Date

Just as there are differences in the funerary goods associated with the tomb (for example, the gold sheet ornaments in Chap. 5, Cats. 24—9), there were differences in its pottery wares. Three hieratic labels are on pots of Nile B2 and one on a pot of Nile D; but whether this signifies that that pottery was made at different times or by different potters is unknown.

General parallels to late Second Intermediate period—Tuthmosis IV pottery can be found in Seiler (1999) and also Askamit, D. Aston (1996b), Bourriau, Brack and Brack, Bruyere, Carnarvon and Carter, Daressy, T. Davis (1906), Dorner and Aston, Fuscaldo, Guidotti, Guksch, Hein (1994a), Holladay, Holthoer, Hope, Lansing and Hayes, Lecuyot, Loyrette, Loyrette and Fekri, G. Nagel, Petrie (1909), Rose, Schiaparelli (1923), Seiler, S. Smith, Szafranski, B. Williams, and Winlock (1932). The bulk of the pottery was initially termed pre-Malqata (D. Aston), generally Tuthmoside (Bourriau), and most recently, transitional between the “early New Kingdom” and “advanced Tuthmoside style” (Arnold communication, 4 Apr. 2002).

Some specific comparisons are in the Pottery Register, others made by colleagues follow:

Pi—P15: similar to large storage jar from KV 21 in the earlier part of the Hatshepsut—Tuthmosis IV period (D. Aston et al. 2000: 15);

Pi8, P33 black rims, an “early New Kingdom” trait (Arnold communication, 4 Apr. 2002), not much beyond Hatshepsut/Tuthmosis III at Memphis (Bourriau communication, 1989). See the black and red rims on Hatshepsut (Szafranski 1992) and Tuthmosis III pottery at Deir el-Bahari (Hein communication from Szafranski, 22 Nov. 1999);

P40, P44: conical bowls, largely 15th century (B. Williams 1992: 34f);

P58: typical of the Amenhotep I—Tuthmosis III era (Bourriau communication, 1989);

P69: generally a Second Intermediate period form (Bourriau communication, 1989); at Thebes in Dynasty 17 burials (Arnold communication, 4 Apr. 2002); p86—pSy: later Tuthmosis III period, scarce here (Arnold communication, 4 Apr. 2002); p99: similar to a Late Bronze I shape (D. Aston 1998: 69, fabric IV.07.01: see Amiran 1969: pi. 43.2).

The occurrence of modern pottery at the site made it difficult to be sure of the date of several items from Areas I, II, and IV (P109—PI13); Tuthmoside parallels have not been found, and the fabrics were not recognized. For post-Dynasty 18 pottery comparisons see D. Aston (1999) and D. Aston, B. Aston, and Brock (1998).