Akhenaten (Box, Carter Archive 001K)

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,829
Bendigo
To be fair with the ones who saw "body" there, I have to say that the status of the erased and newly engraved areas is not exceptionally clear. Anyway "body" in hieroglyphics is to be written with a short vertical line and honestly I cannot see something like that there.

But ... I'm basing my opinion on Peet's work [a drawing], I have to evaluate the work made by the ones who have physically examined the pieces.
I think we have clearly discovered - and rediscovered again and again! - on this thread, that if you really want to conduct a proper investigation, you have many obstacles to overcome. I really pity those historians and archeologists who seriously attack their craft forensically. Yet, the chase seems even more enticing for it, perhaps... but perhaps NOT.... lol.
 

AlpinLuke

Ad Honoris
Oct 2011
25,567
Italy, Lago Maggiore


I think we have clearly discovered - and rediscovered again and again! - on this thread, that if you really want to conduct a proper investigation, you have many obstacles to overcome. I really pity those historians and archeologists who seriously attack their craft forensically. Yet, the chase seems even more enticing for it, perhaps... but perhaps NOT.... lol.
As a general comment about Egyptology, we can add that early researchers weren't exactly professional; they were more interested in golden objects and mummies [there was a popular belief that mummies had incredible powers and they used them to make medicine!] than in discovering historical reality. Furthermore, once they opened tombs and interred chambers, the content begun to deteriorate and they didn't mind that much about this.

For example, today it would be a useless hope to think to go to the tombs at Tell El Amarna to observe the depictions copied by Lepsius as he saw them. Many of those representations are not in the same conditions. This is an other limit for any research in that field ... we cannot study exactly what the early "Egyptologists" studied, so that partially we have to base our work on their work.
 

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,829
Bendigo
As a general comment about Egyptology, we can add that early researchers weren't exactly professional; they were more interested in golden objects and mummies [there was a popular belief that mummies had incredible powers and they used them to make medicine!] than in discovering historical reality. Furthermore, once they opened tombs and interred chambers, the content begun to deteriorate and they didn't mind that much about this.

For example, today it would be a useless hope to think to go to the tombs at Tell El Amarna to observe the depictions copied by Lepsius as he saw them. Many of those representations are not in the same conditions. This is an other limit for any research in that field ... we cannot study exactly what the early "Egyptologists" studied, so that partially we have to base our work on their work.
Yes. It would nice to have more and ready access to the records that the earliest archeologists left. Does not help when some things are locked up.
 

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,829
Bendigo
Amenophis III/Akhenaten Timeline {hypothetical, of course}

Round brackets: Year of Reign
Square brackets: Age of personages... {hypothetical ages only}

Timeline 1 without Coregency

(-12). Birth of Amenophis III [0]
(1). Amenophis III [12]
(4). Amenophis III [16]. Birth of Prince Thutmose [0]
(6). Amenophis III [18]. Birth of Prince Amenophis [0]
(8). Amenophis III [20]. Birth of Sitamun. [0]
(30). Amenophis III [42]. Thutmose [26] Amenophis [24] Sitamun [22]
(39). Amenophis III [51]. Amenophis [31] Sitamun [29]
(1). Amenophis IV [31]. Sitamun [29]
(2). Amenophis IV [32]. Sitamun [30] Meritaten [0]
(17). Akhenaten [40]. Sitamun [38]. Meritaten [16]

Akhenaten is 40 or younger when he ascends the throne. In this scenario, Nefertiti would certainly not be Sitamun. Not if she went on to have 6 daughters.

Timeline 2 with Coregency

(-12). Birth of Amenophis III [0]
(1). Amenophis III [12]
(4). Amenophis III [16]. Birth of Prince Thutmose
(6). Amenophis III [18]. Birth of Prince Amenophis
(8). Amenophis III [20]. Birth of Sitamun.
(30). Amenophis III [42]. (1) Amenophis IV [24] Sitamun [22]
(31) Amenophis III [43]. (2) Amenophis IV [25] Sitamun [23] Meritaten [0]
(39). Amenophis III [51]. (9)Amenophis IV [31] Sitamun [29] Meritaten [8]

Whether or not Sitamun [22] is Nefertiti, Akhenaten is 24 (or younger) when he ascends throne.


No matter how you look at it, unless Amenophis was 31 when he ascended the throne, a coregency is looking good. This, of course, could mean Nefertiti was much younger when she was made wife of Akhenaten, but he certainly waited a long time before taking a potential number 1 queen into his arms.
Re- posted. Note: If Meritaten is Meritre and Tut her son, with a Coregency, we have Tut born in Year 9 without much difficulty in the timescale, but without a Coregency, we have her give birth in around Year 13 at earliest, when Akhenaten is 32 years. Then we need to find a few more years after Akhenaten’s death, and therefore rule by others for the period. I can only find, in my reckoning, Smenkhkare to fill that bill, unless Neferneferuaten’s 3 years was as sole ruler.


To make the sign for "Royal" be similar to the first sign of the word "body" you have to engrave in a very bad way. But considering that the surface in that area had erased and then inscribed again ... it's not so clear.
Thinking on this, the ‘Kiya as king’s daughter’ thing surely must remain an open question.
 

AlpinLuke

Ad Honoris
Oct 2011
25,567
Italy, Lago Maggiore
Re- posted. Note: If Meritaten is Meritre and Tut her son, with a Coregency, we have Tut born in Year 9 without much difficulty in the timescale, but without a Coregency, we have her give birth in around Year 13 at earliest, when Akhenaten is 32 years. Then we need to find a few more years after Akhenaten’s death, and therefore rule by others for the period. I can only find, in my reckoning, Smenkhkare to fill that bill, unless Neferneferuaten’s 3 years was as sole ruler.




Thinking on this, the ‘Kiya as king’s daughter’ thing surely must remain an open question.
Until we won't find the work by Hayes ...

In the meanwhile, the MET offers a publication about the women of Amarna https://www.metmuseum.org/art/metpu...of_Amarna_Images_of_Beauty_from_Ancient_Egypt. The authors are in the middle: the genealogical tree at XX [in the beginning of the work] shows Nefernefruaten Nefertiti as King Neferneftruaten [they prefer the sould "nefru" to "neferu" as plural of "nefer"]. But they indicate Smenkhkare as a separated individual. At page 14 we find a paragraph about Kiya.
 

AlpinLuke

Ad Honoris
Oct 2011
25,567
Italy, Lago Maggiore
Here there is the original work by Fairman [1961 Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology Vol.47 : The Egypt Exploration Fund : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive] where there are the two inscriptions where the name Kiya had seen for the first time. Before if Kiya the author discusses some opinions about the coffin found in KV55. Then he goes back to the coffin, suggesting it belonged to Meritaten. And here the inscription under the coffin we have already considered: Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology Vol.47 : The Egypt Exploration Fund : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Here, on the right Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology Vol.47 : The Egypt Exploration Fund : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive, you can ready his translation with that "bodly and beloved King's daughter". But it's an interpolation of the author, it's not visible. In those pages he explains his choice and he shows how he interpolates and that "bodly and beloved King's daughter" is a version of "Royal Daughter, beloved of his body" [a not so rare formule].

When we have discussed that inscription, we haven't mentioned that "bodly and beloved King's daughter" or "Royal Daughter, beloved of his body" because it's not visible.

It's the black area "Z" [this is the bottom section of the inscription]

piede2.jpg
 

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,829
Bendigo
Until we won't find the work by Hayes ...

In the meanwhile, the MET offers a publication about the women of Amarna https://www.metmuseum.org/art/metpu...of_Amarna_Images_of_Beauty_from_Ancient_Egypt. The authors are in the middle: the genealogical tree at XX [in the beginning of the work] shows Nefernefruaten Nefertiti as King Neferneftruaten [they prefer the sould "nefru" to "neferu" as plural of "nefer"]. But they indicate Smenkhkare as a separated individual. At page 14 we find a paragraph about Kiya.
I read the Kiya paragraph wondering very much about all the relating to her. How sound are the attributions to her, I wonder?
 

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,829
Bendigo
Here there is the original work by Fairman [1961 Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology Vol.47 : The Egypt Exploration Fund : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive] where there are the two inscriptions where the name Kiya had seen for the first time. Before if Kiya the author discusses some opinions about the coffin found in KV55. Then he goes back to the coffin, suggesting it belonged to Meritaten. And here the inscription under the coffin we have already considered: Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology Vol.47 : The Egypt Exploration Fund : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Here, on the right Journal Of Egyptian Archaeology Vol.47 : The Egypt Exploration Fund : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive, you can ready his translation with that "bodly and beloved King's daughter". But it's an interpolation of the author, it's not visible. In those pages he explains his choice and he shows how he interpolates and that "bodly and beloved King's daughter" is a version of "Royal Daughter, beloved of his body" [a not so rare formule].

When we have discussed that inscription, we haven't mentioned that "bodly and beloved King's daughter" or "Royal Daughter, beloved of his body" because it's not visible.

It's the black area "Z" [this is the bottom section of the inscription]

View attachment 16165
Curious that page 36 of Fairman talks of the coffin in KV55 being Meritaten’s. And the language is reminiscent of the inscription I have been addressing which features ‘king’s bodily daughter’ as one interpretation. This ‘royal daughter’ remains mysterious. Kiya as daughter? Meritaten as daughter? Both the same person, just name altered? If not, whose royal daughter is Kiya?
 

AlpinLuke

Ad Honoris
Oct 2011
25,567
Italy, Lago Maggiore
Curious that page 36 of Fairman talks of the coffin in KV55 being Meritaten’s. And the language is reminiscent of the inscription I have been addressing which features ‘king’s bodily daughter’ as one interpretation. This ‘royal daughter’ remains mysterious. Kiya as daughter? Meritaten as daughter? Both the same person, just name altered? If not, whose royal daughter is Kiya?
What we still need to understand is if the missing section "Z" has been reconstructed on the base of something concrete or it's just an educated interpolation. For example Gardiner [also Fairman reminds this] thought that it was Nefertiti ... We haven't got the possibility to evaluate the original in detail [and in the conditions they found it].
 

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,829
Bendigo
What we still need to understand is if the missing section "Z" has been reconstructed on the base of something concrete or it's just an educated interpolation. For example Gardiner [also Fairman reminds this] thought that it was Nefertiti ... We haven't got the possibility to evaluate the original in detail [and in the conditions they found it].
There is this to consider as well:

Block from the Maru-Aten A King followed by a Queen and a Princess
Titles of the Princess: the King's bodily daughter, his beloved Meritaten-tasherit, (who belongs) to the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, who lives on Maat, the Lord of the Two Lands (Neferkheperure - Waenre)|, born to the wife and great beloved, Kiya;
<Usurped and re-inscribed for the King's Daughter Meritaten>

What do we make of this?

Edit: Thus block does not show what form of hieroglyphs form Aten. it would be interesting to have a point in time when this Meritaten-Tasherit appears. Indeed, it would be nice to know when Kiya was replaced with Meritaten.
 
Last edited:

Similar History Discussions