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 

Did Hatshepsut Intend for Neferure to Succede Her as King?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
SidneyF
Banned


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Sat Jun 08, 2013 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Those who haven't already seen this piece by Dr. Peter Dorman should read it as it is a short but good summary of how confused things appeared in this period until Hatshepsut simply decided to have herself depicted as a male. But even then the scribes weren't always sure if they should call her "him" or "her" in the texts:

http://fathom.lib.uchicago.edu/1/777777190131/

As for me, since people are not providing evidence of an actual coronation for Hatshepsut and prefer to rely on their own ideas of what persons in power could or could not get away with in the New Kingdom, I give up in trying to make them understand that propaganda was far more important
than actuality at this time when Hatshepsut held sway. As I said before, you get your throne name when you are crowned--and Hatshepsut claimed to have received hers while her father was still alive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3754
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Jun 08, 2013 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
SidneyF wrote:
Lutz, I don't know why you are so certain one could not do any of the things you mention without a formal coronation. Where is it written?...

Quote:
In different texts from 3000 years of pharaonic history.

Rather vague, I'm afraid.

There is no book "Complete Rituals and Magic" from the ancient Egyptians, as you know. You have to search for the pieces in individual texts in order to manufacture the overall picture (for example for the coronation ceremony).

SidneyF wrote:
SidneyF wrote:
... For me this just shows that that Hatshepsut had the clout to do whatever she wanted and this was due to the power structure of Egypt. All were dependent upon the ruler for their positions and livelihoods. ...

Lutz wrote:
And then, what do you think Hatshepsut's position was hanging up from? What initiated her claim to power?

A dead pharaoh, a successor who was too young to rule, and a female regent. I'm sorprised you are still asking this question after all the posts in this thread.

Like several times bofore ... Without that the female regent later wanted to be pharaoh.

SidneyF wrote:
SidneyF wrote:
... My point is--nobody could stop Hatshepsut from doing anything. ...

Lutz wrote:
Anyone who could prove that she was not determined by the god Amun himself for the office and, for example, did not the test with the goddess Weret Hekau (daughter of Ra in form of an uräus) during coronation.

And you would have been the one to want to prove this? ...

Although I am no longer 17, but not sooo old then. How about, just as one example, the family of the mother of Thutmose III? Or a few priests of Amun who know that she did not had received divine consecrate in the temple (as you think). Maybe the one who have done the oracle for Thutmosis III`s election? Or whoever ... That there was opposition is very high probability, not at least you prove it yourself with your quote:

SidneyF wrote:
"If you don't believe that, you can find the text right at Deir el Bahari where Thutmose I purportedly warns that anyone who speaks against Maatkare Hatshepsut "shall find his death immediately"

Why warning if no opposition is expected and, how you think, she could do whatever she wanted and all of Egypt stood by and applauded?

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


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Sun Jun 09, 2013 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

These are the two key quotes from the paper of Peter Dorman, URL supplied by me in my last post:

"On a stela from Sinai, the queenly figure of Hatshepsut is shown with her coronation name, Maatkara, and the title "King of Upper and Lower Egypt." After Gardiner et al., Inscriptions of Sinai 1, pl. 56."

Dorman shows the stela. Hatshepsut is called a "queenly figure" because she wears the two tall plumes--and NOT any pharaonic crown--but she is still called by her throne name and acknowledged as king! What further proof does anyone need that what Hatshepsut claimed in her legitimizing text did not appear for the first time on a wall, but had to have been issued by proclamation? Even though she wore no kingly crown, she was still called "king" by the confused artisans who had to deal with Hatshepsut's legitimizing propaganda, even though nobody had knowledge of an actual coronation ceremony!

Dorman again:

"In another early (although undated) document of the reign, Hatshepsut appears in a rock-cut graffito with her household steward, Senenmut, who carved the small scene in commemoration of his commission to obtain a pair of obelisks from the granite quarries at Aswan. According to the text, this commission was effected "through the power of her majesty," and the lady in question is portrayed in her queenly garb, with the double-plumed crown worn by chief queens and the piriform mace wielded by the god's wives of Amun. Her titles, again, are just queenly, but Senenmut describes his mistress as "one to whom Ra has actually given the kingship." Do we detect a streak of sycophancy here, or a hint of the truth?"

In my opinion, it's just the propaganda, the fictions, starting to take shape. It's very obvious to me that Hatshepsut needed no coronation or formal ritual at all to be called "king" but nobody dared, as yet, to portray her with pharaonic headgear. So that's it for me. If people here choose to ignore the evidence, then so be it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3754
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sun Jun 09, 2013 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
These are the two key quotes from the paper of Peter Dorman, URL supplied by me in my last post:

"On a stela from Sinai, the queenly figure of Hatshepsut is shown with her coronation name, Maatkara, and the title "King of Upper and Lower Egypt." After Gardiner et al., Inscriptions of Sinai 1, pl. 56." ...

There is not something like a "coronation name". What Dorman is talking about is her nesut-bit or throne name, Maat-Ka-Ra.

The data for the accession to the throne and the coronation of a king is, as far as I remember, in the New Kingdom not identical. The accession to the throne took place the morning after the death of his predecessor. At least the throne name here should have stood firm, because it is used for bureaucratic documents / lists of government and civil service. The actual crowning in the temple was certainly some weeks later (very fond on New Years Day`s). It was then probably some to prepare... Here are the five big names were announced, which says nothing about it when they were created.

Therefore could, in my view, these representations as well belong in this time between accession to the throne and the coronation. Only just no predecessor had to die before she took the throne...

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


Joined: 16 Sep 2011
Posts: 431

PostPosted: Sun Jun 09, 2013 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Lutz"]
SidneyF wrote:
These are the two key quotes from the paper of Peter Dorman, URL supplied by me in my last post:

"On a stela from Sinai, the queenly figure of Hatshepsut is shown with her coronation name, Maatkara, and the title "King of Upper and Lower Egypt." After Gardiner et al., Inscriptions of Sinai 1, pl. 56." ...


Quote:
There is not something like a "coronation name". What Dorman is talking about is her nesut-bit or throne name, Maat-Ka-Ra.


Dorman wrote "coronation name" because there are actually two depicted with their texts at Deir el Bahari and Luxor. One before the gods, who gives her the crowns and the names and another before the court, in the presence of Thutmose I. Unfortunately, both are complete fictions. Don't you have Breasted's book of the records of the 18th Dynasty? He goes into much detail about all of what is shown. What is it you are after--a third coronation? You won't get it. Those scenes at Deir el Bahari with the false coronation weren't executed until after Year 7. If Hatshepsut hadn't had a real coronation by then--then when would you say it took place?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3754
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sun Jun 09, 2013 8:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Once again, something that is called "coronation name" does not exist in AE. And if you or Dorman not mean her nesut-bit name (also known as throne name), "Maat-Ka-Ra", I have really no idea what you are talking about (a language problem?).

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


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

PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2013 6:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
Hatshepsut is called a "queenly figure" because she wears the two tall plumes--and NOT any pharaonic crown--but she is still called by her throne name and acknowledged as king! What further proof does anyone need that what Hatshepsut claimed in her legitimizing text did not appear for the first time on a wall, but had to have been issued by proclamation? Even though she wore no kingly crown, she was still called "king" by the confused artisans who had to deal with Hatshepsut's legitimizing propaganda, even though nobody had knowledge of an actual coronation ceremony!


kings did not wear a crown in every depiction. and the tall plumes is worn by amun himself, so this is not reason to exclude her claims.

the reason the artisans were confused was because they had not encountered this situation before. the last queen to be crowned pharoah was alive 3 centuries before. while hatshepsut had precedent for females being regent, and women taking the throne, it is obvious she tweaked her role.

egyptian pharoahs both immediately before and after hatshepsut took pride in military matters, and depicted their victories publicly. had hatshepsut had any opposition to her actions, there would have been rebellion. had she put down a rebellion, she would have made it public. this implicitly states that she had consent of the ruling elite. if she had not, like i said, rebellion, or even murder and another regent or council would have been set up in her place.

it is obvious to us that hatshepsut was not crowned or designate dheir under her father's reign. but how many of her subjects could know that? and if she had a coronation much later around the time she dropped the regent act, no one would be any wiser. she wouldn't have to make it public. and her mortuary temple shows the fictional coronation because that is what future generations where to believe. they would have no way of knowing she wasn't crowned when she said she was. so yes propaganda does come into it, but if she never had a coronation, she is breaking the laws of maat, fictional one of not, she would have had one for real.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


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

PostPosted: Mon Jun 10, 2013 6:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SidneyF wrote:
Where? If you mean the "striding statue"--it has breasts.


amarna art. all of the kings of this period were depicted with wide hips and small breasts. while this image looks more feminine to us, it still depicts a king.

SidneyF wrote:
As far as we know, there were no more males of that dynasty remaining and where do you see the male attire? I still see a dress held up by two straps, a dress seen on other females, as well.


there is not much in the way of art from sobekneferu's reign, and she is only believed to have reigned fro 3 years. looking at hatshepsut's art from the early years she still looks like a woman too. this does not mean hatshepsut never looked like a man in her art, as we know this true. the same can be said for sobekneferu, just because there is no art that survived does not mean she did not set precedent for hatshepsut. she still wears the crowns of egypt, a very masculine trait.

there is also an earlier queen, from the beginning of the 5th dynasty, whose titles are unclear, reading either 'mother' or 'king' of 'upper and lower egypt', and she is shown with the royal beard in some depictions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khentkaus_I

SidneyF wrote:
And how do you know that Tutankhamun, while still Tutankhaten, did not have a female regent, too?


there is evidence neferneferuaten was regent for tutankhamun, and we know she was king. so did she start off as regent for him? and then become king? or was she king in her own right, and adopted him as her heir? either way, she was a woman in power over a child king, like thutmose III. except maybe egypt had enough of powerful women, and the amarna age and bumped her off for a regency council? the next woman to take power was tawosret, and there is evidence her rule was challenged by sethnakhte.
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Montu
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 05 Oct 2009
Posts: 61
Location: Ireland

PostPosted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

well whatever happened there must have been some form animosity at the end of her reign to account for either Tuthmosis or Amenhotep defacing her monuments
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naunacht
Priest
Priest


Joined: 06 Oct 2009
Posts: 515
Location: U.S. NJ

PostPosted: Thu Aug 29, 2013 8:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Montu wrote:
well whatever happened there must have been some form animosity at the end of her reign to account for either Tuthmosis or Amenhotep defacing her monuments


Yet, if the current scholarly concurrence is correct, Thutmose III did not begin his proscription of Hatshepsut in earnest until some twenty years or more after her death. The personal animosity motive is a little hard to support under those circumstances unless, of course, there was some reason he could not act against her memory before then or something happened late in his reign which changed his attitude and his policy toward his former co-regent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3754
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naunacht wrote:
... The personal animosity motive is a little hard to support ... unless, of course, there was some reason he could not act against her memory before then ...

With look to his triumphant victory at Megiddo immediately after the beginning of his sole reign, in my view unlikely. He was well risen to the sovereign ruler, not only in Egypt, beloved and supported by his "father" Amun-Ra.

Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Robson
Priest
Priest


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 996
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naunacht wrote:
there was some reason he could not act against her memory before then or something happened late in his reign which changed his attitude and his policy toward his former co-regent.


Maybe because Thutmose intended to rise prince Amenhotep as co-regent and he hadn't anything to do with Hatshepsut, being a son of a commoner instead. It was time to erase Hat's memory because probably there was someone else (any Neferure's offspring?) more connected to her than prince Amenhotep.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3754
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Robson wrote:
Naunacht wrote:
there was some reason he could not act against her memory before then or something happened late in his reign which changed his attitude and his policy toward his former co-regent.

Maybe because Thutmose intended to rise prince Amenhotep as co-regent and he hadn't anything to do with Hatshepsut, being a son of a commoner instead. It was time to erase Hat's memory because probably there was someone else (any Neferure's offspring?) more connected to her than prince Amenhotep.

Affected are only the pictures they show her as Pharaoh, others as Great Royal Wife not. Had he in this case (claim to the throne of lineal descendants) not rather completely erase her memory?

Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Thieuke
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 11 Aug 2012
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:04 am    Post subject: ambitious princess? Reply with quote

Maybe the pharaoh found out that Hatshepsut's example as a ruler was being picked up by one or more of his daughters. If he intended his son to rule as his heir and his sons after him than removing the example of a female ruler makes sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
waenre
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 19 Mar 2010
Posts: 70
Location: Bay Area, California

PostPosted: Sat Aug 31, 2013 1:37 pm    Post subject: Re: ambitious princess? Reply with quote

Thieuke wrote:
Maybe the pharaoh found out that Hatshepsut's example as a ruler was being picked up by one or more of his daughters. If he intended his son to rule as his heir and his sons after him than removing the example of a female ruler makes sense.


Did Thuthmose III have other sons towards the end of his reign, other than Amenhotep II?

Was Amenhotep II fully royal? How much info is available about his mother? Was she a member of the Tao family?

I've read that Amenhotep II was young when he ascended the throne, and that there was a brief coregency initiated by Thuthmose III to assure that Amenhotep II would ascend the throne.

If Thuthmose III did not have any other sons, perhaps he was concerned about other contenders for the throne. Were there any Tao descendants around who could claim the throne?

Thanks in advance.

waenre
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, 8  Next
Page 6 of 8

 
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