This main text is divided into eight numbered sections, opening with an analysis of what can be

divined of the family and career of the tomb owners, Pay and his son Raia. As reconstructed from the texts in the tomb, and the allegedly Abydene British Museum stela EA 156, Raven argues for a Theban military background for Pay's father, Amenemheb, raising the possibility that he might have been a kinsman of the well-known warrior of the same name who was buried in TT 85. Interestingly, Pay seems to have been of considerably higher social standing than his parents or siblings, being, amongst his range of titles relating to the administration of the royal apartments, an iry-pn and hlty-r. On stylistic grounds, cessation of work on the Saqqara tomb is placed early in the reign of Horemheb, although Pay's death is argued, because of the age at death estimated from his bones (assessed later in the book), to have occurred in the reign of Sety I. In the text, these dates are given in absolute terms as c. 1320 and 1300 BC: given the continuing uncertainties as to absolute dating prior to the Late Period, one wonders whether this approach is wise. Raven then moves on to the offspring of Pay and his wife Repit. It is argued, based on their appearance in different parts of the tomb, that a number of the children's births took place while the tomb was being decorated. A link between Pay's family and the Overseer of the Treasury Maya is provided by the depiction of Pay's eldest son, Nebre, in Maya's nearby tomb. The second son, Raia, who extended Pay's tomb, first appears as a 'Stablemaster' on his father's tomb-stela. The further development of his career, in the army, can be traced via the later inscriptions in the tomb, culminating in his taking on his father's former office, that of 'Overseer of the King's Private Apartments at Memphis'. Given the presence of a Hormin in this post under Sety I (Louvre C 213 = E.3337), it is proposed that Raia's tenure had ended around the beginning of that reign ('1300 BC'). Section 2 deals with the architecture of the tomb. When discussing its position vis a vis that of neighbouring tombs, Raven notes the 2004 discovery of the hitherto unknown forecourt of the tomb of Horemheb, only a few metres to the north of Pay and Raia's sepulchre, plus a ruined wall that may be part of another monument lying between them, as well as other as-yet unpublished discoveries in the same general area. It is argued that the strange angle adopted for the construction of Raia's forecourt is a result of the building of one such tomb, just east of Pay's tomb, preceding the start of work by Raia. It is unfortunate that there are no indications of any of these lately discovered structures on the accompanying plan (fig. 2): while one recognises that they still await proper assessment, a few dotted lines and labels on the plan would greatly enhance understanding. Also, why is tomb 96/1 , also published in this volume, not shown - although its position is separately indicated on plate 4? On a similar note, one would have liked to see a map showing the totality of the New Kingdom necropolis as currently known - including both EES/Leiden and Cairo University work to provide fuller context. Perhaps this could be provided in the next publication of a tomb in the cemetery? There is a discussion of the significance of the orientation of the various structures in the area, with the suggestion that they consciously mirrored that of the tomb of Horemheb. The deviation of Pay's shaft from this orientation is used to suggest that the shaft may have been taken over from a preexisting tomb at the site. The tomb is then described systematically, beginning with the added outer courtyard of Raia,