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 

Nefertiti Documented in Year 16 of Akhenaton
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 11, 12, 13  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 12:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

whenever i've read about it, egyptologists have always claimed smenkhkare ruled first after akhenaten's death, followed by neferneferuaten.

if that so, whether she be meritaten or nefertiti, she seems to be only a regent for tutankhamun. then it looks likely she did a hatshepsut, and we know she was not seemingly buried as king, but as queen, so maybe neferneferuaten's burial was demoted to queen, and her things stuck in storage, to be used for tutankhamun in his untimely death.

nefer must have ruled second in any rate, because isn't there evidence of her being alive in tutanhamun's reign? would be a bit hard to rule after smenkhkare if you were before unless: a) she was dethroned, and brought back after his death or b) like mentioned before they were co rulers themselves.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VBadJuJu
Priest
Priest


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:

I hope that Dodson is not still arguing for a coregency between Akhenaten and Smenkhkare! The canopic coffinettes that were pressed into service for Tutankhamun--aren't they now thought to have originally belonged to a female who was "beneficial to her husband"? ...

As far as I know, Dodson has always favored Nefertiti as Neferneferuaten, sometimes to almost silly extremes, IMO. We don't have to surmise the female from the "Effective..." epithet though. Some of the stuff from Tut's tomb - lots of it - bears Neferneferuaten inscriptions. See for example this bracelet. Another example is box 001k. Some things like the stone sarcophagus can have the name etc restored to Ms Nefer; other things just have feminine affectations. The canopic stuff is both, I think.

The sequence Neferneferuaten-Smenkhkare-Tut argues against a long reign for Neferneferuaten, but Dodson sees Nefertiti in that role and reigning a while. So, in re-interpreting the Meryre date to year 13, he moves Smenkhkare back so that she can maybe reign solely for a while and as the coregent of Tut.

Quote:
there is "Ankhetkheperure" with a Year 3 so Manetho seems to have known of a woman-king
A nit, but if you are thinking of the Pare tomb, I think that inscription indicates 'Ankhkheperure'.

Quote:
Also, when one already has 6 daughters [or five if one died] and a woman is capable of ruling in Egypt, creating a male coregent as early as Year 12 or 13 doesn't make the most sense.
I dont think a female makes any sense either except as a desperate last measure. A female on the throne is not going to be able to extend your lineage. Even were she to remarry and have a male heir it would not be considered Akhenaten's. If his motivation was to leave someone committed to his reforms, someone his own age (assuming Nefertiti was not 10-15 yrs younger than he) is a bad choice too.

Nefertiti probably was The most qualified to rule Egypt. But it would also spell the end of Thutmosid rule, and given there was least 1 male with good royal Thutmosid blood around, that might have angered the surviving Thutmosids.

Quote:
If Smenkhkare became a co-king and married the eldest princess, then why was there a female ruler?
What if Smenkhkare and Neferneferuaten were rival kings at the same time? Neseret posted a really good summary of that theory here
_________________
Build a man a fire and he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="VBadJuJu"]
SidneyF wrote:

I hope that Dodson is not still arguing for a coregency between Akhenaten and Smenkhkare! The canopic coffinettes that were pressed into service for Tutankhamun--aren't they now thought to have originally belonged to a female who was "beneficial to her husband"? ...


Quote:
As far as I know, Dodson has always favored Nefertiti as Neferneferuaten, sometimes to almost silly extremes, IMO. We don't have to surmise the female from the "Effective..." epithet though.


At one time Dodson wrote a paper for the KMT "Amarna Letters" in which
he stated his reasons why he believed Smenkhkare was a coregent with Akhenaten and that the golden canopic coffinettes belonged to Smenkhkare. But Dodson was forced to change his mind about those coffinettes for the very reason that there was only Ankh[et]kheperura Neferneferuaten with the epithet "Ax-n-h[A]=s" which means "beneficial to her husband". So, yes, the language does mandate a female.

As to the Year 3 inscription, does anyone believe Smenkhkare was on the throne for three years?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VBadJuJu
Priest
Priest


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:

At one time Dodson wrote a paper for the KMT "Amarna Letters" in which
he stated his reasons why he believed Smenkhkare was a coregent with Akhenaten and that the golden canopic coffinettes belonged to Smenkhkare. ...

As to the Year 3 inscription, does anyone believe Smenkhkare was on the throne for three years?

I dont recall that article, but about that same time (early-mid 1990s) he thought maybe Nefertiti ruled as both Smenkhkare and Neferneferuaten. His position has changed over the years, but Nefertiti as Neferneferuaten has been a mainstay.

The Year 3 inscription is for Neferneferuaten:
The king of Upper and Lower Egypt, lord of the Two Lands, Ankhkheprure - beloved of Aten, son of Re Nefereneferuaten beloved of [...]

Ankh-et-kheprure versions are sort of rare, but sometimes there are feminine traces in the epithet 'mr-t' vs 'mr'. Of the 5 rings Petrie found which we would attribute to Neferneferuaten:
1 used Ankh-et-kheprure and epithet marked as feminine
2 had epithet marked as feminine
2 were not marked as feminine
_________________
Build a man a fire and he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

VBadJuJu wrote:
I dont recall that article, but about that same time (early-mid 1990s) he thought maybe Nefertiti ruled as both Smenkhkare and Neferneferuaten. His position has changed over the years, but Nefertiti as Neferneferuaten has been a mainstay.

The Year 3 inscription is for Neferneferuaten:
The king of Upper and Lower Egypt, lord of the Two Lands, Ankhkheprure - beloved of Aten, son of Re Nefereneferuaten beloved of [...]

Ankh-et-kheprure versions are sort of rare, but sometimes there are feminine traces in the epithet 'mr-t' vs 'mr'. Of the 5 rings Petrie found which we would attribute to Neferneferuaten:
1 used Ankh-et-kheprure and epithet marked as feminine
2 had epithet marked as feminine
2 were not marked as feminine


Very good, but let's be reminded that the identification of Neferneferuaten as a female [hence my giving the Year 3 to Ankhetkheperure] dates back quite a ways now. Wiki sums it up aptly: "Then in 1988 James P. Allen published a paper in which he proposed cutting the Gordian Knot by separating Smenkhkare from Neferneferuaten, recognizing that the ‘simple’ and ‘extended’ versions of the Ankhkheperure cartouche could after all have belonged to different kings. A key observation was that there were no occasions where the ‘long’ version of the prenomen occurred alongside the nomen Smenkhkare, nor the ‘short’ version with the name Neferneferuaten.

Confirmation of this theory came in 1998, when the French Egyptologist Marc Gabolde pointed out that a number of cartouches of Neferneferuaten that had been read as using the epithet ‘mery-Akhenaten’ actually bore the epithet зht-n-h.s, "Effective for her husband", confirmed in 2004 by exhaustive re-assessments of the palimpsest inscriptions inside the canopic coffinettes ultimately used by Tutankhamun, which had long been known to have been usurped from Neferneferuaten."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VBadJuJu
Priest
Priest


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:

Very good, but ...

I was trying to point out was that the inscription in TT139 does not use the feminine form of the name, lest someone wandering through thought it did. That is not the same as saying it did not refer to the female King Neferneferuaten, which is why I called it a "nit".

There used to be a nice rendering of it online but the image is corrupt now.
_________________
Build a man a fire and he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Neferneferuaten Nefertiti
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 15 Mar 2010
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:26 pm    Post subject: Throne War Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
... So perhaps there was a throne-war, with Meritaten and her husband facing off against Nefertiti.


I have always thought that a throne war within the city branched out and the usurper moved to Waset/Thebes with the backing of the Amun priests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Robson
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1001
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Neferneferuaten Ankhkheperure in Waset, and Neferneferuaten Ankh(et)khereperure (Effective to her Husband) in Akhetaten?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:33 pm    Post subject: Re: Throne War Reply with quote

Neferneferuaten Nefertiti wrote:
SidneyF wrote:
... So perhaps there was a throne-war, with Meritaten and her husband facing off against Nefertiti.


I have always thought that a throne war within the city branched out and the usurper moved to Waset/Thebes with the backing of the Amun priests.


Which claimant are you defining as 'usurper'?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nefer-Ankhe
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:18 am    Post subject: Where are all the Egyptian Artifacts held in Berlin? Reply with quote

Off topic: Does this mean, that the bust of Nefertiti and many other artifacts associated with Nefertiti are being held in a separate Museum from where the bust of Nefertiti would have usually been held in Berlin?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3980
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Staatliche Museen zu Berlin ---> Museum Island Berlin, Neues Museum ---> Egyptian Museum and Papyrus Collection

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
VBadJuJu
Priest
Priest


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 1:36 pm    Post subject: Re: Throne War Reply with quote

Meretseger wrote:
Neferneferuaten Nefertiti wrote:
SidneyF wrote:
... So perhaps there was a throne-war, with Meritaten and her husband facing off against Nefertiti.

I have always thought that a throne war within the city branched out and the usurper moved to Waset/Thebes with the backing of the Amun priests.

Which claimant are you defining as 'usurper'?


IF there were rival kings....
I see Smenkhkare ruling from Memphis.
a) As the admin center, if he is recognized there and controls it, in effect he rules Egypt, possibly the army and foreign affairs while Neferneferuaten rules Amarna.
B) Most of the evidence from Smenkhkare's reign comes from Memphis and that is where he is said to have died.

I see it as entirely a division in the royal family, casting it as a political struggle between aten and amun factions smacks too much of civil war for which we might expect to see some evidence.

IF the Year 16 evidence holds up, Nefertiti as Neferneferuaten would be the legit ruler being Akhenaten's chosen successor, as her epithet's make utterly clear. The choice of her instead of at least 2 able males of some royal standing is the primary cause of the split or at least the last straw. Its not that they dont like her, but she is a dynastic dead end - bad for the family and bad for Egypt.

That would make Smenkhkare "the usurper". That being the case, if it was a broader struggle I'd expect to see some sort of depiction of the gods selecting or blessing Smenkhkare ala Hatshepsut (particularly in the wake of the recent proscriptions by Akhenaten and Neferneferuaten nee Nefertiti). That doesn't mean the Amun priests were uninterested, the tail end of the struggle seems to show both sides seeking favor with Amun with temples reopening and Neferneferuaten's Pairi visit).

I like it because it explains a lot of things not addressed in a single line of succession. Unfortunately, it is the kind of thing the AEs were not likely to write about, so it is mostly a conjectural reading of the evidence.
_________________
Build a man a fire and he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now that there seems to be reason to believe that Nefertiti lived so long and possibly even longer than her husband, can it be that the inscription on the foot of the KV55 coffin was originally a dedication by her? Can someone please post a photo of the glyphs of the coffin foot, so we can take a fresh look?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually, I have since found where Lutz posted it some time ago. Well, this is mysterious. According to James Allen, the first line, which reads

1. Recitation by (name erased), the justified:

saw the addition of “Maa kheru” which, of course, means "justified". That ought to mean that, when the coffin was made, the person whose name was in the cartouche was still alive. Because, for the first six lines or so, the personal suffixes indicate a male figure, the individual doing the reciting must be a royal male. Only at the end of Line 6 is there the addition of a female figire suffix, making up the words "that I may receive it and come to 7. (life).

However "justified" is Osiride and not necessarily a part of the funerary rites of Amarna, even though the "Magic Bricks" found in KV55 are Osiride enough. At any rate, I think the latest examination of this coffin concluded that it was original to Akhenaten and not modified for him from that of a woman, as previously thought.

HOWEVER, it is very clear that, on Line 8. The addition of “father, Re-Horakhty” and “like Re”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was unable to keep typing the last line of my message but was able to press "send", so I did but what I meant to say is Line 8. The addition of “father, Re-Horakhty" (meaning Akhenaten--and he was addressed that same way on a statue plinth belonging to Meritaten) is very clearly a substitution for some other term not requiring any more space such as "pAy nb" (my lord) or "pAy hA" {my husband) with one of its several attested spellings.
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 Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 2 of 13

 
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