TAA i.3.22.46
Typewritten and annotated report on the seal impressions, page 2.
© Griffith Institute,
University of Oxford
1/<2>
Of the sizes of these seals, I am not able to give any exact
Dimensions<,> for, after diligent search, I have not succeeded
in finding two impressions of the seals perfectly agreeing
with each other, and generally the difference is very considerable:
but in all cases I have accepted the minimum, which, logically,
may be taken as approximating very nearly the true measurement of
the original seal. The slippery nature of the wet plaster inade-
quately prepared for the purpose of receiving seal-impressions,
and the perfunctory manner in which the imprints were stamped, has
been the cause of this deficiency<,> both in the case of the size/<as well as>
and, unfortunately imperfect imprints of the devices <engraved> upon the seals/<matrixes> employed/<themselves>. In fact, <in the latter case,> it was only by comparing a large number of
impressions that it has been/<was> possible to obtain any idea as to
their correct readings. This applied/<s> not only/<alone> to the large seal-
impressions stamped upon the plaster covering the outer surfaces
of the sealed doorways of the tomb; but also in the case of the/<in a lesser degree to the>