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 

The Origin of Nefertiti - Sitamen and the A3 marriage myth
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RobertStJames
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 80

PostPosted: Sun May 09, 2004 6:17 am    Post subject: The Origin of Nefertiti - Sitamen and the A3 marriage myth Reply with quote

Ok, let’s forget that tiresome old claim that Amenhotep III, a man with literally dozens of high-born Egyptian females in his harem, “married” his eldest daughter Sitamun. The most common reasons given for this are that he needed a “legitimate” queen (ha-ha, after 30 years on the throne he needs this?) or that he needed “more heirs”. Amenhotep III (A3) had plenty of heirs. When Thutmose V died, he elevated Amenhotep IV. Had the future Akenaten died, he would have elevated someone else. But, of course, Akenaten lived. And married. Nefertiti. A woman that no one seems to be able to identify prior to this marriage. The reason, I believe, is that she already *has* been identified, just under a different name.

Sitamun.

Reasons

a) Amenhotep III’s favorite daughter (Sitamun) begins to play a very prominent role towards the end of his reign. Then she vanishes--and Nefertiti magically appears. Whenever people appear and disappear like this, you have to look for “dovetailing” the separation of a single person’s biography into two parts, before and after. In this case we have two very prominent royal women, one with no history before Akenaten’s ascension (Nefertiti) and another with no history after his ascension (Sitamun). A name change has been proposed to explain what happened to Nefertiti after Year 12 of Akenaten’s reign. Why not a name change to explain who she was *before* his reign?

b) The Theban era of Akenaten’s reign. Nefertiti is often shown worshipping the Aten *alone* but for the company of a single daughter. She also wears the short Nubian wig that Fletcher would use as proof that the Younger Lady in KV 35 is Nefertiti. But what young, royal, woman would have this kind of power and autonomy so early in Akenaten’s reign? Sitamun, A3’s pre-eminent daughter at the end of his reign. Who, in the few pictures of her (invariably as a young woman) is wearing a similar wig.

c) The physical resemblance between AIV and Nefertiti is not to be overlooked. Amarna art has long been described as “realistic.” Yet, when it comes to discussing why Nefertiti so closely resembles Akenaten, Egyptologists often fall back on the idea that she was depicted that way to emphasize her connection to Akenaten. Which is it? I think it’s realistic and that both had the long, thin faces, long noses, lob-heads. This may not be artistic convention so much as actual fact indicating a very close familial relationship. Brother and sister.

d) Huy. Superintendent to Sitamun during the latter part of A3’s reign, he continues to play an even more prominent role during Akenaten’s reign. Not hard to imagine if his mistress Sitamun is now Pharaoh’s Great Wife.

e) Tey. This is the wife of Ay, Yuya’s son. She is depicted as a wet nurse to Nefertiti (which, if true, makes one wonder why anyone ever doubted Nefertiti was Egyptian). Furniture from Sitamun to her grandparents, Yuya/Tuya, was found in their tomb, suggesting that Tey, their daughter in law would be the right age to be Sitamun’s wet nurse.

f) Mutnodjme. Neferiti’s sister, wife of Horemheb. Where on earth would Horemheb have found a sister to Nefertiti? As a usurper, marrying the daughter of minor foreign royalty, or even a daughter of Ay and Tey would hardly have been legitimizing. But keeping in mind Horemheb would later claim his descent directly from A3, and that Sitamun indeed had younger sisters, and Mutnodjme becomes far less mysterious. Remember little Baketaten toddling around with Tiye in Amarna paintings? She would be a *very* legitimizing wife for Horemheb. And she would also be Sitamun’s/Nefertiti’s sister.

g) King’s sons such as Akenaten often married their sisters or half-sisters (Thutmose II/Hathsheput, Thutmose IV/Iaret). We see this pattern repeated not once, but twice at Amarna, with Smenkhare’s marriage to Meriaten, and Tutankaten’s marriage to Anknesaten. There’s no reason to assume the same did not occur at Thebes, especially considering Akenaten was only half-royal to begin with. Marrying him off to a non-royal would dilute the bloodline even further, and that was not how the Ancient Egyptians did business.

h) Sitamun is often proposed as the mother of Tut and Smen. As Nefertiti, that would be very possible indeed. Yes, I’m aware that Nefertiti supposedly only had daughters. One would have gotten the same impression of A3’s wife Tiye, except we know better.

i) Nefertiti was quite obviously of royal parentage, being identified as such at Thebes as “King’s wife, King’s Daughter” or alternately, “daughter of the king’s wife.” Sitamun bears these same titles under A3.

j) Name-changes are common in this period: Akenaten becomes Akenaten, for example, and is never afterwards referred to as Amenhotep IV. If the king changed his name, why wouldn’t his wife do the same?

k) Nefertiti, in the Thebes period, is depicted twice as often as Amenhotep IV, and almost his equal in power. What other royal female of Akenaten’s early reign would have such power other than Sitamun.

l) Queen Tiye was quite alive and well during this period. The idea that she would allow her eldest daughter to be passed over in favor of a non-royal foreigner or even another Egyptian royal female is not too likely.

Akenaten would have required a noble wife. The most obvious source would be among his sisters and half sisters. And who is most prominent among them?

Sitamun.

Why no one has proposed a simple name change for this obviously important princess, I don't know. Probably because it's more fun to imagine mysterious origins for Nefertiti rather than the less palatable idea that she was the incestous wife of her brother Amenhotep IV/Akenaten.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Sun May 09, 2004 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Why no one has proposed a simple name change for this obviously important princess, I don't know. Probably because it's more fun to imagine mysterious origins for Nefertiti rather than the less palatable idea that she was the incestous wife of her brother Amenhotep IV/Akenaten.


You sound angry Confused
It HAS been proposed though, how Sitamon could have become Nefertiti. Read H. Schäfer's "Amarna in Religion und Kunst", Leipzig 1931. Don't know if it exists in an English translation though. Else you can read E. Riefstahl's "Thebes in the Time of Amenhotep III", NY 1964. Biggest problem with the statement is this: Akh-en-Iten is a namechange with a decisive political and religious undertone. Nefertiti is not. If it would be a pet name, then why does it appear to be her official one? Why have a name changed when the new name you take, says NOTHING important?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2004 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That’s an interesting theory. I’m not sure the theory fits the facts however.

It’s true that Tiye had several daughters, whom we would expect to see married to the next King. It’s not just Sitamen who married her father. Henutaneb, Isis, and maybe even Nebbetawy married their father Amenhotep III.
We think of father/daughter marriages as disgusting (well, I do anyway.)
This seems to have happened in the Egyptian royal family fairly frequently though. There are quite a few examples: Akhenaten seems to have married his daughters and fathered children with them, Ramses II married several of his daughters and it is clear that he had a daughter with his daughter Bintanath (See Tyldesley), many more examples come from all dynasties and time periods.

If Sitamen were really Nefertiti, then this would mean that there HAD to be a coregency between Amenhotep III and Akhenaten. This is still very much debated among scholars. (See Aldred’s book on that topic)

According to Murnane’s book, Akhenaten’s great wife was always Neferneferuaten-Nefertiti. Even way back before the name change when he was known as Amenhotep IV. This kinda begs the question when the name change from Sitamen to Neferneferuaten-Nefertiti took place. I believe that Sitamen was first made mention of as queen in year 30 of Amenh.III. I got the impression that she was made queen to serve some religious role in one of the festivals.
If we assume a 8-12 year co-regency, then this elevation to queen takes place at the beginning of the reign of Akhenaten/Amenh.IV. This still means though that assuming the co-regency Sitamen and Nefertiti appeared on monuments at the same time, leading me to believe they were 2 different people.

I somehow was under the impression that Sitamen was older than Nefertiti though. I have seen estimates of the time of Sitamen’s birth as early as year 4. This puts her in her early 20’s at the time of her marriage. (This estimate could of course be wrong.) I thought Nefertiti was a teen-bride.
If we assume there was no co-regency, then there’s no way Sitamen and Nefertiti are the same person. Sitamen would have been 10-15 years older than Nefertiti.

Aldred also makes a point of the fact that Nefertiti NEVER claims to be a King’s daughter. She is said to be a Hereditary Princess, which seems to make her a member of the noble class. This is one of many facts that lead me to believe she was a daughter of Anen, and hence a full niece of Tiye. (This is just my own little theory J )

For as far as Mutnodjemet = Baketaten goes: Both women appear in scenes in tombs during the same time period. Baketaten is given the title King’s daughter of his body, while Mutnodjemet never claims to be a King’s daughter at all, just Queen’s sister. If she was a King’s daughter and that title was completely acceptable, why never claim it?
Aldred also mentions that Mutnodjemet is always depicted as slightly older than the Amarna Princesses, while Baketaten seems to be of the same age. This leads me to believe they were 2 different people.
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RobertStJames
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 80

PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2004 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

anneke wrote:
That’s an interesting theory. I’m not sure the theory fits the facts however.


***Oh, I'm not making a claim that I can somehow see something generations of Egyptologists cannot. That few people have proposed this idea is a pretty strong argument for there not being much reason to believe it's true, at least not true based on widely known evidence. What got me going down this road was two things:

a) The KV35 Younger Lady. The two most common candidates put forward are Nefertiti or Sitamun. Both candidates have much to recommend them. So much that's it's tempting to theorize that both arguments are right.

b) Sitamun has constantly been proposed as a possible mother for Tut, perhaps even Smenkhare. I've never understood why Amenhotep *IV* isn't proposed as the father, rather than Amenhotep III. Do you know why Sitamun was ever proposed as a mother to the two Amarna pharoahs in the first place? I haven't been able to figure out where that's coming from.



It’s true that Tiye had several daughters, whom we would expect to see married to the next King. It’s not just Sitamen who married her father. Henutaneb, Isis, and maybe even Nebbetawy married their father Amenhotep III.
We think of father/daughter marriages as disgusting (well, I do anyway.)
This seems to have happened in the Egyptian royal family fairly frequently though.

***Frequently? I see half-brother/half-sister marriages being very frequent, but father-daughter marriages don't appear very often at all.

There are quite a few examples: Akhenaten seems to have married his daughters and fathered children with them, Ramses II married several of his daughters and it is clear that he had a daughter with his daughter Bintanath (See Tyldesley), many more examples come from all dynasties and time periods.

***I'll have to look those up. I don't accept that Akhenaten/Daughter marriages either, since they make no discernible sense. I'm beginning to wonder if many of these marriages aren't based on dicey readings of hieroglyphic evidence...


If Sitamen were really Nefertiti, then this would mean that there HAD to be a coregency between Amenhotep III and Akhenaten. This is still very much debated among scholars. (See Aldred’s book on that topic)

***I've read both sides. The El-Amarna letters seem strong evidence for a co-regency. The other arguments (against) seem proposed mainly to bolster an author's Amarna theories, rather than to explain known evidence.


According to Murnane’s book,


***Murnane is a particular point in case. He's one of the foremost Smenkhare=Nefertiti guys out there, and his case is based almost completely on his particular interpretations of hieroglyphs. I just don't accept it, and the body in KV55 should have shattered this myth.


Akhenaten’s great wife was always Neferneferuaten-Nefertiti. Even way back before the name change when he was known as Amenhotep IV. This kinda begs the question when the name change from Sitamen to Neferneferuaten-Nefertiti took place. I believe that Sitamen was first made mention of as queen in year 30 of Amenh.III. I got the impression that she was made queen to serve some religious role in one of the festivals.

***Which is really a way of saying that nobody's quite figured out what her queenship consisted of. The only logical interpretation is that she was elevated to her new position via a marriage, much like Meriaten/Smenkhare. When vague "religous roles" are given as explanations, it always makes me think that it's a Eygytologists way of saying "we don't have a clue."


If we assume a 8-12 year co-regency, then this elevation to queen takes place at the beginning of the reign of Akhenaten/Amenh.IV.

***Bingo.


This still means though that assuming the co-regency Sitamen and Nefertiti appeared on monuments at the same time, leading me to believe they were 2 different people.

***What monuments? I'm very curious about this, as I've had no luck finding Sitamun depicted on monuments besides the Petrie slab.


I somehow was under the impression that Sitamen was older than Nefertiti though. I have seen estimates of the time of Sitamen’s birth as early as year 4. This puts her in her early 20’s at the time of her marriage. (This estimate could of course be wrong.) I thought Nefertiti was a teen-bride.

***Maybe she *was* in her 20s. That would make sense, seeing as how she has a daughter from her earliest depictions. Perhaps her marriage took place earlier, and she only became relevant (and AIV only became relevant) after the death of Thutmose V.

If we assume there was no co-regency, then there’s no way Sitamen and Nefertiti are the same person. Sitamen would have been 10-15 years older than Nefertiti.

***Indeed. But the age difference would not prevent a marriage, and might go far towards explaining Nefertiti's prominent role during the Karnak years, and fading role throughout the Armana period.

Aldred also makes a point of the fact that Nefertiti NEVER claims to be a King’s daughter. She is said to be a Hereditary Princess, which seems to make her a member of the noble class. This is one of many facts that lead me to believe she was a daughter of Anen, and hence a full niece of Tiye. (This is just my own little theory J )


***Quite possible, and in many ways a better explanation than Sitamun=Nefertiti. Tiye's family was undoubtably a powerful one, far more powerful than the earlier "commoner" explanation offered in the past. And it certainly would explain the presence of the Sitamun chairs in Yuya's tomb. Nefertiti was almost certainly some kind of royal. Which in itself is a surprise, since you'd expect she'd emphasize that royalty. But make her a minor royal, and it makes sense that she would choose instead to emphasize her relationship to AIV, a major noble.

Except Redford in his 1984 "Akhenaten the Heretic" *does* say she claimed to be a King's Daughter.


For as far as Mutnodjemet = Baketaten goes: Both women appear in scenes in tombs during the same time period. Baketaten is given the title King’s daughter of his body, while Mutnodjemet never claims to be a King’s daughter at all, just Queen’s sister. If she was a King’s daughter and that title was completely acceptable, why never claim it?
Aldred also mentions that Mutnodjemet is always depicted as slightly older than the Amarna Princesses, while Baketaten seems to be of the same age. This leads me to believe they were 2 different people.


***Probably. I'm not as firmly attached to Mutnodjemet=Bakeaten. I only argue it from the viewpoint of Horemheb's ascension. I'm not sure why he'd want a bride associated with the Amarna Pharaohs, unless, of course, such a bride tied him back to A3, the Pharaoh he pretended to have succeeded. But more likely is she was the daughter of Ay and Tey, and, as has been proposed, Nefertiti was a daughter by an earlier wife.

It's always fun to theorize, but if I had really strong backing for Nefertiti=Sitamun, I'm sure someone in the past would have proposed it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2004 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

my darling anneke wrote:
If Sitamen were really Nefertiti, then this would mean that there HAD to be a coregency between Amenhotep III and Akhenaten. This is still very much debated among scholars. (See Aldred’s book on that topic)

I follow Aldred's point that coregencies happened frequently (See "The Egyptians") and how, since the Middle Kingdom (with the coregencies of the Amenemhats and Senwosrets), the system got abandoned to use the 'double regency-years', this being quite difficult (years were named after the year of regency by the king, but when two kings ruled together, u would always have to mention both). Since then, coregencies would still occur, but the years in which the king-to-be ruled with his father (or in any case his predecessor) weren't mentioned as much as before. But it's not because they are not mentioned that explicitly, that it didn't happen.
I can't take the responsibility for such a decent remark though, it's all Aldred's thinking Sad

Your points on the age of Sitamen and the non-royal descent of Neffie I can only applaude. I repeat that the theory is something from the fifthies. I have the hope to think things have changed in opinions since then (after all, who's still afraid of the commies?) Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2004 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RobertStJames wrote:
Sitamun has constantly been proposed as a possible mother for Tut, perhaps even Smenkhare. I've never understood why Amenhotep *IV* isn't proposed as the father, rather than Amenhotep III. Do you know why Sitamun was ever proposed as a mother to the two Amarna pharoahs in the first place? I haven't been able to figure out where that's coming from.

Echnaton has been proposed as their father (see the thread on Kiya), but the reason why Sitamen has been proposed as their mother, is because there are no obvious signs Ech would have had sons (they are never depicted with him). That's what makes Amenhotep III a possible father of these two (very young when he died) boys.

Robbie wrote:
Frequently? I see half-brother/half-sister marriages being very frequent, but father-daughter marriages don't appear very often at all. There are quite a few examples: Akhenaten seems to have married his daughters and fathered children with them, Ramses II married several of his daughters and it is clear that he had a daughter with his daughter Bintanath (See Tyldesley), many more examples come from all dynasties and time periods. I'll have to look those up. I don't accept that Akhenaten/Daughter marriages either, since they make no discernible sense. I'm beginning to wonder if many of these marriages aren't based on dicey readings of hieroglyphic evidence...

Look it up Cool

Robbie wrote:
I somehow was under the impression that Sitamen was older than Nefertiti though. I have seen estimates of the time of Sitamen’s birth as early as year 4. This puts her in her early 20’s at the time of her marriage. (This estimate could of course be wrong.) I thought Nefertiti was a teen-bride. Maybe she was in her 20s. That would make sense, seeing as how she has a daughter from her earliest depictions. Perhaps her marriage took place earlier, and she only became relevant (and AIV only became relevant) after the death of Thutmose V.

Robbie wrote:
If we assume there was no co-regency, then there’s no way Sitamen and Nefertiti are the same person. Sitamen would have been 10-15 years older than Nefertiti. Indeed. But the age difference would not prevent a marriage, and might go far towards explaining Nefertiti's prominent role during the Karnak years, and fading role throughout the Armana period.

Neffie still was a teenage bride, can't escape that one. Anyone of u have an idea when she and Ech married exactly? Would clear up a lot.


Robbie wrote:
It's always fun to theorize, but if I had really strong backing for Nefertiti = Sitamun, I'm sure someone in the past would have proposed it.

Like I said in my previous mail: someone in the past, indeed (fifthies-theory).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Tue May 11, 2004 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Sitamun has constantly been proposed as a possible mother for Tut, perhaps even Smenkhare. I've never understood why Amenhotep *IV* isn't proposed as the father, rather than Amenhotep III. Do you know why Sitamun was ever proposed as a mother to the two Amarna pharoahs in the first place? I haven't been able to figure out where that's coming from.


I get the impression that they have suggested every royal lady of roughly the right age. Smile
I think Sitamun would have been the right age to have had both Smenkhare and Tut as children.
But Tiye and Kiya have also been suggested. Then there's this inscription that claims Tut's mother was named Meritra. Can't remember where that was found.

Quote:
***Frequently? I see half-brother/half-sister marriages being very frequent, but father-daughter marriages don't appear very often at all.

I have seen references to father/daughter marriages even way back to the times of the pyramid builders.



Quote:
I don't accept that Akhenaten/Daughter marriages either, since they make no discernible sense. I'm beginning to wonder if many of these marriages aren't based on dicey readings of hieroglyphic evidence...

It seems that Meritaten and Ankhesenpaaten are clearly mentioned as King's daughter and King's wife in Amarna. The only part is that it never says which King they are married to.
I don't see why Akhenaten couldn't have married his daughters.
But it may be that they married Smenkhare.
The children Meritaten and Ankhesenpaaten had (named Meritaten-tasherit and Ankhesenpaaten-tasherit) seem to only show up on the temple/sunshade that was usurped from Kiya. I have wondered if there is other evidence that shows these daughters of the Royal Princesses.
It could be that the image of Kiya and her daughter was taken over by Meritaten and Ankhesenpaaten replacing Kiya and leaving the image of the daughter of Kiya in place.
(I.e. the daughter of the Princesses was made up to account for the little girl in the scenes. But this is pure unadulturated speculation Laughing)



Quote:
Murnane is a particular point in case. He's one of the foremost Smenkhare=Nefertiti guys out there, and his case is based almost completely on his particular interpretations of hieroglyphs. I just don't accept it, and the body in KV55 should have shattered this myth.

The book I'm referring to is just a translation of inscriptions. He's not trying to draw any conclusions. More a book in the style of Breasted.

I agree with you on the Smenkhare=Nefertiti theory. It's hard to explain the body in KV55 if you make Smenkhare a woman. The only other choice would be to identify the body as Akhenaten, but the age at death seems to preclude that. Unless you assume he is just some unknown royal Cool (A weak theory at best.)

Quote:
What monuments? I'm very curious about this, as I've had no luck finding Sitamun depicted on monuments besides the Petrie slab.

I will have to look that up, but I thought Sitamun was depicted dusing some festival in Nubia. (I'm reaching back in my memory here, so I hope I'm not BS-ing)
The only other evidence I know of her is from the chairs in Yuya and Tuya's tomb, some cosmetic items from Malkata, and mentioned in reference to Amenhotep son of Hapu.
I don't think Amenhotep son of Hapu survived into the Amarna age btw.
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Tue May 11, 2004 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Bart Smile wrote:
my darling anneke wrote:
If Sitamen were really Nefertiti, then this would mean that there HAD to be a coregency between Amenhotep III and Akhenaten. This is still very much debated among scholars. (See Aldred’s book on that topic)

I follow Aldred's point that coregencies happened frequently (See "The Egyptians") and how, since the Middle Kingdom (with the coregencies of the Amenemhats and Senwosrets), the system got abandoned to use the 'double regency-years', this being quite difficult (years were named after the year of regency by the king, but when two kings ruled together, u would always have to mention both). Since then, coregencies would still occur, but the years in which the king-to-be ruled with his father (or in any case his predecessor) weren't mentioned as much as before. But it's not because they are not mentioned that explicitly, that it didn't happen.
I can't take the responsibility for such a decent remark though, it's all Aldred's thinking Sad

Your points on the age of Sitamen and the non-royal descent of Neffie I can only applaude. I repeat that the theory is something from the fifthies. I have the hope to think things have changed in opinions since then (after all, who's still afraid of the commies?) Cool


I find it somewhat puzzling that some people seem to dismiss the co-regency idea. The argument that having two rival courts with a split administration would be too difficult seems weak. One could rule upper egypt and the other lower egypt after all. There seem to be two viziers, so why not two courts. It's also a good way to train the incumbent ruler. Can't be easy ruling such a large country.
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Tue May 11, 2004 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Bart Smile wrote:
my darling anneke wrote:




Getting kinda "syruppy" here, huh? Laughing Laughing Laughing
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Tue May 11, 2004 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Echnaton has been proposed as their father (see the thread on Kiya), but the reason why Sitamen has been proposed as their mother, is because there are no obvious signs Ech would have had sons (they are never depicted with him). That's what makes Amenhotep III a possible father of these two (very young when he died) boys.


I did notice however that in some of the headings of the Amarna letters, greetings were sent to Akhenaten, his wives, and SONS.
Unless this is a faulty translation, wouldn't it have been a diplomatic faux pas to sent greeting to non-existing sons? Considering their importance to the royal succession.
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Tue May 11, 2004 8:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

anneke wrote:
I did notice however that in some of the headings of the Amarna letters, greetings were sent to Akhenaten, his wives, and SONS.
Unless this is a faulty translation, wouldn't it have been a diplomatic faux pas to sent greeting to non-existing sons? Considering their importance to the royal succession.


I didn't know that Smile Do u have a link or a book u can refer to? I'm getting intrigued.

There's something I still wanted to say on the parentage of Smench and Tut. It's true that practically every more or less suitable royal princess (or someone with a lower status even) has been named as their mother, but I think they were both around 18-19 years old when they died, right? Tut has often been described to rule for 8 to 10 years (depending on Gardiner it was 8, in Penguin it was 9, for Reeves & Wilkinson, the ones I usually follow up (since they're the most recent), it was 10). That would make him being born around the 10th year of Echnaton (unless I'm completely wrong and Tut was older when he died, something I wouldn't know for sure - remember the "curse", I'm not a specialist on Tut). By the time Tut died, Smench was already dead (or at least not reigning anymore) for close to 10 years. This would make Smench some 8 to 10 years older than Tut.

You're better in maths than me, my divine anneke, but that would create a situation like this:

Smench was born around the 2nd year of Echnaton's reign. Tut was born around the 10th year. That is if they both died around the age of 18-19-20. This would at least make Amenhotep III an unlikely father, being dead for at least two years then.

That was quite what I wanted to say Rolling Eyes

For the rest, I don't like repeating myself, but I'll make an exception this time, since I kinda threw something in the middle some days ago and didn't get a reply on it yet.

I, some time ago, wrote:
Biggest problem with the statement is this: Akh-en-Iten is a namechange with a decisive political and religious undertone. Nefertiti is not. If it would be a pet name, then why does it appear to be her official one? Why have a name changed when the new name you take, says NOTHING important?


Instead of wondering about the "how", why not standing still at the "why"? Names were very important issues back then (not speaking out of personal experience, I wasn't there, but it's quite obvious). Why such a name-change if it brought nothing new into the significance of the person involved?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Segereh
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 2934
Location: Bruges

PostPosted: Tue May 11, 2004 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

anneke wrote:
Dear Bart Smile wrote:
my darling anneke wrote:

Getting kinda "syruppy" here, huh? Laughing Laughing Laughing


Sorry, honey... Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Tue May 11, 2004 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

I didn't know that Do u have a link or a book u can refer to? I'm getting intrigued.



Here's a quote from Touregypt:
Quote:
Opening of a Letter from Tushratta to Akhenaten, King of Egypt
To Napkhuria [1], king of Egypt, my brother, my son-in-law, who loves me and whom I love, thus speaks Tushratta, king of Mitanni, your father-in-law who loves you, your brother.

I am well. May you be well too. Your houses, Tiye [2] your mother, Lady of Egypt, Tadu-Heba [3], my daughter, your wife, your other wives, your sons, your noblemen, your chariots, your horses, your soldiers, your country and everything belonging to you, may they all enjoy excellent health.

[1] Napkhuria: Amenhotep IV Nefer-khepru-re Akhenaten
[2] Tiye: Wife of Amenhotep III, mother of Akhenaten
[3] Tadu-Heba: Daughter of Tushratta, first married to Amenhotep III, then to Akhenaten.


From: http://www.touregypt.net/amarna9.htm


Did Tushratta just snub Nefertiti??
He mentions Tiye and Tadukhepa by name, and places Tadukhepa right after Tiye. He does mention the "other wives".
No mention of Sitamun, Nefertiti, etc.
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Tue May 11, 2004 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Segereh wrote:

There's something I still wanted to say on the parentage of Smench and Tut. It's true that practically every more or less suitable royal princess (or someone with a lower status even) has been named as their mother, but I think they were both around 18-19 years old when they died, right? Tut has often been described to rule for 8 to 10 years (depending on Gardiner it was 8, in Penguin it was 9, for Reeves & Wilkinson, the ones I usually follow up (since they're the most recent), it was 10). That would make him being born around the 10th year of Echnaton (unless I'm completely wrong and Tut was older when he died, something I wouldn't know for sure - remember the "curse", I'm not a specialist on Tut). By the time Tut died, Smench was already dead (or at least not reigning anymore) for close to 10 years. This would make Smench some 8 to 10 years older than Tut.

You're better in maths than me, my divine anneke, but that would create a situation like this:

Smench was born around the 2nd year of Echnaton's reign. Tut was born around the 10th year. That is if they both died around the age of 18-19-20. This would at least make Amenhotep III an unlikely father, being dead for at least two years then.

That was quite what I wanted to say Rolling Eyes

If Smenkhie was about 18-20 when he died, he should have been born right before Akhenaten came to the throne. If Tut was born in year 10, then it depends on the length of the co-regency. Some estimate that to have lasted as many as 12 years. So Tut would have been the much younger son of Amenhotep.

It all seems to come down to the co-regency issue.
There was a great festival (Durbar?) in year 12, with a great tribute from foreign dignitaries. Some have postulated the theory that this marks the time of Amenhotep's death, and the beginning of the sole rule of Akhenaten. It is after this time that Nefertiti seems to take on the role of co-regent (from what I have read anyway), and Smenkhare arrives at the scene even later.

Segereh wrote:

For the rest, I don't like repeating myself, but I'll make an exception this time, since I kinda threw something in the middle some days ago and didn't get a reply on it yet.

I, some time ago, wrote:
Biggest problem with the statement is this: Akh-en-Iten is a namechange with a decisive political and religious undertone. Nefertiti is not. If it would be a pet name, then why does it appear to be her official one? Why have a name changed when the new name you take, says NOTHING important?


Instead of wondering about the "how", why not standing still at the "why"? Names were very important issues back then (not speaking out of personal experience, I wasn't there, but it's quite obvious). Why such a name-change if it brought nothing new into the significance of the person involved?


Maybe the Neferneferuaten part of the name is the significant part of the name change? Just speculating here.
This is clearly an Aten name, and the first impression is that the original name might have been something like Neferure or Neferneferure???

("Nefer" means beauty, right?)
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sesen
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 1048
Location: Luxor

PostPosted: Wed May 12, 2004 5:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Getting kinda "syruppy" here, huh?

Laughing My turn to say...get a room!

Quote:
I didn't know that Do u have a link or a book u can refer to? I'm getting intrigued.


http://www.touregypt.net/amarna11.htm
Even though this leads to number 11 letter and I've never actually found the index for the other letters (havent actually looked) Anneke most cleverly deduced that simply replacing the 11 with a number of your choice will provide a lot more of the letters.

Quote:
Did Tushratta just snub Nefertiti??
He mentions Tiye and Tadukhepa by name, and places Tadukhepa right after Tiye. He does mention the "other wives".
No mention of Sitamun, Nefertiti, etc.

Going by the letters Tushratta writes to Tiye by name, as the senior woman perhaps, on a couple of occasions. As for 'sons', I guess it could also be 'brothers' or close male relatives (translation?)? Although Akhenaten did also have at least one concubine, Ipy, perhaps she produced son/s, they could have been worthy of a mention?
_________________
Priestess of Hathor, Superior of the Harem of Min, dedicated to Maat, beloved of Seshat and Nekhbet.
I enter as a hawk, I come out as a benu bird in the morning.-- Pert em-Hru, ch. 13
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  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
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