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 

Kv21a
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
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's pretty much my point, Sidney. To date the evidence for a co-regency is questionable to say the least. Kings associated themselves with their predecessors all the time for all kinds of reasons. Neferneferuaten as a female pharaoh would have been very likely to associate herself with Akhenaten, from whom her claim derived, in every way she could. Hatshepsut you will remember rewrote history to link herself with her father Thutmose I as his acknowledged heir.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VBadJuJu
Priest
Priest


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meretseger wrote:
I've never quite seen why either Smenkhkara or Neferneferuaten had to be a co-regent.
They dont really have to be, it is just depends on how one Egyptologist or the other chooses to interpret things, but one or the other seems likely.

We do have depictions of Smenkhkare wearing a crown and name in cartouche, so he is king in some form or fashion. His name is associated with Akhenaten on only one thing, so his case for coregent rests largely on his association with Meritaten in a context taken to be about year 13 (meryre).

We have no named depiction of Neferneferuaten, but all the stelae with the feminine form makes a female coregent seem likely. Virtually every epithet associates her with Akhenaten. On UC 410 Nefertiti is replaced by Neferneferuaten in what appears to be a family scene (making a fairly strong case for Nefertiti=Neferneferuaten). When the stele was revised, the nomen was changed to "Neferneferuaten, effective for her husband" which may indicate her coregency coincided with a decline in health of Akhenaten (or even his death)...maybe a convenient death bed elevation, but I've never seen anyone suggest that.

Allen has suggested that maybe Smenkhkare and Neferneferuaten were rival kings (thus explaining the names).

Dodson kills Smenkhkare within a year of being named coregent. As long as you have Smenkhkare fathering Tut before he dies, a rivalry between Tut and Neferneferuaten such as you suggest is possible. There is little to no evidence for a sole reign for Smenkhkare to disturb the picture.

Your idea of Nefertiti and Meritaten 'joining forces' is interesting.
_________________
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
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3551
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

VBadJuJu wrote:
SidneyF wrote:
What you're saying, of course, is that you don't know when the hall was started.

Year 15 is the only date I've ever seen attributed to it. Debris bearing dates (cant recall if that is from the 1930's or 1951 excavations or from Kemp's work) and the rushed job lead to that date and is cited by gobs of Egyptologists. ...

I can not find anything in Peet : The City of Akhenaten III-1 (1951) or in Kemp : The City of Akhenaten and Nefertiti (2012) that your statement on the start of construction of the so called "Coronation Hall" (Peet) supports. On the contrary, Kemp (2012, p. 137) assumes that this hall was built after the death of Akhenaten.

Greetings, 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: Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting. I haven't read much of the more recent Kemp stuff. I've never seen it referenced as being from other than Y15, but that could be a factlet or conclusion simply repeated over and over. I'll try and find where I read the date ref.

What is the basis for the post Akhenaten date?
_________________
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
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3551
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

VBadJuJu wrote:
... Kemp ... What is the basis for the post Akhenaten date?

There is only the sentence-part "... If we ignore the large brick extension that was added to the south after Akhenaten`s death, ..." on page 137. Kemp has probably done re-excavations on the palace grounds. Maybe you'll find something in the newsletters of the Amarna Project which are available online.

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


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3551
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
I can not find anything in Peet : The City of Akhenaten III-1 (1951) or in Kemp : The City of Akhenaten and Nefertiti (2012) that your statement on the start of construction of the so called "Coronation Hall" (Peet) supports. On the contrary, Kemp (2012, p. 137) assumes that this hall was built after the death of Akhenaten.

Short addendum ... After Peet the stamped mud-bricks ("Anchcheperura" + name of the building [not to read], and so not really much place on the brick for epitheta anymore) were not found in situ. They were found in the area, but not inside and as part as one of the wall remains.

Greetings, 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: Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
Unusually, they both are styled just "nsw bity, s3 ra" above, but, below, Akhenaten has his unique epithet of "a3 m aHa=f". Does this pairing indicate a coregency or one man wanting to be associated with another, the association later receiving the disapprobation of another party?
What significance are you trying to attach to the epithet in relation to a coregency?
_________________
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: Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

VBadJuJu wrote:
SidneyF wrote:
Unusually, they both are styled just "nsw bity, s3 ra" above, but, below, Akhenaten has his unique epithet of "a3 m aHa=f". Does this pairing indicate a coregency or one man wanting to be associated with another, the association later receiving the disapprobation of another party?
What significance are you trying to attach to the epithet in relation to a coregency?


Absolutely none. But here's this: I mentioned there was a scene [badly damaged] that contained the cartouches of Akhenaten and king Neferneferuaten in tandem. However, in that scene copied by Lepsius in the tomb of Meryre II, there is only one king and his queen and that man is Smenkhkare. It seems to me, that if this is a newly-appointed coregent, the cartouches of Akhenaten should be there, too, by comparison. In that post of mine, to which you are replying, I gave the examples that might indicate a coregency, but the salient point is the names are always coupled with Akhenaten. The only example from Amarna where there is another king--without Akhenaten--is that scene from the tomb. And there he is, handing out favors, the rays of the Aten upon and the cartouches of the god right beside his own like he was the favorite of the sun now. If Akhenaten was still alive, I doubt Meryre would have had this scene put into his tomb in that fashion. Even though Thutmose III was the rightful king, the royal servants of that period never mentioned him alone but always second to Hatshepsut--if they even mentioned him at all. A tomb was, after all, a boon of the king. Nobody had the means to make one for himself. Of course, if the king was gone and the tomb wasn't completed, then the successor would be the one featured next.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3551
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

VBadJuJu wrote:
... Allen has suggested that maybe Smenkhkare and Neferneferuaten were rival kings (thus explaining the names). ...

What is plain mischief. An anti-king should probably differ significantly in the choice of his name by his opponent? I know of no example in the history of Egypt, specifically here the intermediate periods, when anti-kings chose the throne name of there opponent. And there are only 2 or 3 examples that one king used a throne name of an earlyer king, in 3000 years.

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


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1227
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
And there are only 2 or 3 examples that one king used a throne name of an earlyer king, in 3000 years.


i agree mostly with this statement. but there are more than 2 or 3 instances of a throne name being used over agin. look at the 11 ramses'.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3551
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
Lutz wrote:
And there are only 2 or 3 examples that one king used a throne name of an earlyer king, in 3000 years.

i agree mostly with this statement. but there are more than 2 or 3 instances of a throne name being used over agin. look at the 11 ramses'.

What is plain and simple wrong, as I told you somewhere here in this forum once before.

Sethnacht already used a portion of the throne name of Ramses II and forms his own by supplements. His followers do the same. Suspected is, the new 20th Dynasty tried a kind of legitimacy over the still famous and deified king. Speculation is also about kinship connections between the family of Sethnacht and Ramses II.

However, it remains quite clear every single throne name of the Ramses kings from the 20th Dynasty is unique. No one really is like the other, the kings are clearly distinguishable on there complete throne name.

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1227
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
What is plain and simple wrong, as I told you somewhere here in this forum once before.

Sethnacht already used a portion of the throne name of Ramses II and forms his own by supplements. His followers do the same. Suspected is, the new 20th Dynasty tried a kind of legitimacy over the still famous and deified king. Speculation is also about kinship connections between the family of Sethnacht and Ramses II.

However, it remains quite clear every single throne name of the Ramses kings from the 20th Dynasty is unique. No one really is like the other, the kings are clearly distinguishable on there complete throne name.


it is not wrong. they may have added epithets and used other names, but ramses was the main one. if it were not, we would have to number them. goes for any of the many pharaohs that used predecessor's names.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3551
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kylejustin wrote:
it is not wrong. they may have added epithets and used other names, but ramses was the main one. if it were not, we would have to number them. goes for any of the many pharaohs that used predecessor's names.

Yes it is wrong. They not only "added epithets" or "used other names". They used a part of the throne name from Ramses II and composed a new one by extensions. The numbering of the sa-ra name is modern. This was for the Ancient Egyptians not necessary, because every of these Ramesside kings was identified with his own unique throne name. This throne name was also used in the offices, the state administration, foreign correspondent and for dating. One of the reasons why he had to be unique...

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This pallette of Princess Meketaten is an intriguing item:

http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/100001017

It was sold to the Met by Lady Almina in the 20's and came from the Carnarvon collection. Presumably it came from Tut's tomb? There was one of Meritaten, too, I believe. Interesting heirlooms.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nefer-Ankhe
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
This pallette of Princess Meketaten is an intriguing item:

http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/100001017

It was sold to the Met by Lady Almina in the 20's and came from the Carnarvon collection. Presumably it came from Tut's tomb? There was one of Meritaten, too, I believe. Interesting heirlooms.


Was it used? If so by Meketaten herself? It is interesting and nicely preserved, may I add.
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 6 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