Chapter 2

The Old Kingdom

The Third Dynasty

At the end of the Second Dynasty, the basic form of the royal tomb had been set for some four centuries as a burial structure, supplemented by a rectangular enclosure some distance away. With the beginning of the Third Dynasty, however, there occurred a major conceptual and technological leap forward, which included the erection of the first known pyramid, the precursor of a series that would only come to a final end nearly three thousand years later.

Khasekhemwy was succeeded by a ruler known to history as Djoser (although during his lifeltime as Netjerkhet),¹ the builder of the Step Pyramid at Saqqara (L.XXXII: fig. 4a; pl. IXa).² Conceptually, this monument combined in one monument the previously-separate burial-place and monumental enclosure. The enclosure followed the basic model seen at the Shunet el-Zebib, with a panelled exterior and a principal entrance at the southern end of the east wall. This led via an elaborate colonnade to an open courtyard, containing elements associated with the ritual run that formed part of the royal jubilee (ḥb-sd) ceremonies. A complex of shrines in the adjacent ‘ḥb-sd Court’ was also associated with these activities (pl. IXb), while many of the other structures within the pyramid enclosure also seem to belong to jubilee or coronation ceremonies. Most of these buildings were solid dummies, and imitated construction in plant materials, suggesting that their prototypes may have been temporary structures of such, erected within the Early Dynastic enclosures of Abydos and Saqqara.

Taking the former elements together with the presence in the subterranean portions of the the complex of reliefs of the king taking part in ḥb-sd ceremonies (q.v.), it seems possible that the jubilee ceremonies (which were intended to refresh the vitality of an aging king) may have formed a basis for the conception of the dead king’s revivification at this point in Egyptian history. Given the clear affinities between the Step Pyramid complex and the enclosures associated with earlier royal tombs, it may be that these were also intended as the venues for a posthumous ḥb-sd. Unfortunately, the lack of any textual material relating to the king’s posthumous destiny prior to the appearance of the Pyramid Texts at the end of the Fifth Dynasty makes any assessment of the beliefs potentially underlying the earliest royal funerary monuments problematic.

It is possible that the Step Pyramid enclosure was originally laid out somewhat smaller than was ultimately the case, with a somewhat simpler layout, and was only later extended to the north and west to achieve its final form.³ The area occupied by the enclosure was ultimately separated from the surrounding plateau by cuttings on all four sides (see map 4), the southwestern section being taken over from works accompanying the building of the Second Dynasty royal funerary monuments in that area (see pp. 7-8). This part of the ‘dry moat’ is split on the south side, suggesting that the ancient approach to the entrance to the complex was past the Second Dynasty enclosures, then along the northern fronts of the Second Dynasty royal tombs themselves and finally on to the wide terrace on the east front of the Step Pyramid enclosure, as defined by the eastern arm of the ‘dry moat’.

The Step Pyramid itself (for its dimensions, and those of other Old and Middle Kingdom kingly funerary monuments, see table 1) was constructed in the centre of the enclosure. It was begun as a low square structure, which was then enlarged into a four-stepped pyramid, and then into the final six-stepped rectangular monument (pl. Xa). Although the core was built of limestone quarried nearby, this was faced with much finer stone from the Tura quarries on the opposite side of the Nile. This pattern of stone-use continued in all subsequent stone-built pyramids, Tura limestone casings continuing even when pyramid-cores switched to mud-brick.

A temple built against the north face of the pyramid, but entered from the east, followed a plan known (in private tombs) since the First Dynasty, and included a statue of the king, enclosed in a windowless room known as a serdab. A mastaba was built into the south enclosure wall (dubbed the South Tomb), with chambers mirroring those of the pyramid, but on a smaller scale. It was found empty and no clue as to its purpose exists, but it seems to be the direct ancestor of the later subsidiary pyramids – also lacking in any firm indication of their purpose.⁴

The entrance to the tomb-chambers lay within the temple. These centred on a burial chamber constructed at the bottom of a vertical shaft. In the substructure’s final form, the royal mummy was to be placed in a cavity in a structure of granite blocks, entered via a hole in the roof, blocked by a piece of stone similar to a sink plug, above which was apparently a limestone chamber at the end of the passage that descended from the entrance in the temple; the plug seems to have been concealed under a stone pavement.⁵ A series of galleries surrounded the burial chamber, some decorated with blue faience plaques, others also with reliefs of the king running the ḥb-sd course (pl. Xb) – apparently the first and last time a king would be shown in his tomb until the New Kingdom.

The earliest explorers found parts of one or more mummies within the pyramid – clearly intrusives of Late Period or later date, with a number of portions of a body found in the burial chamber in the 1930s. The date of the latter remains uncertain since, although their context suggests that they ought to belong to the king, radiocarbon determinations have thrown doubt on this.⁶ Otherwise, non-architectural material recovered from the pyramid itself has been limited to a wooden box with the king’s name.

The Step Pyramid’s union of the burial place with the complete cult complex was to continue until the beginning of the New Kingdom, although with many changes and developments during that period of a thousand years. That development during the rest of the Third Dynasty is on occasion difficult to trace with confidence, since the historical sequence of its kings is uncertain and in part derived from the perceived developmental order of its monuments.

Possibly the next royal funerary monument to be constructed was El-Deir at Abu Rowash,⁷ a 20 m-square brick massif, built upon a knoll of rock, and still 4 m high in 1902, within a brick enclosure, some 280 x 150 m (fig. 4b), from which some early Old Kingdom pottery was recovered (the site had been extensively overbuilt down to Coptic times). The scale and form of the monument – particularly its combination of a central monument with a rectangular enclosure – strongly suggest that it was a royal tomb subsequent to Djoser. As for its owner, he may have been Sanakhte, apparently with the personal name Nebka, who is to be dated to the dynasty and is otherwise lacking a tomb: his names appear in the mastaba K2 at Beit Khallaf,⁸ but the form of this tomb is inconsistent with being a king’s monument. Unfortunately, El-Deir has been largely destroyed by irrigation schemes in the area, and apparently not examined since 1931.

Certainly to be dated after Djoser, in particular owing to its use of distinctly larger limestone blocks in its construction, reflecting the trend that is seen during the Third to Fourth Dynasties, is an unfinished step pyramid to the southwest of the Step Pyramid (fig. 4c; pl. XIa),⁹. Owned by Sekhemkhet, who seems to have had the personal name Djoserti (found on a label recovered from the substructure), the pyramid, in contrast to that of Djoser, square; however, it had risen to less than the height of its first step (of an intended seven) when abandoned.

The large panelled enclosure had been enlarged at least once before being abandoned, and had what was presumably intended to be a ritual mastaba tomb in its southern part. This had, however, been used for the burial of a 2-year old child, probably during the Third Dynasty. The entrance to the pyramid itself lay in the centre of the north face, the approach ramp cutting through the terrace upon which the mortuary temple would have been built. Interestingly, two attempts had been made to cut the subterranean corridors. The first had been abandoned after 10m; the floor of the ramp was then raised and a new cutting begun, which formed the definitive entrance passage, leading to a burial chamber under the centre of the pyramid. A long ‘U’-shaped corridor, with 132 small storage chambers, was accessed by a passage from close to the pyramid entrance, holding many stone vessels, amongst which were the seal impressions that bore the name of the pyramid’s owner. Beyond the doorway leading to the storerooms, a vertical shaft penetrated up through the superstructure, perhaps intended for a portcullis-slab of a kind common in tombs of the period.

The roughly hewn burial chamber contained an alabaster sarcophagus of unique form, with a sliding panel at one end sealed with plaster, and the remains of what was interpreted as a funerary wreath on top (pl. XIb).¹⁰ This was the first freestanding stone sarcophagus to be used in a king’s burial – and the last until the reign of Khufu.¹¹ Unfortunately, the sarcophagus proved to be empty, with no trace of a body anywhere in the pyramid.

The unusual store-galleries seen in Sekhemkhet’s pyramid are otherwise found only in the Layer Pyramid at Zawiyet el-Aryan (L.XIV: map 3A; fig. 4d),¹² attributed to Khaba on the basis of inscribed bowls found in a nearby tomb. Significantly smaller than that of Sekhemkhet, the Layer Pyramid lies on the edge of a steep incline from the desert down to the edge of the fields, a rather different location from those of earlier monuments and one unsuitable for the kind of rectangular enclosure found around them. It may thus be at this point that the first major shift in the architecture of the pyramid-complex occurred, with a much less elaborate cult installation centred on the east side, and some form of ramp leading down to the edge of the desert. Here have been noted blocks that might have formed part of a valley building. Such an arrangement might explain its hitherto novel position on the very edge of the desert, with perhaps an as yet untraced causeway leading down to it.

Compared with Sekhemkhet’s pyramid, the store galleries have storerooms on one side only, but demonstrate a number of advances. The latter’s store galleries had been approached via an awkward passage that doubled back on the entrance gallery, which would have made access difficult. In the Layer Pyramid, the entrance ramp was turned through 90 degrees so that at its bottom a right turn would lead direct to the store-rooms, and a left-hand one to the burial chamber. This basic conception was maintained through a number of modifications, all apparently intended to place the burial chamber still deeper underground. This may have been a result of poor quality rock. Whatever the reason, galleries at two successive levels were abandoned before the final burial chamber was cut – and apparently left unused.

The final royal funerary monument that should probably be placed in the Third Dynasty is the Brick Pyramid at Abu Rowash (L.I: map 2A; fig. 4e; pl. XIIa).¹³ Today, all that survives is a massive natural rock-knoll something over a kilometre south of El-Deir, with trenches that once allowed the keying-in of a mud-brick pyramid, the remains of which survived into the 1840s, but were subsequently quarried for use as fertiliser.

High up on the north side, a passageway descends to an entirely rock-cut burial chamber; if projected to the surface of the pyramid itself, this will have placed the entrance itself some 25m above the ground, in marked contrast with the ground-level entrances of all earlier royal tombs. This method of chamber-construction is not found in pyramids after the early Fourth Dynasty, while a high entrance is also a feature of that dynasty. As all early Fourth Dynasty kings have known tombs, the Brick Pyramid’s owner must be placed late in the Third Dynasty, with the most likely candidate the dynasty’s final ruler, Huni.

The most plausible reconstruction of the former brickwork would make the monument a step pyramid, some 215 m square. This would make it by far the biggest pyramid yet begun, and the fourth largest pyramid of all time, although reverting to brick (as had done El-Deir)¹⁴ – a material not to be used again for a pyramid until the Middle Kingdom. The pyramid seems, however, never to have been finished, and by the end of the Old Kingdom enough of the rock core was exposed to allow the construction of tombs cut into it. The distant memory of a giant brick pyramid of the Old Kingdom may lie behind the Greek historian Herodotus’ story of Asychis, ‘the successor of Mykerinos (Menkaure), who …, wishing to go one better than his predecessors, built a pyramid of brick to commemorate his reign, and on it cut an inscription in stone to the following effect: “Do not compare me to my disadvantage with the stone pyramids. I surpass them as far as does Zeus [the Greek ‘translation’ of the Egyptian god, Amun] the other gods. They pushed a pole to the bottom of a lake, and the mud that stuck on it they collected and made into bricks. That is how they built me.”’

Royal family tombs of the Third Dynasty

Burials of at least a few of Djoser’s family were made in some of a series of eleven shafts, originally cut outside the eastern face of the first square monument, partially running under the king’s own subterranean complex, but then covered by the final pyramid.¹⁵ Galleries I–V were panelled with wood and functioned as tombs, at least six alabaster sarcophagi once having been present, one of them containing the remains of a gilded plywood coffin and the skeleton of a young female. VI–XI were unlined and employed for storage, VI and VII containing the remains of around 40,000 assorted stone vessels. Also, under the northern end of the pyramid enclosure were a number of galleries that might have been intended as royal family tombs.¹⁶

As already noted, wooden coffin and skeleton of a two-year-old boy was found in the subsidiary tomb of the unfinished pyramid of Sekhemkhet at Saqqara.¹⁷ Their significance is, however, uncertain, particularly as such subsidiary tombs are not otherwise known to have been used for actual interment but seem to have fulfilled some ritual role. Perhaps a son of the king had died suddenly, and this represents an emergency arrangement; unfortunately no clear evidence exists.

The Fourth Dynasty

The Fourth Dynasty marks the last part of the experimental phase of pyramid design and construction. During the dynasty’s one and a quarter centuries, pyramids not only reached and passed their zenith in terms of size and quality of building, but also established the principles of the ‘standard’ pyramid complex, which was still to be found as late as the Twelfth Dynasty, eight centuries later.

The dynastic founder, Seneferu, was to build no fewer than three full-size pyramids, and was responsible for one, if not seven, smaller ones of uncertain purpose. Of the full-size monuments, the earliest was a step pyramid at Meidum (L.LXV: map 8B; fig.5a; pl. XIIb).¹⁸ This is by far the southernmost of all the major pyramids of the Old Kingdom, close to the entrance of the Fayyum. The most credible explanation for its presence so far from the capital at Memphis may be that it was built near a country residence of the king.

In contrast to the wholly or largely tunnelled substructures of Third Dynasty pyramids, the chambers of the Meidum pyramid were largely built within the structure of the pyramid, only the lowest part of the descending passage and the following horizontal section being constructed in a cutting in the rock. The actual burial chamber, entered from below, was entirely built inside the core of the pyramid, with a distinctive corbelled roof, a type of structure typical of the reigns of Seneferu and his successor, Khufu (pl. XIIIa, XVa, XVIIa). Corbelled cavities, to relieve pressure on flat roofs, were constructed above the antechambers and the lower part of the descending corridor. No sarcophagus was included. A subsidiary pyramid, now destroyed, stood opposite the middle of the south face of the main pyramid, superseding the subsidiary mastabas seen at the pyramids of Djoser and Sekhemkhet; no trace of a secondary tomb has been identified at the other Third Dynasty royal tombs.

The superstructure was begun as a seven-stepped structure, which was then enlarged and converted to an eight-stepped one (never finished as such). Finally, probably after a hiatus in construction (see below), it was converted into a true pyramid. Later stone robbery caused the collapse of some of the outer layers of the upper part, leaving the true pyramid intact at the bottom, together with a tower-like structure that preserves the fifth and sixth steps of the eight-stepped version. The reason for the change to a true pyramid has been much debated, but the most generally posited suggestion is that the true pyramid was a solar symbol, representing the sun’s rays striking down from the sky. This fits well with the prominence of the sun cult during the remaining part of the Old Kingdom, and it is likely that in addition to any benefits that would accrue from being buried under such a manifestation of the sun there was some conception of the rays providing a ‘ramp’ to the heavens.

Presumably from the outset the complex was equipped with what is the earliest surviving causeway (although see p. 15 for the possibility that such an element was introduced earlier).¹⁹ Certainly, in the complex’s final form, a causeway ran from a gate in the enclosure wall down to the edge of the cultivation, where any remains of a valley building would seem to lie below the modern water table. The final mortuary temple, contemporary with the third phase of the pyramid, comprised an offering place flanked by a pair of never-inscribed stelae, approached via a pair of vestibules, the whole a development of the arrangements at the Bent Pyramid at Dahshur.

Built from the outset as a true pyramid, it is unclear whether the Bent Pyramid (L.LVI: map 6B; fig. 5b; pl. XIIIc)²⁰ was begun in parallel with work on the stepped phase of the Meidum pyramid or whether it was begun as its replacement. A feature of step pyramids had been inward-sloping masonry, with the blocks laid at right angles to the slope of the face of the pyramid. This practice was continued with the new pyramid. Part way through the pyramid’s construction it appears that structural problems manifested themselves in the substructure. This led to the angle – and so supercumbent weight – of the upper part of the pyramid being reduced, creating its distinctive shape and modern name, the Bent Pyramid; this part was built in horizontal courses, as were all later pyramids.

A subsidiary pyramid (L.LVII) lay south of the main pyramid, with a chapel to its east, with a pair of stelae bearing the king’s image and names (pl. XIIIb). A similar mortuary temple was built on the east side of the main pyramid (pl. XIVa), the causeway leading to the valley building leaving from the northeast corner of the enclosure. The valley building – the earliest surviving example – lay at the top of a wadi leading down to the desert edge. It was extensively decorated with reliefs and statuary.²¹

The Bent Pyramid’s original substructure was similar to that of the Meidum pyramid, with the exception that the shaft leading up to the burial chamber was replaced by a steep staircase. However, a unique additional set of corridors and chamber, approached from the west, was built within the pyramid masonry itself, equipped with unusual diagonally-sliding portcullises and apparently added following structural failures within the original complex, evidenced by significant cracking. No stone sarcophagus was included in either the Meidum or Bent pyramids.

It is possible that the conversion of the Meidum pyramid to a true pyramid – using horizontal courses of masonry – was begun as an insurance after structural problems manifested themselves at the Bent Pyramid. However, both the replanning of the Bent Pyramid and the recasting of the Meidum pyramid were evidently regarded as sub-optimal, as yet a third pyramid was commissioned, some 2 km to the north of the Bent Pyramid.²² The so-called Red Pyramid (L.XLIX: fig. 5c; pl. XIVb) was built entirely at the lower angle of the upper part of the Bent Pyramid. A rather more elaborate mortuary temple than those of the previous two pyramids was provided, but a proper causeway seems never to have been constructed. The form of the valley building remains unknown, although possible parts were noticed during the nineteenth century. Likewise, no subsidiary pyramid has been identified, although the pyramidion (capstone) of such a monument – too steeply angled for the Red Pyramid itself – has been discovered.

The substructure of the Red Pyramid was built at ground level entirely within the body of the pyramid. It comprised three spectacular corbelled rooms (pl. XVa), the third entered from high up in the wall of the second, clearly for concealment. The floor of the third chamber is now represented by an irregular cavity, and it is possible that a sarcophagus made up of a number of blocks had been built into the floor; fragments of a mummy, probably that of the king, were found in the pyramid.

Seven small step pyramids, apparently devoid of any chambers, appear to date to the end of the Third or the beginning of the Fourth Dynasty. One, at Elephantine (pl. XVb),²³ has been dated to the reign of Huni by the discovery of his name nearby, and another, at Seila, near Meidum,²⁴ to that of Seneferu by an inscribed altar, statue and stelae in its chapel. The five others²⁵ are therefore likely to belong to one or other of these reigns, but their purpose remains wholly obscure.

Seneferu’s successor, Khufu, shifted the location of the royal cemetery northwards to Giza (map 2B; pl. XVIa), where he built what was to be the largest of all pyramids, the so-called Great Pyramid (L.IV: fig. 5d; pl. XVIb).²⁶ As laid out by Khufu, his Giza necropolis differed significantly from earlier royal cemeteries in that it placed the tombs of the nobility and royal family (see below) directly adjacent to the king’s tomb, rather than at a distance from. In addition, these subsidiary cemeteries were laid out on a formal gridded plan, with the cores of the constituent mastabas constructed by the central authority before allocation to and completion by their final owners. This kind of integrated necropolis was not repeated by any subsequent king, although the concept of royal family and senior nobility being buried close to their king would continue.

As for Khufu’s own tomb, the pyramid had the now-standard mortuary temple on its east side, a structure significantly more elaborate than any of those of his father; it had been decorated in relief, but only scattered fragments can now be identified.²⁷ Directly south of this lay the subsidiary pyramid. This was a change from the previous location of the subsidiary tomb opposite the south face of the main pyramid; during the remainder of the dynasty its position would vary from reign to reign, before finally coming to rest back in Khufu’s position early in the Fifth Dynasty. A causeway led from the mortuary temple toward the valley building, some elements of which have been detected under modern buildings below the desert escarpment.²⁸ A number of boat pits were constructed on the south and east sides of the pyramid, two still containing wooden boats when investigated in modern times.²⁹

The pyramid’s substructure seems to have been constructed in three phases.³⁰ First, a rock-cut descending passage was built, leading to what was intended to be the first of a series of chambers deep under the centre of the pyramid. This seems to have been abandoned when it was desired to include a stone sarcophagus in the burial, the passages being too low and narrow to introduce such a piece. An ascending corridor was thus added, apparently cutting through extant masonry, giving access to the so-called Queen’s Chamber. This could have received the sarcophagus before its walls were built, but plans seem to have changed again. The chamber is interesting, in that it replaces the corbelled roof with a new pointed type, which is subsequently standard for such rooms.

To allow plug-blocks to be slid down the ascending passage after the burial, a corbelled room had been begun, beyond the entrance to the passage leading into the Queen’s Chamber, to store the blocks. A shaft was also built to allow workmen to exit down to the descending passage after releasing them. The corbelled room was then apparently greatly extended to become the Grand Gallery (pl. XVIIa), to give access to the final burial chamber – the King’s Chamber – approached via an antechamber with portcullis slabs. Above the King’s Chamber was built a series of relieving chambers, while both it and Queen’s Chamber both had narrow (20 cm square) channels angled upwards from their north and south walls, apparently aimed at the stars. Since such features are not found in any other pyramid, they may be a result of the shift to an elevated burial chamber – a feature unique to the Great Pyramid – whose ascending access passage lacked the direct ‘sight-line’ to the heavens implicit in other pyramids’ descending access-passage.

These channels from the King’s Chamber – wrongly dubbed ‘air shafts’ – continue to the exterior of the pyramid, but at least one of those of the Queen’s Chamber terminates within the body of the pyramid, probably the result of the chamber’s supersession as the burial chamber, the terminations corresponding to the level reached by the pyramid at the time of the plan change. The King’s Chamber still contains a rectangular granite sarcophagus, the earliest of its kind in a royal tomb (pl. XVIIb); such hardstone containers would subsequently be standard for the vast majority of such sepulchres.

A novel oval-shaped sarcophagus was adopted in what seem to have been the next two pyramids to be built. That of Djedefre at Abu Rowash (L.II: map 2A; fig. 6a; pl. XVIIIa)³¹ was certainly that of Khufu’s direct successor. His pyramid was built in a truly spectacular location, on a mountain top with views north into the Delta, and south to at least as far as Dahshur. The relatively modest size of the pyramid, relative to the immediately preceding monuments, would thus have been more than offset by its visibility, its base lying some 20 m higher than the Giza plateau. The structure is now very badly ruined, only the native rock core, plus a little masonry, being visible. However, these remains indicate that a large proportion of the pyramid casing was of polished granite.

The mortuary temple lay on the east side, and was partly constructed in brick, suggesting the king’s premature death. Extensive remains of sculpture have been recovered, hinting that it was adorned with statuary to a degree not found in previous royal mortuary temples. A boat pit was constructed directly south of the temple. The causeway led, uniquely, from the north side of the complex, to allow it to follow a 1.5 km natural ridge for the descent; this probably explains why much of the mortuary temple lay adjacent to the northern part of the east face. The valley building at the bottom has never been excavated, but must have lain close to the Third Dynasty El-Deir. What seems to have been the subsidiary pyramid lay in the southwest corner of the enclosure, an unusual position otherwise found only at the slightly later Giza pyramid of Menkaure.

The substructure (now almost entirely destroyed) was built in a very deep T-shaped cutting (pl. XVIIIb), which placed the burial chamber far below the pyramid base. While only a fragment of what seems to have been the oval sarcophagus appears to have survived, a complete example of such a monument has been found in the Unfinished Pyramid at Zawiyet el-Aryan (L.XIII: map 3A; fig. 6b; pl. XIXa).³² Nothing more than the T-shaped cutting for the substructure and some marking-out of the site seems to have been achieved before work on this monument was abandoned, the only indications of its ownership being quarry-marks that seem to name a king Nebkare Seth?ka. Although early scholars placed the structure in the Third Dynasty, its close similarity to the corresponding part of Djedefre’s monument makes it clear that it is a Fourth Dynasty monument. The fact that deep placement of the burial chamber was abandoned by the time of Khaefre makes it most likely that the Unfinished Pyramid belonged to an otherwise-unattested direct successor of Djedefre, perhaps his eldest son Setka.

The next king, Khaefre, returned to Giza for the construction of his tomb, known today as the Second Pyramid (L.VIII: fig. 6c; pl. XIXb).³³ This monument, the second largest pyramid in Egypt, has an angle of elevation slightly greater than the Great Pyramid and most other kings’ pyramids, and has the remains of part of the casing surviving near the summit. The pyramid may have been intended to be built somewhat north of its final location. This is because it has essentially two substructures, the northern one with an entrance outside the north face, and a burial chamber 30 m north of the centre of the pyramid. With the pyramid further north (and of somewhat larger dimensions than finally employed), both elements would have been in a conventional position. The second set of galleries placed the final burial chamber roughly at ground level, marking the abandonment of deeply buried sepulchral chambers in pyramids. The new complex was linked to the old by a ramp, and protected by a portcullis slab. The sarcophagus was sunk in the floor of the burial chamber, with a sunken cavity for the canopic equipment to the southeast (pl. XXa), the first surviving example of canopic provision within a pyramid.

The subsidiary pyramid (GIIb, now almost completely destroyed) stood on the south side of the main pyramid. The mortuary temple, causeway and valley building marked a major step towards the standard pyramid complex. All were built from particularly massive limestone masonry, facings of ashlars of granite surviving at the valley building (pl. XXb). Its T-shaped hall contained a large number of fine statues, a number of which were preserved through their placement in a pit in later times; it seems that the complex marked a further upswing in the employment of three-dimensional sculpture following on from that already seen under Djedefre.³⁴ The complex also incorporated the Great Sphinx and an associated temple; although usually regarded as having been sculpted in the time of Khaefre, it may have been originally carved during the Early Dynastic Period.³⁵ It is also possible that its head was completely re-carved later, perhaps during the Twelfth Dynasty reign of Amenemhat II, a sphinx of whom may provide the best equivalent of the present form of the face and headdress.³⁶

The successor of Khaefre, Menkaure, built a much smaller pyramid than the other kings who had built at Giza (L.IX: fig. 6d; pl. XXIa);³⁷ indeed, his ‘Third Pyramid’ seems originally to have been intended to be even smaller. It has lost all its limestone casing, but a large amount of a lower, granite, casing is still in place. The substructure is generally viewed to have undergone at least two changes of plan. The initial small pyramid had a simple descending passage and burial chamber but, with the enlargement of the superstructure, a new entrance corridor was provided, including a small panelled chamber and three portcullises, while a new granite burial chamber – uniquely oriented north-south – and a niched storeroom were added at a lower level.³⁸ A panelled sarcophagus of basalt was installed in the final burial chamber, placed most unusually along the axis of the burial chamber, reflecting the latter’s anomalous alignment.³⁹

The pyramid’s temples show a further development over those of Khaefre, moving towards what was later to become the standard basic layout. The subsidiary pyramid (GIIIc – pl. XXIa, left)⁴⁰ is in the unusual position of being near the southwest corner of the main monument, a position previously used by Djedefre, and later only by Userkaf. Two queens’ pyramids (GIIIa–b) were built directly east of it.⁴¹

Curiously, the last king of the Fourth Dynasty, Shepseskaf, did not build a pyramid. Rather, he constructed a huge mastaba at the then-virgin site of Saqqara-South; now known as the Mastabat Faraun, its roof had raised end-pieces reminiscent of those found on the lids of many sarcophagi (L.XLIII: fig. 6e; pl. XXIb).⁴² This would seem to be a manifestation of the ‘pr-nw’ shrine, a shape that was symbolic of Lower Egypt. The meaning of this change is unclear, although the abandonment of the solar symbol that was the pyramid may be connected in some way with the fact that the king’s own name did not, unlike those of his immediate predecessors, contain the name of the sun-god, Re.

The design of the substructure was very similar to that of Menkaure’s pyramid, but arranged more regularly, with the burial chamber west of an antechamber, and a room with store-niches to the south-east. The sarcophagus was smashed in antiquity. A conventional mortuary temple and causeway were built on the east side, but the valley building has never been explored. Likewise, nothing is known of any subsidiary tomb.

Royal family tombs of the Fourth Dynasty

From the Fourth Dynasty, royal family burials become far easier to trace. A number of the sons of Seneferu were buried with their wives in large tombs at Meidum (map 8B),⁴³ while other members of his family were subsequently provided with sepulchres at Dahshur.⁴⁴

The tombs of Princes Rahotep, Ranefer and Nefermaat, and their spouses, at Meidum were huge brick mastabas (numbers 6, 9 and 16), with a pair of small chapels in their eastern faces. That of Rahotep contained remarkable statues of the prince and his wife, while both tombs’ chapels were extensively decorated in the latest styles. The burial chambers lay at the bottom of deep shafts, beginning in the roof of the mastaba. Another large mastaba (17) lay close alongside the Meidum pyramid. This had been finished only after the body had been placed in the burial chamber, so that the entrance passage left the latter, only to stop after a short while in the subsequently-laid bricks of the substructure. The body, of an adult, will almost certainly have been that of a royal prince, but no traces of his name have ever been found. Only three probable tombs of children of Seneferu have thus far been identified at Dahshur, those of Princes Netjeraperef (number II/1), Iynefer and Kanefer (28).⁴⁵ They each lie in different parts of the area and comprise stone mastabas, marking an advance from the brick structures at Meidum.

Curiously, no queens’ tombs have been identified at Meidum or Dahshur.⁴⁶ This lack is remedied at Giza, where pyramids, apparently previously the sole possession of kings, were granted to womenfolk of Khufu, three being built on the east side of the Great Pyramid, adjacent to the king’s subsidiary example (map 2B; pl. XVIb).⁴⁷ The exact identity of their owners is uncertain, but GIc (L.VII) is stated in a much later text to have belonged to Princess Henutsen. Another (GIa/L.VI) may have been intended for Khufu’s mother, Hetepheres I, whose funerary equipment was ultimately (re?)buried in a deep shaft tomb (G7000X)⁴⁸ just north of the pyramid. The remaining small pyramid is likely to have belonged to another wife of the king. Each pyramid had a chapel on the east side, that of GIc being much later enlarged to become the temple of Isis-Mistress-of-the-Pyramids. On the north face of each pyramid, a passage led into the centre of the monument, ending in a burial chamber.

For other members of his family, Khufu laid out a large complex of stone mastabas on the east of his own tomb, adjoining the queens’ pyramids (cemetery G7000)⁴⁹ where a series of a dozen cores was constructed as part of Khufu’s overall necropolis-project. However, four adjacent pairs were subsequently joined together to form huge double-mastabas, the remaining four single cores then being extended to a similar size. Other tombs were then built around this nucleus cemetery.

At the pyramid-complex of Djedefre at Abu Rowash, two small pyramids existed, one to the south of the mortuary temple and one in the southwest corner of the outer enclosure (fig. 5a).⁵⁰ The former appears to have been intended as a subsidiary pyramid, but had been adapted into a tomb, with a limestone sarcophagus and a canopic jar having been found in it. The other structure was presumably a replacement subsidiary. Other members of the king’s family were interred in cemetery F, 1.5 km northeast of the king’s pyramid.⁵¹ However, Khaefre abandoned pyramids for his wives.⁵² Some of them, as daughters of Khufu, retained tombs in Giza cemetery G7000, but at least two began rock-cut tombs south of Khaefre’s pyramid causeway. This was a considerable innovation, marking a step away from the ‘built’ forms of tomb superstructure that had long been standard. One lay in a former quarry south of the king’s mortuary temple, and belonged to Persenet (LG88).⁵³ The other, the ‘Galarza Tomb’, lay close to the bottom of the causeway, and was apparently begun for Khamerernebty I, but substantially modified by her daughter, Khamerernebty II and perhaps a later prince as well.⁵⁴

Rock-cut tombs were employed for a number of other members of Khaefre’s family, clustered around Persenet’s tomb in what had once been a quarry, although Prince Babaef had a stone mastaba in the same general area.⁵⁵ A similar quarry-cemetery was founded by Menkaure, southeast of his pyramid, including the tomb of his son, Khuenre (MQ1).⁵⁶ However, pyramids were revived for two of his wives, with the construction of GIIIa and GIIIb on the south side of the king’s monument, directly east of his subsidiary pyramid (pl. XXIa).⁵⁷ These small pyramids had mud-brick chapels attached to their east sides, although stone construction may originally have been intended. The chapel of GIIIa contained fragments of a lady’s calcite statue but no names were forthcoming from any of the small pyramids.

A monument whose owner’s status is somewhat unclear (LG100 – pl. XXIIa) is one sometimes dubbed the ‘Fourth Pyramid’.⁵⁸ It lies just north of the valley building of Menkaure and comprises a square structure atop a rock-cut podium, in which was excavated a chapel and, below it, a burial chamber. Comprising a square stone-built structure atop a rock-cut podium, its chapel was excavated within the podium, from which access to the burial chamber was to be had. These arrangements were elaborations of the corresponding rock-cut features of late Fourth Dynasty royal family members’ tombs. It is possible that the tomb’s owner, the King’s Mother Khentkawes I, may have been mother of Shepeskaf and Userlaf and may have acted as regent for one of them.⁵⁹

The Fifth Dynasty

As is indicated by the uncertainty of the role of Khentkawes I, little is known of the transition between the Fourth and Fifth Dynasties. During the new dynasty, the principal royal necropolis came to be Abusir, some 11 km south of Giza, although a number of kings were interred at Saqqara, including the first and last three rulers. The size and constructional quality of these pyramids falls well short of Fourth Dynasty norms, but in contrast, their temples are consistently larger and preserve very fine examples of relief decoration.

The dynastic founder, Userkaf, placed his pyramid (L.XXXI: fig. 7a; pl. XXIIb)⁶⁰ at the north end of the east enclosure wall of the Step Pyramid, within the ‘dry moat’ and thus on the terrace in front of the Third Dynasty complex. Since the ‘moat’ lay only a short distance from the eastern side of the pyramid, and the builders were apparently unwilling to fill-in the gap, only a small chapel was built on the east, the main elements of the mortuary temple being constructed on the south side of the pyramid; the subsidiary pyramid was placed in the south-west corner of the complex, as had been the case under Djedefre and Menkaure. The entrance to the complex lay at the southern end of the eastern wall, approached by a causeway, only the lower part of which can be traced; it is unclear how it bridged the ‘moat’ before entering the mortuary temple.⁶¹ The temple had been extensively decorated and included a colossal statue of the king, but had been badly damaged by the building of tombs within it during the Twenty-sixth/seventh Dynasty, obscuring many details. The substructure of the king’s pyramid generally followed Shepseskaf’s pattern, except that the storeroom was placed half way along the entrance corridor and lacks niches.⁶² A broken sarcophagus was found in the burial chamber.

Possibly owing to the problems with finding further suitable pyramid sites at Saqqara (cf. below, pp. 28-9, 32 regarding the pyramids of Menkauhor, Unas and Teti), Userkaf’s immediate successors moved their necropolis north to Abusir (map 3B; pl. XXIIIa), close to the already-noted ancient access to the Saqqara cemetery.⁶³ The first pyramid built there was that of Sahure (L.XVIII: fig. 7b; pl. XXIIIb),⁶⁴ a monument whose layout crystallised what was to be the standard royal tomb for the remainder of the Old Kingdom.⁶⁵ The mortuary temple covered a considerable area against the east face and was elaborately decorated in painted relief. In plan, the causeway opened into a vestibule and then a peristyle court, beyond which lay a hall with statue-niches and then a winding access corridor to the sanctuary, the whole flanked with storerooms. The subsidiary pyramid lay directly south of the temple, which would be its standard location for the remainder of the Old Kingdom.

The interior of the pyramid was wrecked in mediaeval times by stone robbers, leaving a partly collapsed, irregular set of cavities, with but a single fragment of basalt representing the sarcophagus. The burial chamber lay in the centre of the pyramid; on the basis of later monuments, it is likely that an antechamber lay directly east of it, from which a horizontal passage led north towards the centre of the north face. The actual entrance comprised a short sloping passage, close to ground-level – a final abandonment of the ‘high’ entrance typical of the Fourth Dynasty – with a vestibule and portcullis at its inner end.

The following pyramid of Neferirkare (L.XXI: fig. 7c; pl. XXIVa),⁶⁶ was somewhat larger than that of Sahure, and had a core of stepped form: it is possible that it was left thus, and never cased as a true pyramid. Only the inner part of the mortuary temple was completed in stone, the remainder having been completed in brick and wood after the king’s death, with its final plan uncertain.⁶⁷ Its causeway was later diverted to serve the pyramid of Niuserre, the valley building thus also being taken over by that king. The interior of the pyramid was another victim of stone robbers, and little more than the general layout can be discerned. This was very similar to that found in the pyramid of Sahure, but included a deviation of the entrance corridor to the east for a considerable distance beyond the entrance vestibule, after which it moved to an approximately north-south line (but apparently deviating slightly to the west) that gave access to the antechamber. The burial chamber lay to the west. The eastern deviation of the main corridor would be a distinctive feature of most of the remaining kings’ pyramids of the dynasty.

Neferirkare’s successor, Neferefre, was also unable to finish his tomb (L.XXVI: fig. 7d; pl. XXIVa)⁶⁸ as originally planned. However, in this case the pyramid had risen only a few courses when the king died and was accordingly finished off by filling much of the incomplete interior with gravel (including the cutting within which the substructure was constructed), thus turning it into a mastaba of uniquely square plan. Since the causeway and valley building were barely begun, the mortuary temple, largely built in brick, was enlarged to incorporate elements usually found in the valley building. The structure is well preserved, and revealed many items, including a wooden boat, statuary and administrative papyri.

The substructure followed the now-established pattern but with the oblique inner corridor continuing to the door of the antechamber. It suffered particularly severely from stone robbery owing to its coverage by little more than rubble. Along with fragments of the sarcophagus were found a number of parts of the royal mummy, including a hand, part of the skull and other fragments. These proved to be those of a young man. Neferefre seems to have been succeeded by an even more ephemeral king, Shepseskare. His may have been the barely-begun pyramid, the outline of which lies under the sand to the north of the other Abusir pyramids.⁶⁹ The T-shaped outline of the cut for the substructure is visible, but little else, amounting to perhaps one or two months’ work.

Niuserre, however, had a more substantial reign, and succeeded in completing a pyramid whose basic form followed that of Sahure (L.XX: fig. 7e; pl. XXVa).⁷⁰ However, the arrangement of the elements of the mortuary temple was adjusted to allow the king to take over most of the unfinished causeway and valley building of Neferirkare, the outer parts being placed further south than usual to facilitate the construction of the new upper, joining, section of the causeway. The substructure of the pyramid was once again badly ruined by the activities of stone robbers.

The pyramid of Niuserre was the last king’s tomb to be built at Abusir, the remaining kings of the Fifth Dynasty moving back to Saqqara. That of Menkauhor is known from inscriptions of his mortuary priests, but his ownership of a largely-destroyed pyramid a little to the south of the Early Dynastic private necropolis, close to the edge of the escarpment (L.XXIX: fig. 7f), can be demonstrated only on architectural and topographical grounds.⁷¹ First, the layout of the interior, with an oblique second passageway, is found only in the pyramids at Abusir, and had been abandoned by the time of Menkauhor’s successor, Isesi: indeed, the plan of the substructure is essential identical to that of Niuserre. Second, the pyramid complex of Teti displays a number of anomalies in layout and orientation that can only be explained as the result of the previous construction of this pyramid on the site to its east (q.v.).

The location, on the edge of the escarpment, and in a position that required a steep and/or long causeway (now destroyed) probably reflected the lack of a suitable site further to the west, Userkaf having employed the last virgin site capable of accommodating a pyramid-complex in the vicinity of the Step Pyramid. It may also have reflected a desire for a prominent position on the skyline visible from Memphis and beyond (cf. the pyramid of Djedefre at Abu Rowash). The whole of Menkauhor’s complex was later swallowed up by the Late/Graeco-Roman Period Anubiaeon temple-complex. The principal remains are of the lower courses of the masonry of the inner parts of the substructure, showing that the design followed the approach seen at Abusir of placing the outer vestibule, portcullises and, as already noted, inner passage at an oblique angle the north-south axis. The latter gave access to an antechamber, with a burial chamber to the east and a storeroom to the west – the latter a pattern seen in all later Old Kingdom kings’ pyramids.

The shortage of suitable sites in the main Saqqara cemetery was probably the reason that the next king, Isesi, chose to build his pyramid (L.XXXVII: fig. 7g; pl. XXVb)⁷² in a hitherto-virgin location well to the south of the earlier monuments, an area that also lacked the steep escarpment that had complicated the construction of causeways there. The valley building is lost, but the mortuary temple was somewhat larger than those at Abusir, and replicated the arrangement seen at the pyramid of Niuserre of having store rooms flanking the entrance hall. A new feature was a square massif at the southern end of the temple’s façade (the situation is less clear to the north), which is unique to Isesi’s pyramid.

However, in most of its other aspects, the pyramid of Isesi contained elements that would become standard in all future Old Kingdom pyramids. The pyramid itself was of the usual constructional style, and of the same size as the pyramid of Niuserre, but its substructure differed from that of any preceding monument. First, the entrance (to what is the last example of an oblique entrance passage) lay just outside the limit of the north face, and opened from the floor of a chapel that abutted the pyramid casing, any attempt at concealing the location of the entrance to the substructure having now been abandoned.⁷³ Second, the inner access corridors no longer ran obliquely, but once again proceeded in a straight line towards the centre of the pyramid. Third, a triple set of portcullises was set a little way along the horizontal corridor beyond the initial vestibule. Finally, the annexe that had been introduced east of the antechamber by Menkauhor was divided into three by stub walls.⁷⁴ In the burial chamber, the canopic chest was sunk in the floor, southeast of the foot of the sarcophagus (the situation of the chest in preceding Fifth Dynasty pyramids is unknown). Fragments of the king’s mummy were found amid the broken sarcophagus. The substructure-arrangement found in Isesi’s pyramid henceforth became standard in all king’s pyramids down to the end of the Old Kingdom. In addition, the pyramid’s base-dimensions – 150 cubits square⁷⁵ – also became standard for the rest of the Old Kingdom, only the immediately succeeding pyramid of Unas deviating from this.

The reason for this – the pyramid was only 110 cubits square – almost certainly lies in the site the king chose for his pyramid (L.XXXV: fig. 7h; pl. XXVIa).⁷⁶ Like Userkaf before him, Unas clearly desired to be buried close to the Step Pyramid, the only practicable spot being at west end of the south side of of that monument, in the ‘precinct’ constructed for the tombs of Hotepsekhemwy and Ninetjer back in the Second Dynasty. Presumably not wishing to undertake the extensive quarrying needed to extend the precinct sufficiently to allow a ‘full-size’ pyramid, Unas’s monument was thus constrained in size by its site.

To allow to be built at all, however, whatever still remained of the superstructure of the tomb of Hetepsekhemwy was demolished in its entirety, the eastern side of the pyramid and inner part of the mortuary temple of Unas being built over it. Further east, the superstructure of Ninetjer was also taken down to clear the route of the upper part of the causeway, which then ran along part of the southeastern arm of the Djoser dry moat, before following the natural slope down through a number of bends to the site of the valley building, three-quarters of a kilometre away. The Unas causeway is around twice the length of the second longest causeway, that of the Sixth Dynasty Pepy II, considerably increasing the amount of engineering work required compared with most complexes for this aspect, emphasising, together with the acceptance of reduced pyramid-dimensions, the importance to Unas of the placement of his pyramid.

The mortuary temple of Unas was very similar to that of Isesi, but without the strange pylons, and remarkably assymetrical in layout, a further impact of the restrictions imposed by the site. Apart from this aspect, the temple’s design formed the basis for the ‘standard’ plan that was carried through the next dynasty. The valley building (pl. XXVIb) continued the basic pattern of design seen in those of Sahure and Niuserre, and which is seen later at the pyramid of Pepy II; unfortunately, the valley buildings of many pyramids remain unexcavated and the detail of architectural evolution thus obscure.

Internally, Unas’s monument was essentially identical in design with that of Isesi but with the important difference that it was the first royal substructure to be decorated since the time of Djoser (pl. XXVIIa). A delicate panelled design was incised into walls directly adjacent to the sarcophagus, while the ceiling was adorned with five-pointed stars. Most importantly, however, the rest of the burial chamber, the antechamber and part of the approach corridor were covered with columns of hieroglyphs. These comprised a compilation of religious spells that now became the standard decorative scheme for kingly pyramids until the end of the Old Kingdom. Interestingly, decoration (of a completely different kind) also appears at this very time in some private burial chambers – hitherto likewise devoid of adornment.⁷⁷ At least some of the blocks used in the substructure had been reused, at least one preserving traces of a relief of Khufu.⁷⁸

The royal burial-chamber texts, now known as the ‘Pyramid Texts’,⁷⁹ deal with the posthumous destiny of the king, which differed greatly from that of the mass of humanity: as a divine being he would dwell with his fellow gods in the entourage of the sun-god, Re. These texts are a miscellaneous compilation of spells of various kinds and lengths, with no two pyramids having precisely the same sets of spells: indeed, some are unique to a given tomb. They include instructions for ceremonies, hymns and spells to aid the progress and transformation of the spirit, possibly arranged in sets radiating out from the kernel of the pyramid, the sarcophagus.

Royal family tombs of the Fifth Dynasty

The regular appointment of princes to high governmental office was ended early in the Fifth Dynasty, with important implications for royal family tombs, the only easily identifiable examples of which are hitherto queens’ pyramids or mastabas adjacent to their husbands’ tombs. The relatively few royal offspring with known sepulchres have tombs indistinguishable from those of contemporary commoners.

A pyramid directly south of that of Userkaf at Saqqara belonged to Neferhetepes A (fig. 6a);⁸⁰ it appears that some work may have been carried out on the pyramid under Userkaf’s successor, Sahure. At Abusir, however, there appears to be no obvious pyramid for a wife of Sahure himself,⁸¹ although a small pyramid that lay south of Neferirkare’s monument belonged to Khentkawes II, probably his wife.⁸² A further small pyramid (L.XXIV) lay to the southeast of that of Khentkawes II,⁸³ perhaps associated with the tomb of Neferefre, which lay directly to the west, or perhaps dating to the time of Niuserre, the area around whose pyramid seems to be too congested to have accommodated a queen’s pyramid. Close by were built an adjacent pair of unusual mastabas (L.XXV/1 and L.XXV/2), apparently to be dated to the reign of Niuserre, each containing the burial of related females, one perhaps a Princess Hanebu.⁸⁴ No names have been recovered from any of these sepulchres. A further mastaba, close to the tomb of Neferefre, contained a quarry mark naming a King’s Wife and King’s Mother Khentkawes,⁸⁵ but this may represent the use of a block originally intended for the nearby tomb of Khentkawes II, as the form and contents of the tomb are not consistent with contemporary queenly practice.

Regarding royal sons, the tomb of Nakhtsare was one of a group of four mastabas south of the mortuary temple of Neferefre.⁸⁶ Although Abusir ceased to be the kingly cemetery after the time of Niuserre, a number of Isesi’s family were buried in brick mastabas southeast of Niuserre’s mortuary temple, including Princess Khekeretnebty, whose body was found partly intact.⁸⁷ Isesi’s principal wife, however, was presumably the owner of a large pyramid northeast of her husband’s at South Saqqara, with one of the most elaborate mortuary chapels known from a queenly monument (fig. 7g; pl. XXVb).⁸⁸

A series of royal spouses and children was buried close to the north wall of the Step Pyramid complex, together with a number of other highly placed individuals,⁸⁹ with some a little further west.⁹⁰ They have been generally regarded as belonging to the family of Isesi, but some at least may actually be affiliated to Menkauhor, whose pyramid lies due east of them, with Meresankh IV, owner of mastaba 82⁹¹ potentially his queen.

Unas certainly abandoned the use of pyramids for his queens: rather, his principal spouses instead shared a double mastaba positioned, as with Isesi’s queen, directly north of the outer part of the king’s mortuary temple (L.XXXVIII: fig. 7h; pl. XXVIIb).⁹² The eastern half belonged to Queen Nebet, the western to Khenut. Each lady had a separate set of rooms, of apparently identical plan, with its own entrance; the chambers were extensively decorated. Further tombs, belonging to other members of Unas’s family lay directly north of the queens’ mastaba, including that of Prince Unasankh,⁹³ and that of the Princess Idut;⁹⁴ finally, the Princess Hemetre had a tomb west of the Step Pyramid (D65).⁹⁵

A number of royal daughters married commoners, and so were buried in their husbands’ tombs. Examples include Niuserre’s daughter, Khamerernebty A, wife of Ptahshepses B, interred in a large tomb in central Abusir,⁹⁶ and Sheretnebty, buried with her now-nameless husband at Abusir-South in tomb AS68.⁹⁷

The Sixth Dynasty

The founder of the Sixth Dynasty, Teti, placed his monument (L.XXX: fig. 8a; pl. XXVIIIa)⁹⁸ almost directly west of the sepulchre of Menkauhor, a strange location explicable only by the shortage of suitable pyramid sites in the area and/or a decision to emulate Niuserre vis à vis Neferirkare in appropriating the lower portion of the earlier king’s causeway. Certainly, the causeway departed the far left-hand end of the façade of the mortuary temple at an angle that took it parallel to the south face of the pyramid of Menkauhor.⁹⁹

Save for the rearrangement of the very outermost part of the temple to allow for this, the plan of the mortuary temple essentially followed that of Unas, with the exception that it was more symmetrical, reflecting the lack of space constraints to the south; the pyramid was also able to revert to the size seen in the pyramid of Isesi. Internally, the monument followed the plan seen the tombs of Isesi and Unas, with the Pyramid Texts repeated, albeit with a slightly different selection of spells.¹⁰⁰ In addition, the royal sarcophagus was decorated with texts for the first time, bands of hieroglyphs being inscribed on the upper surface of the lid and the interior sides and floor of the coffer.

Tradition had it that Teti was murdered,¹⁰¹ and it appears that he was directly followed by a usurping king, Userkare. No clear evidence exists of any potential tomb, although subsurface geophyisical traces at Tabbet el-Guesh, at Saqqara about a kilometre south of the Step Pyramid and a kilometre north of the pyramid of Isesi, have been suggested as a potential site.¹⁰²

Teti had in any case exhausted the last potential pyramid site at northern Saqqara: no later such monuments of any size would be erected there. For the rest of the Old Kingdom, pyramids were built in areas to the south first colonised by Isesi and Shepeseskaf. Pepy I built his monument a little northwest of that of Isesi,¹⁰³ in size and layout (apart from a conventional axial causeway) a near-replica of the pyramid-complex of Teti (L.XXXVI: fig. 8b; pl. XXVIIIb). Its decorative scheme did, however, differ in that the panelling around the sarcophagus was reduced in height to that of the sarcophagus itself, and applied only to the north and south walls, the west side of the sarcophagus being occupied by the dwarf walls on which the sarcophagus lid had been stored until drawn forward into place. Additional Pyramid Texts now occupied the area formerly occupied by the upper section of panelling, while the sarcophagus-inscriptions were moved to the outside of the coffer. A hand from the king’s mummy was found in the pyramid.

The pyramid complex of Nemtyemsaf I (L.XXXIX: fig. 8c; pl. XXIXa),¹⁰⁴ built southwest of Isesi’s tomb, seems to have been all-but-identical to that of Pepy I, although only the interior of the pyramid has been excavated to date. A mummy found in the sarcophagus is likely to have been intrusive. In the case of both pyramids, the apparent directions taken by their causeways indicate that they lay at the margins of wadis that allowed the cultivation to penetrate deeply into the desert region.

The wadi south of Nemtyemsaf’s pyramid separated it from the last pyramids of the Old Kingdom tradition (map 5; pl. XXIXb). The first of these was that of last major king of the dynasty, Pepy II,¹⁰⁵ the final manifestation of the ‘standard’ pyramid complex, lying close to the Fourth Dynasty giant mastaba of Shepseskaf. Pepy II’s pyramid (L.XLI: fig. 8d; pl. XXIXc) is much better preserved than those of his immediate predecessors, and seems to have been built with rather more care. When at least partly built, a 6.5 m thick masonry ‘girdle’ was added around the lower part of the structure; this may have resulted from a perceived instability of the pyramid, perhaps after an earthquake. The construction of this feature necessitated the dismantling of the north chapel and its reconstruction further out.

Pepy II’s complex represented the Old Kingdom royal tomb at its most developed, with all elements preserved to some extent. After his reign there seems to have been a rapid decline in Egypt’s fortunes, heralding a period of disunity known as the First Intermediate Period, from which only a handful of royal tombs survives.

Royal family tombs of the Sixth Dynasty

A necropolis grew up on the north side of the pyramid of Teti, including the tombs of major figures in his administration.¹⁰⁶ Pyramids were built for his womenfolk in the northeastern part of this cemetery, one probably for Teti’s mother Sesheshet,¹⁰⁷ and one each for his wives Iput I and Khuit II (fig. 8a).¹⁰⁸ The pyramids were small, but had substantial chapels, that of Iput I being the first queen’s example to include deities in its decoration. Both of the latter two sepulchres seem to have been first built as mastabas, and then converted to pyramids. In Iput’s case, at least, this occurred after the lady’s death. Her skeleton and some of her jewellery survived in her sarcophagus, at the bottom of a vertical shaft under the centre of the pyramid, which was sealed by its construction.

As in the Fifth Dynasty, a number of princesses married commoners. One of the most notable was Sesheshet-Watetkhethor, who had a distinct suite of rooms in the very large mastaba of her spouse, the Vizier Mereruka.¹⁰⁹

A very large queenly cemetery was provided on the south side of Pepy I’s pyramid (fig. 8b; pl. XXXa).¹¹⁰ These pyramids included the tombs of Ankhenespepy II, Nebwenet, Inenek-Inti, Meryetyotes IV, Mehaa, Ankhenespepy III, Behenu and another (perhaps the earliest of them all). All but that of Mehaa (where the tomb of her son Netjerykhethor lay directly east of her pyramid) had substantial chapels, that of Inti having its doorway flanked with small obelisks. The pyramid of Ankhenespepy II was the largest queen’s pyramid yet built, including features hitherto specific to a king’s sepulchre, including having its burial chamber adorned with the Pyramid Texts.¹¹¹ Most of the ladies buried in the cemetery were wives of Pepy I, but Ankhenespepy II subsequently also married her stepson/nephew Nemtyemsaf I, while Ankhesenpepy III was a spouse of Pepy II, as was probably Behenu – most unusually for the period thus interred 1.5 km from their husband. Behenu’s pyramid also had Pyramid Texts, of similar type to those found in the pyramids of two queens of Pepy II, contributing to her proposed dating to his reign.

The complex of Nemtyemsaf I has never been excavated, and very little is known of its associated necropoleis. However, a map drawn in the 1840s shows three approximately square mounds around the king’s pyramid. Two of these, to the north, are of the right size for queens’ pyramids (map 5) and moreover lie in a similar position relative to the king’s monument as the tombs of Teti’s queens to his.

The pyramid complex of Pepy II is accompanied by the last three queens’ pyramids of the Old Kingdom, two at the king’s tomb’s northwest angle (of Neith and Iput II – pl. XXXb), and the other (of Wedjebten) at the opposite corner.¹¹² Each monument had a substructure decorated with Pyramid Texts and large decorated chapels, incorporating a subsidiary pyramid (fig. 8d). Iput’s chapel was itself used a little later as the tomb of a queen, one of the store-rooms having had had a funerary stela carved into one of its walls, and a sarcophagus placed in the chamber, used for the burial of Queen Ankhenespepy IV. The sarcophagus had been carved from an older block, with a lid made from what had once been a section of the Sixth Dynasty royal annals¹¹³, the contrast between such improvised arrangements and the burial places of the other wives of Pepy II is most striking, reflecting the decline of the royal house following the old king’s demise.

This kind of use of an older temple in lieu of a proper tomb is seen in the case of another member of the royal family of the period following Pepy II’s death. Prince Ptahshepses was laid to rest in a corridor in the southeast part of the valley building of the funerary complex of Unas, enclosed in a late-Fourth Dynasty sarcophagus.¹¹⁴ It is likely that other senior members of the court at the end of the Old Kingdom were similarly interred. However, there is a severe lack of material from this period, with only one king’s tomb known between the death of Pepy II and the end of the First Intermediate Period, that of Ibi. Furthermore, only one tomb belonging to a member of the royal family has been identified, that of Princess Nebet II, at Koptos, the hometown of her husband. Little is known of its layout, the tomb having been over-built by a modern house, and only the granite false door and three blocks examined in situ.¹¹⁵