Funerary uses and reuses of Theban rock-cut architecture between the 9th century BC and the Ptolemaic period: planimetric re-functionalization of tombs at the Neferhotep Complex (Luxor-Egypt)

When approaching the study of private tombs at Thebes, often the main emphasis is given to the iconographic and epigraphic apparatuses, to the typologies andchronologies of the findsandto the layout. In general Theban tombs, as suggested by some scholars, are mostly associated with the namesof the individuals for whom they were built; they are considered as if they were alwaysand for ever‘pre-planned projects’for a single individual or family. But in this way we lose the developments and the changes to the project which may have occurred even during the early phases of construction; some alterations in accommodation may be due to unexpected reasons which occurred even during the construction of the monument. There are numerous cases of premature deathsof members of the family or of related families which determined a different choice in the layout and in the burials. Possible changes tothe original project may have occurred due to an abrupt change inlithotypesto forms which are unsuitable for quarrying, determining therefore the change of orientation of chambers and corridors in order to find more suitable bedrock. Moreover, there was also the need to respect or avoid chambers and sectionsof close tombs which were earlier in date and may have been unknown because they were no longerin use: in this case the reaching of the chamber of an unknown earlier tomb during the quarrying may have determined the choice to adapt or change the project or even re-use earlier burials. The partial use or reuse of sectionsor chambers of other tombs may certainly happened inlater phases, but it could also belong to the early phases, in case the original project have reached nearby tombs.Therefore the study of use, reuse and later developments of these tombs, in order to properly understand the chronologyand the stratification of the architectural and planimetric phases, needsto take into account, together with iconographic, epigraphic, ritual and anthropological studies, also the geomorphology of the area, the topography of the surrounding monuments, the study of lithotypes and sub-lithotypes, the micromapping of the tool marks on the inner surfaces and the associations of all these data with the finds.