In Ancient Egypt iconography Isis was mainly placed at the feet of the mummy, while Nephtys were at his head. That happened in tomb walls and in sarcophagi.
We have seen that this position was not accidental, but something deliberate. That typical icon of the mummy flanked by Isis at his feet and Nephtys at his head would remain two things. On one hand, it could represent a birth itself, when one woman gives birth (Isis) and being assisted by a midwife (Nephtys). On the other hand, it could refer to the mythical copulation between Isis and Osiris, so the goddess being at his feet would be ready for putting herself over her husband.
Coffin of Khnum Nakht. Head extreme with image of Isis. On the left the false door with the two udyat eyes indicating the threshold between the earthly world and the Afterlife. XIII Dynasty. Metropolitan Museum of Art of New York.
But, sometimes, Egyptian art surprises us with some exceptions. Looking at the coffin of Khnum Nakht in the Metropolitan Museum of Art of New York we realised that the decoration in it did not follow the rule we have said before.
The coffin of Khnum Nakht dates from the XIII Dynasty and comes from Meir (Middle Egypt). The decoration in it includes on the left side of the coffin the false door with the two udyat eyes. That indicates that the head of the mummy was located behind it.
Coffin of Khnum Nakht from Meir. An image of Isis at the head extreme of the coffin. XIII Dynasty. Metropolitan Museum of Art of New York.
At both extremes of the corpse the artist placed two goddesses. At the extreme of the head appears a goddess with a strange standard on her head carrying two hieroglyphs of the sealed oil jar with unguent mrht or mDt. According to the inscription above, she is Isis the Divine (Ast nTrt).
At the feet of the coffin there is no image, but two paintings of the façade of the palace. However we know this was the place of Nephtys thanks to the inscription.
Coffin of Khnum Nakht. Feet extreme with inscriptions referring to Nephtys. XIII Dynasty. Metropolitan Museum of Art of New York.
Isis and Nephtys were there, at both extremes of the coffin assisting in the deceased’s resurrection. But it is surprising to watch that they were not where they were supposed to be: that is, Isis at the feet and Nephtys at the head.
We do not why, but the artist who decorated the coffin of Khnum Nakht located the feet as the place for Nephtys and the head as the place of Isis.
Was it maybe just a mistake? The coffin is made with an exquisite technique, so the manufacturer was not a beginner. The coffin was decorated by an expert (or a team of experts).
Was the icon of Isis at the feet and Nephtys at the head of the corpse still not too consolidated during the Middle Kingdom?…
HAIR AND DEATH IN ANCIENT EGYPT 
Pingback: The Sarcophagus of Khnumnakht | Per aa Montu
Hi, I have 3 questions concerning the coffin of Khnum Nakht.
Thanks in advance for your help in this matter! Much appreciated!
Bill
Hi Bill.
Thanks for your interest in the articles. I answer you:
1. In fact, it is the only explanation I also can find. We have to take into consideration that we are facing a production from the end of Middle Kingdom and, although technically the execution is almost perfect, the composition is full of oddities (headdress of Isis, the name of the owner sometimes is written Khnum-Nakht and sometimes Nakht-Khnum, the mention to some gods, or mentioning some twice…)
2. This column is dedicated to god Imsety (one of the sons of Horus). He is the one protecting the liver. But the texts mentions te god as coming to join the organs. These three hierglyphs could be three determinatives of the word ct (internal organ- See Wb p.160). Here again an oddity, because it should be something related to Anubis instead to Imsety.
3. Another oddity. Here, as you say, it lacks the name of the owner, who is the “true of voice”. We could think that in the expression “the honoured one before Isis” the name Khnum-Nakht is implicit, because it also happens in the feet end abve Nephthys. So, it happens twice and in te same space (at both ends). In my opinion it was not an spontaneous mistake, but something wrongly projected from the beginning. Maybe designed this way due to the lack of space, instead of making the hieroglyphs smaller,
It seems that in this coffin the aesthetics were prioritized over the content.
All that matches with the subject of the artice, which questions the unusual placement of the goddesses at the ends of the coffin.
I hope I have answered you.
Many thanks