Go to the Egyptian Dreams shop
Egyptian Dreams
Ancient Egypt Discussion Board
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

KV 55 = Smenkhare? Akhenaten?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
~Ankhesenamun~
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Jan 2010
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:48 pm    Post subject: KV 55 = Smenkhare? Akhenaten? Reply with quote

Okay all this DNA/Mummy identification hype is making me go crazy! Shocked
People are throwing theories everywhere so I thought I'd start one of my own!
If you think about it logically, if Smenkhare was indeed the father of Tutankhamun, why did was Tut born with the name 'Tutankhaten', Living image of Aten?
Why wouldn't Smenkhare change his name as well, (Smenkharaten)?
If Smenkhare was the brother of Akhenaten and gave into the religious revolution, he would have surely changed his name as well, no?
Option B: I know others beg to differ, and the age range doesn't fit our image of the "heretic" Akhenaten, maybe he came to the throne at the age of 12 or 13 marrying a slightly older Nefertiti (age 14-16; making her able to bear children) Then he died at around 25, who knows?
It would make sense for Tutankhamun to be the son of Akhenaten because as we know, most of his daughters' names (4/6) end in -aten, reflective of his religious revolution.
If Smenkhare was the father of Tut, he would not have wanted the religious connotation of the Aten to follow his son for his entire life and would have at least changed his son's name during his rule.
Thus far, there is no evidence of that.
Tut's only name change occurred during his own reign after his marriage to Ankhesenpaaten and I know this was all Ay's idea because he had seen the result that the Atenistic revolution had on the people of Egypt and wanted to revert back to old ways (seeing as Tut was around ~9-10 and Ankhesenpaaten ~11-13).
Though even after the name change, there is evidence that Tutankhamun and Ankhesenamun continued to practise Atenism, consistent with Akhenaten being his father.

This is just my theory.

Feel free to criticize! Laughing Very Happy
_________________
"Over 3,500 years ago, Rome was no more than a soggy marsh and the Acropolis was just an empty rock, but Egypt was on the brink of its greatest age - the New Kingdom" - PBS: Egypt's Golden Empire
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Names are not very helpful to solve the problem who KV55 is.
First at the time that Tut was born (around year10 to 12,as most put it) the Atenism was at its height, so it was suitable for a royal child to be named after the Aten.
The problem is that Akhenaten did not even name all of his own children after the Aten ( 5th daughter Nefer-Neferu-Re, 6th Setepen-Re) and he kept the prenomen Nefer-Kheperu-Re Wa-en-Re during all his reign.

Nor was it just him who used Aten in names: princess Baket-Aton is thought to be Tiye`s and AIII`s daughter. There was also Tiye`s splendid pleasure boat with the name tjehen-Aten.

The use of "Re" in names and inscriptions was still allowed and even as seen promoted by the royal family (because Re and Aten are basically only different aspects of the sun). So it is easy to understand why Semenkhkare had no need to change his name.
And as there was yet no sign of a reapproach to the old religion at the time of Tut`s birth it is possible that Semenkhkare named his son after the Aten (or Ahenaten for that matter).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
herper
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 18 Feb 2010
Posts: 229
Location: New Haven,CT USA

PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

2 points on the names. 1. was Smenkare a true Atenist? 2. was he just loyal to Ankhenaten, and honoring him with a sons name? I agree that Atenism was at its peak around the time of Tuts birth, and if your in line for the throne do you want to cross the king over a name that can be changed later if needed? lets face it political ambition and love of power are not modern ideas. Smenkare may have been a devout Atenist, but saw that it was hopeless and went with political, over religious forces(yes in AE the 2 are intertwined) in the end
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
karnsculpture
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 314

PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The youngest possible age for Akhenaten at his time of death is 29, because according to the available evidence he reigned for 17 years and had at least 6 children with Nefertiti, with the eldest conceived pretty swiftly when he came to the throne.

The only way Akhenaten could be KV55 is if:

1) The forensic estimates of age at death of KV55 are wrong

2) Akhenaten reigned for less than 17 years, making him young enough to be KV55 at death. This might also account for the lack of dated monuments after Year 14 in Amarna.

Is the evidence for Akhenaten's usually quoted 17-year reign solid?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
karnsculpture
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 314

PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just a thought, but perhaps if Neferneferuaten (Nefertiti or Meritaten, it doesn't matter) stepped in as an interregnum Queen until Tutankhamun was old enough to rule, she may have continued to use her husband's regnal years.

This could account for wine jar dockets from the estate of the Queen existing up to year 17.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I understand Neferneferuaten has her own regnal years up to three.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ra-Mont
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Posts: 41
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Can anyone please post a translation of (or a clear illustration of) the hieroglyphs which are on the coffin lid from KV55? I see that a forum member earlier on posted a link to a translation of these, but unfortunately it is now dead.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ra-Mont wrote:
... (or a clear illustration of) the hieroglyphs which are on the coffin lid from KV55? ...

See Theodore M. Davis : The tomb of Queen Tiyi - The discovery of the tomb (1910) .

Greetings, Lutz.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ra-Mont
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Posts: 41
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Many thanks for that, Lutz. I've downloaded the book and look forward to examining its contents. I've looked at so many works for the KV 55 coffin inscription and its absence was making me think it must be one of Egyptology's best kept secrets.

And for my first real comment on this forum, in my opinion there's no way the mummy in KV 55 can be Akhenaten's. Whoever put Queen Tiye's funerary shrine in there took care to excise Akhenaten's cartouche and erase his image so as to deny him an afterlife. It appears also that his name wasn't allowed on the coffin lid, though it survived possibly out of sight in dedications inside the container. Akhenaten was vilified after his downfall even in the writing lessons of Egyptian children (The Literature of the Ancient Egyyptians, Adolf Erman, 1927, pp. 309-310). Furthermore, his sarcophagus at Amarna was fragmented in what was obviously a rage attack. Yet despite all of this, Zahi Hawass flies in the face of all evidence to the contrary and declares the KV 55 body to be that of Akhenaten. I find it staggering that a person so learned as this could make such a claim, and I wonder at his motives. It's surely inconceivable that the body of the great heretic Akhenaten would, after all, be granted a burial in the Valley of the Kings (presumably being declared "true of voice" before Osiris) in a tomb where even his name was not allowed! No, the burial surely belongs to Smenkhkare.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ELISE
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 18 Jul 2005
Posts: 169

PostPosted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What annoys me is the joining of two unrelated facts.

1) KV55 is Tuts father

2) Akhenaten is a poss candidate for Tuts father.

=

3) KV55 is Akhenaten.

I agree that it's an unscientific conclusion from someone who should know better. BTW, this is now reported as 'fact' in various Discovery Channel type docs which have aired in the UK since the genetic profiling.

I am not saying 3 is impossible - it might well be true. But it certainly hasn't been proven.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 12:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ra-Mont wrote:
... I've looked at so many works for the KV 55 coffin inscription and its absence was making me think it must be one of Egyptology's best kept secrets. ...

For what is known about the coffin (material analyses, ct scans of the lid, analyses and translation of the inscriptions) and the 31 (!!) major theories from 1907 - 2001 about coffin and KV 55 see

Alfred Grimm ; Sylvia Schoske : Das Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges - Echnaton und das Ende der Amarnazeit. - [Veröffentlicht anläßlich der Sonderausstellung Das Geheimnis des Goldenen Sarges - Echnaton und das Ende der Amarnazeit, München,Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst, 17. Oktober 2001 bis 6. Januar 2002]. - München : Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst, 2001. - ISBN : 3-87490-722-8. - 162 p., ill., maps. - Schriften aus der Ägyptischen Sammlung - SAS - 10

Ra-Mont wrote:
... It's surely inconceivable that the body of the great heretic Akhenaten would, after all, be granted a burial in the Valley of the Kings (presumably being declared "true of voice" before Osiris) in a tomb where even his name was not allowed! ...

His name appears, for instance, on the magic bricks. Nobody can say with secure when the cartouches were deleted. It is in my opinion very probably them were intact when the pieces were deposited at KV 55.

Greetings, Lutz.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ra-Mont
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Posts: 41
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
His name appears, for instance, on the magic bricks. Nobody can say with secure when the cartouches were deleted. It is in my opinion very probably them were intact when the pieces were deposited at KV 55.

Greetings, Lutz.


Thank you again, Lutz. Yes, those two magic bricks with Akhenaten's name on them are an enigma, though it is an obsolete form of the name, and not what he would have wanted with his burial. Also, if Akhenaten's bricks had been brought from his Amarna tomb, why not his coffins and canopic jars, etc? The jars were found in situ in his Amarna tomb, smashed but with no sign of their having been used. The bricks seem to fit with the rest of the burial, which gives the impression of being put together hastily -- and cheaply -- for the interment of somebody who had very little of his own funerary gear prepared when he died. The short reign of Smenkhare fits this scenario. Whoever put the bricks in there perhaps felt a smugness at having managed to quietly perpetuate Akhenaten's name after all, albeit his early one. It could have been the Atenist Aye, but, like so much of the Amarna period, that can be only a theory.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4098
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ra-Mont wrote:
... those two magic bricks with Akhenaten's name on them are an enigma, though it is an obsolete form of the name, and not what he would have wanted with his burial. ...

On the Northern and the Southern Brick we find the so called throne or nesut-bit name : "Nefer-Cheperu-Ra" with the usual addition "Wa-En-Ra".
This name was given to Amenhotep IV. when he was crowned as king of Egypt. He never changed it during his reign. This name was in official documents the most often used one (of five). For instance, the complete foreign-policy correspondence (Amarna tablets) run under this name.
So, I don`t understand what you mean with "it is an obsolete form of the name" ... Idea

Greetings, Lutz.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 1033
Location: United Kingdom

PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
Ra-Mont wrote:
... those two magic bricks with Akhenaten's name on them are an enigma, though it is an obsolete form of the name, and not what he would have wanted with his burial. ...

On the Northern and the Southern Brick we find the so called throne or nesut-bit name : "Nefer-Cheperu-Ra" with the usual addition "Wa-En-Ra".
This name was given to Amenhotep IV. when he was crowned as king of Egypt. He never changed it during his reign. This name was in official documents the most often used one (of five). For instance, the complete foreign-policy correspondence (Amarna tablets) run under this name.
So, I don`t understand what you mean with "it is an obsolete form of the name" ... Idea


What is unusual is that Akhenaten uses the /mAat xrw/ formula on the bricks and on a view other items (shabtis, mainly), which have a distinctly Osiride basis. As Akhenaten's Atenism did not envision an Osiris or a judgment, etc., one has to ask if these items were created before the full move to Atenism by the king, and were thus surplus burial equipment which was used by the next rulers who did wish rapprochement with the traditional religious funerial rituals - Smenkhkare and "King Neferneferuaten."

If one takes the "King Neferneferuaten" shabtis found in Tutankhamun's tomb, one sees little evidence of Osiride funeral traditions expressed. However, when one looks at the funereal equipment which can solidly be attributed to Smenkhkare (sarcophagus (Eaton-Krauss 1992) and the second coffin of Tutankhamun (Dodson 1992)), then perhaps re-use of Akhenaten's magic bricks, when he still held with such beliefs, seems more clear.

I have never bought the idea that simply because Akhenaten's two "magic bricks" existed in KV 55 was a dead-sure giveaway that the body so interred within was automatically that of Akhenaten, which seems to be the position of some Egyptologists. There's far too much evidence that the revision of the KV 55 coffin from a female to a royal male was to dispel the Atenist beliefs and revert back to a more traditional rishi-styled coffin of a king.

There's far too much evidence that both Atenist and pre-Atenist burial equipment was in evidence and the Osiride equipment was being reused during these two cache burials in the Kings Valley (both KV 55 and KV 62 (Tutankhamun) are considered cache burials).

Reference:

Dodson, A. 1992. KV 55 and the end of the reign of Akhenaten. In VI Congresso Internationale di Egittologia, 1: 135-139. Turin: International Association of Egyptologists.

Eaton-Krauss, M. 1992. The Sarcophagus in the Tomb of Tut'ankhamun. In C. N. Reeves, Ed., After Tut'ankhamun: Research and Excavation in the Royal Necropolis at Thebes: 85-90. Studies in Egyptology. London: Kegan Paul International.

Engelbach, R. 1931. The So-called Coffin of Akhenaten. ASAE 31: 98-114.

Fairman, H. W. 1961. Once Again the So-called Coffin of Akhenaten. JEA 47: 25-40.

Grimm, A. and S. Schoske, Eds. 2001. Das Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges. Echnaton und das Ende der Amarnazeit. Schriften aus der Ägyptischen Sammlung (SAS) 10. Munich: Staatlichens Museum Ägyptischer Kunst.

Helck, W. 2001. Das Grab Nr. 55 im Königsgräbertal. Seine Inhalt und seine historische Bedeutung. Sonderschrift/Deustches Archäologisches Institut Abteilung Kairo 29. Mainz: von Zabern.

Perepelkin, G. 1978. The Secret of the Gold Coffin. Moscow: Nauka Publishing House/USSR Academy of Sciences.

HTH.
_________________
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg

Doctoral Candidate
Oriental Institute
Oriental Studies
Doctoral Programme [Egyptology]
Oxford University
Oxford, United Kingdom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Osiris II
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 1752

PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

neseret has said:
(both KV 55 and KV 62 (Tutankhamun) are considered cache burials).

This statement confuses me--it is the first time I've heard of the burial of Tutankhamen referred to as a cache burial.
I've always assumed that a cache burial was a reference to a burial (or the goods) originally made in Amarna (or someplace) that had been re-opened and then re-buried in the VoK.
Although the tomb of Tutankhamen was, quite obviously, someone's humble, non-enitity tomb that had been hurriedly prepared for the young king, whose death was so sudden and unexepcted; was also robbed of some of the more valuable contents; was very hastily and not at all with any care, jammed with his burial goods, and then sealed and quickly forgotten, it still was his original burial site.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 1 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group