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 

Horemheb
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Paramesse
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 1
Location: Windsor, England

PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 11:10 am    Post subject: Horemheb Reply with quote

Does anyone know what Horemheb's name was before ascension to the throne?

Also did the title "Commander of the Army" mean he had real control. I was wondering this because when he overthrew Ay, he had been replaced as the Commander of the Army and so in theory it couldn't have been a military coup, could it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 12:59 pm    Post subject: Re: Horemheb Reply with quote

Paramesse wrote:
Does anyone know what Horemheb's name was before ascension to the throne?

Also did the title "Commander of the Army" mean he had real control. I was wondering this because when he overthrew Ay, he had been replaced as the Commander of the Army and so in theory it couldn't have been a military coup, could it?


Horemheb's name before acquiring the throne was - Horemheb. It's his given birth name as far as anyone has been able to determine.

Horemheb also did not "overthrow" Ay; all indications are that he continued as head of the army under Ay and put down the Nubian rebellion of Nakhtmin (Schulman 1964), a military officer often thought to have been Ay's 'heir' - though this is disputed (Schaden 1977), since Nakhtmin held the title of "King's son of Kush" (a viceroy title in Nubia). It is also thought that this same Nakhtmin was involved in a power struggle for the throne with Horemheb after the death of Ay (Ockinga 1997).

It appears Ay died as King, was given full honours as same and Horemheb then acquired the throne. This would not have happened had there been a "coup d'etat."

Horemheb's Coronation Decree states he was Deputy Regent under a king (Tutankhamun? Ay?) before becoming king in his own right, as he claims he was destined to do by the will of the "Lord of Hnes," a local form of Horus at Hatnub (Murnane 1995).

This is the only justification Horemheb uses to ascend the throne - not battle, nor marriage to a member of the royal family (his queen Mutnedjmet was NOT a king's daughter nor the sister of Nefertiti) - simply oracular decree that a god wished them there - something used by Egyptian kings who had tenuous claims to the throne of Egypt.

Reference:

Murnane, W. J. 1995. Texts from the Amarna Period in Egypt. Society of Biblical Literature: Writings from the Ancient World 5. Atlanta: Scholars Press.

Ockinga, B. G. 1997. A Tomb from the Reign of Tutankhmun at Akhmim. Australian Center for Egyptology Reports 10. Warminster: Aris and Phillips.

Schaden, O. J. 1977. The God's Father, Ay. History. Ph.D. Dissertation (Unpublished). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

Schulman, A. R. 1964. Excursus on the "Military Officer" Nakhtmin. JARCE 3: 124-126.
_________________
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
Hekat
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 18 May 2010
Posts: 320
Location: Luxor

PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aidan Dodson & Dyan Hilton in The Complete Royal Families of Ancient Egypt say Horemheb possibly began his career as Paatenemheb (Amarna Tomb TA24) He was from the Herakleopolitan area
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hekat wrote:
Aidan Dodson & Dyan Hilton in The Complete Royal Families of Ancient Egypt say Horemheb possibly began his career as Paatenemheb (Amarna Tomb TA24) He was from the Herakleopolitan area


This is an old theory which has been more recently rebutted. I know that even Aidan Dodson said recently this a very remote theory.
_________________
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
J-Mak
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 06 Dec 2009
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 1:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Was horemheb the military advisor for Akhenaten/Smenkhare and Tutankhamun as well as Ay?

I just need this confirmed for a presentation I am doong, and felt this thread was quite relevant.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J-Mak wrote:
Was horemheb the military advisor for Akhenaten/Smenkhare and Tutankhamun as well as Ay?

I just need this confirmed for a presentation I am doong, and felt this thread was quite relevant.


He's known during the reign of Tutankhamun, but before then, no. Horemheb serves as Commander of the Army also under Ay and of course, as king in his own right thereafter.

Reference:

Davis, T. M. 2001 (1912). The Tombs of Harmhabi and Touatânkhamanou. Excavations: Bibân el Molûk. London: Gerald Duckworth and Co, Ltd.

Schaden, O. J. 1977. The God's Father, Ay. History. Ph.D. Dissertation (Unpublished). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

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
J-Mak
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 06 Dec 2009
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

neseret wrote:
J-Mak wrote:
Was horemheb the military advisor for Akhenaten/Smenkhare and Tutankhamun as well as Ay?

I just need this confirmed for a presentation I am doong, and felt this thread was quite relevant.


He's known during the reign of Tutankhamun, but before then, no. Horemheb serves as Commander of the Army also under Ay and of course, as king in his own right thereafter.

Reference:

Davis, T. M. 2001 (1912). The Tombs of Harmhabi and Touatânkhamanou. Excavations: Bibân el Molûk. London: Gerald Duckworth and Co, Ltd.

Schaden, O. J. 1977. The God's Father, Ay. History. Ph.D. Dissertation (Unpublished). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

HTH.


Thanks for that!

I have a presentation coming up on the late 18th dynasty. I just wanted to confirm my facts. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
CSM
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So if Horemheb was not of royal blood and did not marry into the royal family - why is his reign still considered to be within Dynasty 18 whereas Ramesses I starts the 19th dynasty?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Because including him in Dynasty 18 is simpler than making him a dynasty of one? More seriously perhaps because he began his career under the 18th Dynasty and co-opted the regnal years of all his predecessors up to Amenhotep III.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Robson
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1002
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CSM wrote:
So if Horemheb was not of royal blood and did not marry into the royal family - why is his reign still considered to be within Dynasty 18 whereas Ramesses I starts the 19th dynasty?


I believe that Horemheb was anyhow related to the thutmosids, possibly by marriage. Both Aye's and Horemheb's wives appear very prominently in royal depictions, and it wouldn't be merely fortuitous. And he maybe stressed this relationship in the repairs in the tomb of Thutmose IV. None ramessid did anything alike.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Robson wrote:
CSM wrote:
So if Horemheb was not of royal blood and did not marry into the royal family - why is his reign still considered to be within Dynasty 18 whereas Ramesses I starts the 19th dynasty?


I believe that Horemheb was anyhow related to the thutmosids, possibly by marriage. Both Aye's and Horemheb's wives appear very prominently in royal depictions, and it wouldn't be merely fortuitous. And he maybe stressed this relationship in the repairs in the tomb of Thutmose IV. None ramessid did anything alike.


First of all, Great Royal Wives (GRW) are "prominently displayed" because it is a feature of the institution of kingship to prominently display the main (chief) wife since the beginning of the New Kingdom, rising to its ultimate display of the GRW during the reign of Amenhotep III where Tiye's image is shown in conjunction with the king in about 70-80% of his portraits.

However, I doubt that either wife was related to a Thutmosid family line, or such a relationship would have been noted. Had Aye, for example, had a royal connection via Tey (his GRW), then why marry Ankhesenamun as noted in the Newberry Ring? Why emphasise his (tenuous) relationship to Tutankhamun as his /it nTr/ "God's father" (mentor) role that king as part of Aye's titulary? Why would Aye refer to Tutankhamun as "my son" when it was clearly known that he was not the preceding king's father? Why is Aye the only king shown performing the "opening of the mouth" ceremony in Tutankhamun's tomb, as a means of cementing his claim to the throne?

These are actions of a man who has no direct relationship to the throne at all, but is choosing specific relationship motifs of ancient Egyptian culture to bolster his claim to taking the throne as king.

Horemheb would have also noted a direct familial relationship to the Thutmosids had either his first wife (Amenia) or his second wife (Mutnedjmet) had any royal connection. Such a connection ("king's daughter", "king's sister", etc.) would have been prominently mentioned.

But no: Horemheb has to create the "oracular decree" that the "Lord of Hnes" (a localised form of the god Horus at Hatnub, Horemheb's home city) had decreed that one day he would be king, as noted on Horemheb's Coronation Decree.

Note that marriage to just any female in the Thutmosid family tree would not have given any non-royal male relative access to the royal throne - only a marriage to the direct line had any effect of elevating a male to the throne - this is why the "Egyptian Queen" correspondence is so telling. Whoever wrote that letter is telling you how the inner workings of a dying dynasty works: if a non-royal male marries the widow of a reigning king, then that person can become the next king of Egypt.

There are numerous cases of relatives of a royal family who are not in direct royal lineage throughout Egyptian pharaonic history who led unremarkable lives as low level civil servants, or as nomarchs in the king's service, and who never capitalised on their royal relationships.

Ward (1986) and Baud (1999) tell of a number of king's sons, who were never to become heir-sons, who lived in other dynasties who married noble (but non-related) wives and they lived out their lives in relative obscurity: the same was also true of some king's daughters - married off to unrelated nobles, they retained their titles as /sAt nsw/ but later were simply known as /r.t-pat/ = 'countess, noblewoman', titles of simple nobility.

So, one should not make a great deal of "being related to the Thutmosid line" as a direct line to the throne itself. Like today, there are a large number of everyday people who can trace their lineage to, say, Queen Elizabeth II, but would not be able to get into Buckingham Palace without paying the usual visitor/tourist fee. Laughing

Queen Elizabeth II is no more aware of these people that an everyday person would be to find that there may be in actuality only 10 degrees of separation by family to his next door neighbour in the UK (where most people live in the same area most of their lives, and for generations).

None of these everyday people related to the Queen have any hope of being in line to the throne of England, and thus marrying such person in today's world wouldn't give anyone any hope of attaining the English throne in the future.

Reference:

Baud, M. 1999. Famille royale et pouvir sous l'Ancien Empire égyptien. (2 Vols.) Bibliothèque d'Étude 126. Cairo: IFAO.

Ward, W. A. 1986. Essays on Feminine Titles of the Middle Kingdom and Related Subjects. Beirut: American University of Beirut.
_________________
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
Robson
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1002
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

neseret wrote:

First of all, Great Royal Wives (GRW) are "prominently displayed" because it is a feature of the institution of kingship to prominently display the main (chief) wife since the beginning of the New Kingdom, rising to its ultimate display of the GRW during the reign of Amenhotep III where Tiye's image is shown in conjunction with the king in about 70-80% of his portraits.


AFAIK, in the 18th Dynasty it happens to Ahmose-Nefertari, Tiye, Ankhesenamun (and Sitiah and Merytre, both however apparently imposed to conjure up the ghosts of Hatshepsut and Neferure). The other Royal Wives (Ahmose, Isis, Tiaa, Mutemuwia) only got such a prominence in their children reigns

neseret wrote:

However, I doubt that either wife was related to a Thutmosid family line, or such a relationship would have been noted. Had Aye, for example, had a royal connection via Tey (his GRW), then why marry Ankhesenamun as noted in the Newberry Ring?


And why Ankhesenamun is not described as King's Daughter in any of her depictions? If was the case of not relate her to Akhenaten, why the same thing it wouldn't happen with Tey and Mutnodjmet? In the affair Tey x Ankhesenamun, we must also remember an analogous situation regarding to Queen Ahmose X Mutnofret in the reign of Thutmose I. Maybe just an endorsement of rights.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CSM wrote:
So if Horemheb was not of royal blood and did not marry into the royal family - why is his reign still considered to be within Dynasty 18 whereas Ramesses I starts the 19th dynasty?


There are some older (19th century CE) history books on ancient Egypt which link Horemheb to the Ramessid dynasty, and thus as part of the 19th Dynasty. For example, James Henry Breasted's Ancient Records of Egypt (3) places Horemheb in the 19th and not 18th Dynasty. It would be a natural mistake to do so, IMO, as Horemheb was considered by the Ramessids to be something of an "ancestor" to their dynasty, and his name is often mentioned in their recountings of "ancestors" whom the Ramessids honoured. After all, the Rammesids held their position only due to the good fortune their family line was chosen by Horemheb to succeed him when Horemheb died without an heir of his own.

However, the kingslist dynasties were revised some years ago (some Egyptologists say in the early 20th century) when the Amarna and post-Amarna kings were better understood (perhaps after the discovery of Tutankhamun? I'm not sure). It was then than Horemheb was then placed back into the 18th Dynasty, once the places of these Amarna kings were finally understood.

It's clear from the Coronation Decree of Horemheb (found on a double statue of Horemheb with his Great Royal Wife Mutnedjmet, now rising in the Turin Museum) that Horemheb himself held that much of his political position to a preceding (Amarna/post-Amarna) king who appointed him as /ra-Hry/ (Chief spokesman) of the entire land, and was (in Horemheb's words) "...(the) hereditary prince of the entire land; he was unique, without his equal." (Breasted 2001c (1906): 15; § 25; Murnane and Meltzer 1995: 231; No. 106).

In reality, the term "hereditary prince" is probably a mistranslation: the term is /Hry rpat/ of "highest of noblemen/counts" - in short, a position probably in modern times called "Deputy Regent," a position where a non-royal person holds the highest administrative function, second only to a royal ruler.

So, there's no doubt Horemheb owed his elevated position (he was already general of all the armies) to either Tutankhamun - or possibly Ay, both clearly rulers from the 18th Dynasty. For this reason, we now think of Horemheb as an 18th Dynasty ruler, as his status and rule were inextricably linked to matters of the post-Amarna 18th Dynasty.

Reference:

Breasted, J. H. 2001c (1906). Ancient Records of Egypt. The Nineteenth Dynasty. (Vol. 3). Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Murnane, W. J. 1995. Texts from the Amarna Period in Egypt. Society of Biblical Literature: Writings from the Ancient World 5. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
_________________
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
neseret
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Robson wrote:
And why Ankhesenamun is not described as King's Daughter in any of her depictions? If was the case of not relate her to Akhenaten, why the same thing it wouldn't happen with Tey and Mutnodjmet? In the affair Tey x Ankhesenamun, we must also remember an analogous situation regarding to Queen Ahmose X Mutnofret in the reign of Thutmose I. Maybe just an endorsement of rights.


We have no evidence at any time that Tey or Mutnedjmet were related to the royal family ot Amarna. During the Amarna period, we know that Ankhsenpaaten/Ankhsenamunt was called /sAt nsw nt Xt.f mrt.f/ ('Daughter of the king's own body, whom he loves/has chosen'). Once she becomes the Great Royal Wife of Tutankhamun, she drops this title. It is thought that perhaps she does so not to be linked with the "heretic" Akhenaten and his family, but interestingly, she does maintain epithets of being the daughter of the GRW Nefertiti, on occasions, even after becoming queen.

Tey, on the other hand, is referred to at Amarna as /Hsy n nfr nTr mnat n Hmt nswt wrt (nfr-nfrw-itn nfrt-iti)|/ "praised of the good god [the king], nurse of the Great Royal wife (Neferneferuaten Nefertiti)|" and /mnat aAt Sdt nTr Xrt nswt/ "great nurse, who nurtured the goddess [Nefertiti]; royal ornament [lady in waiting]" (Roehrig 1990: 263-264).

Had Tey held any other royal title at Amarna, indicating a royal lineage, it would have appeared there. But it does not. Her highest title at Amarna is "great nurse" to the queen, and as Catherine Roehrig noted in her study of royal nurses of the 18th Dynasty, Tey's prominence at Amarna in imagery there (and likely later as the GRW of the new king Ay), is solely based upon her prominence as nurse of the GRW Nefertiti (Roehrig 1990: 265).

Roehrig also points out that Tey being the mother of Nefertiti (but denying her relationship to her daughter) is very unlikely, for as she noted:

Akhenaten's own mother Queen Tiy was of non-royal origin, and her mother Tjuya was accorded the title "royal mother of the Great Royal Wife" (mwt nswt n Hmt wrt). There is no reason to believe that Nefertiti's mother would have been denied the same honors. It seems best to interpret Tey's position with regard to Nefertiti as being similar to that of the other royal nurses of the Dynasty 18. (Roehrig 1990: 267)

Mutnedjmet, on the other hand, is something of a cipher. Nothing is known of this queen until she appears on the scene as Horemheb's Great Royal Wife. She possesses no royal titles beyond her relationship to this king, and does not even possess the title of /r.t-pat/ "noblewoman/countess", which may argue that she was not even of the elite nobility class. In fact her only non-royal title indicates her possible origin as a temple singer, for she is called /Hsy.t nt Hwt-Hr/ "singer of Hathor" (she is the only queen in all pharaonic history to hold such a title, for example).

It has been shown in various studies that there is no reason to associate Mutnedjmet with Nefertiti's (half?)-sister who appears with a pair of dwarves in the tombs of Panehsy, Tutu, May, Ay and Parennefer at Amarna, whom Egyptologists now revise to name as Mutbenret (Martin 1982; Reeves in Freed, Markowitz, et all 1999: 87; Dodson and Hilton 2004: 285; n. 104, 117). You can read the reasoning behind the renaming if this relative here, (part 9 of the thread, in a post by me).

Reference:

Dodson, A. and D. Hilton. 2004. The Complete Royal Families of Ancient Egypt. London: Thames and Hudson.

Martin, G. T. 1982. Queen Mutnodjmet at Memphis and el-Amarna. In L'Égyptologie en 1979. Axes prioritaires de recherches, 2: 275-278. Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 595. Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.

Reeves, N. 1999. The Royal Family. In R. E. Free, Y. J. Markowitz, et al. eds., Pharaohs of the Sun: Akhenaten: Nefertiti: Tutankhamen: 81-95. Boston: Museum Fine Arts/Bulfinch Press/Little, Brown and Company.

Roehrig, C. H. 1990. The Eighteenth Dynasty Titles Royal Nurse (mnat nswt), Royal Tutor (mna nswt), and Foster Brother/Sister of the Lord of the Two Lands (sn/snt mna n nb tAwy). Ph.D Dissertation. Berekley: University of California.
_________________
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
Montu
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 05 Oct 2009
Posts: 61
Location: Ireland

PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CSM wrote:
So if Horemheb was not of royal blood and did not marry into the royal family - why is his reign still considered to be within Dynasty 18 whereas Ramesses I starts the 19th dynasty?


Well I guess he had some form of connection having married Nef's sister - also he had no heirs so he didn't establish any dynasty as it were. It makes sense for Ramses I to have been the first of the 19th dynasty - would be wierd if the first pharaoh in a dynasty was unrelated to all the others. And I guess as someone else said a dynasty of I or even 2 if u stuck Ay in with him would be pretty lame.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 1 of 6

 
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