The tomb TT45 was carved during the period of Amenhotep II (c. 1427 – 1400 B.C) for Djehuty, an official of modest rank. A few centuries later, towards the end of the reign of Ramses II (c. 1279 – 1213 B.C), a new occupier, Djehutyemheb, takes possession of the surroundings (Kampp places the reutilisation of the tomb slightly later, during the 20th dynasty). It is a legal recovery, and the new occupier respects the numerous inscriptions and vignettes of his predecessor; it is probably him who carves the largest part of the longitudinal room. This double occupation allows for an interesting comparison between the techniques and themes that were in vogue during the Ramesside period (and their mediocre quality of execution) and those dating to the first part of the 18th dynasty.


The tomb was discovered by Mond during the 1903-1904 season. He cleared it up and then went on to publish the majority of the texts. A few years later, Norman de Garis Davies continued with the study of the monument, which, during the interval period, had unfortunately been robbed by looters. His wife Nina, who was in charge of illustrating and recording the scenes of the tomb, must have taken on the task with mixed joy.
The tomb TT45 is situated on the foot of the hill of Sheikh Abd el-Gurnah (), slightly towards the south of the well-known tomb (opened to the public) of Khaemhat, TT57. Magnetically speaking, the tomb is nearly positioned in a north-south direction, however the decorations of the tomb recreate the symbolic east-west orientation () ; it is this symbolic orientation that we will follow throughout the description of the walls.

The tomb presents itself in the shape of a ‘T’, classic for the period in question, however it was left unfinished regarding both on the level of the excavation of the longitudinal room, as well as in the decoration of the transversal room, being the sole one to have been painted. The decorations of the first phase of occupation by Djehuty are limited to the right side (north) of this room, and these were in some occasions only sketched, the owner that followed was contented to finish them in the ramesside fashion. In the second phase, in the ramesside period, all the remaining wall surfaces are decorated, and one can also notice additions and commentaries which complete what pre-dated.


Djehutyemheb “recuperated” for his personal usage the funerary monument that had initially been constructed for Djehuty around two centuries earlier. In this case, the word “usurped” is not technically appropriate and thus one must prefer that of legal reoccupation. Since there were no family ties unifying these two individuals, one may suppose that, besides their names being related to the god Thot, it is their role as responsible of the draperies in the temple of Amun that provides the reason (and maybe the legitimisation) for the re-usage of the tomb. It should also be stated that in proximity to the TT45 one can locate the tomb TT133 of Neferrenpet, who himself was also responsible of the textile workers in the Ramesseum.

1) - Djehuty

His most complete titles are can be found in a funerary cone: “Scribe of the offering table of Mery, Great Priest of Amun: Superior to all the weavers of Amun; Steward of the house of Mery, Great Priest of Amun.” Mery is the owner of the tomb TT95. His mother carries the same name as him, Djehuty – a frequent practice during the thutmoside period, just like other theophoric names. Also mentioned in the funerary cone are three sons: Panakhtenopet, Userhatnakht, Unnefer, as well as three grandchildren them being, Amenemopetnakht, Panebenopet and Suti also called Khensniuaa. However, he does not make any allusions to his wife.

2) - Djehutyemheb

Djehutyemheb does not establish any direct filiation between him and his predecessor. In fact, due to eight generations separating them, it is most probably the case that between both owners there is no verifiable genealogic connection. Djehutyemheb also does not incorporate any functional filiation formula, as is the case with .
Djehutyemheb is also in charge of the weaving workshops, since he is “Superior of the textile workers of the temple of Amun”, and more precisely “superior of the textile workers of fine linen of the temple of Amun”.

The father of Djehutyemheb, Unnefer, was also in charge of the textile workers of the temple of Amun. His mother’s name was Isis. His wife, Bakkhonsu was “chantress of the Theban triad” (the Theban triad is constituted of the god Amun, his consort Mut, and their “son” Khonsu). In addition to his father, mother and wife, Djehutyemheb also mentions five daughters, all of them chantresses of Amun (Tyemheb, Nakhtmut, Iakhmut, Dinimuti and Aset), as well as four sons (Panakhtenopet, Userhatnakht, Unnefer, Panesuttaui).

Djehutyemheb demonstrates great restraint and respect towards the previous decorations featured in the tomb of Djehuty.

At no moment did he attempt to mask the identity of his predecessor; in fact, he even allowed a large artistic representation of Djehuty sitting, and of his mother, to remain on the east wall. On the areas already decorated, he positioned a certain number of elements of Ramesside fashion and completed the captions. The clothes, for example, can be observed to have been frequently touched up on in white in order to suggest the superposition of the cloths and the puffed aspect of the sleeves as had become the fashion during that period. This can be observed in the artistic representation of his wife (see opposite image). On the other hand, he completely removed the incomplete scenes (those whose depictions had not been completed) contained on the north wall, and thus devoted the entirety of the wall to the members of his family.
The left wing of the room, which had not been decorated in the 18th dynasty, is of ramesside type, and this can be observed, for example, at the level of the frieze that overhangs the décor: to the classic frieze of khakeru of the 18th dynasty () ensues a more complex frieze illustrating Djehutyemheb and his wife in adoration in front of Anubis (south wing, walls east and west, ), or an alternation of the head of the goddess Hathor and of some khakeru (south wall, , ).
Globally, the quality of paintings’ execution is average, and one can distinguish a far better artistic rendering in the first phase of the tomb decorations than with that of the ramesside period. In any case, it is not the Masters that decorated this chapel…


The small courtyard that precedes the entrance is sunken, but its original plan has been completely shattered by modern developments. In his work, Mond makes mention of a shaft that has not been investigated after him. Nothing remains regarding the façade of the chapel. Concerning the entrance level, Davies describes the artistic remains of a personage, dressed in the ramesside fashion, and featured facing towards the outer entrance followed by a woman holding a sistrum. We do not actually hold any photographs of these artistic representations.

We will now proceed to describing the transversal room of the chapel.