THE BURIAL OF

NEFERTITI?
by Nicholas Reeves, FSA
Amarna Royal Tombs Project, Valley of the Kings

ADDENDA AND CORRIGENDA

(August 28, 2015)

Page 3 Adam Lowe of Factum Arte kindly draws to my attention “the very damaged area of [the north]
wall that runs through the [ka] of Tutankhamun on the left of the vertical line [no. 2]” (email, July
30, 2015). “There is a large area that is new around the Ankh and legs of the [ka] – about a square
meter. In Burton’s photos of the north wall [cf. p0879c] it is present but without any brown spots.
This seems to imply that the restoration was done at the time Carter opened the tomb but I have
not seen any description of this being done. Strangely the area is now covered with splatters of
brown paint mimicking the spots – Who did this? When and why?” Might this restoration,
subsequently disguised, be evidence of a surreptitious attempt by Carter to test – perhaps on an
already loosened section of decoration – that the north wall was indeed truly solid? The putative
partition, of course, lies at the wall’s opposite end, towards the east.

Page 4 For the recently proposed identification of Hanover 1970.49 as a portrait of the co-regent
Ankhkheperure (+ epithet) Neferneferuaten (+ epithet), altered from a head of Nefertiti with the
queen’s flat-topped crown replaced by a kingly blue crown in inferior limestone, see W. Raymond
Johnson, “An Amarna Royal Head at Hanover's Museum August Kestner: Evidence for King
Ankhkheperure Neferneferuaten,” Kmt 26/3 (fall, 2015), 22-29.

Page 7 Note that the dog’s-leg fissure visible in Fig. 17, top, lies beneath the decoration’s final, yellow re-
paint, indicating that shrinkage within the putative north wall partition had taken place some time
before the decision was made to adapt room J as a Burial Chamber for Tutankhamun.

A further hint that the area of the north wall bounded by my features 2 and 3 may represent an
artificial blocking has been brought to my notice by Adam Lowe (email, July 30, 2015): “If you
look at the areas of mould/microbacteria on the North wall [there] is a greater density of mould to
the right hand side of the vertical line (2) than there is to the left of this line – this would imply the
presence of fresher plaster and more moisture.”

Page 10 I am grateful to John R. Harris for the following supplementary remarks pertinent to the proposed
female ownership of the north wall painting in its original, white-ground manifestation (letter,
August 21, 2015): “I’m not sure how far Amarna conventions will hold at this stage, or in this
context, but it is clearly the case that the Osirid ‘king’ (Figure 27) has a ‘female,’ concave curve at
the back of the neck (cf. [John R. Harris, “Nefertiti Rediviva,”] Acta Orientalia 35 [1973], pp. 7-8
and nn. 13, 14). The sem-priest on the other hand appears to have a far more angular ‘male’
contour—though it isn’t pronounced.”

Page 14 Add to the References the following, under “Harris, John R.”:
1973 “Nefernefruaten,” Göttinger Miszellen 4, 15-17.

Figure 16 The caption should read “(negative).”

Figure 19 The caption should read “highlighting in yellow.”

Copyright © Nicholas Reeves 2015