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 

Two Female Pharaoh`s Before Tutankhamun?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3920
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 6:40 am    Post subject: Two Female Pharaoh`s Before Tutankhamun? Reply with quote

" Egyptologist in Canada Presents Theory of Two Queen Rule Before Tutankhamun " (Phys.org - DPA, 27.04.2019)
Quote:
... Some thought she was Nefertiti, the sister and wife of Akhenaten, who proclaimed herself "king" following his death. Others believed it to be the eldest daughter Princess Meritaten.

UQAM's Valerie Angenot says she has now conducted an analysis based on the study of symbols which revealed that two daughters of Akhenaten seized power at his death while their brother Tutankhamun, aged four or five at the time, was too young to rule. ...

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


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 234

PostPosted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really wonder if an approximately 16 year old Meritaten and an approximately 7 year old Neferneferuaten-tasherit seizing power was actually a thing. Seems odd for a 7 year old girl to take precedence over a male heir barely younger. I wonder how she can explain away Carter box 001K with Ankhkheperure Nefeneferuaten and Meritaten as two distinct individuals, and the scene in the tomb of Meryre II showing Meritaten as GRW to Smenkhare, and no mention of Neferneferuaten-tasherit after year 16.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Montuhotep88
Priest
Priest


Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 516
Location: Central Ohio

PostPosted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Few facts, endless variations on the theories. Same old Amarna story. We need to find the "House of the King's Domestic Correspondence" (assuming there was such a thing) at Akhet-aten or something!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Robson
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1000
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2019 3:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Based on Manetho's two Acencheres?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3920
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2019 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The problem is, there is, to my knowledge, no official publication at the moment, only more or less short reports on the internet, most of them in German and French.

Here is another in English : " Newsletter Osirisnet Avril / April 2019 - DEUX reines après Akhénaton ? / TWO queens after Akhenaten? ", also with links to the main French sources.

As far as I understand it, the conclusions by Valérie Angenot are based mainly on interpretations of artistic representations?

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


Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 234

PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2019 6:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
based mainly on interpretations of artistic representations


That seems to be just about all she has, though there has to be more to enable her to state that Smenkhare is Zannanza and that Tutankhaten was living at the Fayum. I find it difficult, if not impossible, to accept anything she is putting forward, which looks more and more like fantasy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Montuhotep88
Priest
Priest


Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 516
Location: Central Ohio

PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2019 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I read somewhere recently a speculation that "Zannanza" was not a name, but rather the Hittite term for the prince involved (the assumption has been crown prince/heir, but that's not certain), much as "Dahamunzu" was not a name. Might have been in Timelines (the Manfred Bietak festschriften).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3920
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri May 03, 2019 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Montuhotep88 wrote:
I read somewhere recently a speculation that "Zannanza" was not a name, but rather the Hittite term for the prince involved ...

Mario Liverani : Zannanza. - In: Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici - SMEA 14. - 1971. - pp. 161 - 162.

Liverani sees in "Zannanza" the Hittite transliteration of the Egyptian title "s3 n nsw" (son of the king).

Greetings, Lutz.
_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Montuhotep88
Priest
Priest


Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 516
Location: Central Ohio

PostPosted: Fri May 03, 2019 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm sure it wasn't that article... and I would wonder why the Hittites would refer to a Hittite son of a Hittite king by a transliteration of an Egyptian title.

Idea
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3920
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri May 03, 2019 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Montuhotep88 wrote:
I'm sure it wasn't that article...

"Timelines" (FS Bietak) is from 2006, Liverani`s "Zannanza" from 1971 ... Who will call on whom? Cool
Liverani, Zannanza, 1971, p. 162:
Quote:
... Può sorprendere che in un testo hittita si usi un termine egiziano per designare un principe hittita il cui nome doveva essere noto e non presentava problemi di scrittura. In realtà però il passo che cita Zannanza riporta (o almeno mostra di riportare) il passo della lettera con cui dall'Egitto si dà notizia della morte del principe, e in tale lettera è ragionevole che il principe sia stato indicato col termine egiziano. Il termine sarebbe poi passato dalla lettera egiziana al passo annalistico, sia come citazione della lettera stessa sia a contatto immediato della citazione. Se si ricorda che le 'Gesta di Suppiluliuma' sono un testo redatto all'epoca di Mursili II, almeno una diecina d'anni dopo l'episodio, non si potrà escludere neppure l'ipotesi che la lettera egiziana (presumibilmente conservata in archivio) abbia funto da fonte diretta per la redazione del passo.

Quote:
Google: ... It may be surprising that in an Hittite text an Egyptian term is used for to designate a Hittite prince whose name was to be known and did not present writing problems. In reality, however, the passage quoted by Zannanza reports (or at least shows to report) the passage of the letter with which from Egypt yes gives news of the death of the prince, and in that letter it is reasonable that the prince has been indicated with the Egyptian term. The term would then be passed from the Egyptian letter to the annalistic passage, both as a quotation from the letter itself is in immediate contact with the summons. If you remember that the 'Gesta di Suppiluliuma 'is a text written at the time of Mursili II, at least a dozen in the years after the episode, we cannot exclude even the hypothesis that the Egyptian letter (presumably kept in the archive) acted as direct source for drafting the passage.

Quote:
Promt: ... It can wonder that in a text hittita you use an Egyptian term to itself for to designate a prince hittita whose name had to be well-known and he was not presenting writing problems. In fact nevertheless the step that Zannanza cites brings back (or at least it shows of bringing back) the step of the letter with which the Egypt itself it gives notice of the death of the prince, and in such a letter it is reasonable that prince has been indicated by the Egyptian term. The term would have then passed from the Egyptian letter to the step annalistico, be like quotation of the letter same be in immediate contact of the quotation. If it is remembered that the 'Deeds of Suppiluliumà is a text drafted to the epoch of Mursili II, at least a ten in years after the episode, it will not be possible to exclude even the hypothesis what Egyptian letter (presumably kept in archives) has acted fountain run for the drafting of the step.

Certainly not perfect translations, but I think it is understandable what the author wanted to says...

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


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3920
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2019 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

" King Tut's Sisters Took the Throne Before He Did, Controversial Claim Says " (Live Science - Laura Geggel, 08.05.2019)
Quote:
... However, Angenot's idea about the "two queen pharaohs" is controversial among Egyptologists, many of whom think that the mystery queen is none other than Nefertiti, the principal wife of King Akhenaten and stepmother to King Tut.

Angenot presented her research, which has yet to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, at the annual meeting of the American Research Center in Egypt, held April 12-14 in Alexandria, Virginia. ...

... Angenot described her research in a 20-minute talk at the conference, and she is now detailing it in a paper that she will submit to a scientific journal. Many Egyptologists are eagerly awaiting the paper's publication so they can get more details about this unusual theory. ...

_________________
Ägyptologie - Forum (German)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Montuhotep88
Priest
Priest


Joined: 12 Dec 2008
Posts: 516
Location: Central Ohio

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2019 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:

Quote:
Google: ... It may be surprising that in an Hittite text an Egyptian term is used for to designate a Hittite prince whose name was to be known and did not present writing problems. In reality, however, the passage quoted by Zannanza reports (or at least shows to report) the passage of the letter with which from Egypt yes gives news of the death of the prince, and in that letter it is reasonable that the prince has been indicated with the Egyptian term. The term would then be passed from the Egyptian letter to the annalistic passage, both as a quotation from the letter itself is in immediate contact with the summons. If you remember that the 'Gesta di Suppiluliuma 'is a text written at the time of Mursili II, at least a dozen in the years after the episode, we cannot exclude even the hypothesis that the Egyptian letter (presumably kept in the archive) acted as direct source for drafting the passage.


Oh--- yes, that makes sense. Danke!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3920
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2019 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is a comment in English from Valérie Angenot, in a German-language blog, with some more information : " Folgten Echnaton zwei Töchter auf den Thron? " (8. Mai 2019). Scroll down to the 2nd comment ...
_________________
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: 77

PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 12:24 pm    Post subject: surpassing Tut Reply with quote

im not convinced at her arguments that because the youngest daughter was too young to conceive she was groomed to be a stand-in pharaoh and even preferred over the King's only living son whose mother was a Royal princess and married to the second surviving daughter of the Pharaoh and the Great Royal Wife.

There is one reason i've come up with lately that might have seen both Tut and his sister-wife been relegated to the sidelines: physical deformity.

In the last few years various studies have shown very different results as to the physical state of Tut. Some speak of a young warrior king dying in battle others of a basically handicapped man who needed the use of walking sticks to go about and often was seated during activities that others would do standing up.

If Tut was handicapped could that have been the real reason why he did not succeed his father but others (his stepmother/mother-in-law or his half-sister(s)) stepping in before he succeeded when there was no-one left?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Robson
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1000
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Or maybe it is all about cliques of courtisans in dispute behind the kids.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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