxford
1975; Vol. II, Oxford 1979; Vol. III, Oxford 1981; Vol. IV, Oxford 1982; Vol. V,
Oxford 1983; Vol. VI, Oxford 1983; Vol. VII, Oxford 1989; Vol. VIII, Oxford 1990
LÄ = Lexikon der Ägyptologie, 7 vols., ed. W. Helck, E. Otto, W. Westendorf, 1972/5-,
Wiesbaden.
MÄS = Münchner Ägyptologische Studien (Berlin/Munich)
Minerva = Minerva: the International Review of Ancient Art and Archaeology (London)
NEA= Near Eastern Archaeology [formerly: Biblical Archeologist (BA)]
OBO = Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis (Friburg, All., Göttingen)
OLA = Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, (Leuven)
OLZ = Orientalistische Literaturzeitung (Münster/Berlin/Leipzig)
220
OrAnt = Oriens antiquus (Rome)

PSBA = Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology (London)
QuadAc= Quaderni di Acme. Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia, Univ. degli stud. (Milan)
RAPH = Recherches d'archéologie, de philologie et d'histoire (IFAO, Le Caire)
RdÉ= Revue d'Égyptologie (Paris)
Rec Trav = Recueil de traveaux relatifs à la philologie et à l'archéologie égyptiennes et
assyriennes (Paris)
RITA = Kitchen, K.A., 'Ramesside Inscriptions Translated & Annotated: Translations', I
ff., Oxford, 1993 ff.
RITANC = Kitchen, K.A., 'Ramesside Inscriptions Translated & Annotated: Notes &
Comments', I ff., Oxford, 1993 ff.
SAK = Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur (Hamburg)
StudAeg = Studia Aegyptiaca (Budapest)
UGAÄ = Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Ägyptens
(Hildesheim/Leipzig/Berlin)
URAÄ = Urkunden zum Rechtslebenim alten Ägypten (Tubingen)
Urk. = Urkunden des ägyptischen Altertums', 8 vols. ed. K.Sethe, H.W. Helck, H. Schäfer,
H. Grapow, O. Firchow, 1903-1957 (Leipzig/Berlin)
VA = Varia Aegyptiaca (San Antonio)
VDI = Vestnik Drevnej Istorii (Revue d'Histoire ancienne) (Moscow/Leningrad)
Wb = A. Erman und H. Grapow (Hrsg.), Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache, 13 Bande,
Berlin 1982 (unveränderter 4. Nachdruck der Auflage von 1926-1953)
Allam 1968
Allam, S., “Sind die nichtliterarischen Schriftostraka Brouillons?”, JEA 54, 1968, 121-128.
Allam 1973
Allam, S., Hieratische Ostraka und Papyri aus der Ramessidenzeit, 2 vols, URAÄ 1,
1973.
Allam 1982
Allam, S., “Einige hieratische Ostraca der Papyrussammlung der Staatlichen Museen zu
Berlin“, FuB 22, 1982, 51-62.
Allam 2009
Allam, S., “Using administrative archives in Pharaonic time”, in: Egyptian Archives,
Piacentini, P., Orsenigo, C. (eds). QuadAc 111, 2009, 61-70.
221
Altenmüller 1996
Altenmüller, H., “Das präsumtive Begräbnis des Siptah“, SAK 23, 1996, 1-9.
Altenmüller 1999
Altenmüller, H., “Zwei Ostraka und ein Baubefund: Zum Tod des Schatzkanzlers Bay im
3. Regierungsjahr des Siptah”, GM 171, 1999, 13-18.
Altenmüller 2015
Altenmüller, H., “Zwei Annalenfragmente aus dem frühen Mittleren Reich”, SAK Beihefte
16, 2015.
Andreu 1985
Andreu, G., "La tombe de Thothermaktouf a Deir el Medina (TT 357)," BIFAO 85, 1985,
1-21.
Andreu 2002
Andreu, G., Les artistes de Pharaon, Paris, 2002.
Badawy 1948
Badawy, A., Le dessin architectural chez les Anciens Egyptiens. Étude comparative des
représentations égyptiennes de constructions. Le Caire, 1948.
Baer 1965
Baer, K., “Ein Grab verfluchen?”, OLA 34, 1965, 428-438.
Baines 2008
Baines, J., “On the evolution, purpose and forms of Egyptian annals”, in: Zeichen aus
dem Sand. Streiflichter aus Ägyptens Geschichte zu Ehren von Günter Dreyer.
Dreyer, G.; Engel, E.V.; Müller, V.; Hartung, U. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2008, 19-40.
Barns 1956
Barns, J.W.B., Five Ramesseum Papyri. Oxford. 1956
Baud-Dobrev 1995
Baud, M.; Dobrev, V., “De nouvelles annales de l’Ancien Empire égyptien. Une "Pierre
de Palerme" pour la VIe dynastie”. BIFAO 95, 1995, 23-92.
222
Baud-Dobrev 1997
Baud, M.; Dobrev, V., “Le verso des annales de la VIe dynastie. Pierre de Saqqara-Sud”.
BIFAO 97, 1997, 35-42.
Bellion 1987
Bellion, M., Égypte ancienne: catalogue des manuscrits hiéroglyphiques et hiératiques
et des dessins, sur papyrus, cuir ou tissu, publiés ou signalés, Paris, 1987.
Bierbrier 1982
Bierbrier, M., The Tomb-builders of the Pharaohs, London, 1982.
Birch 1868
Birch, S., Inscriptions in the Hieratic and Demotic Character from the Collections of the
British Museum, London, 1868.
Blackman 1926
Blackman, A. M., “Oracles in Ancient Egypt. II”, JEA 12, 1926, 176-185.
Bogoslovsky 1973
Bogoslovsky, E., S. “Monuments and Documents from Dêr el-Medîna in Museums of the
USSR. V”, VDI 123, 1973, 78-104.
Bonnet-Valbelle 1975
Bonnet, C., Valbelle D., “Le village de Deir el-Médineh: Reprise de l'étude
archéologique” BIFAO 75, 1975, 429-446.
Botti-Peet 1928
Botti, G., Peet, T.E., Il giornale della necropoli di Tebe (I papiri ieratici del Museo di
Torino), Turin, 1928.
Botti 1964
Botti, G., “Frammenti di papiri ieratici della XX dinastia nel Museo Egizio di
Firenze”, OrAnt 3, 1964, 221-226.
Bruyère 1930a
Bruyère, B., Rapport sur les fouilles de Deir el Médineh (1929) Cairo (= FIFAO VII), 1930.
223
Bruyère 1930b
Bruyère, B., Mert Seger à Deir el Médineh, Cairo, 1930.
Bruyère 1937
Bruyère, B., Rapport sur les fouilles de Deir el Médineh (1933-1934) Cairo (= FIFAO
XIV), 1937.
Burkard-Fischer-Elfert 1994
Burkard, G., Fischer-Elfert, H. W., Aegyptische Handschriften. Tl. 4, Stuttgart, 1994.
Burkard 2006
Burkard, G., “Das xtm n pA xr von Deir el-Medine”, in: A. Dorn and T. Hofmann ed.,
Living and Writing in Deir el-Medine. Socio-historical Embodiment of Deir el-Medine
Texts, Aeg.Helv. 19, 2006, 31-42.
Caillaud 1821-1862
Caillaud, F., Voyage à l'Oasis de Thèbes et dans les déserts situés à l'Orient et à
l'Occident de la Thébaïde fait pendant les années 1815, 1816, 1817 et 1818,Paris, 1821-
1862.
Caminos 1954
Caminos, R. A., Late-Egyptian Miscellanies, (Brown Egyptological Studies 1), London,
1954.
Carter-Gardiner 1917
Carter, H., Gardiner, A. H., “The Tomb of Ramesses IV and the Turin Plan of a Royal
Tomb”, JEA 4, 1917, 130-158.
Černý 1927a
Černý J., “Le culte d'Amenophis I chez les ouvriers de la Nécropole thébaine”, BIFAO
27, 1927, 159-203.
Černý 1927b
Černý, J., “Quelques ostraca hiératiques inédits de Thèbes au Musée du Caire”, ASAE
27, 1927, 183-210.
224
Černý 1927c
Černý, J., “Papyrus Salt 124 (Brit. Mus. 10055)”, JEA 15, 1929, 243-258.
Černý 1929
Černý, J., “L'identité des ‘Serviteurs dans la Place de Verité’ et des ouvriers de la
nécropole royale de Thèbes”, RdÉ 2, 1929, 200-209.
Černý 1931
Černý, J., "Ostrakon Nr. 2973 der Staatl. Ermitage zu Leningrad", ArOr 3, 1931, 395-
399.
Černý 1935a
Černý, J., Catalogue des ostraca hiératiques non littéraires de Deir el Médineh, Cairo.
Tome I (Nos 1 à 113), 1935 = Documents de fouilles, 3.
Černý 1935b
Cerný, J., Catalogue Général des Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. Nos.
25501-25832: Ostraca hiératiques. Tomes I et II, Cairo, 1935.
Černý 1936
Cerný, J., “Datum des Todes Ramses' III. und der Thronbesteigung Ramses' IV.” ZAS
72, 1936, 109-18.
Černý 1937a
Tome II (Nos 114 à 189), 1937 = Documents de fouilles, 4.
Černý 1937b
Tome III (Nos 190 à 241), 1937 = Documents de fouilles, 5.
Černý 1939
Tome IV (Nos 242 à 339), 1939 = Documents de fouilles, 6.
Černý 1945
Černý, J. "The Will of Naunakhte and the Related Documents," JEA 31, 1945, 42-53.
225
Černý 1951
Tome V (Nos 340 à 456), 1951 = Documents de fouilles, 7.
Černý 1954
Černý, J., Prices and Wages in Egypt in the Ramesside Period. CHM I, 4, 1954, 903-
921.
Černý 1955
Černý, J., “The Storehouses of This”, in: Studi in memoria di Ippolito Rosellini nel primo
centenario della morte (4 giugno 1843 - 4 giugno 1943), Vol. II, Pisa, 1955, 29-31.
Černý 1957
Černý, J., Gardiner, A.H., Hieratic Ostraca, Vol. I, Oxford, 1957.
Černý 1962
Černý, J., "Review of Wolfgang Helck, Zur Verwaltung des Mittleren und Neuen
Reichs," BiOr 19, 1962, 143.
Černý 1970
Tome VII (Nos 624 à 705), 1970 = Documents de fouilles, 14.
Černý 1973a
Černý, J., A Community of Workmen at Thebes in the Ramesside Period, BdE 50, 1973.
Černý 1973b
Černý, J., The Valley of the Kings. Fragments d'un manuscrit inachevé, BdE 61, 1973.
Černý 1985
Cerny, J., Paper and Books in Ancient Egypt, Chicago, 1985.
Černý 1986
Cerny, J., Papyrus hiératiques de Deir-el-Médineh. T. II: Nos XVIII-XXXIV, documents
de fouilles - IFAO; t. 22, Cairo, 1986.
226
Černý MMS
Černý, J., Unpublished manuscripts in the Griffith Institute Archive, Oxford.
Černý NB
Černý, J., Unpublished notebooks, with transcriptions of ostraca and papyri in the Griffith
Institute Archive, Oxford.
Chabas 1867
Chabas, F., “Sur un ostracon de la collection Cailliaud”, ZÄS 5, 1867, 37–40.
Chabas 1869
Chabas, F., “Sur quelques données des Papyrus Rollin”, ZÄS 7, 1869, 85-92.
Christophe 1953
Christophe, L., A., “Les enseignements de l'ostracon 148 de Deir el-Médineh”, BIFAO
52,1953, 113-144.
Cilli 2014
Cilli, D., “A New Corpus of Hieratic Ostraca from the Valley of Kings (KV 47)”, in: Toivari-
Viitala, J. et al. (eds) Proceedings of the Deir el-Medina Studies Conference,
Helsinki/Finland, June 24th to 26th 2009, The Finnish Egyptological Society - Occasional
Papers 2, 2014, 7-15.
Collier 2004
Collier, M., Dating late XIXth dynasty ostraca, Leiden, 2004.
Collier-Quirke 2006
Collier, M., Quirke, S., The UCL Lahun Papyri: Accounts, Oxford, 2006.
Collier-Quirke 2004
Collier, M., Quirke, S., The UCL Lahun Papyri: Religious, Literary, Legal, Mathematical
and Medical, Oxford, 2004.
Collier-Quirke 2002
Collier, M., Quirke, S., The UCL Lahun Papyri: Letters, Oxford, 2002.
227
Condon 1984
Condon, V., “Two Account Papyri of the Late Eighteenth Dynasty (Brooklyn 35.1453 A
and B)”, RdE 35, 1984, 57-82.
Condon 1986
Condon, V., “Two variant accounts?” by Janssen?, VA I, 3, 109-112, VA II, 1986, 23-29.
Daressy 1901
Daressy, G., Ostraca in Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du
Caire nos 25001-2535, Cairo, 1901.
Daressy 1912
Daressy, G., Ramsès-si-Ptah, Rec Trav 34, 1912, 39-52.
Daressy 1927
Daressy, M. G., “Quelques ostraca de Biban el Molouk”, ASAE 27, 1927, 161-182.
Davies 1997
Davies, B.G., Egyptian Historical Inscriptions of the Nineteenth Dynasty, Documenta
Mundi Aegyptiaca 2, Jonsered, 1997.
Davies 1999
Davies, B. G., Who’swho at Deir el-Medina. A prosopographic study of the royal
workmen’scommunity, EgUit 13, 1999.
Davies 2017
Davies, B. G., Variations in the size of the Deir el-Medina workforce. The Cultural
Manifestations of Religious Experience. Studies in Honour of Boyo G. Ockinga. Camilla
Di Biase-Dyson und Leonie Donovan (Eds.) Ägypten und Altes Testament, Vol.
85, 2017.
Deicher-Maroko 2015
Deicher, S., Maroko, E., Die Liste. Ordnungen von Dingen und Menschen in Ägypten,
Deicher, S., Maroko, E., eds, Ancient Egyptian Design, Contemporary Design History
and Anthropology of Design, 1, Berlin, 2015.
228
Demarée 1993
Demarée, R., J., "Recent Work on the Administrative Papyri in the Museo Egizio, Turin”,
in: Zaccone G.M. and di Netro T.R. ed., Sesto Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia.
Atti II, Turin, 1993, 101-105.
Demarée 2002a
Demarée, R.J., Ramesside Ostraca, London, 2002.
Demarée 2002b
Demarée, R.J., O. Heidelberg Inv. Nr. 567: fragment of a necropolis journal, ZAS 129, 2002,
109-114, tafel XVII-XIX.
Demarée 2004
Demarée, R.J., “Review of Helck, W., Die datierten und datierbaren Ostraka, Papyri und
Graffiti von Deir el-Medineh” OLZ 99 (3), 2004, 285-294.
Demarée 2005
Demarée, R.J., The Bankes Late Ramesside Papyri, (British Museum Research
Publication 155) London, 2005, 7-9, 34-37.
Demarée 2008
Demarée, R.J., Reports on Tomb-Construction at Saqqara in the New Kingdom, Saqqara
Newsletter 6, 2008, 7-10.
Demarée 2010
Demarée, R.J., “Ramesside Administrative Papyri in the Civiche Raccolte Archeologiche
e Numismatiche di Milano”, JEOL 42, 2010, 55-78.
Demarée 2015
Demarée, R. J., “A Late New Kingdom Administrative Miscellany on the verso of a
Magical Papyrus in the British Museum. Preliminary notes”, in: Verhoeven-van
Elsbergen, U., Ägyptologische "Binsen"-Weisheiten I – II: neue Forschungen und
Methoden der Hieratistik; Akten zweier Tagungen in Mainz im April 2011 und März 2013,
2015, 335-340.
229
Demarée 2016
Demarée, R. J., “The workmen who created the royal tombs”, in The Oxford Handbook
of the Valley of the Kings, Richard H. Wilkinson and Kent R. Weeks eds., Oxford-New
York, 2016, 75-86.
Demarée 2016/2017
Demarée, R.J., “Announcement of the passing of Ramesses II”, JEOL 46, 2016/2017,
117-121.
Demarée 2017
Demarée, R. J., “New information on the mining expedition to the Wadi Hammamat in
year 3 of Ramesses IV”, in: Du Sinaï au Soudan: itinéraires d’une égyptologue. Mélange
offerts au Professeur Dominique Valbelle, Paris, 2017, 101-106.
Demarée-Egberts 1992
Demarée, R.J., Egberts A. ed., Village Voices. Proceedings of the symposium 'Texts
from Deir el-Medîna and their interpretation’, Leiden, May 31 - June 1, 1991 (CNWS
Publications 13), Leiden, 1992.
Demarée-Egberts 2000
Demarée, R.J., Egberts A. ed., Deir el-Medina in the third millennium AD: a tribute to
Jac. J. Janssen, EgUit 14, 2000.
Demarée-Haring 1999
Demarée, R.J., B.J.J. Haring, “The Deir el-Medina Database”, in: Hafemann, I. ed., Wege
zu einem digitalen Corpus ägyptischer Texte. Akten der Tagung “Datenbanken im
Verbund” (Berlin, 30. September – 2. Oktober 1999) (Thesaurus Linguae Aegyptiae 2),
Berlin, 2003, 41-48.
Demarée-Valbelle 2011
Demarée, R. J, Valbelle, D., Les registres de recensement du village de Deir el-Medineh
(Le "Stato Civile"), Leuven, 2011.
Demichelis 2002a
Demichelis, S., Il calendario delle feste di Montu. Papiro ieratico CGT 54021, verso
(Catalogo del Museo Egizio di Torino, serie prima – monumenti e testi, 10), Turin, 2002.
230
Demichelis 2002b
Demichelis, S., “Le Papyrus de la grève“, in: Andreu, G. ed., Les artistes de
Pharaon. Deir el-Médineh et la Vallée des Rois, Paris 2002, 208 and 209, no. 162.
Demichelis 2016
Demichelis, S. “Ricomporre frammenti. Lavori in corso tra i papiri del Museo Egizio
di Torino”, in: Ciampini E., Demichelis S, Dal Po al Nilo. Studi di filologia ed epigrafia
egizia, Memorie della Classe di Scienze Morali, vol. 40, Torino, 2016, 3-44.
Donadoni Roveri 1988

Donadoni Roveri, A. M., Il Museo Egizio di Torino: guida alla lettura di una civiltà, Novara,
1988.
Donadoni Roveri 1989

Donadoni Roveri, A.M., Dal museo al museo. Passato e futuro del Museo Egizio di
Torino, (Archivi di archeologia), Torino, 1989.
Donadoni Roveri-D'Amicone-Leospo 1994

Donadoni Roveri, A. M., D'Amicone, E., Leospo E., Gebelein: il villaggio e la necropoli,
Torino, 1994.
Donker van Heel 1992

Donker van Heel, K., “Use and Meaning of the Egyptian Term wAH-mw” in: Demarée, R.J.
and Egberts A. ed., Village Voices. Proceedings of the symposium 'Texts from Deir el-
Medîna and their interpretation’, Leiden, May 31 - June 1, 1991 (CNWS Publications 13),
Leiden, 1992, 19-30.
Donker van Heel 2003

Donker van Heel, K., “Clusters of individual handwritings and the duplication of
information in the administrative documentsfrom deir el-Medina” in: Donker van Heel, K.
and Haring, B.J.J., Writing in a Workmen’s Village. Scribal Practice in Ramesside Deir
el-Medina, EgUit 16, 2003, 39-48.
Donker van Heel-Haring 2003

Donker van Heel, K. and Haring, B.J.J., Writing in a Workmen’s Village. Scribal Practice
in Ramesside Deir el-Medina, EgUit 16, 2003.
231
Dorn 2006
Dorn, A., “MAA-nxt.w=f, ein (?) einfacher Arbeiter, schreibt Briefe“, in: A. Dorn and T.
Hofmann ed., Living and Writing in Deir el-Medine. Socio-historical Embodiment of Deir
el-Medine Texts, Aeg.Helv. 19, 2006, 67-85.
Dorn 2011
Dorn, A., Arbeiterhütten im Tal der Könige: ein Beitrag zur altägyptischen
Sozialgeschichte aufgrund von neuem Quellenmaterial aus der Mitte der 20. Dynastie
(ca. 1150 v. Chr.). [I]: Text- und Katalogband; [II]: Tafeln 1-480; [III]: Tafeln 481-784,
Aeg.Helv. 23, 2011.
Dresbach 2012
Dresbach, G., Zur Verwaltung in der 20. Dynastie: das Wesirat. Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz, 2012.
Edgerton 1951
Edgerton, W., F., “The Strikes in Ramses III's Twenty-Ninth Year”, JNES 10, 1951, 137-
145.
Eichler 1990
Eichler, S., “Untersuchungen zu den Wasserträgern von Deir el-Medineh I, SAK 17
(1990) 135-175.
Eisenlohr 1897
Eisenlohr, A., Rollin Papyri and their Baking Calculations. PSBA XIX, 1897, 91-104, 115-
120, 147-155, 252-265.
Endesfelder 1967
Endesfelder, E., “Drei neuägyptische hieratische Ostraka”, FuB, 8, 1967, Berlin, 65-69.
Engelbach-Gunn 1923
Engelbach, R., Gunn B., Harageh, British School of Archaeology in Egypt, London, 1923.
Erman 1910
Erman, A., Zwei Aktenstücke aus der thebanischen Gräberstadt, Reimer, 1910.
232
Erman 1911
Erman, A., Hieratische Papyrus aus den Königlichen Museen zu Berlin, Hrsg. von der
Generalverwaltung. 3. Bd, Schriftstücke der VI. Dynastie aus Elephantine.
Zaubersprüche für Mutter und Kind. Ostraka. Leipzig, 1911.
Eyre 1980a
Eyre, C.J., Employment and Labour Relations in the Theban Necropolis in the
Ramesside Period (diss., unpublished), Oxford, 1980.
Eyre 1980b
Eyre, C.J., 'An Accounts Papyrus from Thebes', JEA 66, 1980, 108-119, pls. XII and XIII.
Eyre 1987
Eyre, C.J., “Papyrus Deir el-Medîna XXIV: an Appeal for Wages?”, GM 98, 1987, 11-21.
Eyre 1996
Eyre, C. J., “Is Egyptian historical Literature “historical” or “literary”?”, in: Loprieno, A.
ed., Ancient Egyptian Literature: History and Forms, Leiden, 1996, 415-433.
Eyre 2009
Eyre, C. J., “On the Inefficiency of Bureaucracy”, in: Piacentini, P., Orsenigo, C. eds,
Egyptian archives: proceedings of the first session of the International Congress
Egyptian Archives/Egyptological Archives, Milano, September 9–10, 2008, Milano, 2009,
15–30.
Eyre 2013
Eyre, C. J., The use of documents in pharaonic Egypt, Series: Oxford studies in ancient
documents, Oxford, 2013.
Ezzamel 1997
Ezzamel, M., Accounting, Control and Accountability: Preliminary Evidence from Ancient
Egypt. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 8, 1997, 563-601.
Ezzamel-Hoskin 2002
Ezzamel, M. and Hoskin, K., Retheorizing the Relationship between Accounting, Writing
and Money with Evidence from Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. Critical Perspectives
on Accounting, Vol. 13, 2002, 333-367.
233
Farazmand 2009
Farazmand, A., Bureaucracy and Administration, Public Administration and Public Policy
153, 2nd edition, CRC Press, 2009.
Faulkner 1962
Faulkner, R. O., A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian, Griffith Institute, Oxford, 1962.
Fischer-Elfert 2000
Fischer-Elfert, H.-W., “Rest in pieces: fragments of absence from work in Deir el-Medina
(Pap. Berlin P. 14485 a+d+14449 c+g; I and 14448)”, in: Demarée, R.J. and Egberts A.
ed., Deir el-Medina in the third millennium AD: a tribute to Jac. J. Janssen, EgUit 14,
2000, 101-107.
Fischer-Elfert 2003
Fischer-Elfert, H.-W., "Representations of the Past in the New Kingdom Literature", in:
Tait, J., W., ‘Never Had the Like Occurred’: Egypt's View of Its Past, London, 2003, 119-
138.
Fischer-Elfert 2012
Fischer-Elfert, H.-W., “A Strike in the Reign of Merenptah? Plus the Endowment of Three
Cult Statu(ett)es on Behalf of the Same King at Deir el-Medina (Pap. Berlin P. 23300 and
P. 23301)”; in:
Forschung in der Papyrussammlung: eine Festgabe für das Neue Museum, Lepper, V.
M. (ed.), Berlin, 2012, 47-73, pl. 6-9.
Fisher 2010
Fisher, M., “A New Kingdom ostracon found in the King’s Valley”, in Perspectives on
Ancient Egypt. Studies in honor of Edward Brovarski. Cahier N° 40. Hawass, Z., Der
Manuelian, P., Hussein, R. eds., 201, 93-100.
Fowler 1982
Fowler, A., Kinds of Literature: An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes.
Oxford, 1982.
Frandsen 1989
Frandsen, P. J., “A Word for 'Causeway' and the Location of 'The Five Walls'”, JEA 75,
1989, 113-123.
234
Frandsen 1990
Frandsen, P.J., “Editing reality: the Turin Strike Papyrus“, in: Studies in Egyptology-
presented to Miriam Lichtheim, II vol. Israelit-Groll, S., ed., Jerusalem, 1990. 166-169.
Frandsen 1991
Frandsen, P.J., The Carlsberg Papyri I, Copenhagen, 1991.
Gardiner 1931
Gardiner, A. H., Late-Egyptian Stories, Bruxelles, 1931.
Gardiner 1937
Gardiner, A.H., Late-Egyptian Miscellanies, (Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca VII), Bruxelles,
1937.
Gardiner 1941
Gardiner, A. H., “Ramesside Texts Relating to the Taxation and Transport of Corn”, JEA
27, 1941, 19-73.
Gardiner 1948
Gardiner, A.H., Ramesside Administrative Documents, Oxford, 1948.
Gardiner 1955
Gardiner, A.H., The Ramesseum Papyri, Griffith Institute, Oxford, 1955.
Gardiner 1957
Gardiner, A. H., Egyptian Grammar, Griffith Institute, Oxford, 3rd ed., 1957.
Gauthier 1914
Gauthier, H., Le livre des rois d’Égypte: recueil de titres et protocoles royaux, noms
propres de rois, reines, princes et princesses et parents de rois, suivi d’un index
alphabétique. T.III, de la XIX à la XXIV dynastie, Cairo,1914.
Geller 1990
Geller, M. J., "Babylonian Astronomical Diaries and Corrections of Diodorus",
BSOAS 53 (1), 1990, 1-7.
235
Gitton 1975
Gitton, M., L'épouse du dieu Ahmes Néfertary. Documents sur sa vie et son culte
posthume (Annales littéraires de l’Université de Besancon, Centre de Recherches
d’Histoire Ancienne 15), Paris, 1975.
Glick-Livesey-Wallis 2005
Glick, T. F., Livesey, S. J., Wallis, F., Medieval science, technology, and medicine: an
encyclopedia, 2005, New York.
Goedicke-Wente 1962
Goedicke, H., Wente E. F., Ostraka Michaelides, Wiesbaden, 1962.
Golénischeff 1913
Golénischeff, W., Les Papyrus hieratiques no. 1115, 1116a et 1116b de L'Ermitage
Imperial à St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, 1913.
Grajetzki 2004
Grajetzki, W., Harageh, an Egyptian burial ground for the rich around 1800 BC, London,
2004.
Grandet 2000
Grandet, P., Catalogue des ostraca hiératiques non littéraires de Deir el Médineh VIII
(Nos. 706-830), Cairo, 2000 = DFIFAO 39.
Grandet 2002
Grandet, P., “Ostracon: un ouvrier retrouve la tombe de ses ancêtres“, in: Andreu, G.
ed., Les artistes de Pharaon. Deir el-Médineh et la Vallée des Rois, Paris 2002, 294, no.
241.
Grandet 2003
Grandet, P., Catalogue des ostraca hiératiques non littéraires de Deir el Médineh IX
(Nos. 831-1000), Cairo, 2003 = DFIFAO 41.
Grandet 2003b
Grandet, P., “Travaux, grèves et personnages célèbres aux XIXe et XXe dynasties”, in:
G. Andreu ed., Deir el-Médineh et la Vallée des Rois. La vie en Égypte au temps des
236
pharaons du Nouvel Empire. Actes du colloque organisé par le musée du Louvre les 3
et 4 mai 2002, Paris, 2003, 209-233.
Grandet 2006
Grandet, P., Catalogue des ostraca hiératiques non littéraires de Deîr el-Médînéh X (Nos
10001-10123), Cairo, 2006 = DFIFAO 46.
Grandet 2016
Grandet, P., “Un document relatif aux grèves de Deîr el-Médînéh en l'an 29 de Ramsès III et
un fragment de l'Enseignement d'Amennakhté, §39-48: O. IFAO 1255 A-B (ONL 514 A-B)”, in:
Aere perennius: mélanges égyptologiques en l'honneur de Pascal Vernus. Collombert, P. &
Al. (ed.). OLA 242, 2016, 327-359.
Grapow 1949
Grapow, H., Studien zu den Annalen Thutmosis des Dritten und zu ihnen verwandten
historischen Berichten des neuen Reiches. Abhandlungen der Deutschen Akademie der
Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1949.
Griffith 1891
Griffith, F. L., “The account papyrus no.18 of Boulaq”, ZAS 29, 1891, 102-116.
Griffith 1898
Griffith, F. L., Hieratic papyri from Kahun and Gurob: (principally of the Middle kingdom),
London, 1898.
Gutgesell 1983
Gutgesell, M., Die Datierung der Ostraka und Papyri aus Deir el-Medineh und ihre
ökonomische Interpretation, Bd. 1. Hildesheim, 1983.
Gutgesell 1984
Gutgesell, M., “Eine neue Wachhabendenliste aus Hildesheim”, SAK 11, 1984, 227–229.
Gutgesell 1989
Gutgesell, M., Arbeiter und Pharaonen: Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte im Alten
Ägypte, Hildesheim, 1989.
237
Hagen 2016
Hagen, F., “On Some Movements of the Royal Court in New Kingdom Egypt”, in: Another
mouthful of dust. Egyptological Studies in Honour of Geoffrey Thorndike Martin. J. Van
Dijk (ed.). OLA 246, 2016, 155-181.
Hagen forthcoming
Hagen, F., “Libraries in Ancient Egypt, c. 1600–800 BC”, in: Ryholt, K., Barjamovic, G.
eda, Libraries Before Alexandria, Oxford.
Hagen-Soliman 2018
Hagen, F., Soliman, D., M., “Archives in Ancient Egypt, 2500–1000 BCE “, in: Bausi, A.,
Brockmann, C., Friedrich, M., Kienitz, S. (eds), Manuscripts and archives: comparative
views on record-keeping, Studies in manuscript cultures 11, Berlin, 2018, 71-170.
Häggman 2002
Häggman, S., Directing Deir el-Medina. The External Administration of the
Necropolis (Uppsala Studies in Egyptology 4), Uppsala, 2002.
Hari 1964
Hari, R., Horemheb et la reine Moutnedjemet ou la fin d'une dynastie, Genève, 1964.
Haring 1993
Haring, B.J.J., “Libyans in the Theban region, 20th Dynasty”, in: Zaccone G.M. and di
Netro T.R. ed., Sesto Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia. Atti II, Turin, 1993,159-
165.
Haring 1997
Haring, B.J.J., Divine Households. Administrative and Economic aspects of the New
Kingdom royal memorial temples in western Thebes, EgUit 12, 1997.
Haring 1998
Haring, B.J.J., “Temple or domain? Critical remarks on the espression pr Imn in the New
Kingdom Administrative Texts”, in: Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress
of Egyptologists, Cambridge 3-9 September 1995, C.J. Eyre (ed.). OLA 82, 1998, 539-
545.
238
Haring 2000
Haring, B.J.J., “Towards Decoding the Necropolis Workmen’s Funny Signs”, GM 178,
2000, 45-58.
Haring 2003
Haring, B.J.J., “From Oral Practice to Written Record in Ramesside Deir el-Medina”,
JESHO 46, 2003, 249-272.
Haring 2004
Haring, B. J. J., “Hieratic varia”, JEA 90, 2004, 215-221.
Haring 2006
Haring, B.J.J., Scribes and Scribal Activity at Deir el-Medina, in: A. Dorn and T. Hofmann
ed., Living and Writing in Deir el-Medine. Socio-historical Embodiment of Deir el-Medine
Texts, Aeg.Helv. 19, 2006, 107-112.
Haring 2009a
Haring, B.J.J., “Workmen's Marks on Ostraca from the Theban Necropolis: A Progress
Report”, in: B.J.J. Haring & O.E. Kaper ed., Pictograms or Pseudo Script? Non-textual
identity marks in practical use in Ancient Egypt and elsewhere. Proceedings of a
Conference in Leiden, 19-20 December 2006, EgUit 25, 2009, 143-167.
Haring 2009b
Haring, B.J.J., “On the Nature of the Workmen’s Marks of the Royal Necropolis
Administration in the New Kingdom”, in: P. Andrássy, J. Budka & F. Kammerzell
ed., Non-Textual Marking Systems, Writing and Pseudo Script from Prehistory to Modern
Times (Lingua Aegyptia - Studia monographica 8), Göttingen, 2009, 123-135.
Haring forthcoming
Haring, B. J. J., “Material matters. Documentary Papyri and Ostraca in Late Ramesside
Thebes”, in: Donker van Heel, K., Hoogendijk, C., eds., Beyond Papyri: The Materiality
of Ancient texts, Leiden and Boston, forthcoming.
Haring-Soliman 2014
Haring, B.J.J., Soliman, D. M., “Reading Twentieth Dynasty Ostraca with Workmen’s
Marks”, in: B.J.J. Haring, O.E. Kaper, R. van Walsem ed., The workman's progress:
239
studies in the village of Deir el-Medina and other documents from western Thebes in
honour of Rob Demarée, EgUit 28, 2014, 73-93.
Harper-Kalinowski 2017
Harper, D., Kalinowski, M., Books of Fate and Popular Culture in Early China. The
Daybook Manuscripts of the Warring States, Qin, and Han. Series: Handbook of Oriental
Studies. Section 4 China, Volume 33, Brill, 2017.
Hayes 1955
Hayes, W. C., A Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom in the Brooklyn Museum. Brooklyn
Museum, reprint of the 1955 editon.
Helck 1963a
Helck, W., Materialien zur Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Neuen Reiches, Wiesbaden. Vol.
III, 1963.
Helck 1963b
IV, 1963.
Helck 1965
V, 1965.
Helck 1969
VI, 1969.
Helck 1974
Helck, W., “Altägyptischen Aktenkunde des 3. und 2. Jahrtausend”, MÄS 31, 1974.
Helck 1984
Helck, W., “Der Anfang des Papyrus Turin 1900 und 'Recycling' im Alten Ägypten”, CdÉ
59, 1984, 242–247.
240
Helck 1992
Helck, W., “Begräbnis Pharaos”, in: U. Luft ed., The Intellectual Heritage of Egypt.
Studies presented to László Kákosy by friends and colleagues on the occasion of his
60th birthday. StudAeg 14, 1992, 267-276.
Helck 2002
Helck, W., Die datierten und datierbaren Ostraka, Papyri und Graffiti von Deir el-Medineh
(Bearbeitet von A. Schlott) (Ägyptologische Abhandlungen 63), Wiesbaden, 2002.
Hoffmeier 1993
Hoffmeier, J., K., "The Problem of ‘History’ in Egyptian Royal Inscriptions”, in: Zaccone
G.M. and di Netro T.R. ed., Sesto Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia. Atti II, Turin,
1993, 291-299.
Horváth 2009
Horváth Z., “Temple(s) and Town at El-Lahun: a study of Ancient Toponyms in the el-
Lahun Papyri”, in Archaism and Innovation: Studies in the Culture of Middle Kingdom
Egypt, New Haven-Philadelphia, 2009, 171-203.
Hoskin-Macve 1988
Hoskin, K., Macve, R., The Genesis of Accountability: The West Point Connection’,
Accounting, Organization and Society, Vol. 13, 1988.
Hoskin-Macve 1992
Hoskin, K., Macve, R., Accounting and the Genesis of Managerialism: Towards an
Understanding of the Springfield Armory Episode, Working Paper, University of Warwick,
1992.
http://dem-online.gwi.uni-muenchen.de/sammlung.php?sml=2 (last checked on August

2017).
http://dmd.wepwawet.nl/ (last checked on August 2017).
http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/online_research_catalogues/ramesseum_papy
ri/preface.aspx (last checked on April 2015).
241
Hudson 2015
Hudson, S., E., “Three New Deir el-Medina Absence Lists in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford”,
ZAS 142(1), 2015, 45-54.
Janssen 1961
Janssen, J. J., Two ancient Egyptian ship's logs: Papyrus Leiden I 350 verso and
Papyrus Turin 2008 + 2016, Leiden, 1961.
Janssen 1975
Janssen, J.J., Commodity Prices from the Ramesside Period. An Economic Study of the
Village of Necropolis Workmen at Thebes, Leiden, 1975.
Janssen 1979
Janssen, J.J., “Background Information on the Strikes of Year 29 of Ramesses
III”, OrAnt 18, 1979, 301-308.
Janssen 1980
Janssen, J.J., “Absence from Work by the Necropolis Workmen of Thebes”, SAK 8,
1980, 127-152.
Janssen 1984
Janssen, J. J., “A curious error”, BIFAO 84, 1984, 303-306.
Janssen 1985
Janssen, J. J., “Two variant accounts?”, VA I, 1985, 109-112.
Janssen 1992
Janssen, J. J., “Gear for the tombs (O. Turin 57366 and O. BM. 50733 + O. Petrie 30),
RdE 43, 1992, 107-122.
Janssen 1997
Janssen, J.J., Village Varia. Ten Studies on the History and Administration of Deir el-
Medîna, EgUit 11, 1997.
Janssen 2003
Janssen, J.J., Woodcutters, potters and doorkeepers: service personnel of the Deir el-
Medina workmen, Leiden, 2003.
242
Janssen 2005
Janssen, J.J., “Accountancy at Deir el-Medîna: How accurate are the administrative
ostraca?”, SAK 33, 2005, 147-157.
Janssen 2005a
Janssen, J.J., Donkeys at Deir el-Medina, Leiden, 2005.
Janssen-Janssen 1997
Janssen, J., Janssen, R., “The Tale of a Lost Papyrus”, Minerva 8/6
(November/December 1997), 32-34.
Jiménez 2004
Jiménez, A., La piedra de Palermo: traducción y contextualización histórica, Madrid,
2004.
Kaplony-Heckel 2010
Kaplony-Heckel, U., “Das Wasser-Ellen-Tagebuch auf dem Ostrakon Strasbourg D 283”,
in: Honi soit qui mal y pense: Studien zum pharaonischen, griechisch-römischen und
spätantiken Ägypten zu Ehren von Heinz-Josef Thissen, OLA 194, 2010, 257-260.
Keimer 1941
Keimer, L., Études d'égyptologie. IFAO. Cairo, 1941.
Kemp 2018
Kemp, B. J., Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization, 3rd edition, Routledge, 2018.
Kitchen 1982
Kitchen, K.A., Pharaoh Triumphant. The Life and Times of Ramesses II, King of Egypt,
Warminster, 1982.
Koenig 1988
Koenig, Y., “Nouveaux textes hiératiques de la Vallée des Reines”. BIFAO 88, 1988,
113-129.
Koenig 1991
Koenig, Y., “Les ostraca hiératiques du musée du louvre”, RdE 42, 1991, 105.
243
Koenig 1997
Koenig, Y., Les ostraca hiératiques inédits de la Bibliothèque Nationale et Universitaire
de Strasbourg, Cairo, 1997.
Kóthay 2015
Kóthay, K., A., “Duties and Composition of the Personnel of the Cults as Lahun”, in:
Panagiotis Kousoulis and Nikolaos Lazaridis (eds), Proceedings of the Tenth
International Congress of Egyptologists, OLA 241, vol. 1, Leuven, 2015, 763-775.
Kraemer-Liszka 2016
Kraemer, B., Liszka, K., "Evidence for Administration of the Nubian Fortresses in the
Late Middle Kingdom: The Semna Dispatches", JEH 9, 2016, 1-65.
Krauss 1977
Krauss, R. “Untersuchungen zu König Amenmesse”, SAK 5, 1977, 131-174.
Krauss 1997
Krauss, R., “Untersuchungen zu König Amenmesse: Nachträge”, SAK 24, 1997, 161-
184.
Lagerwey-Kalinowski 2008
Lagerwey, J., Kalinowski, M., “Early Chinese Religion: Part One: Shang Through Han (1250
BC-220 AD)”, Handbook of Oriental Studies. Section 4 China, Volume: 21/1, 2008, 386.
Leach 2006
Leach, B., “A conservation history of the Ramesseum Papyri”, JEA 92, 2006, 225–240.
Lesko 1994
Lesko, L. H., Pharaoh’s workers. The villagers of Deir el-Medina, Cornell University
Press, 1994.
Letellier 1978
Letellier, B., Le Louvre présente aux Musées de Metz: La vie quotidienne chez les
artisans de Pharaon: du 12 novembre 1978 au 28 février 1979, Moulins les Metz, 1978.
244
Lieblein 1870
Lieblein, J. Les récits de récolte datés dans l'ancienne Égypte comme éléments
chronologiques, Rec. Trav. 1.4, 1870, 141-152.
Lieblein-Chabas 1868
Lieblein, I., Chabas, F., Deux papyrus hiératiques du Musée de Turin (Mémoires de la
Société des Sciences à Christiana), Christiania, 1868.
López 1978
CGT N. 57001-57092
López, J., Ostraca ieratici. Opera eseguita con il contributo del Consiglio nazionale delle
ricerche. Museo egizio di Torino. Consiglio nazionale delle ricerche (Italy). Milano:
Cisalpino-La Goliardica, 1978.
López 1980
CGT N. 57093-57319
López 1982
CGT N. 57320-57449
López 1984
CGT N. 57450-57568. Tabelle Lignee N. 58001-58007
Lüddeckens- Kaplony-Heckel 1986

Lüddeckens, E., U. Kaplony-Heckel, U., Aegyptische Handschriften. Tl. 3, Stuttgart,
1986.
245
Luft 1992a
Luft, U., Das Archiv von Illahun: Briefe 1. Hieratische Papyri aus den Staatlichen Museen
zu Berlin - Preußischer Kulturbesitz, 1,1, Berlin, 1992.
Luft 1992b
Luft, U., Die chronologische Fixierung des agyptischen Mittleren Reiches nach dem
Tempelarchiv von Illahun, Wien, 1992.
Luft 2006
Luft U., Urkunden zur Chronologie der späten 12. Dynastie: Briefe aus Illahun.
Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie 34. Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern
Mediterranean 7, 2006.
Mandeville 2014
Mandeville, R., Wage accounting in Deir el-Medina, Liverpool, 2014.
Mariette 1872
Mariette, A. Les papyrus egyptiens du Musee de Boulaq. Vol. II, Paris, 1872.
McDonald 1957
McDonald, A., The Style of Livy. Journal of Roman Studies, 47 (1-2), 1957, 155-172.
McDowell 1993
McDowell, A.G., Hieratic Ostraca in the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow: (The Colin
Campbell Ostraca), Oxford, 1993.
McDowell 1999
McDowell, A.G., Village Life in Ancient Egypt. Laundry Lists and Love Songs, Oxford,
1999.
Megally 1971a
Megally, M., Considérations sur les variations et la transformation des formes hiératiques
du papyrus E. 3226 du Louvre, BdE 31, 1971.
Megally 1971b
Megally, M., Le papyrus hiératique comptable E. 3226 du Louvre, BdE 36, 1971.
246
Megally 1977a
Megally, M., Recherches sur l'économie, l'administration et la comptabilité égyptiennes
à la XVIIIe dynastie d'après le papyrus E. 3226 du Louvre, BdE 46, 1977.
Megally 1977b
Megally, M., Notions de comptabilite: à propos du papyrus E.3226 du Musée du Louvre,
BdE 47, 1977.
Menu 1973
Menu, B., “Le prêt en droit égyptien”, CRIPEL 1, 1973, 59-141.
Menu 1982
Menu, B., Recherches sur l'histoire juridique, économique et sociale de l'ancien Égypte,
Versailles, 1982, 217-300.
Michalowski 1989
Michalowski, P., The Lamentation over the Destruction of Sumer and Ur, Winona Lake
IN, 1989.
Miniaci-Quirke 2009
Miniaci, G., Quirke, S., “Reconceiving the Tomb in the Late Middle Kingdom. The Burial
of the Accountant of the Main Enclosure Neferhotep at Dra Abu al-Naga” in: BIFAO 109,
2009, 339-383.
Möller 1927
Möller, G., Hieratische Paläographie: die aegyptische Buchschrift in ihrer Entwicklung
von der Fünften Dynastie bis zur römischen Kaiserzeit. Zweiter Band: Von der Zeit
Thutmosis’ III bis zum Ende der einundzwanzigsten Dynastie, mit acht Tafeln
Schriftproben. Second edition, Leipzig, 1927.
Moreno García 2013

Moreno García, J., C., Eds., Ancient Egyptian Administration, Leiden, 2013.
Müller 2004
Müller, M., “Der Turiner Streikpapyrus (P. Turin 1880)”, in: Janowski, B. and Wilhelm G.
ed., Texte zum Rechts- und Wirtschaftsleben (Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten
Testaments, Neue Folge, 1), Gütersloh, 2004, 165-184.
247
Müller 2014
Müller, M., “Deir el-Medina in the Dark-the Amarna Period in the History of the Village:
Workmen Moving to Akhetaten?”, in: Toivari-Viitala, J. et al. (eds) Proceedings of the
Deir el-Medina Studies Conference, Helsinki/Finland, June 24th to 26th 2009, The
Finnish Egyptological Society - Occasional Papers 2, 2014, 156-168.
Muszynski 1977
Muszynski, M., “P. Turin Cat. 2070/154”, Or.Ant 16, 1977, 183-200.
Neveu 1990
Neveu, F., “A propos du P. DM 28. Un conseil royal consacré aux affaires de
«la tombe»”, RdE 41, 1990, 143-152.
Olmstead 1915
Olmstead, A.T., “The Assyrian Chronicle”, JAOS 34, 1915, 344-368.
O' Mara 1979

O' Mara, P.F., The Palermo stone and the archaic kings of Egypt, California, 1979.
Oxford Dictionary 1982

Sykes, J.B., The concise Oxford dictionary of current English, Oxford, 1982.
Parkinson 1996
Parkinson, R., “Types of literature in the Middle Kingdom”, in: Loprieno, A. ed., Ancient
Egyptian Literature: History and Forms, Leiden, 1996, 297-312.
Parkinson 1999
Parkinson, R., Cracking Codes. The Rosetta Stone and Decipherment, London 1999.
Parkinson 2002
Parkinson, R., Poetry and culture in Middle Kingdom Egypt: a dark side to perfection,
London-New York, 2002.
Parkinson 2011
Parkinson, R. B., The Ramesseum Papyri, British Museum Online Research Catalogue,
2011.
248
Peden 2000
Peden, A.J., “The Workmen of Deir el-Medina and the Decline of Textual Graffiti at West
Thebes in Late Dynasty XX and Early Dynasty XXI”, in: Demarée, R.J. and Egberts A.
ed., Deir el-Medina in the third millennium AD: a tribute to Jac. J. Janssen, EgUit 14,
2000, 287-290.
Peden 2001
Peden, A., J., “Where did Ramesses VI bury his nephew?”, GM 181, 2001, 83-88
Peet 1930
Peet, T. E., “An Ancient Egyptian ship’s log”, BIFAO 30, 1930, 481-490.
Pelegrin-Andreu-Lanoë-Pariselle 2016
Pelegrin, J., G., Andreu-Lanoë, G., Pariselle, C., “La production des ostraca en calcaire
dans la nécropole thébaine”, BIFAO 115, 2016, 325-352.
Peterson 1973
Peterson, B., Zeichnungen aus einer Totenstadt, Bildostraka aus Theben-West, ihre
Fundplätze, Themata und Zweckbereiche mitsamt einem Katalog der Gayer-Anderson-
Sammlung in Stockholm. Medelhavsmuseet Bulletin 7-8, 1973.
Petrie 1891
Petrie, W. M. F., Illahun, Kahun and Gurob. 1889-90. 1891, London.
Pleyte 1868
Pleyte, W., Les papyrus Rollin de la Bibliothèque impériale de Paris, Leiden, 1868.
Pleyte-Rossi 1869
Pleyte, W., Rossi, F., Papyrus de Turin. Texte et Planches, Leiden, 1869-1876.
Polis 2011
Polis, S. “Le serment du P. Turin 1880, v 2, 8-19: Une relecture de la construction iw bn
sDm.f à portée historique” in: M., Collier and Snape, S. (Eds.), Ramesside Studies, in
honour of K. A. Kitchen, Bolton, 2011, 387-401
249
Posener-Kriéger 1968
Posener-Kriéger, P. and J. de Cenival, Hieratic papyri in the British Museum. Fifth series.
The Abu Sir Papyri, London, 1968.
Posener-Kriéger, P., Les archives du temple funéraire de Néferirkarê-Kakaï: (Les
papyrus d'Abousir) traduction et commentaire, BdE 65, 1976.
Posener-Kriéger, “Construire une tombe a l’ouest de Mn-nfr (P. Caire 52002)”, RdE 33,
1981, 47-58.
Posener-Kriéger, “Au plaisir des paléographes. Papyrus Caire JE 52003”, in: P. Der
Manuelian and R. Freed (eds.), Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, Boston, 1996,
II, 655–664.
Posener-Kriéger, P., I papiri di Gebelein - scavi G. Farina, Demichelis, S. ed., 1935,
Torino, 2004.
Posener-Krieger, Verner, Vymazalova 2006

Posener-Krieger, P., Verner, M. and Vymazalova, H., The Pyramid Complex of
Raneferef: The Papyrus Archive. Abusir X. Prague, Czech Institute of Egyptology, 2006.
Quack 2014
Quack, J. F., “Totenbuch und Getreideabrechnung” in: D. Luft, J.F. Quack (Ed.),
Erscheinungsformen und Handhabungen Heiliger Schriften, MTK 5, 2014, 111-135.
Quibell 1896
Quibell, J.E., The Ramesseum. Egyptian Research Account 2, 1–21, pls 1–30a. London,
1896.
Quirke 1990
Quirke, S., The Administration of Egypt in the Late Middle Kingdom, New Malden, 1990.
250
Redford 1965
Redford, D. B., “The coregency of Tuthmosis III and Amenophis II”, JEA 51, 1965, 107-
122.
Redford 1965
Redford, D. B., “The Meaning and Use of the Term gnwt “Annals””, in: Junge, F., ed.,
Studien zu Sprache und Religion Ägyptens zu Ehren von Wolfhart Westendorf,
Göttingen, 1984, I, 327-341.
Redford 1986
Redford, D.B., Pharaonic King-Lists, Annals, and Day-Books: A Contribution to the Study
of the Egyptian Sense of History, SSEA Publication IV, Mississauga, Ontario: Benben
Publications, 1986.
Redford 2003
Redford, D. B., The Wars in Syria and Palestine of Thutmose III: Volume 16 of Culture
and history of the ancient Near East, Netherlands: Brill, 2003.
Ridley 1979
Ridley, R.T., The world's earliest annals: a modern journey in comprehension, Roma,
1979.
Roccati 1982
Roccati, A., La littérature historique sous l’Ancien Empire égyptien, Paris, 1982.
Roccati 2006
Roccati, A., “A chi servivano i papiri di Gebelein?”, in: L’Ufficio e il Documento. I luoghi,
i modi, gli strumenti dell'amministrazione in Egitto e nel Vicino Oriente antico. Atti delle
giornate di studio degli Egittologi e degli Orientalisti italiani, Milan, 2006, 87-91.
Rochberg-Halton 1991
Rochberg-Halton, F., "The Babylonian Astronomical Diaries", JAOS 111 (2), 1991, 323-
332.
251
Sauneron 1959
Sauneron, S., Catalogue des ostraca hiératiques non littéraires de Deir el Medineh
VI: numéros 550 à 623.
Scamuzzi 1965
Scamuzzi, E., Egyptian Art in the Egyptian Museum of Turin, New York, 1965.
Scharff 1922
Scharff, A., “Ein Rechnungsbuch des königlichen Hofes aus der 13. Dynastie”, ZAS 57,
1922, 51-68, Tafeln 1**-24**.
Schiaparelli 1923
Schiaparelli, E., Relazione sui lavori della missione archeologica italiana in Egitto:
esplorazione della "Valle delle Regine" nella necropoli di Tebe, Volume I, Torino, 1923.
Schneider 2000
Schneider, T., “Ramses X.: Person und Geschichte”, in: Jenni, H. ed., Das Grab
Ramses’ X. (KV 18) (Aeg. Helv. 16), Basel 2000, 81-104.
Schott 1990
Schott, S., Bücher und Bibliotheken im alten Ägypten: Verzeichnis der Buch- und Spruchtitel
und der Termini technici, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1990.
Sethe 1903
Sethe, K. H., Beitrage zur ältesten Geschichte Ägyptens, UGAÄ 3, 1903.
Simpson 1963
Simpson, W.K., Papyrus Reisner I: the records of a building project in the reign of
Sesostris I, Boston, 1963.
Simpson 1965
Simpson, W.K., Papyrus Reisner II: accounts of the Dockyard workshop at this in the
reign of Sesostris I, Boston, 1965.
Simpson 1969
Simpson, W.K., Papyrus Reisner III: the records of a building project in the early twelfth
Dynasty, Boston, 1969.
252
Simpson 1986
Simpson, W.K., Papyrus Reisner IV: personnel accounts of the early twelfth Dynasty,
Boston, 1986.
Smither 1941
Smither, P., “A Tax-Assessor's Journal of the Middle Kingdom”, JEA 27, 1941, 74-76.
Smither 1945
Smither, P., “The Semnah Despatches”, JEA 31, 1945, 3-10.
Spalinger 1977
Spalinger, A., “A Critical Analysis of the "Annals" of Thutmose III (Stucke V-VI)”. JARCE
14, 1977, 41-54.
Spalinger 1985
Spalinger, A., “Notes on the day summary accounts of P. Bulaq 18 and the
intradepartmental transfers”, SAK 12, 1985, 179-241.
Spalinger 1986
Spalinger, A., “Foods in P. Bulaq 18”, SAK 13, 1986, 207-247.
Spiegelberg 1895
Spiegelberg, W., “Das Geschäftsjournal eines ägyptischen Beamten in der Ramsesstadt
aus der Regierung Ramses’II”, Rec.Trav. 17, 1895, 143-160.
Spiegelberg 1896
Spiegelberg, W., Rechnungen aus der Zeit Setis I. (circa 1350 v. Chr.) mit anderen
Rechnungen des Neuen Reiches, 1: Text; 2: Dreiundvierzig Tafeln. Strassburg: Trübner,
1896.
Spiegelberg 1898a
Spiegelberg, W., Hieratic ostraka & papyri found by J.E. Quibell in the Ramesseum,
1895-6, London, 1898.
Spiegelberg 1898b
Spiegelberg, W., Zwei Beiträge zur Geschichte der Thebanischen Necropolis im Neuen
Reich, Strassburg, 1898.
253
Spiegelberg 1902
Spiegelberg, W., “Beiträge und Nachträge zu Daressys Publikation der hieratischen
Ostraca des Museums von Gizeh”, OLZ 5, 1902, 307-335.
St. John 1999

St. John, M., The Palermo stone - an arithmetical view. Together with a computer
graphics enhancement of the recto of the Palermo fragment, London, 1999.
Tallet 2010
Tallet, P., “La fin des Devoirs du Vizir”, in: Warmenbol, E., Angenot, V. éd, Thèbes aux
101 portes-mélanges à la mémoire de Roland Tefnin, Monumenta Aegyptica 12,
Bruxelles, 2010.
Tallet 2016
Tallet, P., “Un aperçu de la région Memphite à la fin du règne de Chéops selon le “journal
de Merer” (P. Jarf I-III)”, in: Décrire, imaginer, construire l'espace. Toponymie égyptienne
de l'Antiquité au Moyen Âge, RAPH 39, 2016, 13-30.
Tallet 2017
Tallet, P., Les papyrus de la mer Rouge I. le « Journal de Merer » (P. Jarf A et B),
MIFAO 136, 2017.
Tallet-Marouard 2014
Tallet, P., Marouard, G., “The harbor of Khufu on the Red Sea Coast at Wadi al-Jarf,
Egypt”, NEA 77/1, 2014, 4-14.
Tiradritti 1999
Tiradritti, F.,” La documentazione di Deir el-Medina”, in: SESH, lingue e scritture
nell'antico egitto, Milano, 1999, 130-135.
Toivari-Viitala 2006
Toivari-Viitala, J., “Absence from Work at Deir el-Medina”, in: A. Dorn and T. Hofmann
ed., Living and Writing in Deir el-Medine. Socio-historical Embodiment of Deir el-Medine
Texts, Aeg.Helv. 19, 2006, 155-159.
254
Trapani 2009
Trapani, M., “La terminologie concernant les archives dans les textes du nouvel empire”,
in: Egyptian Archives, Piacentini, P., Orsenigo, C. (eds). QuadAc 111, 2009, 103-114.
Valbelle 1985
Valbelle, D., Les ouvriers de la Tombe. Deir el-Médineh à l'époque ramesside, BdE 96,
1985.
Van den Berg-Donker van Heel 2000

Van den Berg, H., Donker van Heel, K., “A scribe’s cache from the Valley of Queens?
The palaeography of documents from Deir el-Medina: Some remarks’, in: Demarée, R.J.
and Egberts A. ed., Deir el-Medina in the third millennium AD: a tribute to Jac. J.
Janssen, EgUit 14, 2000, 9–49.
Van den Boorn 1988

Van den Boorn, G., P., F., The duties of the vizier: civil administration in the early New
Kingdom. London, 1988.
Van Dijk 1993

Van Dijk, J., The New Kingdom Necropolis of Memphis: Historical and Iconographical
Studies, Groningen, 1993.
Van Seters 1997

Van Seters, J., In Search of History: Historiography in the Ancient World and the Origins
of Bible History, Indiana, 1997, 150-151.
Ventura 1986
Ventura, R., Living in a City of the Dead. A Selection of Topographical and
Administrative Terms in the Documents of the Theban Necropolis. OBO 69, 1986.
Verner 1995
Verner, M., The pyramid complex of Khentkaus. Abusir III. Prague: Universitas Carolina
Pragensis, 1995.
Vernus 1980
Vernus, P., “Derechef les inscriptions de ¤A-mwt surnommé Kyky”, RdÉ 32, 1980, 145-
146.
255
Vernus 1991
Vernus, P., “Les ‘décrets’ royaux (wD-nsw): L’énconcé d’auctoritas comme genre”, in:”
Schoske, S. ed., Akten des 4. Internationalen Ägyptologen Kongresses München 1985,
BSAK 4, 1991, 239-246.
Vernus 2013
Vernus, P., “L’acte fondamentale du poivoir dans l’Égypte pharaonique: l’ordre royal
(oudj-nesou)”, in: Bussi, S., ed., Egitto dai Faraoni agli Arabi: atti del convegno Egitto:
amministrazione, economia, societá, cultura dai Faraoni agli Arabi. Milano, Università
degliStudi, 7–9 gennaio 2013, 2013, 21–35.
Vogel 2004
Vogel, C., Ägyptische Festungen und Garnisonen bis zum Ende des Mittleren Reiches,
HÄB 46, 2004.
Von Beckerath 1994

Von Beckerath, J., “Papyrus Turin 1898 +, verso”, SAK 21, 1994, 29-33.
Von Beckerath 1997

Von Beckerath, J., Chronologie des pharaonischen Ägypten: die Zeitbestimmung der
ägyptischen Geschichte von der Vorzeit bis 332 v. Chr, Mainz, 1997.
Von Beckerath 2000

Von Beckerath, J., “Bemerkungen zu Papyrus Turin 1885 Verso II-III”, in: Demarée, R.J.
and Egberts A. ed., Deir el-Medina in the third millennium AD: a tribute to Jac. J.
Janssen, EgUit 14, 2000, 1-7.
Waerzeggers 2012
Waerzeggers, C., “The Babylonian Chronicles: Classification and Provenance”. JNES
71/2, 2012, 285-298.
Warnemünde 2007
Warnemünde, G., “Pharaos Arbeiter - gut genährt und wohl versorgt”, Kemet - Die
Zeitschrift für Ägyptenfreunde 16/3, 2007, 31-35.
256
Wente 1972
Wente, E. F., “Review of: Papyrus Reisner III: The Records of a Building Project in the
Early Twelfth Dynasty by William Kelly Simpson”, JNES 31, No. 2, 1972, 138-139.
Wente 1973
Wente, E., F., “A Prince's Tomb in the Valley of the Kings”, JNES 32, 1973, 223-234.
Wilkinson 2000
Wilkinson, T.A.H., Royal annals of ancient Egypt: the Palermo Stone and its associated
fragments, London, 2000.
Wimmer 1995
Wimmer, S., Hieratische Paläographie der nicht-literarischen Ostraka der 19 und 20
Dynastie, vols. 1 (text) and 2 (tables) (Ägypten und Altes Testament 28), Munich, 1995.
Ziegler 2002
Ziegler, C., The Pharaohs, Milan, 2002.
257
Acknowledgments
Since I started working on my PhD at Leiden University, many things have changed in
my life. I established a Publishing House in Canary Islands together with my friend and
colleague Mila Àlvarez Sosa, again with her I started an archaeological project in Luxor,
and in the last years, our new projects brought us far away to discover Egypt in Cuba
and Ghana, “writing every page together”. To her I owe the realization of all my dreams.
I would like to express here my sincere thanks to all the friends, colleagues and
loved ones for their support and encouragement in writing this thesis.
In particular, I want to express my gratitude to Dr. Robert Demarée. Words fail to describe
his fatherly concern and his support during the past years for the patience and the
enormous help in providing me material and important data, for the enthusiasm shown
for my work and for allowing me to make use of his knowledge on the thousands of
fragmentary journals scattered all over the world. I am much indebted to Professor Olaf
Kaper for the kindness and the patience in reading my thesis. Moreover, I am grateful to
him for his feedback and interesting points of view. My sincerest thanks also to to Jennifer
Cairns for giving me comments on my English and to Maurizio Papalini for his help and
the time he devoted to the database. Without him, the online version simply would not
exist.
I am greatly indebted to my Italian “Clan”, my blood sister Elisa, Rosina, Chiara
and Daniela together with Rumi, Bambo and Martino, friends since I have memory, who
never stopped supporting me spiritually, even if far away, and who are now waiting me
home. A special mention goes to Silvia, “polpetta” who appeared literally at the door of
my life many years ago and never left, “ci sei sempre stata”; and to Valentina, who called
me one day by chance, and then came to meet me, starting a longlasting friendship. The
laughs and the tears since then are ours.
Many thanks are due to the new friends I made in Leiden during the years,
especially Viviana and Filippo, for their support, their laughs, friendship and love in the
difficult moments, and their help in arranging the day of my defence, and also, in no
order, Cocky, Lara, Jeroen, Vera, Alice, Renz, Renata, Arianna, Ibrahim, Bianca, Irene,
Fayola, Despi, Maxine, Maaike, Julia, Nicole…and all the NINO. I am also grateful to all
my colleagues, friends and roomates in the Netherlands who have made my life in Leiden
much easier and also to all the people, Egyptologists and non-Egyptologists, who made
it abundantly more complicated, pushing me to fight even harder for my dreams.
Finally, I direct my warmest thanks to my parents for always believing in me even
when I did not, and for making it possible for me to continue my studies in Egyptology,
and to Edgar for his never-failing support and patience, for his encouragement and
especially for his love. He is and will always be on my side as my biggest supporter.
258
259
CURRICULUM VITAE
Irene Morfini was born in Lucca, Italy, in 1980. She started her studies in the field of
Egyptology at the Faculty of Classical Studies, Pisa University, and achieved her MA
(Laurea) in 2005 with the evaluation of 110/110. During 2000-2006 she started gaining
field experience in Italy as field assistant in medieval and anthropological excavations.
In 2006 she was the winner of the scholarship Summer School of Egyptology in
Montepulciano (Italy) and started working in Egypt with the Italian Archaeological Mission
to Luxor (MAIL) in the funerary complex of Harwa (TT37) and Akhimenru (TT404) as
epigraphist, documenting, cataloguing and studying blocks and fragments of decoration
and copying and identifying texts. She was a team member of the MAIL until 2011, when
she was appointed Deputy-Director (and at the same time she was chosen as field
assistant by the Dutch Expedition to the New Kingdom Necropolis at Saqqara). In the
same year she obtained her second MA in Egyptian Language and Culture, at Leiden
University, and founded the Canary Association of Egyptology and the Publishing House
Ediciones ad Aegyptum, both in Tenerife (Spain).
At the end of 2012 she decided to continue her studies in Leiden and started her
PhD on the Necropolis journals of Deir el-Medina. In 2013 she obtained the permission
from the Ministry of Antiquities to work in Egypt with her own archaeological mission, the
Canarian-Tuscan Archaeological Mission in TT109, Luxor (Min Project), and in 2014 she
founded the NGO “Preserving Heritage for the Development” in order to support her
project in Egypt. In 2014 and 2015, the Min Project was the protagonist of two major
discoveries (a new XVIII Dynasty tomb and a ‘replica of the Osiris tomb’) and as a result,
she gave many interviews and presentations in Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Egypt and
Cuba. In 2015 she received the prize “Romano Silva” in Art and Culture by the Lions
Club of Lucca, Italy.
Amongst her publications, articles in Spanish, English and Dutch, and two books:
‘Tierras de Momias. La técnica de eternizar en Egipto y Canarias’, concerning the
mirlado, the mummification technique used in Canary Island, and the Catalogue of the
Egyptian collection held in the National Museum of Fine Arts in Havana (Cuba), a project
realized in cooperation with the Government of Tenerife. In 2016 she started working on
a forgotten and unpublished Egyptian collection held in the storerooms of the National
Museum of Accra, Ghana, with the intention of publishing a Catalogue of all the artifacts.
Since 2017 she is a staff member of CAMNES (Center for Ancient Mediterranean and
Near Eastern Studies) in Florence, Italy, cooperating with them by giving lectures and
organizing congresses.
260
SUMMARY
NECROPOLIS JOURNAL: DAILY RECORDS OF EVENTS IN AN
ANCIENT EGYPTIAN ARTISANS’ COMMUNITY
In Egyptological literature, Necropolis journals are considered as records written on

papyri and ostraca concerning the activities of the workmen or artisan community of Deir
el-Medina in Thebes. In these notes, written by the scribes in hieratic, information about
the gang of workmen employed in the construction of the royal tombs in the Valleys of
the Kings and the Valley of the Queens throughout the Ramesside period is given (c.
1300-1100 BC): their payments, presence or absence, collective administration, private
problems concerning individual crew members, internal perturbations (strikes, trials,
etc.), visits by officials and incursions from “foreigners”.
These documents are therefore of extreme interest as they provide detailed information
about the life of the village and its inhabitants. They have been labelled ‘Necropolis
journal” ever since the first publication of such documents from the late 20th Dynasty by
Botti and Peet 1928 (“Il Giornale della Necropoli di Tebe”). Since then, the idea of “a
journal” and notably “an events journal” developed amongst Egyptologists and it
appeared in almost all publications about the Deir el-Medina community, without really
saying what in fact this would mean in practice. The question has arisen as to whether
indeed this was a specific genre of document.
Is it correct to define such notes as journals? Would they be considered journals

from an ancient Egyptian point of view? What is a Necropolis journal and did the concept
of a Necropolis journal exist in the minds of the scribes of Deir el-Medina? What do the
different kinds of annals and day-books have in common? Who was the intended
readership? How many types of journal can we identify? How can the list of such
documents called journals become a useful updatable tool available to all scholars
interested in the subject?
These are our main research questions we tried to answer in this study.
This work examined whether the notes of the so-called Necropolis journal would be
considered as such according to the ancient Egyptian point of view, i.e. if the concept of
Necropolis journal existed. To this end, the concept of journal in a broader Egyptian
perspective has been researched comparing material ranging from the Old Kingdom until
the New Kingdom in order to identify common features and differences between these
records and the so-called Necropolis journal. Conclusions were then drawn in the form
of criteria to identify what a Necropolis journal is.
261
A new list of documents considered as Necropolis journals was then created

according to these criteria, and it was divided into two sections: documents dated with
certainty and documents not dated with certainty. All the documents dated with certainty
were then collected and investigated (together with photos, transcriptions and
translations). These documents all appear in a separate Appendix for reasons of space
and in order to be consulted easily.
We proceeded then to see if it was possible to understand for whom Necropolis
journals were written, i.e. who was the intended readership. In our opinion examining the
way the content of the notes is organised can tell us if they were meant for internal use
or instead to be submitted to a higher authority or simply to be audited. We can indeed
imagine that, if a document was written to be submitted to someone or to retrieve
information later, the scribe would try to write it and present it orderly: neat and clear,
with the intention of facilitating its reading. If, on the other hand, the document shows a
disordered appearance or the notes are written randomly on the page and occupy all the
available small spaces, it is rather improbable that such a document would end up in the
hands of someone else to be checked.
Based on the available inventory of dated documents, we could identify two main
groups according to their layout: on the one hand, sloppy and careless documents that
seem to have been hastily written and on the other hand, a group of more precise day-
books which are well-organised and written in neat and compact business-like
handwriting. Nonetheless, it became clear that the question “Who was the intended
readership of the day-books?” cannot be definitively answered. It is impossible to trace
a real and clear-cut distinction and place the documents into categories affirming with
certainty that some journals were for internal use and others were meant for a superior.
We lack evidence and can only guess and wait until new findings might throw light on
the issue. Surely, we can conclude that some documents, given the presence of control
marks as traces of the act of accessing and retrieving information in the material, suggest
that the scribes did not write simply for the sake of writing. Instead, these texts, at least
some of them, were somehow used and “checked”. Others were written and remained
documents for an internal use in the village.
Journals had therefore different audiences and different purposes.
There were thus different types of documents, all looking like journals, but they
must have had different purposes. We attempted to identify and describe smaller
subgroups of journal encountered according to their content (deliveries/provisions,
absences/presences, work completed and events concerning the community, which we
called respectively group A, B, C and D). For purposes of study only, we made note of
and list the differences amongst the types of journals. We realized that Necropolis
262
journal, even if it existed as a concept in the minds of the scribes of Deir el-Medina, was
not a fixed genre. But as a result of our research it has become clear that the Necropolis
journal was a type of “events journal”, for which some parallels can be found in war
diaries and ship’s logs.
The last objective of this study was finally to make the research done, not for its
own sake, but share it with all Egyptologists interested, making the work done not an end
point but a useful starting-point for further studies, answering thus to our question: How
can the list become a useful updatable tool available to all scholars interested in the
subject? To this aim, the Necropolis Journal database that was built and used during our
work has been published online at https://www.edicionesadaegyptum.com/irenemorfini/.
We are aware of the fact that the ongoing project of the papyrus database of the Museo
Egizio of Turin (only for specialists so far), the available Deir el-Medina database and
Trismegistos, already provide much useful information. Nonetheless, it is our aim to offer
a Necropolis journal database, i.e. only dedicated to this kind of records, with the
intention to facilitate the creation of a separate branch of texts amongst the vast number
of 4506 records present for example in the Deir el-Medina database (last consulted on
August 2018).
263
SAMENVATTING
NECROPOLIS JOURNAL: AANTEKENINGEN BETREFFENDE

DAGELIJKSE GEBEURTENISSEN IN EEN OUD-EGYPTISCHE
GEMEENSCHAP VAN AMBACHTSLIEDEN
In Egyptologische vakliteratuur worden Necropolis journals gedefinieerd als op papyri en

ostraca geschreven aantekeningen betreffende de dagelijkse activiteiten van de groep
gespecialiseerde arbeiders of ambachtslieden gevestigd in de nederzetting Deir el-
Medina in Thebe. Deze door de schrijvers in het hieratisch genoteerde aantekeningen
bevatten informatie over de groep ambachtslieden die verantwoordelijk waren voor de
aanleg en de decoratie van de koninklijke grafmonumenten in de Vallei der Koningen en
de Vallei der Koninginnen tijdens de Ramessiedische Periode (c. 1300-1100 v.Chr.):
hun rantsoenen, aanwezigheid of afwezigheid, privé-kwesties van leden van de
gemeenschap, bijzondere gebeurtenissen (stakingen, processen, enx.), bezoeken door
hoge functionarissen en al dan niet vreedzame contacten met “vreemdelingen”.
Deze documenten zijn dus van bijzondere betekenis aangezien ze gedetailleerde
informatie leveren over het dagelijks leven van het dorp en de inwoners. Ze worden
“Necropolis journal” genoemd sinds de allereerste publicatie van dergelijke documenten
uit de late 20e dynastie door Botti en Peet in 1928 (“Il Giornale della Necropoli di Tebe”).
Sindsdien kwam het begrip “a journal” en met name “an events journal” in zwang onder
Egyptologen en verscheen het in vrijwel alle publicaties over de gemeenschap van
ambachtslieden van Deir el-Medina, zonder evenwel duidelijk omschrijven wat dit in de
praktijk betekende. De vraag is derhalve gerezen of dit inderdaad een specifiek genre
van documenten betrof.
Is het juist om dergelijke documenten met aantekeningen als “journals” aan te

duiden? Zouden ze vanuit Oud-Egyptische standpunt als “journals” worden beschouwd?
Wat is een Necropolis journal en kenden de schrijvers van Deir el-Medina het begrip
Necropolis journal? Wat hebben de verschillende typen annalen en dagboeken met
elkaar gemeen? Voor wie waren deze documenten bedoeld? Hoeveel typen journal
kunnen we onderscheiden? Hoe kan een lijst van dergelijke als journal aangeduide
documenten een bruikbaar hulpmiddel worden ten dienste van alle in het onderwerp
geïnteresseerde wetenschappers?
Bovenstaande onderzoeksvragen staan centraal in de onderhavige studie.
In deze studie is onderzocht of de notities in de zogenoemde Necropolis journals ook

naar Egyptisch inzicht zo zouden worden genoemd, m.a.w. of het concept van een
264
Necropolis journal feitelijk bestond. Voor dat doel werd het concept van het Necropolis
journal in breder Egyptisch perspectief onderzocht door het te vergelijken met
tekstdocumenten uit de periode van het Oude Rijk tot en met het Nieuwe Rijk om
eventuele gemeenschappelijke kenmerken en verschillen tussen deze documenten en
het zogenoemde Necropolis journal te identificeren. Uit dit onderzoek werden conclusies
getrokken in de vorm van criteria om te bepalen wat een Necropolis journal is.
Op basis van de aldus verkregen criteria werd een nieuwe lijst samengesteld van
documenten die als Necropolis journals kunnen worden aangeduid. Deze lijst werd
onderverdeeld in twee delen: ten eerste documenten die met redelijke zekerheid kunnen
worden gedateerd en ten tweede documenten die niet geheel zeker te dateren zijn. Alle
met enige zekerheid dateerbare documenten werden verzameld en bestudeerd (op
basis van foto’s, transcripties en vertalingen). Deze documenten zijn in een aparte
Appendix opgenomen, enerzijds omdat ze veel ruimte innemen en anderzijds om het
raadplegen te vergemakkelijken.
Vervolgens werd onderzocht of het mogelijk was na te gaan voor wie Necropolis
journals werden geschreven, m.a.w. wie de beoogde lezers/gebruikers waren van de
informatie in de documenten. Naar onze mening kan onderzoek naar de wijze waarop
de inhoud van de notities is georganiseerd ons vertellen of ze bedoeld waren voor intern
gebruik of dat ze werden voorgelegd aan hogere instanties of warden gecontroleerd. We
kunnen ons voorstellen dat, indien een document werd geschreven om aan een instantie
voor te leggen of om de erin opgenomen informatie later te kunnen teruglezen, de
schrijver zich zou inspannen om dit zorgvuldig en overzichtelijk te schrijven en te
presenteren: netjes en duidelijk, met de bedoeling om het lezen en terugvinden van
informatie te vergemakkelijken. Indien het document een rommelige indruk maakt of de
notities slordig over de pagina verdeeld zijn en alle beschikbare ruimte vullen, dan is het
daarentegen vrij onwaarschijnlijk dat zo’n document ter controle zou worden voorgelegd
aan iemand anders.
In de samengestelde lijst van gedateerde documenten konden we gebaseerd op
hun layout twee groepen onderscheiden: enerzijds de slordige en onzorgvuldige
documenten die haastig geschreven lijken en anderzijds een groep veel nauwkeuriger
dagboeknotities die goed georganiseerd zijn en geschreven in een net en compact
zakelijk handschrift. Het is echter wel duidelijk geworden dat de vraag “Wie waren de
beoogde lezers/gebruikers van de dagboeknotities?” niet definitief kan worden
beantwoord. Het is niet goed mogelijk om een echt duidelijk onderscheid te maken en
de documenten in categorieën te plaatsen en met redelijke zekerheid te stellen dat
sommige journals voor intern gebruik bestemd waren en andere bedoeld waren om aan
superieuren te worden voorgelegd. Duidelijke bewijzen ontbreken en we kunnen alleen
265
veronderstellingen uiten en verder wachten tot nieuwe vondsten licht kunnen werpen op
de kwestie. Wel kunnen we, gezien de aanwezigheid in de documenten van controle-
tekens die wijzen op raadpleging en gebruik van de gegevens, aannemen dat de
schrijvers de teksten niet louter en alleen schreven om het schrijven zelf. Het is duidelijk
dat deze teksten, in elk geval sommige, op de een of andere wijze werden gebruikt en
“ge-checked”. Daarnaast bleven andere teksten ongetwijfeld alleen documenten voor
intern gebruik in het dorp.
Journals waren derhalve bestemd voor verschillende gebruikers en verschillende
doeleinden.
De verschillende typen documenten, die allemaal op journals lijken, moeten
verschillende doeleinden hebben gehad. We hebben geprobeerd verschillende
subgroepen van journals te identificeren en te beschrijven op basis van hun inhoud
(leveranties/rantsoenen, afwezigheid/aanwezigheids-lijsten, werkrapportages en
gebeurtenissen betreffende de dorpsgemeenschap, die we respectievelijk groep A, B, C
en D hebben genoemd). Om meer inzicht te verkrijgen noteerden we de verschillen
tussen de typen journal. We realiseerden ons dat het Necropolis journal, als het al
bestond als concept in de gedachten van de schrijvers van Deir el-Medina, geen
vastomlijnd genre was. Maar wel is duidelijk geworden dat het op basis van ons
onderzoek een type “events journal” was, waarvan bijvoorbeeld parallellen te vinden zijn
in oorlogsdagboeken en scheepsjournaals.
Het laatste doel van onze studie was tenslotte om het verrichte onderzoek ook
beschikbaar te stellen voor alle geïnteresseerde Egyptologen, zodat het een bruikbaar
startpunt kan zijn voor verdere studies en beantwoordt aan onze vraag: “Hoe kan de lijst
een nuttig en aanvulbaar hulpmiddel worden voor alle in het onderwerp geïnteresseerde
wetenschappers?” Om die reden is de bij ons werk gebruikte database beschikbaar via
https://www.edicionesadaegyptum.com/irenemorfini/.
We zijn ons bewust van het feit dat het lopende project van de papyrus database van
het Museo Egizio in Turijn (voorlopig alleen voor vakspecialisten), de beschikbare Deir
el-Medina Database en Trismegistos reeds zeer veel bruikbare informatie verschaffen.
Het beschikbaar stellen van een Necropolis journaal database, d.w.z. speciaal gewijd
aan dit soort dagboeknotities, heeft alleen ten doel een aparte groep teksten bijeen te
brengen binnen het enorme aantal van 4506 records die nu bijvoorbeeld raadpleegbaar
zijn in de Deir el-Medina Database (laatste consultatie Augustus 2018).
266

1887 - 68810-Full Text

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1887 - 68810-Full Text

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1887 - 68810-Full Text

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Necropolis journal: daily records of events in an ancient Egyptian

Version: Not Applicable (or Unknown)

The handle http://hdl.handle.net/1887/68810 holds various files of this Leiden University

Daily Records of events in an

ter verkrijging van

de graad van Doctor aan de Universiteit Leiden,

op gezag van Rector Magnificus prof. mr. C.J.J.M. Stolker,

volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties

te verdedigen op donderdag 21 februari 2019 klokke 15:00 uur door

geboren te Lucca, Italië, in 1980

Promotor: Prof. dr. O.E. Kaper

Copromotor: Dr. R.J. Demarée

Promotiecommissie: Prof. dr. A. Dorn (Uppsala University)

Dr. B.J.J. Haring

Prof. dr. J. van der Vliet

Mw. Prof. dr. Caroline Waerzeggers

1.1 Status quaestionis ............................................................................................... 14

2.1 The village ........................................................................................................... 23

3.1 A journal in Ancient Egypt .................................................................................... 30

4. WHAT WAS CONSIDERED A JOURNAL IN ANCIENT EGYPT

4.1 The notion of journal in a broader Egyptian perspective....................................... 35

4.2.n The Papyri Brooklyn 35.1453 A and B ........................................................ 88

5. LIST OF NECROPOLIS JOURNALS FROM DEIR EL-MEDINA

5.1 The creation of the list: criteria ........................................................................... 118

6. THE STUDY OF THE JOURNALS (IN A SEPARATE APPENDIX)

7.1 The concept of a Necropolis journal ...................................................................... 181

7.2.a Day-books for internal use? ...................................................................... 186

7.3 Different types of journal ....................................................................................... 190

7.4. The database ....................................................................................................... 211

FINAL CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................... 217

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................. 220

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................... 258

6. THE STUDY OF THE JOURNALS

6.1 Dynasty XVIII ....................................................................................................... -2-

6.2 Dynasty XIX ......................................................................................................... -7-

6.2.b Merenptah................................................................................................. -19-

6.5.c Amenmesse .............................................................................................. -46-

6.2.d Sethi II ...................................................................................................... -82-

6.2.e Siptah ..................................................................................................... -148-

O. Cairo 25516 ......................................................................................... -152-

6.3 Dynasty XX ...................................................................................................... -207-

O. DM 911 ................................................................................................ -296-

6.3.b Ramesses IV .......................................................................................... -429-

6.3.c Ramesses V............................................................................................ -524-

6.3.d Ramesses VI .......................................................................................... -547-

6.3.e Ramesses VII ......................................................................................... -565-

6.3.f Ramesses IX ........................................................................................... -578-

P. Turin 1900 + P. Turin 2048 + P. Turin 2088 + P. Turin 2093 + P. Turin

6.3.g Ramesses X ........................................................................................... -775-

6.3.h Ramesses XI .......................................................................................... -798-

1.1 Status quaestionis

7 Valbelle 1985, 33-35.

14 Valbelle 1985, 45-49.

1.2 Research questions

1.2.a Did the concept of a Necropolis journal exist?

1.2.c Who was the intended readership of the day-books?

1.2.d How many types of journal can we identify?

2.1 The village

2.2 The workmen of Deir el-Medina37