TAA i.2.2.7
On this page Mace hypothetically writes about the "mummy placed in sarcophagus & inner shrines" prior to their actual discovery later in the excavation process.
© Griffith Institute,
University of Oxford
{28 November 1923, continued}
from the fact that the cardinal points painted on the
corners of the Shrine as a guide are in their wrong positions.
This also the case in second shrine, and perhaps in the
others. Possibly an accidental mistake, a mistake
impossible to rectify, once the sections were in position.
On the other hand it may be deliberate, owing to the small
capacity of the chamber. Difficult to see how it could
have been accidental, as the cardinal points were already
marked, and a large object like the eye panel could
hardly be overlooked.
If the Shrine had been correctly orientated their/<e> v/<s>wing
doors would have been on the west side, and it would have
been a matter of extreme difficulty to get at them. Moreover
if in this case, if room was left to open & close the swing
doors the back of shrine would have practically blocked the
entrance to the inner Store Chamber. This not insuperable
as at the period there should have been a store-chamber on
each side, and we know that the larger object in the store
chamber must have been placed there before the Shrines were
erected. Afterwards there would not have been room to
get them round the corner.
4. Larger objects at any rate must have been taken into store-chamber
before shrines were erected.
( Probable course of procedure. Objects Ch/<Se>pulchral chamber )
( painted in advance, partition wall included. At burial )
( objects placed first in inner store chamber. Next )
( sections of outer shrine introduced through door and fla leant )
( against wall opposite their correct positions. Then )
(mummy placed in sarcophagus & inner shrines erected, & )
( finally outer shrine connected up. <No> )
<See under Dec 6.>
If this were so why is partition wall necessary at all,
as all objects could have been taken through a door in the
natural rock.