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 

Manetho and the XVIIIth Dynasty
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orwell wrote:
Josephus could be forgiven for thinking the Old Testament was actual history. Events during the Jewish War would seem his most polemic , and he does smooth out his side of things, no doubt. But as to events in the XVIIIth Dynasty - what polemic gain is there but in the line of boost the reputation of ancient Jews. There is no reference to these Pharaohs in relation to the Hew except his mention of the Jews (Henrews) being forced out of Egypt around the time of Ahmose.


My posting can be poorly writ, but the above is worser than usual! Wink

Should read:

Josephus could be forgiven for thinking the Old Testament was actual history. Events he records during the Jewish War would seem his most polemic , and he does smooth out his side of things, no doubt.

But as to events in the XVIIIth Dynasty, there is no reference to these XVIIIth Dynasty pharaohs in relation to the Hebrews except his mention of the Hebrews being forced out of Egypt around the time of Ahmose.


Edited quite a bit, but hopefuly shows up better what I was originally contending. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Montuhotep88
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 415
Location: Central Ohio

PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's my theoretical reconstructed outline of the "12th" through "18th" dynasties (beginning of Book II): (Note: Dynasties are NOT numbered. Part of my supposition is that someone else later on numbered them, which is part of the problem in some copies where the numbering was done differently.)



Book II

Discussion of Background of Ammenemes & his (non-royal) father Sesostris

Ammenemes began a new line of kings of Diospolis. He ruled 8, then 8, then 4 years (altogether 20), then introduced his son Sesonchosis as co-regent for 10 years. He was killed by his own eunuchs.
Sesonchosis, his son, ruled for 42 years, then introduced his son Ammemenes as co-regent for 2 years.
Ammenemes, his son, ruled for 35 years, then introduced his son Sesostris as co-regent for 3 years.
Sesostris, his son, ruled for 19 years.
Sesostris, his son, ruled for 39 years, then introduced his son Ameres as co-regent for 3 years.
Ameres, his son, ruled for 46 years, then introduced his son Ammenemes as co-regent for 2 years. He built the Labyrinth.
Ammenemes, his son, died in his 9th year.
Scemiophris, his sister, ruled for 4 years.
Total from Ammenemes to Scemiophris, 8 kings, 216 years.

More Kings of Diospolis

Asiatic infiltration and chieftains

Hyksos Rulers

War between Hyksos rulers and final 5 of Kings of Diospolis

Kings of Diospolis:

Amosis defeated the Hyksos, then ruled for 25 years and 4 months.
Amenophis, his son, ruled for 20 years and 7 months.
Khebron ruled for 13 years.
Memphres, his son, ruled for 12 years and 1 month.
Amensis, Khebron’s daughter, ruled for 21 years and 9 months, during the reign of Misphragmouthosis; she claimed to succeed Khebron directly.
Misphragmouthosis, Memphres’ son, ruled for 53 years and 11 months, including the 21 years and 9 months of Amensis’ reign.
Amenophis, his son, ruled for 30 years and 10 months.
Touthmosis, his son, ruled for 9 years and 8 months.
Amenopthis called Oros, his son, ruled for 36 years and 5 months.
Akhenkheres (“Criminal”), his son, and another Akhenkheres (“Criminal”), ruled for 19 years and 6 months.
Rathotis, the son of the first “Criminal,” ruled for 9 years.
Akheres (“Criminal”?), ruled for 4 years and 1 month.
Harmais, who was succeeded by Rhamesses, ruled for 24 years and 8 months. He dated the beginning of his reign to the end of the reign of Amenopthis, making the total of his reign 57 years and 3 months, even including the 9 years of Rathotis.

Legend of the expulsion of the “lepers” [sic]

Harmais was known as Danaus among the Greeks; Rhamesses was known as Aegyptos. (Actually with a -us ending, but the board nukes that name. Smile )
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EgyptianRose
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 08 Mar 2012
Posts: 251
Location: Australia. Down Under.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thankyou Neseret! Plutarchs version is much more interesting. I did in fact think that there was more said between one Octavians men and Charmion, I will change it Wink I do love how Charmion finishes the whole Cleopatra story with that quote. Did Charmion actually say this before her death?

Anyway off topic. I asked before on this thread if it was possible if the second female mentioned by Josephus could have been Ankhesenamun? Or if it has already been out ruled as a possiblity? I have yet seen a reply. Would be appreciated =)
_________________
It is of course the hieght of irony that, after this intensive campaign to expunge them from the annals of Egypt, the Amarna pharaohs are today probably the most recognized of all the country's ancient rulers!

Quote 'Amarna Sunset' by Aidan Dodson.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
EgyptianRose
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 08 Mar 2012
Posts: 251
Location: Australia. Down Under.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thankyou Neseret! Plutarchs version is much more interesting. I did in fact think that there was more said between one Octavians men and Charmion, I will change it Wink I do love how Charmion finishes the whole Cleopatra story with that quote. Did Charmion actually say this before her death?

Anyway off topic. I asked before on this thread if it was possible if the second female mentioned by Josephus could have been Ankhesenamun? Or if it has already been out ruled as a possiblity? I have yet seen a reply. Would be appreciated =)
_________________
It is of course the hieght of irony that, after this intensive campaign to expunge them from the annals of Egypt, the Amarna pharaohs are today probably the most recognized of all the country's ancient rulers!

Quote 'Amarna Sunset' by Aidan Dodson.
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: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

EgyptianRose wrote:
Did Charmion actually say this before her death?

Anyway off topic. I asked before on this thread if it was possible if the second female mentioned by Josephus could have been Ankhesenamun? Or if it has already been out ruled as a possiblity? I have yet seen a reply. Would be appreciated =)


To answer Question 1: we don't know. Charmion was Cleopatra's Egyptian servant, as I recall, so her saying the line would be in keeping with the possible Egyptian view opf the queen (Cleopatra VII was apparently popular with the Egyptians as she tended to rule well, look out for their interests in the face of potential Roman occupation, and of course, had bothered to learn the language, which no Ptolemy had ever done).

Perhaps Plutarch says that Charmion said the line as repesentative of Egyptian opinion; on the other hand, perhaps she actually said the line, as an Egyptian servant who saw what lengths Cleopatra went to save her line and Egypt.

Onto Question 2: I would doubt that Ankhsenamun is the "Akheres" of Manethian legend history. There's no indication that Ankhsenamun ever ruled alone, and the "second" Akheres is normally associated with Aye, who may have married Ankhsenamun in order to legitimise his ascension to the throne. Akhenaten is called the first "Akkheres" by Manetho (via Josephus), as opposed to "Akheres," which equals Aye.

It's only when one gets to the Pseudo-Manethian histories of Africanus and Eusebius (the Armenian translation, as well as via Syncellus and via Jerome) are thrown in does one have a multiplicity of "Akheres/Akkheres/Accheres" to worry about. Manetho (via Josephus) actually never mentions a female ruler: this all comes from the later (much later from the contemporary writings even of Manetho) histories.

Africanus lists

- "Akheres 1" in the position of Akhenaten (for a 12 year reign), followed by

- Rhathos (="King Neferneferuaten"/Smenkhkare position, 6 year reign),

- Khebres (= Tutankhamun) for 12 years, and finally,

- "Akheres 2" in the position of Aye (for a 12 year reign).

Eusebius (Armenian transl) lists

- "Akhenhkheres" in the position of Akhenaten (for 16 year reign),

- "Akherres" for 8 years, and

- "Kherres" for 15 years in the roughly same position as Aye, ignoring the reigns of "King Neferneferuaten," Smenkhkare and Tutankhamun.

Eusebius (via Syncellus) lists

- "Akhenkherses" for the position of Akhenaten (with a 16 year reign),

- Athoris (="King Neferneferuaten"/Smenkhkare position, 39 years),

- Khenkheres (the mystery female ruler or Tutankhamun [?], 16 years), Akherres (after Tutankhamun) for 12 years, and finally Kherres (in the Aye position) for 15 years.

Eusebius (via Jerome) has

- Achencheres for the Akhenaten position, for a 12 year reign, followed by

- Athoris (="King Neferneferuaten"/Smenkhkare position, 8 years),

- Chencheres (the mystery female ruler or Tutankhamun [?], 16 years).

- Acheres (again, after Tutankhamun, who is not mentioned by his usual Khebres name), for 8 years and, finally,

- Cherres (in the Aye position), for 15 years.

So, I don't see how I could hypothesize if Ankhsenamun was the "mystery female ruler" of Manetho's history as Manetho, via Josephus, never mentions such a ruler.

Meanwhile, we have a very confused jumble of rulers through the Pseudo-Manethian histories of Africanus and Eusebius, with Eusebius' work being the most convoluted of all.

Reference:
Verbrugghe, G. P. and J. M. Wickersham 1996. Berossos and Manetho: Introduced and Translated. Native Traditions in Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

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
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

neseret said: "Manetho (via Josephus) actually never mentions a female ruler: this all comes from the later (much later from the contemporary writings even of Manetho) histories."

My copy of Whiston's translation of The Works of Josephus has two queens, Amesses (Hatshshetsup?) and "Acenchres" (choose your favorite candidate).

In "Against Apion" there are three similar names at the end of the dynasty. According to Josephus two males by name "Acencheres", and one female "Acenchres" the sister of Rathotis and the ruler who preceded him on the throne. (Whiston 2001 edition).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orwell wrote:


Josephus could be forgiven for thinking the Old Testament was actual history.


He could but the OT does NOT present the early patriarchs as great kings, well off beduin chieftains at best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I haven't read Antiquities for quite a few years, but I can't quite recall the "great kings" part. Even if so, I don't suggest that Joesphus wasn't tend to immune from a bit of exaggeration. Patriotic historians rarely are immune from it, it does not mean their basic report of events is doubtful in all parts.

In comparison, I'm not a fan of the Bible as a history source, far far more unreliable than Josephus as a general rule, and yet I would not deny that mixed up amid all the legend, myth, patriotism, theology and politics, there is actual history as well, and some of it probably quite accurate. Asked to choose between Josephus and the Bible, I'd pick Josephus every time as at least being closer to the truth.

Anyhow, we're dealing with ancient authors here. As far as it goes, I think Josephus was fairly accurate most of the time. His interpretation of events might have been iffy at times, but that doesn't make his accounts totally untrustworthy. My response is to take him at his word unless there is good reason not to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Montuhotep88 wrote:
...

Akhenkheres (“Criminal”), his son, and another Akhenkheres (“Criminal”), ruled for 19 years and 6 months.
Rathotis, the son of the first “Criminal,” ruled for 9 years.
Akheres (“Criminal”?), ruled for 4 years and 1 month.
Harmais, who was succeeded by Rhamesses, ruled for 24 years and 8 months. He dated the beginning of his reign to the end of the reign of Amenopthis, making the total of his reign 57 years and 3 months, even including the 9 years of Rathotis.


How do you define "Criminal" in your analysis? What crime/s did they commit?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3757
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orwell wrote:
Montuhotep88 wrote:
...

Akhenkheres (“Criminal”), his son, and another Akhenkheres (“Criminal”), ruled for 19 years and 6 months.
Rathotis, the son of the first “Criminal,” ruled for 9 years.
Akheres (“Criminal”?), ruled for 4 years and 1 month.
Harmais, who was succeeded by Rhamesses, ruled for 24 years and 8 months. He dated the beginning of his reign to the end of the reign of Amenopthis, making the total of his reign 57 years and 3 months, even including the 9 years of Rathotis.


How do you define "Criminal" in your analysis? What crime/s did they commit?

"The criminal from Amarna" is a designation for Akhenaten from the times of the Ramesside and later. They avoided this way the mention of his name. Officially in there chronology he has not existed, but sometimes it was necessary to mention him ...

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


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, I already 'detected' that, Lutz. Smile

But Montuhotep88 is spreading the word around a bit more!


(If you want to investigate a tricky case, Lutz, you must leave

no

stone

unturned... Idea )
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Montuhotep88
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 415
Location: Central Ohio

PostPosted: Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not my invention... That's after a speculation of Donald B. Redford in Pharaonic King-Lists, Annals, and Daybooks which on page 252 suggests that "<A> χερρηϛ" ("Acherres") is a derivation of pA-Xrw ("the enemy"). It's entirely reasonable to conjecture that the damnatio memoriae of Akhenaten extended to the temple historical records which were Manetho's most likely information source.

Arrow Please note that my attempt is to reconstruct what Manetho may have originally written, and not to reconstruct Egyptian history as we know (or theorize) it to be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Did Redford suggest it as a universal name for all the Amarna rulers?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Montuhotep88
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 415
Location: Central Ohio

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nope, that was pretty much suggested by the Ramesside kings... Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orwell
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 441
Location: Victoria, Australia

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Montuhotep88 wrote:
Nope, that was pretty much suggested by the Ramesside kings... Very Happy


So what you're really saying is, youve decided in your own mind that the Amarna rulers were "Criminals', not just 'Akhenaten'!The Ramesside kings (in your outline) tried to remove all of them rom history, so that 'suggests' the Ramesieds saw them as each and everyone "The Criminal."

Fair enough, Montuhotep... Very Happy

So long as we remember, I guess, that only Akhenaten was directly referred to as "The Criminal."

If that, of course, who they were particularly referring to, mind? Idea

I've always assumed it was 'Akhenaten' referred to - but should I be so sure? Shocked
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 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
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