The public account of the sealed gallery catalogue relies on the threshold inventory and the release slips signed by conservators. A review of that source and the field notes finds a specific limit: the count can be repeated, but it does not include a small clay tag whose number does not match the number in the register.
Ava Korr checked the threshold inventory and the release slips signed by conservators against the field notes. The method is to note who made a record, who preserved it and who can still consult it; it confirms the entries, but not every interpretation attached to them. The comparison covers 26 objects with a public catalogue entry; 26 appear in the prior file. No signed correction to either entry was present when this review closed.
Reldan Oss, cataloguer for objects recovered from sealed chambers, said the source register was complete for its stated purpose. The office has not provided a separate measure for how to describe objects from the sealed gallery without claiming a history the evidence cannot support, so the public record cannot yet show which account is more representative.
The first catalogue calls the objects ceremonial; conservators say the recovered context is too mixed to confirm their use. The current record does not settle that disagreement. This report does not establish that either side misstated the evidence. It establishes that the published total is narrower than the conclusion being drawn from it.
A field check has compared the written rule with the place where it is used. The entry belongs to the common measure file at the catalogue desk at the Old Gallery threshold. The archive will separate observed material from attributed history in each entry. The next file should preserve the original entries and explain any change in method.
