Akhenaten (Box, Carter Archive 001K)

Status
Closed

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,250
Bendigo
Btw, regarding the position of the arms of a mummy, we have to ponder the extra difficulty that the Amarna period introduced: the lack of respect [to say the least] of some pivotal aspects of the Egyptian religious traditions. We absolutely don't know if Akhenaten intended to modify something also about the preservation of the body. Regarding the mere process of mummification, it doesn't seem he introduced new ideas. Anyway this could depend on who followed the process of mummification and final preparation of the Royal burial site. Neferneferuaten or Smenkhkare? I guess Neferneferuaten. In this case the surviving Monarch not only opened the mouth of Akhenaten but was represented on his sarcophagus instead of the usual deities ...

Ankhkheperure Neferneferuaten was getting again in touch with the traditional cults, so we cannot be sure that she did exactly all how the husband required. But the general impression is that it was an Atenist entombment and probably she respected his will.
I have pondered the question of Nefertiti and Akhenaten’s burial here before now, and I agree. I think Nefertiti, while devoted to her husband, also may well have ‘softened’ things around the edges to make his more excessive religious ideas more palatable to those who were not absolute fanatics like him. And, yes, I think he had fanatical traits. She could do this on all good conscience, without betraying him or his memory. She would have been doing the right thing by him by erasing some of his failings, so to speak.

So his burial itself? Did he even leave any particular blueprint for it? Nefertiti as goddesson all four corners of his sarcophagus. That was clearly the plan. But his coffin? What happened with that? IMO, the most likely scenario is, he was placed in the selfsame coffin that he was found in, in KV55. It was made for him, I would think. And if ‘Kiya’ was on it, it was still Nefertiti. I just find it hard to think Nefertiti would throw him in a secondary wives coffin. It lacks reason for me. As to any other coffins, who knows? If the coffin is from an earlier time at Akhetaten, well, burials were planned well ahead of time. I read somewhere on s that plans for burials began quite on after Pharaohs ascended the throne. So would it be a surprise if Nefertiti was still called Kiya when the coffin was made? Or, if as I have hypothesised, Nefertiti might have been more official name, and Kiya for generally more private use? And maybe, while there was overlap, as time went by, Kiya fell more out of use, even in a private setting. Which reminds me suddenly...

Did Nefertiti have her name left on things like cosmetic jars and pencases and suspender belts and those more personal kinds of things? I posted about a Kiya seeming to be mentioned on more personal things and in possibly more private settings (e.g. like Maruatens and palaces). What about Nefertiti? Do we find the name on personal things too?

And, to beat a dead horse, I think we should stop dividing Neferneferuaten and Smenkhkare into two people. Lol. I really want to see some cogent theories about why on earth Smenkhkare would reuse a Throne Name in such close proximity of time to another pharaoh (Neferneferuaten). Or viceversa in time, if Neferneferuaten succeeded Smenkhkare. The more I think about it the more a nonsense it seems to me. Someone, please give me a motive for that reuse. I promise to listen attentively. I know I have proven nothing. 😎
 
Last edited:

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
26,838
Italy, Lago Maggiore
I have pondered the question of Nefertiti and Akhenaten’s burial here before now, and I agree. I think Nefertiti, while devoted to her husband, also may well have ‘softened’ things around the edges to make his more excessive religious ideas more palatable to those who were not absolute fanatics like him. And, yes, I think he had fanatical traits. She could do this on all good conscience, without betraying him or his memory. She would have been doing the right thing by him by erasing some of his failings, so to speak.

So his burial itself? Did he even leave any particular blueprint for it? Nefertiti as goddesson all four corners of his sarcophagus. That was clearly the plan. But his coffin? What happened with that? IMO, the most likely scenario is, he was placed in the selfsame coffin that he was found in, in KV55. It was made for him, I would think. And if ‘Kiya’ was on it, it was still Nefertiti. I just find it hard to think Nefertiti would throw him in a secondary wives coffin. It lacks reason for me. As to any other coffins, who knows? If the coffin is from an earlier time at Akhetaten, well, burials were planned well ahead of time. I read somewhere on s that plans for burials began quite on after Pharaohs ascended the throne. So would it be a surprise if Nefertiti was still called Kiya when the coffin was made? Or, if as I have hypothesised, Nefertiti might have been more official name, and Kiya for generally more private use? And maybe, while there was overlap, as time went by, Kiya fell more out of use, even in a private setting. Which reminds me suddenly...

Did Nefertiti have her name left on things like cosmetic jars and pencases and suspender belts and those more personal kinds of things? I posted about a Kiya seeming to be mentioned on more personal things and in possibly more private settings (e.g. like Maruatens and palaces). What about Nefertiti? Do we find the name on personal things too?

And, to beat a dead horse, I think we should stop dividing Neferneferuaten and Smenkhkare into two people. Lol. I really want to see some cogent theories about why on earth Smenkhkare would reuse a Throne Name in such close proximity of time to another pharaoh (Neferneferuaten). Or viceversa in time, if Neferneferuaten succeeded Smenkhkare. The more I think about it the more a nonsense it seems to me. Someone, please give me a motive for that reuse. I promise to listen attentively. I know I have proven nothing. 😎
Objects of daily use belonging to a Royal Couple not rarely carried their cartouches. Akhenaten and Nefertiti weren't an exception about this.

At MET museum there is a Goblet which is absolutely a really important piece: it carries the early cartouches of the Aten and then the cartouches of Neferkheperure Waenre Amenhotep and of Nefertiti. On that goblet Amenhotep is defined "Good God" and Nefertiti already Great Royal Wife. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/545756
 

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,250
Bendigo
Objects of daily use belonging to a Royal Couple not rarely carried their cartouches. Akhenaten and Nefertiti weren't an exception about this.

At MET museum there is a Goblet which is absolutely a really important piece: it carries the early cartouches of the Aten and then the cartouches of Neferkheperure Waenre Amenhotep and of Nefertiti. On that goblet Amenhotep is defined "Good God" and Nefertiti already Great Royal Wife. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/545756
Wonder when that goblet is dated to? Year 3? Year 5? Year 7? Also, is a goblet all that ‘personal’? I am probably leaning toward the idea that ‘Kiya’ was maybe ‘early’ and ‘Nefertiti’ later, in general.

Btw, did you have a think on comparing the hieroglyphs for Tiye, Tey, Tiy and even my poke at names, Tiji (Thuja)? Actually, and the Titi part of Nefertiti?
 

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,250
Bendigo
I have made an other composition, putting all toghether.
View attachment 20577
Thank you. Post noted.

Tiye and Tey are quite similar. Yet without vowels they are Ty and Ty? Or should they differ? I must look up what ‘determiatives’ are. Tjuiu is clearly different, as is Kiya. What is the difference with the women. One seems to be fishing and has a headpiece (crown?).

Edit: Ha! Determinative means words like ‘the’ and ‘every’, I see.Do we have meanings fir the names: Nefertiti is the beauty has come or similar. And Kiya, maybe something to do with monkeys. Do we have them for Tiye, Tiy and Tjuiui?
 
Last edited:

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
26,838
Italy, Lago Maggiore
Thank you. Post noted.

Tiye and Tey are quite similar. Yet without vowels they are Ty and Ty? Or should they differ? I must look up what ‘determiatives’ are. Tjuiu is clearly different, as is Kiya. What is the difference with the women. One seems to be fishing and has a headpiece (crown?).
Determinatives?

Eh ... from our perspective they can be something really odd: they are signs which explain the nature of the preceding word. Is it the name of a Royal Wife? Ok, there will be a sitting woman with a flower. Is it the name of a woman [or of a common wife]? There will be a sitting woman.

The determinative played an important role in that writing system.
 

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,250
Bendigo
Determinatives?

Eh ... from our perspective they can be something really odd: they are signs which explain the nature of the preceding word. Is it the name of a Royal Wife? Ok, there will be a sitting woman with a flower. Is it the name of a woman [or of a common wife]? There will be a sitting woman.

The determinative played an important role in that writing system.
I add an adjustment to my previous post, if you would have a look.

So a woman with a woman with flower (and headpiece?) is a sign of a royal woman? Without, a commoner?

Edit: Tiye and Tey are maybe princesses? Or became so in marriage? Maybe Tiye. Tey from birth?
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
26,838
Italy, Lago Maggiore
I add an adjustment to my previous post, if you would have a look.

So a woman with a woman with flower (and headpiece?) is a sign of a royal woman? Without, a commoner?

Edit: Tiye and Tey are maybe princesses? Or became so in marriage? Maybe Tiye. Tey from birth?
The flower is the discriminating symbol. Then, shape and room can play a role [you can find objects with Royal wives without flower or even without determinative]. So consider only surfaces which are enough wide to allow the artist to engrave [or to draw] all the set of signs.

A ring, for example, is a limited surface, so it's particular context.
 

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,250
Bendigo
The flower is the discriminating symbol. Then, shape and room can play a role [you can find objects with Royal wives without flower or even without determinative]. So consider only surfaces which are enough wide to allow the artist to engrave [or to draw] all the set of signs.

A ring, for example, is a limited surface, so it's particular context.
For clarity: the flower signifies royalty?

Tiye was daughter of Yuya who shares DNA with Amenophis III... hmmmm? Tey has a flower? Tjuiu is without a flower... Do we ask ourselves questions about all this on the issue of who has royal blood and who hasn’t? If Yuya is related to Amenophis III, so is Tiye...

Edit: Ummm.... so Tiye actually isn’t such a commoner after all? 🤔

Edit: Yuya ‘Father of the God?’ Was Yuya Thutmose IV’s brother or cousin? God Father, even, (tutor?), to Amenophis III when he was a boy?

Another edit: Does Mutemwiya have a flower? [Had a look at Wikipedia: maybe not]
 
Last edited:
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions