Egyptian Dreams

Josip199 · Citizen Joined: 18 Jan 2018 Posts: 18

Dr Joyce Tyldesley , an Egyptologist from The University of Manchester, says Queen Nefertiti was just one of a series of powerful queens who played an influential role in Egyptian history.
Do you think this is true?

Article

Thieuke · Scribe Joined: 11 Aug 2012 Posts: 111

Well there is enough evidence to speculate that the 18th dynasty did produce another female pharaoh after Hatshepsut.
Between Achnaten and Tutankhamen two pharaohs probably reigned: Neferneferuaten and Smenkhare. In what order we don't know. Also the identity of both is unknown.
The female ruler could be Nefertete or one of her daughters. Smenkhare could be her brother-in-law, a stepson or a foreign Hittite prince who became her son-in-law (Meritaten was most likely married to the male pharaoh).
My personal belief is that the Amarna reign created a special status for the Great Royal Wife Nefertete so she was elevated to co-ruler at the end of her husband's reign and continued a solo reign after he died.
I don't believe Achnaten had a living son when he died or that son would have succeeded.
After a relatively short reign Nefertete was succeeded by her husband's younger brother who had married her oldest daughter Meritaten. I also think he previously had been wed to one of his sisters and that marriage had produced prince Tutankhamen. His first wife had died shortly of the boy was born and her widower remarried his brother's oldest daughter.
With no sons from Achnaten to succeed him he elevated his wife to co-regent as she was his female counterpart in the Armarna religion. She succeeded and started to revert to the old gods. She was confronted with a rival or a successor in the shape of her brother+son-in-law and he died after a short reign leaving the throne to his son.
I've come to this conclusion as i know of no example where a Pharaoh had a living son from a high status wife and yet was not succeeded by that son.
To me that rules out Achnaten as the father of Tutankhamen and that only leaves Smenkhare to be the younger brother of the Amarna king and the father of the boy king.
It also means the female ruler has to have succeeded Achnaten and in that case Nefertete is the likeliest candidate. She was his female counterpart and already displayed in ways no other Great Royal Wife was.

karnsculpture · Scribe Joined: 27 May 2010 Posts: 404

I think that's plausible.

Something that we don't know enough about yet is the influence of the officials at Memphis, Horemheb included, during the latter part of the reign at Akhetaten. I feel that some of the chronological problems we have stem from the lack of evidence. Akhenaten's crime may have been the chaos his reign ended in rather than his religious revolution. The Tutankhamun reign seems like a compromise between different factions - with Ay on one side and Horemheb (who had been based in Memphis) on the other. The court under Tut operated out of Memphis not Thebes as is commonly assumed - the majority of officials tombs from the reign are there.

dzama923 · Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:43 am Post subject:

Hey, thieuke, I want to know if there is any evidence to your assertion that Tutankhamen was not the son of Akhenaten. I do not see any problem with a female pharaoh ruling, as Tutankhamen might have been too young to rule. Sometimes in history the rules of governance are bent to fit what is going on. I can't, however, completely rule out your theory, which is why I want to know what gave you this idea.

Lutz · Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:40 pm Post subject:

I do not know the a few days ago published book, just a short review and an article with parts from an interview with the author. The arguments presented here do not seem to me to be really substantive and scientifically / archaeologically founded ... But one has to read the book, I think?
_________________
Ägyptologie Forum (German)

Thieuke · Scribe Joined: 11 Aug 2012 Posts: 111

My evidence for Tutankhamen not being a son of Achnaten is simple. No Pharaoh was ever succeeded by someone other than his son if he had one. Especially if that son was the child of the/a Great Royal Wife or another important lady in the King's harem.
Tutankhamen's DNA shows he most likely was the son of two children of Amenhotep III (himself a child when he succeeded) and his Great Royal Wife Tiye (who was barely more than a child when she married the pharaoh).
There is no logic in Achnaten being succeeded by two rulers who were not his sons before his son succeeded.
That leaves only one alternative: Achnaten did not have a son and was succeeded either by his wife or one of his daughters and the second male ruler between the reign of Achnaten and Tutankhamen being a third son of Amenhotep III and Tiye. Smenkhare seems the most logical choice.
That would explain a normal line of succession:

Amenhotep III
Amenhotep IV/Achnaten (son of the previous ruler)
Neferneferuaten (co-regent and wife or daughter of previous ruler)
Smenkhare (brother in law and son in law or husband+uncle of previous ruler)
Tutankhamen (son of previous ruler)

All those suggesting Tut was Achnaten's son have the real burden of proof. They have to come up with an example of when and solid reason why a dead pharaoh was not succeeded by his legitimate son.

evarelap · Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:27 am Post subject:

Lutz · Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:01 am Post subject: Re: Tut's parents

dzama923 · Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:56 pm Post subject:

I don't know, I will look into this matter a bit more deeply. I haven't read a lot about Ancient Egyptian historical dating, and sucessions. Has anyone heard of other child pharaoh's?

herper · Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 3:34 am Post subject: