Tine Bagh, PhD
Curator, Egyptian Art
Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek
Forming Material Egypt
Archaeological Site Management and Conservation
A tomb chapel out of context - a case study
In 1890-91 Flinders Petrie copied what was left of the filled-in reliefs in the tomb chapels of
Nefermaat and Itet in Meydum. He saw this as his "immediate duty" and lamented that so much of
the tomb decoration had been destroyed since Vasalli had hacked out the Meydum Geese in 1872.
When he returned in 1909 the situation was even worse and Gaston Maspero, head of the
Antiquities Service had asked him to take down what Petrie termed the "wretched remains". In his
opinion the chapel decoration should have been "put in safety" fifty years earlier when it was still
complete. Today the chapel of Nefermaat is displayed in the Cairo Museum and the more
fragmentary parts of the northern chapel of Itet are dispersed among collections in Europe. It will
here be discussed whether there is an ideal way of displaying these reliefs and what we can do in
the future to justify the removal and distribution of these "examples of this earliest tomb sculpture"
as Petrie called them. How can we best manage this precious heritage today?
The early descriptions of the tomb of Nefermaat
The publication by Yvonne Harpur (2001) has documented the complete history of the mastabas of
Nefermaat and the almost contemporary mastaba of Rahotep. The initial recording of the large
mastaba tombs in Meydum is from December 1871 when the tomb of Rahotep and Nefert was the
first to be discovered (Harpur 2001:7-20) by Monsieur Vigne, a merchant from Alexandria.
Auguste Mariette was Director of Egyptian Monuments and as he was busy with the preparations of
the Opera Aida for the opening of the Suez Canal and thus not able to come to the site himself.
Instead he wrote instructions to his assistant Albert Daninos: "It is essential that everything stays in
its original state until you receive new orders. ... You know as well as I do that much of the interest
of a discovery depends upon our determining the place where everything is situated. This often
results in the recording of fruitful scientific notes." When the statues of Rahotep and Nefert were
discovered the Khedive Ismail himself arrived at Meydum and Daninos carefully wrapped the
statues in linen to transport them to the Boulaq Musuem. In January 1872 Mariette himself took
over in Meydum, but his recording of the tombs was sketchy for all his good intentions. When he
had finished he had the entrances covered with sand.
Petrie in Meydum 1881
Not long after his first work in Giza Petrie went on a photographic tour up the Nile in the winter of
1881-82. He took photos of the chapels of Nefermaat and Itet as they looked then (Harpur
2001:245-250) and noted that the tomb chapel of Nefermaat was 'the most visible'. The photo of
Itet's chapel shows that only the upper part of the lintel was visible. The drawings made by Mariette
in 1872 were unfortunately neither complete nor correct in every detail. It was, however, not till
1890-91 that Petrie was able to come back and copy the reliefs and paintings of the tomb chapels.
Petrie’s drawings from 1892 became the most important documentation of what was at least still
preserved at that time since even more had disappeared when he returned in December 1909 with
his assistants Gerald Wainwright and Ernest Mackay.
Petrie in Meydum 1909-10
In 1909 it was decided to remove of the remaining reliefs and paintings from the chapels of
Nefermaat/Atet and also from the tomb of Rahotep/Nefert. The head of the Antiquities Service,
Gaston Maspero, had requested this to be done in order to rescue what was left as the decoration
was by then badly damaged. Most of what was left was still in situ but many fragments had also
fallen down and were collected. Petrie made an agreement with Maspero that he could take the
fragments of reliefs and paintings from the northern chapels of the wives Atet and Nefert to London
while the more complete decoration of Nefermaat and Rahotep would stay in Cairo where it is now
in the Egyptian Museum. Petrie’s share would be distributed among his sponsors, various museums
and collections including the Glyptotek in Copenhagen. Petrie commented on his reasons for the
distribution procedure: “As the whole tomb-chapels of relief work (Rahotep) and of inlay
(Nefermaat) are to be set up in Cairo Museum, the most useful course was to distribute the other
examples of this earliest tomb sculpture as widely as might be, so as to give points of reference in
many centres for study.” To have 'reference points' and study collections was obviously important
for students of Egyptology in a time without abundant publications, the internet and other digital
means of sharing material existing today. Many museum visitors have no doubt marvelled at the
fine work of the reliefs and paintings, but only few have been aware of their context. Before we
discuss whether this is necessary and how best to present the dispersed reliefs (and paintings) a look
at the present fate of the decoration as well as the mastaba of Nefermaat and Itet itself is in place.
Nefermaat in Cairo
The chapel of Nefermaat was as mentioned the more complete and it was kept in Cairo where it is
still part of the Old Kingdom display of the Egyptian Museum. The original two front jambs on the
sides of the entrance of the chapel with Nefermaat on each side and the upper architrave with his
name and titles are built up around the entrance to Room 42 with the statue of Khephren. To the left
and right of this entrance are the walls that were originally the inner side walls of the chapel,
recognizable with their slanting sides following the slanting façade. Next to these are then the
panels that were originally next to the jambs that are now around the door to Room 42.
The façade and side walls of the chapel of Nefermaat outside Room 42 in the Egyptian Museum
The display thus partly constitutes a reconstruction of the chapel with the slanting façade, but the
form of the niche itself is lost.
The distribution of the chapel of Itet
The reliefs from the northern chapel of Itet were as mentioned not as well preserved as that of
Nefermaat.
In a letter from March 1910 Petrie wrote to his wife Hilda:
"The state of the stone is bad in much of it being fissured and sealed, but capable of repair. There
are however several blocks in good state with all the inlay perfect. It will be a most interesting and
valuable asset to us, as there are no other tombs of this work, in inlayed coloured pastes. As there is
altogether about 30 feet length of it, 10 feet high, there will be enough for several museums.”
Before distributing the paste-filled reliefs Petrie first divided them into categories of ‘best quality’,
‘repair’ and ‘poor’ according to their state of preservation. Petrie’s classification did not only refer
to the amount of paste preserved but also to the relief itself.
The display of the two paste-filled reliefs ÆIN 1133a (right) and b (left) from the chapel of Itet in the Ny Carlsberg
Glyptotek
As an example we will look at the west façade of the original niche of Itet. All walls were divided
into registers and this panel had seven of slightly irregular sizes. Part of the north panel is now in
the Glyptotek, ÆIN 1133 (a) the second register from the top and ÆIN 1133 (b), the lower two
registers. Below these part of an undecorated area was also preserved. Between the two fragments
in the Glyptotek three registers were preserved, now in the Manchester Museum while the top
register is in Cambridge. The south panel of the west facade went to Oriental Institute, Chicago.
ÆIN 1133 (b) in the Glyptotek was of Petrie's ‘best quality’ and even one of the very best as it was
also marked as having ‘best colour inlay’. ÆIN 1133 (a) was added in a note to ÆIN 1133 (b) in
one of Petrie’s distribution lists from 1910. It constituted a complete motif, but it had only a few
traces of the paste. The Manchester fragment between ÆIN 1133 (a) and (b) was also ‘best quality'
and ‘best colour inlay’. The top register now in Cambridge was ‘best quality’ but with the
reservation ‘good small no colour’. All together the north panel of the west facade with ÆIN 1133
was one of the best preserved in the chapel of Itet. The reddish brown colour used for male skin
seems in general to have survived better than the other colours.
The panel in Chicago (heavily restored) and Petrie's 1892 drawing
The three registers of the north panel of the west façade in Manchester when it was first prepared for display and the
penultimate display when it was part of an agriculture theme.
The reliefs are now largely displayed as separate examples of the unique technique with filled-in
reliefs, works of art, examples of motives in tomb chapels of the early Old Kingdom in Egypt etc.
But obviously not as a tomb chapel since they are mere fragments from the original chapel. As an
Egyptologist/archaeologist it is on one hand possible to imagine how the reliefs once formed part of
the mastaba no matter how the reliefs are on display. On the other a wish to show the original
context is evident, but the question is how to do this best and if it should be done.
Plan of the chapel of Itet and a photo from 2011.
The Chapel of Nefermaat 2011
The tomb of Nefermaat today and the future for the chapels
Attempts were already made by Mariette to cover up the chapels in Meydum and also more recent
efforts to protect what is left today have been made. The problem of doing this properly has existed
since the chapels were exposed and it is not less today as Meydum and the mastabas are situated
relatively isolated and not on the main track. This is of course not an issue unique to Meydum, but
as Petrie wrote 'there are no other tombs of this work, in inlayed coloured pastes´ so there must be a
way to make justice to this heritage. We were no doubt lucky that what could be saved was saved a
hundred years ago. It may always be discussed whether it is ethic or justifiable to remove complete
monuments or part of monuments, but we must still deal with the situation as it is now. And it is
certain that there would not have been as much left today had it been left on site.
Ideally all should be neatly reconstructed and brought back to the site, but that is naturally not
realistic for many and obvious reasons. The more complete chapel of Nefermaat in Cairo may one
day be built up in a different way with the panels and walls in the right order.
The technology of today and in the near future, however, also give us new tools to at least make a
virtual reconstruction that should be available in all the collections that house parts of the chapels of
Nefermaat and Itet. It would be possible to do this in different ways, but first of all a collaboration
between the 'keepers' of the various parts should be established. The different collections have
different ways of presenting Ancient Egypt in general and the Nefermaat reliefs as shown. In the
Glyptotek, for example, there is an overall aesthetic art historical concern that may be admired and
discussed but is an essential and integrated part of the museum as a whole. Big posters with tomb
plans and explanations etc. are not an option for the permanent display as it is today and less so a
1:1 reconstructed tomb chapel. An alternative idea would be to make QR codes (when one day soon
there will be wifi in the museum). These could then lead to information and reconstructions with
photos of the site and all the recorded and preserved reliefs (and paintings) from the chapels etc. in
the case of Nefermaat in Meydum.
The points that can be discussed here can be summarised thus:

Can a radical action as the removal of an ancient monument, or as in this case part of an
ancient monument, be justifiable?

In most collections the reliefs and paintings from the chapels Nefermaat and Itet in Meydum
are now largely displayed as works of art with no context. What should ideally happen to the
dispersed reliefs and paintings from the tomb chapels today?

We cannot bring all the removed and dispersed walls from mastabas in museums back to
their origin, so Is there an ideal way of displaying them in a museum? The chapels of
Nefermaat and Itet is a good case in point.

The filled-in reliefs from the chapels Nefermaat and Itet have in some cases been restored in
order to show how they once looked. Is this a good idea? When and how to restore.

The fate of the mastaba tomb of Nefermaat and Itet and how best to preserve and present it
and the site of Meydum today.
Bagh, T. 2011. Finds from W.M.F. Petrie's excavations in Egypt in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek.
Copenhagen.
Harpur, Y. 2001. The Tombs of Nefermaat and Rahotep at Maidum. Oxford.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1892. Medum. London
Petrie, W.M.F. 1910. Meydum and Memphis (III). London.