The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 58 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
The afterlife of Hatshepsut’s statuary
Open accessAbstract
The statuary of Hatshepsut, who ruled Egypt during the Eighteenth Dynasty, is believed to have been targeted for violent destruction by Thutmose III, her successor. Yet the condition of the statues recovered in the vicinity of Hatshepsut’s mortuary temple at Deir el-Bahri varies considerably and many survive with their faces virtually intact. Through the examination of archival material from the original excavations, the author offers an alternative, more utilitarian, explanation of the treatment of these statues. Rather than outright hostility, much of the damage may instead derive from the ‘deactivation’ of the statues and their reuse as raw material.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper re-examines Hatshepsut’s statuary from Deir el-Bahri using Winlock’s excavation archives and argues that much damage attributed to Thutmose III’s hostility instead reflects deactivation and reuse as raw material. Variation by statue type and findspot suggests later reuse and dispersal, not a single iconoclastic campaign, best explain the condition of the corpus.
Key findings
- Among roughly 40 architectural/Osiride statues recovered, only three have faces that remain largely intact (Cairo JE 56259A, 56260, 56261; the latter two have nose damage); head and crown fragments are overrepresented because the statues were dismantled along plaster-masked stone courses, with reusable body blocks removed and irregular heads/crowns left behind.
- Up to 120 sandstone sphinxes are represented among the finds, but most are paw or head fragments; only one example (Cairo JE 53113) was recovered with its face essentially intact, and bases were often missing or reused, with some sphinxes recut into column drums.
- Of 18 freestanding statues where at least part of the head was recovered, nine had no facial damage or only minor nose damage (Group A) and nine had significant facial damage (Group B); seven Group A statues were near-complete except for the base and found in the Hatshepsut Hole or neighbouring quarry areas, while no Group B statue was near-complete and its fragments were widely dispersed.
- In the Hatshepsut Hole, the only context sealed by Thutmose III’s causeway, five of six recovered heads were pristine; the paper concludes that facial damage to freestanding statues was likely caused by later reuse and extraneous activities rather than by Thutmose III.
Methods
- Archival study of Herbert Winlock’s 1922–1928 Metropolitan Museum of Art excavations at Deir el-Bahri, using unpublished field notes, drawings, photographs, correspondence, and the multi-volume *Metropolitan Museum of Art Theban Excavations* compendia, plus unpublished notes, drawings, and a manuscript by Dorothea Arnold examined in 2023.
- Findspots for statue fragments were reconstructed where possible, the quarry was divided into general areas, and condition, completeness, and dispersion were compared by statue typology: architectural/Osiride statues, sphinxes, and freestanding statues.
- The Hatshepsut Hole, covered by the causeway to Thutmose III’s temple, was used as a key context with a *terminus ante quem* in the reign of Thutmose III.
Limitations
- Stated in the paper: findspot records generally provide only lateral position, often described ambiguously and without a map; vertical stratigraphy is rarely specified; documentation thoroughness varies, with freestanding statues recorded in much greater detail than sphinxes and architectural statues.
- Stated in the paper: natural decay and sedimentation rates in the quarry cannot be fully addressed due to data limitations, so the analysis emphasizes body-part recovery rates and assumes fragments from the same statue were subjected to similar environmental conditions.
- Stated and evident: the complexity of the evidence precludes definitive conclusion; the alternative scenario that Thutmose III ordered complete destruction but it was only partially carried out is considered improbable but not impossible, and the argument depends heavily on Winlock’s cursory or ambiguous archival documentation and Arnold’s unpublished analysis.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
3 of 58 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
- Premisecitation
The same form of damage is also common in statue caches or favissae.
“The same form of damage is also common in statue caches or favissae (Valbelle 2016;Charloux et al. 2017;Charloux & Ali Abady Mahmoud 2019).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked- cites Valbelle 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Charloux et al. 2017 source
The Abstract (page unavailable) describes numerous fragmentary statuettes and figurines in a favissa, supporting the occurrence of damage in this cache. It does not identify the 'same form' of damage or establish that it is common across statue caches or favissae. (LLM, conf=0.68)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured - cites Charloux & Ali Abady Mahmoud 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
The removal of the uraeus and beard is seen on the statuary of various Egyptian rulers.
“The removal of the uraeus and beard is seen on the statuary of various Egyptian rulers (Connor 2018: 161;Bleiberg 2019: 42-45).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked- cites Connor 2018: 161 source
- cites Bleiberg 2019: 42-45
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Premisecitation
These deposits typically include images of various rulers, many of whom are not known to have been the victims of hostility.
“Found in various parts of Egypt and Nubia, these deposits typically include images of various rulers, many of whom are not known to have been the victims of hostility (El-Saghir 1991: 42-43, 45-46, 62-64, 69-71;Bonnet & Valbelle 2003;Jambon 2016).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked- cites El-Saghir 1991: 42-43, 45-46, 62-64, 69-71
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Bonnet & Valbelle 2003 source
The available text identifies a deposit of royal statues at Kerma (title, p. 749), but the passages retrieved from pp. 749–752 do not describe which rulers the statues depict or whether those rulers faced hostility. Searches for multiple rulers and the deposit's destruction returned no later passages; the decisive discussion may be missing from our copy. (LLM, conf=0.74)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured - cites Jambon 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingcitation
A stone house located to the north-east of the temple courtyard was constructed using large sections of Hatshepsut's statuary fragments.
“The most cogent example of this is found in a stone house located to the north-east of the temple courtyard, where large sections were constructed using fragments of Hatshepsut's statuary (Dorman 1991: 158-59; MMATE VII: 183-84).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Dorman 1991: 158-59
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites MMATE VII: 183-84
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingreasoning
The condition and recovery rate of Hatshepsut's statues vary based on their typology.
“The condition and recovery rate of statues can therefore be seen to vary based on their typology.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Findingnone given
Among the 40 or so architectural statues recovered, only three have faces that remain largely intact (Cairo JE 56259A, 56260, 56261; the latter two have sustained damage to their noses).
“Among the 40 or so architectural statues recovered, only three have faces that remain largely intact (Cairo JE 56259A, 56260, 56261; the latter two have sustained damage to their noses).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingnone given
Between 1926 and 1928, a larger collection of statues was uncovered in the quarry.
“Between 1926 and 1928, a larger collection of statues was uncovered in the quarry (Figure 6).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingnone given
Most of the sphinx finds consist of paw and head fragments.
“Most of the finds consist of paw and head fragments.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingnone given
Most of the statuary in the MMA collection was recovered from the Hatshepsut Hole and quarry adjacent to the temple causeway at Deir el-Bahri.
“Most of the statuary in the MMA collection was recovered from the socalled 'Hatshepsut Hole' and 'quarry' adjacent to the temple causeway at Deir el-Bahri (Figure 1).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation
Fragments from the same statue were often located in different parts of the necropolis, at times hundreds of metres apart.
“In addition, fragments from the same statue were often located in different parts of the necropolis, at times hundreds of metres apart (Winlock 1942: 158, 168).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Winlock 1942: 158, 168
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingcitation
Fragments have been recovered from every architectural statue from the Main Sanctuary of Amun (four in total) and the Lower Portico (two).
“Fragments have also been recovered from every architectural statue from the Main Sanctuary of Amun (four in total) and the Lower Portico (two) (MMATE VII: 61-62, 101).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites MMATE VII: 61-62, 101
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingcitation
The statues found in the Hatshepsut Hole include fragments from seven small kneeling statues, broken across the neck, waist and knees.
“The statues found here (outlined in MMATE VIII: 22) include fragments from seven small kneeling statues, which are broken across the neck, waist and knees.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites MMATE VIII: 22
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingcitation
Most of the recovered fragments from architectural statues originate from the head or crown.
“Winlock's documentation, which is often cursory, indicates that most of the recovered fragments originate from the head or crown (MMATE VIIl: 54-114; Figure 8).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites MMATE VIIl: 54-114
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingnone given
Statue heads that were found away from the quarry and the Hatshepsut Hole (Cairo JE 53115, MMA 29.3.2, MMA 30.3.2 & MMA 30.3.3) or in post-Thutmose III contexts (Cairo JE 53115, MMA 29.3.2) have invariably sustained facial damage.
“In fact, statue heads that were found away from the quarry and the Hatshepsut Hole (Cairo JE 53115, MMA 29.3.2,MMA 30.3.2 & MMA 30.3.3) or in post-Thutmose III contexts (Cairo JE 53115, MMA 29.3.2) have invariably sustained facial damage.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The Hatshepsut Hole is the only context with a terminus ante quem dating to the reign of Thutmose III.
“Indeed, in the Hatshepsut Hole, the only context with a terminus ante quem dating to the reign of Thutmose III, five of the six heads were recovered in pristine condition.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation
Tool marks left by workers indicate that they were searching for the joints between the stone courses that had been masked by plaster and paint.
“Tool marks left by workers indicate that they were searching for the joints between the stone courses that had been masked by plaster and paint (MMATE VII: 94a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites MMATE VII: 94a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingnone given
Inscriptions of Hatshepsut's name on freestanding statues tend to be fully intact.
“Inscriptions of Hatshepsut's name tend to be fully intact.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingnone given
Every statue that was found in near-complete condition has sustained no significant damage to its visage.
“However, this is clearly not the case-every statue that was found in near-complete condition has sustained no significant damage to its visage.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Five of the six heads in the Hatshepsut Hole were recovered in pristine condition.
“Indeed, in the Hatshepsut Hole, the only context with a terminus ante quem dating to the reign of Thutmose III, five of the six heads were recovered in pristine condition.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given
The uraeus on the forehead of freestanding statues was usually removed, in a manner similar to the treatment of the sphinxes and architectural statues.
“The uraeus on the forehead was usually removed, in a manner similar to the treatment of the sphinxes and architectural statues.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The pieces of the seven near-complete statues in group A were all found within a small radius: each was either found entirely in the Hatshepsut Hole or within neighbouring areas of the quarry.
“The pieces of these same seven statues in group A were all found within a small radius: each was either found entirely in the Hatshepsut Hole or within neighbouring areas of the quarry (Table 1).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning
The architectural statues were formed using multiple stone courses held together by plaster, rather than being carved from a single block of stone.
“Rather than being carved from a single block of stone, the architectural statues were formed using multiple stone courses held together by plaster.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given
The Osirides at the Lower Portico consisted of eight courses of stone that formed their bodies, with other courses for their heads and crowns.
“For instance, the Osirides at the Lower Portico consisted of eight courses of stone that formed their bodies, with other courses for their heads and crowns.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Among the 18 freestanding statues where at least part of the head has been recovered, only nine have sustained facial damage that can be considered significant.
“However, among the 18 freestanding statues where at least part of the head has been recovered (Table S1), only nine have sustained facial damage that can be considered significant.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Table S1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingcitation
Hatshepsut's sphinxes were often attached to an additional course of stone that formed their base.
“Hatshepsut's sphinxes were often attached to an additional course of stone that formed their base.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation
The heads of certain Osirides (e.g., those from the Upper Court) were bonded to the wall using mortise and tenon.
“The heads of certain Osirides (e.g.those from the Upper Court) were also bonded to the wall using mortise and tenon (MMATE VII: 90-91).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites MMATE VII: 90-91
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In group A, seven statues were recovered in near-complete condition, with their base being the only missing element.
“In group A, seven statues were recovered in near-complete condition, with their base being the only missing element”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In group B, none of the examples were recovered in near-complete condition.
“in group B, none of the examples were recovered in near-complete condition (Tables 1 & 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Fragments from the group B statues are all widely dispersed, with many found at a considerable distance away from the Hatshepsut Hole and quarry.
“In contrast, fragments from the group B statues are all widely dispersed, with many found at a considerable distance away from the Hatshepsut Hole and quarry (Table 2).”
- Also stated in: § Freestanding statues · hedged
“However, it is evident that fragments from group B tend to be more widely dispersed.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Freestanding statues · hedged
- Findingcitation
The stone house appears to have been constructed mostly from Osiride fragments.
“Indeed, the aforementioned stone house appears to have been constructed mostly from Osiride fragments (MMATE VIII: 23).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites MMATE VIII: 23
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingcitation
At Deir el-Bahri, some sphinxes appear to have been recut into column drums.
“At Deir el-Bahri, some appear to have been recut into column drums (MMATE VIII: 101;Winlock 1942: 213).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites MMATE VIII: 101
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Winlock 1942: 213
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
The only exception is a head fragment that matches another fragment found at the west end of the quarry (MMA 31.3.162).
“The only exception is a head fragment that matches another fragment found at the west end of the quarry (MMA 31.3.162),though it remains unclear whether the damage was deliberate or incidental.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The disproportionate survival of head fragments among architectural statues cannot be explained by material differences alone, because heads were made of the same material as the rest of the body.
“However, even if the architectural statues were more susceptible to damage and decay, it does not explain the disproportionate survival of head fragments, which were made of the same material as the rest of their body.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The statues were not buried immediately after their removal from the temple.
“This suggests that the statues were not buried immediately after their removal from the temple.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The discrepancy in survival of head fragments appears to relate to the way each statue type was reused.
“Instead, this discrepancy appears to relate to the way in which each statue type was reused.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisenone given
The statues of Hatshepsut recovered at Deir el-Bahri can be divided into three categories: architectural statues, sphinxes and freestanding statues.
“In general, the statues of Hatshepsut recovered at Deir el-Bahri can be divided into three categories: architectural statues, sphinxes and freestanding statues.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The statues deposited over a vast area were subject to different taphonomic processes.
“As the statues were deposited over a vast area, they were subject to different taphonomic processes.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The statues in the Hatshepsut Hole appear to have been moved there to act as in-fill for the causeway's construction.
“The statues, much like the building material and ostraca, appear to have been moved here to act as in-fill for the causeway's construction.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data
Much of the damage to Hatshepsut's statuary may derive from the 'deactivation' of the statues and their reuse as raw material, rather than outright hostility.
“Rather than outright hostility, much of the damage may instead derive from the 'deactivation' of the statues and their reuse as raw material.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Thutmose III's treatment of Hatshepsut's statues cannot be properly understood without first disentangling later processes.
“As a result, Thutmose III's treatment of these statues cannot be properly understood without first disentangling these later processes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
The destruction of Hatshepsut's monuments was initiated by Thutmose III, her nephew and successor.
“This act was initiated by Thutmose III, her nephew and successor (sole reign c. 1458-1425 BC), but the motivation behind it remains contentious (Nims 1966;Dorman 1988: 46-65;Laboury 1998: 483-512;Arnold 2005;Roth 2005: 280-81;Bryan 2012: 365-69;Kapiec 2021: 121-34).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Nims 1966 source
- cites Dorman 1988: 46-65
- cites Laboury 1998: 483-512
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationnone given
Fragments from several statues (e.g. MMA 31.3.160, MMA 31.3.162) were moved from the quarry to the Hatshepsut Hole as a convenient fill for the construction of the causeway for Thutmose III's temple.
“Subsequently, fragments from several statues (e.g.MMA 31.3.160,MMA 31.3.162)were moved from the quarry to the Hatshepsut Hole as a convenient fill for the construction of the causeway for Thutmose III's temple.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The faces of the sphinxes and Osiride statues sustained heavier damage, possibly due to their forcible removal and reuse activities.
“The faces of the sphinxes and Osiride statues sustained heavier damage, possibly due to their forcible removal and reuse activities.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The scenario that Thutmose III ordered the complete destruction of the statues' visage but the order was only partially carried out is improbable.
“While this scenario would also explain the current condition of the statues, it must be considered improbable due to the reasons outlined below.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Group B was far more affected by reuse and other later modifications than group A.
“Their wide dispersal and missing parts suggest that group B was far more affected by reuse and other later modifications than group A.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The idiosyncrasy of head fragment overrepresentation seems related to the way these statues were constructed, and consequently how they were reused.
“This idiosyncrasy seems to be related to the way these statues were constructed, and consequently how they were reused.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The most practical way to detach the heads of certain Osirides might have been to demolish them in situ.
“As a result, the most practical way to detach them might have been to demolish them in situ.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The overrepresentation of head fragments in architectural statues is striking, given that the head constitutes only a small mass of material relative to the body.
“This overrepresentation is striking, given that the head constitutes only a small mass of material relative to the body in these statues.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationcitation
The missing bases of freestanding statues likely reflect that bases were regular blocks that could be repurposed without substantial reworking.
“This pattern likely reflects the fact that the bases were regular blocks that, unlike other parts of the statue, could be repurposed without substantial reworking (Laboury 1998: 167).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Laboury 1998: 167
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning
The courses below the neck of the architectural statues are essentially uniform blocks of stone that are ideal for reuse.
“As these statues depict a tightly shrouded body, the courses below the neck are essentially uniform blocks of stone that are ideal for reuse.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The treatment of both Hatshepsut's statuary and the 'deactivated' statues of other rulers appears to have been driven by pragmatic considerations, which, from a modern perspective, can only be clumsily described as ritualistic or superstitious.
“The treatment of both Hatshepsut's statuary and the 'deactivated' statues of other rulers appears to have been driven by pragmatic considerations, which, from a modern perspective, can only be clumsily described as ritualistic or superstitious.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The agents of Thutmose III had the means to inflict damage to the faces of freestanding statues, if there was such an inclination.
“As each statue was broken across several points, it is apparent that the agents of Thutmose III had the means to inflict damage to the faces, if there was such an inclination.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Detaching the base from the body of freestanding statues cleanly would have required considerable skill, as the contact area can be quite large.
“As the contact area between the base and the body can be quite large (particularly for the seated statues), detaching the two parts cleanly would have required considerable skill.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The current condition of the statues reflects the sum of these processes.
“The current condition of the statues reflects the sum of these processes.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationnone given
By the time the causeway was under construction, many of the prized parts of the sculptures had already been taken away for reuse.
“By the time the causeway was under construction, many of the prized parts of the sculptures had already been taken away for reuse.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
There is room for a more nuanced understanding of Thutmose III's actions, which were perhaps driven by ritual necessity rather than outright antipathy.
“Yet, there is room for a more nuanced understanding of Thutmose III's actions, which were perhaps driven by ritual necessity rather than outright antipathy.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
To ease their removal, the architectural statues were first dismantled into individual blocks.
“To ease their removal, therefore, the statues were first dismantled into individual blocks.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The pattern of preservation of sphinxes is likely related to reuse activities.
“This pattern of preservation is likely also related to reuse activities.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
A correlation may be seen between extraneous processes and the destruction of statue heads.
“A correlation may therefore be seen between these extraneous processes and the destruction of statue heads.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationnone given
Even if the surfaces of heads and crowns were chipped off to produce reusable blocks, the refuse from this process would remain identifiable in the archaeological record.
“Even if the surfaces were chipped off to produce reusable blocks, the refuse from this process would remain identifiable in the archaeological record.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The facial damage to the freestanding statues was likely caused by later activities rather than Thutmose III.
“In other words, the facial damage to the freestanding statues was likely caused by later activities rather than Thutmose III.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The reuse of freestanding statues appears to have begun during the reign of Thutmose III, since all examples found in the Hatshepsut Hole-which was covered beneath the causeway to the temple of Thutmose III-are missing their bases.
“The reuse of freestanding statues appears to have begun during the reign of Thutmose III, since all examples found in the Hatshepsut Hole-which was covered beneath the causeway to the temple of Thutmose III-are missing their bases.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The fragments recovered from sphinxes often consist of thin, inscribed surfaces which were probably chipped off before the base was reused.
“The fragments recovered often consist of thin, inscribed surfaces (e.g.MMA 23.3.172)which were probably chipped off before the base was reused.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites MMA 23.3.172
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationcitation
The bases of Hatshepsut's sphinxes must have been particularly prized for reuse, as they are not often attested in the archaeological record.
“These bases must have been particularly prized for reuse, as they are not often attested in the archaeological record (MMATE VIII: 139; Smilgin 2012).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites MMATE VIII: 139
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Smilgin 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning
Sphinxes are easily repurposed as building material, particularly if protruding parts such as the head and paws are removed.
“Sphinxes are easily repurposed as building material, particularly if protruding parts such as the head and paws are removed.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Hatshepsut did suffer a programme of persecution.
“That being said, the same form of damage does not negate the possibility of differing connotations: unlike the other rulers, Hatshepsut did suffer a programme of persecution, and its wider political implications cannot be overstated (Laboury 1998: 483-512;Arnold 2005: 270-76).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Laboury 1998: 483-512
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Arnold 2005: 270-76
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning
Once such damage has been discounted, their treatment is reminiscent of the 'deactivated' statues found in various caches.
“Once such damage has been discounted, their treatment is reminiscent of the 'deactivated' statues found in various caches.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The sheer size of the Osiride statues meant that the heads were likely to fall and sustain damage during the removal process.
“The sheer size of these statues meant that the heads were likely to fall and sustain damage during the removal process.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
- It may state two separate claims as one. 29
- Probably not a substantial claim. 8
It may state two separate claims as one.
FindingcitationSome statues were covered by other deposits within the Eighteenth Dynasty, while others were found in layers dating to the Graeco-Roman period or later.
“Some were covered by other deposits within the Eighteenth Dynasty (c.1550-1069 BC) (Dorman 1991: 84; MMATE VII: 181-82), while others were found in layers dating to the Graeco-Roman period or later (Winlock 1942: 158, 168-70).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Dorman 1991: 84
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites MMATE VII: 181-82
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Winlock 1942: 158, 168-70
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
FindingcitationReuse activities of Hatshepsut's statue fragments persisted as late as the Graeco-Roman period, and some fragments were encountered by nineteenth-century visitors to the Deir el-Bahri region.
“Some fragments would remain exposed to human modifications for millennia; reuse activities persisted as late as the Graeco-Roman period (c.332 BC-AD 95) and some fragments were encountered by nineteenth-century visitors to the Deir el-Bahri region, at times near the surface of the ground (Lepsius 1849-59: vol. 3, pl. 25;Winlock 1942: 168-70).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Lepsius 1849-59: vol. 3, pl. 25
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Winlock 1942: 168-70
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
FindingcitationThe causeway to Thutmose III's temple was constructed over the Hatshepsut Hole, making it the only context where Hatshepsut's statues remained undisturbed since the reign of Thutmose III.
“The causeway to Thutmose III's temple was constructed over this hole, hence it is the only context where Hatshepsut's statues remained undisturbed since the reign of Thutmose III (Winlock 1942: 75-76, 201-203;Dorman 1991: 82, footnote 271).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Winlock 1942: 75-76, 201-203
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Dorman 1991: 82, footnote 271
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Findingnone givenThe condition of Hatshepsut's statues recovered in the vicinity of her mortuary temple at Deir el-Bahri varies considerably, and many survive with their faces virtually intact.
“Yet the condition of the statues recovered in the vicinity of Hatshepsut's mortuary temple at Deir el-Bahri varies considerably and many survive with their faces virtually intact.”
- Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
“Many of her statues survive in relatively good condition, with their faces virtually intact (Figure 4).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
It may state two separate claims as one.
FindingcitationWinlock's excavation recovered face fragments for 22 of the 24 statues on the Upper Portico pillars, and nine mouth fragments for the 10 statues in the Upper Court.
“Winlock's excavation recovered face fragments for 22 of the 24 statues on the Upper Portico pillars, while nine mouth fragments were recovered for the 10 statues in the Upper Court (MMATE VII: 68B-83).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites MMATE VII: 68B-83
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Findingnone givenWhile the total number of sphinxes must have originally been in the hundreds, only one example (Cairo JE 53113) was recovered with its face essentially intact.
“While the total number of sphinxes must have originally been in the hundreds, only one example (Cairo JE 53113) was recovered with its face essentially intact (Figure 7).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataFive of the seven small kneeling statues from the Hatshepsut Hole sustained no damage to their faces and were recovered in full apart from their missing bases, while the remaining two consist of body and head fragments.
“Five of them sustained no damage to their faces and were recovered in full apart from their missing bases, while the remaining two consist of body and head fragments (accession number: MMA 31.3.162,MMA 31.3.161).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites MMA 31.3.162
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites MMA 31.3.161
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
FindingcitationThe architectural statues range from 3.13m to 7.35m in height.
“The architectural statues are the largest in size among the three categories, each ranging from 3.13m to 7.35m in height (MMATE VII: 89, 108; Dziedzic & Caban 2019: 278-79).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites MMATE VII: 89, 108
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Dziedzic & Caban 2019: 278-79 source
It may state two separate claims as one.
FindingcitationUp to 120 sandstone sphinxes are represented among the finds, though many are represented only by fragments from the paw or the head.
“Up to 120 sandstone sphinxes are represented among the finds (Winlock 1942: 212), though many are represented only by fragments from the paw or the head (MMATE VIII: 101-42; Shukanau 2013: 159).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Winlock 1942: 212
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites MMATE VIII: 101-42
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Shukanau 2013: 159
It may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataAll examples of freestanding statues were broken across the neck, waist and feet, with some also broken across their beard, knees and crowns.
“All examples were broken across the neck, waist and feet, with some also broken across their beard (likely incidental to breakage across the neck), knees and crowns.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Findingnone givenEach freestanding statue was carved from a single block of stone.
“Each freestanding statue was carved from a single block of stone.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
FindingreasoningAll the freestanding statues found in the Hatshepsut Hole are missing their bases, while the Osirides and sphinxes were represented primarily by less reusable fragments (head and claws).
“All the freestanding statues found in the Hatshepsut Hole are missing their bases, while the Osirides and sphinxes were represented primarily by less reusable fragments (head and claws).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
FindingcitationThe pattern of head fragments outnumbering torso and leg fragments persisted decades later when more Osiride fragments were recovered in the temple of Thutmose III; head fragments (n > 20) outnumbered torso (n = 14) and legs.
“This pattern persisted decades later when more Osiride fragments of Hatshepsut were recovered in the temple of Thutmose III; head fragments (n > 20) outnumbered those from the torso (n = 14) and legs (which are the least numerous; Dąbrowski 1968: 132).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Dąbrowski 1968: 132
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
FindingcitationSeven of the Group B statue heads are fragmented; for the remaining two, the head was recovered in a single piece, with damage limited to the surface.
“Seven of the statue heads are fragmented; for the remaining two, the head was recovered in a single piece, with damage limited to the surface (MMA 27.3.163,MMA 29.3.1).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites MMA 27.3.163
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites MMA 29.3.1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataOverall, the head, torso and lower body of freestanding statues were recovered at a generally proportional rate, while the statue bases are often missing.
“Overall, the head, torso and lower body were recovered at a generally proportional rate, while the statue bases are often missing (Table S1).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Table S1
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
InterpretationcitationHatshepsut's statues in the Hatshepsut Hole were scattered throughout the debris, suggesting they were buried without much deliberation.
“Hatshepsut's statues were scattered throughout the debris, suggesting they were buried without much deliberation (Figure 5; Winlock 1923: 33).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Winlock 1923: 33 source
It may state two separate claims as one.
InterpretationcitationSmaller pieces of statues were often found above the edge of the quarry, with larger pieces from the same statues identified within the quarry, suggesting many statues were broken up at the edge and then rolled into the quarry.
“Smaller pieces of statues were often found above the edge of the quarry, with larger pieces from the same statues identified within the quarry itself, suggesting that many of the statues were broken up at the edge and then rolled into the quarry (Arnold 2005: 273).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Arnold 2005: 273
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
It may state two separate claims as one.
InterpretationreasoningThe statues were exposed to various disturbance processes, the most significant of which must have been their reuse as raw material.
“As a result, they were exposed to various disturbance processes, the most significant of which must have been their reuse as raw material.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Premisenone givenFollowing her death, the monuments of Hatshepsut were subject to a systematic programme of destruction, the most common manifestation being the erasure of her name and image from temple walls.
“Following her death, the monuments of the pharaoh Hatshepsut (reigned c. 1473-1458 BC) were subject to a systematic programme of destruction, the most common manifestation of which was the erasure of her name and image from temple walls.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
InterpretationreasoningDeposition in the quarry was likely an act of convenience, as the bulk of the statues were found in the western and southern parts nearest to the temple.
“Deposition here was likely an act of convenience-indeed, the bulk of the statues were found in the western and southern parts, which are the areas nearest to the temple.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
InterpretationcitationBoth the Hatshepsut Hole and the quarry appear to have been formed to obtain landscaping material for Hatshepsut's temple.
“Both depressions appear to have been formed to obtain landscaping material for Hatshepsut's temple (Winlock 1923: 30-1;1942: 154-55;Arnold 2005: 273).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Winlock 1923: 30-1 source
- cites Winlock 1942: 154-55
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Arnold 2005: 273
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Interpretationnone givenIn addition to these anthropic factors, further damage might have been caused by seismic activity, decay and other post-depositional phenomena.
“In addition to these anthropic factors, further damage might have been caused by seismic activity, decay and other post-depositional phenomena.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Interpretationnone givenBecause the statues had effectively been 'deactivated', it was no longer necessary to erase the names inscribed on them.
“Perhaps because the statues had effectively been 'deactivated', it was no longer necessary to erase the names inscribed on them.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
InterpretationreasoningOnly the smallest of the freestanding statues were deposited in the Hatshepsut Hole because once they had been 'deactivated', each fragment could be carried by a single individual.
“It is perhaps no coincidence that only the smallest of the freestanding statues were deposited here-once they had been 'deactivated', each fragment could be carried by a single individual.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
InterpretationreasoningThe irregular surfaces of the heads and crowns made them harder to repurpose, aiding their archaeological survival.
“In contrast, the irregular surfaces of the heads and crowns made them harder to repurpose, aiding their archaeological survival.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
PremisecitationStatues of male pharaohs found at Deir el-Bahri (including Mentuhotep II, Senwosret III, Amenhotep I and Thutmose III) are typically broken across their neck, knees and/or ankles, with fragments often scattered across large areas.
“In addition, statues of male pharaohs found at Deir el-Bahri (including Mentuhotep II, Senwosret III, Amenhotep I and Thutmose III) are typically broken across their neck, knees and/or ankles, with fragments often scattered across large areas (Naville 1907: 57;Arnold & Winlock 1979: 46-49;Lipin ́ska 1984: 14-6;Szafran ́ski 1985: 258-60).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Naville 1907: 57
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Arnold & Winlock 1979: 46-49
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Lipin ́ska 1984: 14-6
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
PremisecitationThis treatment is believed to be a form of 'deactivation' intended to neutralise the inherent power of the statues.
“This treatment is believed to be a form of 'deactivation' intended to neutralise the inherent power of the statues (Jambon 2016: 153-63;Connor 2022: 137-44).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Jambon 2016: 153-63
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Connor 2022: 137-44
It may state two separate claims as one.
InterpretationreasoningThe characteristics displayed by the two groups do not satisfy the sequence of events in which Thutmose III ordered complete destruction but it was partially carried out.
“On the balance of probability, however, the characteristics displayed by the two groups do not seem to satisfy this sequence of events.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The condition of a statue's visage has little effect on whether its other body parts were selected for reuse.
- Rests on an assumption: Statues with intact faces are just as likely to have been scattered by later activities as those with damaged faces.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Interpretationnone givenThe removal of statues from Hatshepsut's temple occurred at some point during the sole reign of Thutmose III (c.1458-1425 BC).
“The removal of statues from Hatshepsut's temple occurred at some point during the sole reign of Thutmose III (c.1458-1425 BC).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationnone givenThe quarry (and its surrounding area) contained the highest concentration of fragments and was most likely the primary area of deposition.
“The quarry (and its surrounding area) contained the highest concentration of fragments and was most likely the primary area of deposition.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationnone givenMuch of the facial damage on Hatshepsut's statuary can be attributed to incidental damage during their removal (in the case of the architectural statues), as well as their reuse as a raw material and other extraneous interventions (freestanding statues and sphinxes).
“Nevertheless, it appears that much of the facial damage on Hatshepsut's statuary can be attributed to incidental damage during their removal (in the case of the architectural statues), as well as their reuse as a raw material and other extraneous interventions (freestanding statues and sphinxes).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
InterpretationreasoningMany statue bases are missing in their entirety, suggesting they were not broken into smaller fragments but were taken away whole.
“Indeed, the fact that many statue bases are missing in their entirety suggests that they were not broken into smaller fragments but were taken away whole.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Interpretationnone givenThis period may also have seen deliberate but less systematic destruction of the statues, perhaps by individuals or groups fearing the inherent power of these images.
“This period may also have seen deliberate but less systematic destruction of the statues, perhaps by individuals or groups fearing the inherent power of these images.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationnone givenFreestanding statues were broken across their neck, waist and feet; some sustained facial damage that may have been incidental to their transport and 'deactivation', though many had their visage intact.
“Freestanding statues were broken across their neck, waist and feet; some sustained facial damage that may have been incidental to their transport and 'deactivation', though many had their visage intact.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationnone givenAt the quarry, the reuse of the statues would persist long after the reign of Thutmose III, leading to their dispersal to various parts of the necropolis.
“At the quarry, the reuse of the statues would persist long after the reign of Thutmose III, leading to their dispersal to various parts of the necropolis.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown dataThe number of freestanding statues with intact faces is substantial, and this does not appear to have occurred by happenstance.
“The number of statues with intact faces is substantial, and this does not appear to have occurred by happenstance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
The condition of a statue's visage has little effect on whether its other body parts were selected for reuse.
“Firstly, the condition of a statue's visage should have little effect on whether its other body parts were selected for reuse.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Statues with intact faces are just as likely to have been scattered by later activities as those with damaged faces.
“In the same vein, statues with intact faces should be just as likely to have been scattered by later activities as those with damaged faces.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Fragments from the same statue would have been subjected to similar environmental conditions, thus missing parts are more likely to result from human activity.
“In this way, this analysis assumes that fragments from the same statue would have been subjected to similar environmental conditions, thus missing parts are more likely to result from human activity.”
Citations
Cites
The XIth dynasty temple at Deir el-Bahari
Naville, É., Hall, H. R., Ayrton, E. R., Clarke, S., Currelly, C. T., & Freer, C. L. (1907) · doi:10.5479/sla.860741.39088017853151 · Cited by 80
The date of the dishonoring of Hatshepsut
NIMS, C. F. (1966) · Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde · doi:10.1524/zaes.1966.93.1.97 · Cited by 50
(1988) · Kegan Paul International eBooks · Cited by 43
The Museum's Excavations at Thebes
Winlock, H. E. (1923) · The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin · doi:10.2307/3254661 · Cited by 21
The Egyptian Expedition 1925-1927: The Museum's Excavations at Thebes
Winlock, H. E. (1928) · The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin · doi:10.2307/3256026 · Cited by 21
The Sad Fate of Statues and the Mutilated Statues of Hazor
Ben-Tor, A. (2006) · Penn State University Press eBooks · doi:10.5325/j.ctv1bxh448.6 · Cited by 21
The date of the dishonoring of Hatshepsut
NIMS, C. F. (1966) · Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde · doi:10.1524/zaes.1966.93.12.97 · Cited by 20
Mutiler, tuer, désactiver les images en Égypte pharaonique
Connor, S. (2018) · Perspective · doi:10.4000/perspective.11431 · Cited by 7
SANDSTONE SPHINXES OF QUEEN HATSHEPSUT FROM DEIR EL-BAHARI: PRELIMINARY REMARKS
Smilgin, A. (2009) · Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean · Cited by 6
A Selection of Tuthmoside Ostraca from Der El-Bahri
Hayes, W. C. (1960) · The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology · doi:10.2307/3855661 · Cited by 4
Un dépôt de statues royales du début du VIe siècle av. J.-C. à Kerma
Bonnet, C., & Valbelle, D. (2003) · Comptes-rendus des séances de l année - Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres · doi:10.3406/crai.2003.22600 · Cited by 4
Edgerton, W. F. (2026) · doi:10.83354/k4m8-td08 · Cited by 3
Disabling Demonic Images: Regional Diversity in Ancient Iconoclasts’ Motives and Targets
Sauer, E. (2014) · doi:10.4324/9781315252827-9 · Cited by 3
The afterlife of Egyptian statues: a cache of religious objects in the temple of Ptah at Karnak
Charloux, G., Thiers, C., Abd Al-Aziz, M., Ali Abady Mahmoud, M., Boulet, S., Bourse, C., Guadagnini, K., Laroye, J., & ElNasseh, A. M. S. (2017) · Antiquity · doi:10.15184/aqy.2017.137 · Cited by 2
Dziedzic, T., & Caban, M. (2019) · Greco-Roman Cities at the Crossroads of Cultures: The 20th Anniversary of Polish-Egyptian Conservation Mission Marina el-Alamein · doi:10.2307/j.ctvndv687.26 · Cited by 2
(2013) · Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean · Cited by 1
(2022) · HAL · Cited by 1
The Various Lives of Statues in the City of the Sun
Connor, S. (2021) · The American University in Cairo Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctv2ks6x98.16 · Cited by 1
A CLASSIFICATION OF ‘SACRED’ CACHES IN ANCIENT EGYPT
Charloux, G., & Mahmoud, M. A. A. (2020) · Peeters Publishers eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctv1q26tr1.15
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- ARNOLD, D. 2005. The destruction of the statues of Hatshepsut from Deir el-Bahri, in C.H. Roehrig, R. Dreyfus & C.A. Keller (ed.) Hatshepsut: from queen to pharaoh: 270-76. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
- BLEIBERG, E. 2019. Why are the noses broken on Egyptian statues? in E. Bleiberg & S. Weissberg (ed.) Striking power: iconoclasm in Ancient Egypt: 27-64. Brooklyn (NY): Brooklyn Museum.
- BRYAN, B.M. 2012. Episodes of iconoclasm in the Egyptian New Kingdom, in N.N. May (ed.) Iconoclasm and text destruction in the Ancient Near East and beyond (Oriental Institute Seminars 8): 363-94. Chicago (IL): The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
- JAMBON, E. 2016. La Cachette de Karnak. Étude analytique et essais d'interprétation, in L. Coulon (ed.) La Cachette de Karnak. Nouvelles perspectives sur les découvertes de G. Legrain: 131-75. Cairo: Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale.
- LEBLANC, C. 1980. Piliers et colosses de type «osiriaque» dans le contexte des temples de culte royal. Bulletin de l'Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale 80: 69-89.
- MINIACI, G. 2023. In the footsteps of Auguste Rodin: fragmentation is not an end, in G. Miniaci (ed.) Breaking images: damage and mutilation of ancient figurines: 3-13. Oxford: Oxbow.
- ROTH, A.M. 2005. Erasing a reign, in C.H. Roehrig, R. Dreyfus & C.A. Keller (ed.) Hatshepsut: from queen to pharaoh: 277-81. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
- SUTER, C.E. 2012. Gudea of Lagash: iconoclasm or tooth of time? in N.N. May (ed.) Iconoclasm and text destruction in the Ancient Near East and beyond: 57-87. Chicago (IL): Oriental Institute.
- VALBELLE, D. 2016. Statues enterrées, dépôts liturgiques et différentes catégories de favissae, in L. Coulon (ed.) La Cachette de Karnak: nouvelles perspectives sur les découvertes de Georges Legrain: 21-33. Cairo: Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Odler, M. (2026) · Antiquity · doi:10.15184/aqy.2026.10304
Metadata
- Authors
- Wong, J. Y.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Wong, Jun Yi
- ORCID
- Wong, Jun Yi
- Venue
- Antiquity
- Publisher
- Antiquity Publications
- Published
- 2025-06
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 405
- Pages
- 746-761
- ISSN
- 0003-598X (ISSN-L)
- 1745-1744
- OpenAlex
- W4411574417
- Semantic Scholar
- 6b03d01307c59feb9c6eed6ae8f32b42e4873f5e
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 8.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Antiquity (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Ancient Egypt and Archaeology
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Classics › Classical Antiquity Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Ancient Mediterranean Archaeology and History
- Keywords
- Hatshepsut, Deir el-Bahari, Thutmose III, ancient Egyptian sculpture, Eighteenth Dynasty
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
