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 

what if Ankhesenpaaten Tasherit married Tut instead?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Robson
Priest
Priest


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 993
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's no definitive evidence that Ankhesenpaaten actually married her father. In the so-called "Tasherits' talatat" her nme and Meritaten's were apparently recarved over someone else's, possibly on Kiya's name, making believe that both Meritaten Tasherit and Ankhesenpaatem Tasherit were her daughters and not from their namesakes.

For Meritaten there are the Amarna letters addressing her with great deference, but we really don't know is as Akhenaten's wife mainly because we know a letter from her to the Babylonian king Burnaburiash (EA# 12) in which she describers herself as "the daughter of the king", and not "wife".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Frater0082
Account Suspended


Joined: 03 Jul 2012
Posts: 175

PostPosted: Thu Aug 30, 2012 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I still think that Ankhesenpaaten- Junior was the one whom married Tut and perhaps was disgraced sometime during the reign of Aye or executed for treason( The Zannanza affairs).

And as fot the rest of the family, I do not beleive that they all just died off right before the reign of Tut perhaps some of them retire from their positions, we still don't have the full story (yet anyways)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1231
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 9:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

there is a documented plague in egypt during the latter half of akhenaten's reign.......that neatly explains the absence of the royal family.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frater0082
Account Suspended


Joined: 03 Jul 2012
Posts: 175

PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 3:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
there is a documented plague in egypt during the latter half of akhenaten's reign.......that neatly explains the absence of the royal family.


that's Vaguely documented, But back on topic, if Ankhesenamun was twenty-one years old when Tut died like it is suggested then that would mean that she was born in Y10 of Akhenaten which, to me, makes her the younger Akhensenamun because Ankhesenamun-senior is said to have been born in Y5 or Y4 of Akhenaten. Plus, the two Tasherits girls are attested well before the death of Akhenaten so this could be possible so that means that Ankhesenamun-senior became a mommy at the age of 8 or older.

In the case of KV21A, I think we can safely assume that the mummy is a Ankhesenamun alright but not Ankhesenamun senior. I just think that we mixed up the two Ankhesenamun's identities simply because due to the fact that they shared the same name.

But its not our fault these Armarnas are tought to figure out(phew). But from what I gathered from doing major research and listening to you guys posts I can conclude that we may have indeed discover the remains of Ankhesenamun-Tasherit thus making the remains of Ankhesenamun- Senior still out there just waiting for us to discover her and I think Dr. Zahi Hawass knows this thats why he is holding some of the information from the DNA results to himself. I guess we all better jump on the Hawass ban-wagon for the search of Ankhesenamun-Senior.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1231
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2012 7:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ankhesenamun is thought to have been born around year 5. this makes her 12 when akhenaten dies, and 16ish when tut accedes. so she would be 25 at the time of tut's death.

since she is too young to have borne the tasherit's in her father's lifetime it kind of rules her out as a mother of surviving children. but perfectly capable of bearing children to tut, hence the foetuses.

also both tasherits are only mentioned in fragmented and reinscribed inscriptions originally referring to kiya. so i think it is safe to say their very existence is doubtful. i think kiya is depicted with a daughter, and the inscription has been recarved for meritaten with maybe ankhesenamun also in the scene.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frater0082
Account Suspended


Joined: 03 Jul 2012
Posts: 175

PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
ankhesenamun is thought to have been born around year 5. this makes her 12 when akhenaten dies, and 16ish when tut accedes. so she would be 25 at the time of tut's death.

since she is too young to have borne the tasherit's in her father's lifetime it kind of rules her out as a mother of surviving children. but perfectly capable of bearing children to tut, hence the foetuses.

also both tasherits are only mentioned in fragmented and reinscribed inscriptions originally referring to kiya. so i think it is safe to say their very existence is doubtful. i think kiya is depicted with a daughter, and the inscription has been recarved for meritaten with maybe ankhesenamun also in the scene.


But still that doesn't mean that they didn't exist. futhermore, to argue against the possibility that Tut married Ankhesenpaaten-Senior I think it would have been hard for her to just dump her father's traditions like that granted that she too was an Aten worshipper whereas Ankh-Junior would not have this problem at all as she and even Tut himself was born towards the end of this charade.

True Ank-Senior would've have been perfectly able to produce a child for Tut a A Surviving Child at That especially at her age but none of Tut's daughters survived which make me also beleieve that Ankhesepaaten-Tasherit was Tut's wife. reasons why because if Ankh-Junior did exist her DNA would have been far too close to Tut's granted that she would have been his Sister/ Cousin which would've made it extremely hard for these children to out live the age of one.

Like I stated earlier I think that we just mixed thier profiles up due to the two sharign the same name. I have to admit it is confusing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1231
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

there is no evidence for the tasherit's aside from those inscriptions made originally for kiya. so i think their existence is quite seriously not a viable option. and ankhesenamun would have had no option i think in marrying tut and dumping her father's reign and it's ideals. for all we know, she hated her father and never agreed with him on matters of religion.

the important thing at tut's accession was to have him accepted as the legitimate ruler. marrying him to an eligible princess and returning to the traditions of their ancient country was all the courtiers wanted. aknhesenamun may have been around 16, but she had no power base, and surely she would have understood the unstability of the country at the time, and the need to sort it all out and survive. she came from a background of strong women, so i doubt she was stupid enough to try and raise a rebellion against the new establishment.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
there is no evidence for the tasherit's aside from those inscriptions made originally for kiya. so i think their existence is quite seriously not a viable option. and ankhesenamun would have had no option i think in marrying tut and dumping her father's reign and it's ideals. for all we know, she hated her father and never agreed with him on matters of religion.

the important thing at tut's accession was to have him accepted as the legitimate ruler. marrying him to an eligible princess and returning to the traditions of their ancient country was all the courtiers wanted. aknhesenamun may have been around 16, but she had no power base, and surely she would have understood the unstability of the country at the time, and the need to sort it all out and survive. she came from a background of strong women, so i doubt she was stupid enough to try and raise a rebellion against the new establishment.


How should we know who hated whom or who was personally happy with what?
All we know is all members of the royal family were depicted as eager Aten worshippers as long as this was the official religion.
Personal feelings and attitudes are not disclosed to us.
The only viable option at the beginning of Tut`s reign seems to have been as you say the return to traditional values and worship and the royal couple is shown as being devoted hereto no matter what they personally thought of this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1231
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Frater0082 wrote:
futhermore, to argue against the possibility that Tut married Ankhesenpaaten-Senior I think it would have been hard for her to just dump her father's traditions like that granted that she too was an Aten worshipper whereas Ankh-Junior would not have this problem at all as she and even Tut himself was born towards the end of this charade.


sothis, my post was in answer to this......italics and bold mine to emphasize my point.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Realpolitik can be very convincing. Akhkheperure Neferneferuaten seems to have been very strong on continuing the Atenist policies of Akhenaten but Tut's regents clearly wanted a return to tradition. However the Aten was not proscribed during his reign simply demoted back to being one god among many.

We have no way of knowing what Ankhesenamon or any of the Amarna family were like personally. She could have been a gentle, yielding girl ready to do whatever her elders thought best. She could even have been entranced by the colorful gods of the old pantheon and an eager worshipper. There are any number of possibilities.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sothis
Priest
Priest


Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 659

PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
for all we know, she hated her father and never agreed with him on matters of religion.



....and I wanted to respond to this sentence in particular which somehow appears to me to be unfounded.
I agree with you on the rest that Ankhes had no other option than to do what she did.

I should have been more accurate with my quoting, I was just too lazy to delete all the rest of the quote.
NowI`ve done it Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frater0082
Account Suspended


Joined: 03 Jul 2012
Posts: 175

PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 4:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
there is no evidence for the tasherit's aside from those inscriptions made originally for kiya. so i think their existence is quite seriously not a viable option. and ankhesenamun would have had no option i think in marrying tut and dumping her father's reign and it's ideals. for all we know, she hated her father and never agreed with him on matters of religion.

the important thing at tut's accession was to have him accepted as the legitimate ruler. marrying him to an eligible princess and returning to the traditions of their ancient country was all the courtiers wanted. aknhesenamun may have been around 16, but she had no power base, and surely she would have understood the unstability of the country at the time, and the need to sort it all out and survive. she came from a background of strong women, so I doubt she was stupid enough to try and raise a rebellion against the new establishment.


Why would someone go through all the trouble of making up these beleived to be non characters(the Tasherits) to replace another character existence (Kiya)instead of just placing her name with more porminent characters (like the real Ankhesenamun and Meritaten) it doesn't make any since to me.

The whole idea about these two girls being made up is proposterous to me and I think the reason why some claim these girls to not even exist at all is because the fact that Ankh-Senior would have been very young to concieve Ankh-Junior which to me is also inconclusive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1231
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no one is saying they are made up.....the scenes that originally depicted kiya showed her with a child, so thoughts will go with kiya bore akhenaten a daughter.

but when kiya died/was disgraced/went into retirement/whatever her fate was, akhenaten had her inscriptions and scenes altered, and her images and names were replaced in some of these by meritaten and some by ankhesenpaaten.....this recarving was not thorough, as the egyptologists could still get a glimpse of the original scenes and inscriptions....

hence not 'made up', they were not deliberately thought up to fit in with some theory, it is simply early mistakes in trying to understand recarved scenes.

now if they were mentioned somewhere else, on say funerary equipment, tomb scenes, jewellry etc then that is untainted evidence. but as far as i am aware, the only evidence is kiya's scenes.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frater0082
Account Suspended


Joined: 03 Jul 2012
Posts: 175

PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
no one is saying they are made up.....the scenes that originally depicted kiya showed her with a child, so thoughts will go with kiya bore akhenaten a daughter.

but when kiya died/was disgraced/went into retirement/whatever her fate was, akhenaten had her inscriptions and scenes altered, and her images and names were replaced in some of these by meritaten and some by ankhesenpaaten.....this recarving was not thorough, as the egyptologists could still get a glimpse of the original scenes and inscriptions....

hence not 'made up', they were not deliberately thought up to fit in with some theory, it is simply early mistakes in trying to understand recarved scenes.

now if they were mentioned somewhere else, on say funerary equipment, tomb scenes, jewellry etc then that is untainted evidence. but as far as i am aware, the only evidence is kiya's scenes.


Not unless they they made it into King Tut's reign(yes i'm still implying that it was Ankhesepaaten-Tasherit that was married to Tut instead of her mother). Ankhesepaaten-Tasherit could also changed her name to Ankhesenamun and dropped her Tasherit title.

I think the reason why the two Tasherit girls are even inscribed is clearly because of mothers. Heck if the original Meritaten and Ankhesenamun were becoming more prominent like it is thought then why not add on their daugthers to their newly acclaimed assets makes much sense to me.

Also I think the reason why their names were replaced by Kiya's daughter is perhaps because she was already grown up and maybe their aunt didn't mind if they claim their step-mother's assets.

I don't beleive that Ankhesepaaten-Senior married three of her male family members over such short course of time. However, I due beleive that she and her sisters Mekenaten and Meritaten became Great Royal Wives under their father just like their aunt's Sitamun, Isis, Henuttaneb did under their father AIII.

Thus granted that Meritaten and Ankhesepaaten-Senior are inscribed to have had children there is a possibility that Mekenaten had a child as well but she died due to childbirth and the plague that reaked havoc in their home town.

Come on, People let's get real here. Most children at the age of 8 would not want to play with a 16 year old and neither would a 16 year old want to play an 8 year old . I don't think Tut would marry Ankh-senior for political reasons. They have completely different mind set.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1231
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2012 6:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Frater0082 wrote:
Not unless they they made it into King Tut's reign(yes i'm still implying that it was Ankhesepaaten-Tasherit that was married to Tut instead of her mother). Ankhesepaaten-Tasherit could also changed her name to Ankhesenamun and dropped her Tasherit title.


that could happen, but they would need some way to differentiate between the 2 queens.....and ankhesenamun hold no title that would say she is different from another queen of the same name......

Frater0082 wrote:
Also I think the reason why their names were replaced by Kiya's daughter is perhaps because she was already grown up and maybe their aunt didn't mind if they claim their step-mother's assets.


kiya's daughter was part of the ORIGINAL scene. when kiya dissapears, her monuments were recarved for meritaten and ankhesenamun....like already stated, they did a hash job, and thought that ankhesenamun and meritaten were mothers, when in reality the existence of the tasherit's is a mistake.....the little girl behind the princesses in the scenes is kiya's daughter. and we do not know her name.

what do you mean by 'aunt'?

Frater0082 wrote:
I don't beleive that Ankhesepaaten-Senior married three of her male family members over such short course of time. However, I due beleive that she and her sisters Mekenaten and Meritaten became Great Royal Wives under their father just like their aunt's Sitamun, Isis, Henuttaneb did under their father AIII.


ankhesenamun was married to tutankhamun. that is the only proof of any of her 'marriages'. her promotion to prominence in scenes late from her father's reign has given some experts to think she MAY have married her father. while there is no solid evidence of that, there is precedent: amenhotep III married or promoted 3 of his daughters. as for aye, the only evidence of marriage to him is a ring that has both of their names on it. they are not mentioned in any insrciptions or scenes together from what i have seen.

Frater0082 wrote:
Come on, People let's get real here. Most children at the age of 8 would not want to play with a 16 year old and neither would a 16 year old want to play an 8 year old . I don't think Tut would marry Ankh-senior for political reasons. They have completely different mind set.


it does not matter what the princess wants. she does as she is told, by her father, an official, whoever is in power at the time. isabella of france was 8 when she married richard II of england. he was around 30. henry VII's mother margaret beaufort was 12 when she gave birth to him. there are many examples of child or teenage brides marrying adult and middle aged kings. so tut marrying an older cousin is perfectly normal, and neither would have been given any choice in the matter.

as for 'political reasons', ankhesenamun is the perfect choice for queen. she is of child bearing age, she has no family left- so no one can form a power base behind her and try to control the king, she is of royal blood, and if she marries the current king, she can't marry someone else and set up an alternate line of succession. she is also maleable to help set up the old ways again. she can be trained to do what the new government wants. and she is old enough to get started, not some child they have to wait for maturity-which they could never be 100% would happen.

i suggest you read more on the amarna period, and in royal marriages full stop. most of the points here you have raised are invalid. stop thinking of the facts as they would apply to someone from the 21st century, and start thinking about it from a different perspective.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
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, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 4 of 7

 
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