Amarna, Before and After

[Wepwawet]

8 hours ago, Wistman said:

I'll just quote Kenneth Kitchen:  "Absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.  No theory can be sacrosanct, and widespread acceptance of a theory does not guarantee its truth."  I am merely applying Dr. Kitchen's admonition to the supposed premature death of Prince Thutmose.

 

Right, so moving past this interference in the thread, Kitchen's words most certainly are applicable to the death of Thutmose. Here we have an instance of a presumption made without solid evidence, and that is the presumption, put forward almost as fact, for many decades that Thutmose died in or shortly before year 30. However, this presumption is not plucked from thin air, and if Akhenaten became co-ruler in year 30, then common sense dictates that it is because Thutmose, as previous crown prince, has died. I made a comprehensive list of all the known evidence for Thutmose earlier, so no need to go over it again. What it does show though is that Thutmose cannot be pinned down to any year within the reign of Amunhotep III, it is not known when he was born, when Apis I died, or when he died. He is not associated with any person other than his father, who btw is not named on the fragment of the Apis I chapel, but is another presumption, though in this case there is no reason at all to doubt that the king shown is Amunhotep III.

The difficulty, one difficulty amongst many, is the model bier with him as sem and the cat sarcophagus with him as HPP and sem. I think that except when the position of HPP is inherited, not the case with Thutmose or Khaemwaset, then it is clear that there is a progression from sem to HPP, and that the way in which a sem is depicted is not as clear cut as presumed, that word again, as depictions show, notably in the tomb of Seti I. The main question I have is would the bier have been made before his death or when he had died, and there are pros and cons, both connected. As he was crown prince and destined to become king, then I cannot see why any funeral items would be made for him in advance, not least as anything made for him as a prince would be useless when he became king, so much would need to be changed that it would be easier to make a new item. Therefore it looks like the bier was made when he died. But, in a society that likes to proclaim their titles, highest ones prominently, it's odd that the bier names him only as sem. I don't know how to resolve this other than to see if any HPP, who has some funeral equipment surving, is also named on any item only as sem. Where to even start...

[Wistman]

18 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

Right, so moving past this interference in the thread, Kitchen's words most certainly are applicable to the death of Thutmose. Here we have an instance of a presumption made without solid evidence, and that is the presumption, put forward almost as fact, for many decades that Thutmose died in or shortly before year 30. However, this presumption is not plucked from thin air, and if Akhenaten became co-ruler in year 30, then common sense dictates that it is because Thutmose, as previous crown prince, has died. I made a comprehensive list of all the known evidence for Thutmose earlier, so no need to go over it again. What it does show though is that Thutmose cannot be pinned down to any year within the reign of Amunhotep III, it is not known when he was born, when Apis I died, or when he died. He is not associated with any person other than his father, who btw is not named on the fragment of the Apis I chapel, but is another presumption, though in this case there is no reason at all to doubt that the king shown is Amunhotep III.

The difficulty, one difficulty amongst many, is the model bier with him as sem and the cat sarcophagus with him as HPP and sem. I think that except when the position of HPP is inherited, not the case with Thutmose or Khaemwaset, then it is clear that there is a progression from sem to HPP, and that the way in which a sem is depicted is not as clear cut as presumed, that word again, as depictions show, notably in the tomb of Seti I. The main question I have is would the bier have been made before his death or when he had died, and there are pros and cons, both connected. As he was crown prince and destined to become king, then I cannot see why any funeral items would be made for him in advance, not least as anything made for him as a prince would be useless when he became king, so much would need to be changed that it would be easier to make a new item. Therefore it looks like the bier was made when he died. But, in a society that likes to proclaim their titles, highest ones prominently, it's odd that the bier names him only as sem. I don't know how to resolve this other than to see if any HPP, who has some funeral equipment surving, is also named on any item only as sem. Where to even start...

Agreed.  The nut in this is the bier, for sure.

On a tangential note, I'm going to quote Wikipedia:

Quote

As the eldest daughter of a powerful queen, Sitamun would have been groomed for a political role but never fulfilled this potential, despite having her own property at Malkata and her high position at court. One possibility is that she was married to an heir who never assumed the throne.  Another possibility is that she died prematurely or went into seclusion after her brother Akhenaten became king. She was an aunt of Tutankhamun.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sitamun

Huh.

Married to Thutmose?  Who died or maybe was disinherited but retained position of HPP, and being king's daughter, Pharaoh took her back into his household and married her himself, perhaps for reasons of propriety, being a widow or having had, say, her marriage annulled after having conceived a son.  Thutmose would had to have survived to maturity though if he is KV55, and the bier implies not.

Everything changed around the year 30 Heb Sed for the royal family.  Very curious.  AIV becomes heir, Malkata becomes permanent royal residence instead of Memphis, Atenism becomes more and more central to Pharaoh, etc.  And Sitamun appears and is wed to her father.  Where in all this does Thutmose bow out?  Just not enough material to say.

I wonder if AIII had a change of character, like Henry VIII did.  Or if he had some mental trauma.  I've read that he became fat and luxuriant, not sure where that information came from, post year 30. 

The whole era is like a fascinating train wreck.

Edited February 14, 2022 by Wistman

[Wistman]

11 hours ago, Wistman said:

Married to Thutmose?  Who died or maybe was disinherited but retained position of HPP, and being king's daughter, Pharaoh took her back into his household and married her himself, perhaps for reasons of propriety, being a widow or having had, say, her marriage annulled after having conceived a son.

Yipes.  I can hardly believe I wrote such a ratchet sentence last night.   Should be:

Married to Thutmose?  Who died...or maybe was disinherited but retained his position as HPP.  And she being king's daughter, Pharaoh took her back into his household and married her himself - perhaps for reasons of propriety, she being a widow who should have been a queen, or having had (say) her marriage annulled after conceiving a son.

Edited February 14, 2022 by Wistman

[Wepwawet]

2 hours ago, Wistman said:

Yipes.  I can hardly believe I wrote such a ratchet sentence last night.   Should be:

Married to Thutmose?  Who died...or maybe was disinherited but retained his position as HPP.  And she being king's daughter, Pharaoh took her back into his household and married her himself - perhaps for reasons of propriety, she being a widow who should have been a queen, or having had (say) her marriage annulled after conceiving a son.

"Mis-writing" seems to be catching

I think that the marriage between Sitamun and Amunhotep III was soley for the purposes of religious functions, even with the presence of Tiye. However, I could see that she was made GRW if there was some problem that precluded her from having a normal marriage. That she was GRW indicates to me that either, as you suggest, she had been married and it had ended, or that she had never married, and now as GRW, would never marry in the normal way. Box 001K gives us an example of being married twice, though in the extremely unusual circumstances of being GRW to two kings in succession.

I also think that sibling marriage for the purposes of procreation was an aberration in Egypt probably confined to Akhenaten. Presuming Nefertiti was his sister, then he has married his sister and his daughter, which is a bit extreme, appalling even. Was he degenerate, or was it due to the Shu and Tefnut thing, and this religious reason over-riding the norms of human behaviour, then just as now, as I don't see this happening at other times, for the purposes of procreation that is as there are no obvious signs of this previously in the 18th Dynasty, the DNA does not show this.

A question is was this behaviour confined only to Akhenaten, or was it started by Amunhotep III with his marriage to Sitamun. With many bodies missing, and those that we do have that are not the children of Akhenaten, it seems that the answer is probably no, as neither Akhenaten or Nefertiti are the result of incest, and the known children of AIII and Tiye are just that, the offspring of a couple who are not siblings or first cousins.

Based on all of that, then I would see a marriage between Thutmose and Sitamun as highly unlikely. However, as AIII seems to be the driving force behind Atenism, even if he kept with the normal pantheon, could he have had a plan to have two of his siblings marrry and become a representative Shu and Tefnut. Unless there was no co-regency at all, something that does not seem to be possible these days, then AIII has had Akhenaten and Nefertiti marry, presuming that Nefertiti is the YL and his full sister, though I am only presuming this is so for the sake of this line of discussion. If this marriage was essentially at the command of AIII, then it does become a possibility that this was in fact a second attempt, the first being a marriage between Sitamun and Thutmose. I don't believe this to have been the case, but as it has happened with Akhenaten, we have a precedent with AIII to have this happen. I'll take a breather at this point before I get tied in knots, if that is not already happening...

Edited February 14, 2022 by Wepwawet

[Wistman]

How sure are we that Nefertiti was in fact daughter of AIII and Tiye?  Is there hard evidence, other than the proposition that she's YL, and therefore 'must be'?

I'm reminded that Meritaten, upon the death of Smenkhkare (or his disappearance, to be exact), is deprived of her queenship and so then is married to AIII.  This could be religious in function, or it could be a father ensuring that his daughter gets her due.  And, in this instance differing from AIII and Tiye, Nefertiti is raised up into official co-regency leaving an empty GRW space to be filled.

As always, just exploring possibilities. 

[Wepwawet]

3 minutes ago, Wistman said:

How sure are we that Nefertiti was in fact daughter of AIII and Tiye?  Is there hard evidence, other than the proposition that she's YL, and therefore 'must be'?

I'm reminded that Meritaten, upon the death of Smenkhkare (or his disappearance, to be exact), is deprived of her queenship and so then is married to AIII.  This could be religious in function, or it could be a father ensuring that his daughter gets her due.  And, in this instance differing from AIII and Tiye, Nefertiti is raised up into official co-regency leaving an empty GRW space to be filled.

As always, just exploring possibilities. 

Other than the circumstantial evidence provided by the YL, there is not a shred of evidence to show who Nefertiti was.

Meritaten being deprived of being GRW by the presumed death of Smenkhare, and I see no other reason for his dissapearance other than death, and her then becoming GRW to the joint kingship of Akhenaten and Neferneferuaten, might be an echo of Sitamun. Other than a king needing a GRW to carry out state religous functions, perhaps Sitamun was made GRW as a compsensation, and this may be part of the reason, as you suggest, for Meritaten being made GRW.

Looking at the reigns of AIII and Akhenaten I see an echo, or something stronger. I'll put forward this suggestion to explain what I can discern, even if it's not correct.

Amunhotep III is by his position as king, the Son of Ra and the Living Horus, and he has proclamed himself to also be Khonsu. So far so normal really, but he then proclaims himself to be Ra-Horakhty and the Dazzling Aten, and this is not normal, even in a society that is very enthusiastic about accruing as many titles as possible. He is in essence almost declaring himself to be the Sungod, and therefore, as close as they come to this, God. This, even for an Egyptian king, is possibly megalomania, or some religous issue that he can indulge in as he is king. Therefore, as Sungod, he is also Atum, and he wants a Shu and Tefnut, step forward his eldest son and daughter, Thutmose and Sitamun. However, there is zero evidence that they were ever married, much less proclaimed as Shu and Tefnut. Could it be that AIII had organised this for his Sed festival in year 30, but Thutmose died before any of this happened, and so no record was ever made. AIII then makes Sitamun GRW as compensation, and has to rapidly adjust his plans and make the new crown prince Amunhotep, his co-regent. But prince Amunhotep is in his early teens and not married, so, probably in his year 1, AIII has him married to a sister, Nefertiti, thus giving him his Shu and Tefnut.

Fast forward about fifteen years and the eldest son of Akhenaten, who for the purposes of this will of course be Smenkhare, is promoted to co-regent and is married to his sister Meritaten, a Shu and Tefnut for Akhenaten. Oops, another eldest son dies, though at least having made it to be co-regent, again leaving an unattached GRW, who then gets taken up by Akhenaten to fulfill his need for a GRW now he has made Nefertiti his co-regent, his now eldest son, Tutankhaten, being far too young. As Smenkhare is seen as living as co-regent around year 15, that Nefertiti is still GRW on the year 16 graffito may indicate a period of X number of months of indecision by Akhenaten as what now to do, or, maybe Smenkhare was around for a bit longer than we have evidence for, and lived into year 16 and was still alive when the graffito naming Nefertiti was made.

While I have pointed out that there is zero evidence to show Thutmose alive in any year of the reign of AIII, therefore authors stating that he died in or shortly before year 30 are speculating, a sudden death on the eve of the Sed festival when he would have been made co-regent with Sitamun as his GRW, could be the reason for the rather sudden appearance of the young prince Amunhotep as co-regent. Looking at what we do know, and best guesses, it does look like a sequence of "emergency measures" caused by sudden deaths.

I think that is a neat solution to a number of issues, but it's all speculation, fiction even, and I should write a novel about it.

[Wistman]

@Wepwawet

Here's a couple more relevant quotes from Wikipedia's entry on Amenhotep III:

Quote

Amenhotep would father at least two sons, Crown Prince Thutmose and Amenhotep IV (later called Akhenaten). In addition, several daughters are frequently credited to the couple: Sitamun, Henuttaneb, Iset, Nebetah, and Beketaten.^[12] Most of the daughters appear frequently on statutes and reliefs from Amenhotep's reign.^[13] However, Nebetah is attested only once, on a colossal limestone group of statues from Medinet Habu,^[12][14] and Beketaten only appears in Amarna.^[15]

Nefertiti, unlike the other daughters, appears not at all on statues and relief from Amenhotep's reign, despite the fact that she would be raised up as queen, equal in power to Tiye.  Why proudly show the others and not her?

Quote

A sculpture restored by Amenhotep for his grandfather, Amenhotep II, shows Sitamun with a young prince beside her.  This has led to theories that Sitamun was the mother of Smekhkare and/or Tutankhamun.

An unpopular view, no doubt.

So...I wonder, why would AIII, upon the death of his eldest son Crown Prince Thutmose, deprive him of official burial as HPP, and reduce his titulary to Sem alone.  That makes little sense, unless we infer something about it not in evidence.  

Edited February 14, 2022 by Wistman

[atalante]

18 hours ago, Wistman said:

....On a tangential note, I'm going to quote Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sitamun

Huh.

Married to Thutmose?  Who died or maybe was disinherited but retained position of HPP, and being king's daughter, Pharaoh took her back into his household and married her himself, perhaps for reasons of propriety, being a widow or having had, say, her marriage annulled after having conceived a son.  Thutmose would had to have survived to maturity though if he is KV55, and the bier implies not.

Everything changed around the year 30 Heb Sed for the royal family.  Very curious.  AIV becomes heir, Malkata becomes permanent royal residence instead of Memphis, Atenism becomes more and more central to Pharaoh, etc.  And Sitamun appears and is wed to her father.  Where in all this does Thutmose bow out?  Just not enough material to say.

 

Wistman,

Any 18th dynasty royal family was, first and foremost, administrators of a vast and wealthy empire.   So it seems wise to investigate pragmatic details of administration (and not to place sole emphasis on Amarna-era people marrying their sisters, rulers being mentally ill,etc.).

An intriguing starting point for investigating administration can be the titles of Merymose, viceroy of Amenhotep III (starting presumably in AIII's year 5, and continuing until ?? (perhaps until AIII year 30, when a bunch of changes occurred for administering the Egyptian empire).   "Viceroy" Merymose's titles included, among other things, "God's son of Kush", and "Overseer of the Southern lands", and "Overseer of the gold lands of Amun".  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merymose

At roughly AIII's year 30, prince Thutmose ceases to be active inside Egypt.  But by coincidence, soon after year 30, someone named "Viceroy of Kush, Thutmose" starts building many talatat temples of Aten in Kush, over the foundations of previous Egyptian Amun temples.  https://www.academia.edu/47452110/Akhenatens_Temples_in_Nubia_Evidence_for_Revolution_and_Reform_On_the_Periphery_of_Empire  

i.e. Thutmose is the name of Akhenaten's Viceroy of Kush.

 

 

 

 

 

[Wepwawet]

27 minutes ago, atalante said:

Wistman,

Any 18th dynasty royal family was, first and foremost, administrators of a vast and wealthy empire.   So it seems wise to investigate pragmatic details of administration (and not to place sole emphasis on Amarna-era people marrying their sisters, rulers being mentally ill,etc.).

An intriguing starting point for investigating administration can be the titles of Merymose, viceroy of Amenhotep III (starting presumably in AIII's year 5, and continuing until ?? (perhaps until AIII year 30, when a bunch of changes occurred for administering the Egyptian empire).   "Viceroy" Merymose's titles included, among other things, "God's son of Kush", and "Overseer of the Southern lands", and "Overseer of the gold lands of Amun".  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merymose

At roughly AIII's year 30, prince Thutmose ceases to be active inside Egypt.  But by coincidence, soon after year 30, someone named "Viceroy of Kush, Thutmose" starts building many talatat temples of Aten in Kush, over the foundations of previous Egyptian Amun temples.  https://www.academia.edu/47452110/Akhenatens_Temples_in_Nubia_Evidence_for_Revolution_and_Reform_On_the_Periphery_of_Empire  

i.e. Thutmose is the name of Akhenaten's Viceroy of Kush.

 

 

 

 

 

I think however that there is an issue with Thutmose, Viceroy of Kush, being ex crown prince Thutmose. The actual title they hold is King's Son of Kush, sometimes abreviated, depending on the context of where an inscription might be, to just King's Son, which of course could cause confusion to us. At Sehel there is an inscription showing viceroy Thutmose standing in front of the throne name of Akhenaten, and he is titled just King's Son. I think it would be confusing even to an Egyptian if the biological son of a king was also his son as the holder of an office, and I don't see any of the known Viceroys being the actual son of a king. But that's not to say there are no exceptions out there. I think it would also be an issue in that if this was prince Thutmose, then he has been essentially thrown out of the royal family as he would still be "Eldest King's son of his body" or at least "King's son of his body", and I cannot see any circumstances where anybody would let go of these titles, a birthright, but then be put in charge of Nubia, a place from which they could raise rebellion to re-take their rightfull throne.

[Wepwawet]

1 hour ago, Wistman said:

@Wepwawet

Here's a couple more relevant quotes from Wikipedia's entry on Amenhotep III:

Nefertiti, unlike the other daughters, appears not at all on statues and relief from Amenhotep's reign, despite the fact that she would be raised up as queen, equal in power to Tiye.  Why proudly show the others and not her?

An unpopular view, no doubt.

So...I wonder, why would AIII, upon the death of his eldest son Crown Prince Thutmose, deprive him of official burial as HPP, and reduce his titulary to Sem alone.  That makes little sense, unless we infer something about it not in evidence.  

I don't see a reduction in rank as this would indicate a serious issue with him, and I think that he would have been "dealt with", as Penteware was dealt with after the assassination of Ramesses III. There is also the case that unlike Penteware who was not crown prince and therefore had something to gain by the coup, Thutmose was going to become king anyway. The bier, btw, could easily have also had his HPP title as it is only three hieroglyphs, or he could be named as sem on one side and HPP on the other, but both sides are identical. Aanen was HP at Heliopolis, and there is the decent statue of him dressed as sem-priest of Ra, but the titles on the front of the statue go in the order, Greatest of Seers, Sem-priest in Upper Egyptian Heliopolis and Second Prophet of Amun. "Sem-Priest of Ra in Thebes" is an interesting one.

Nefertiti is a proper name, yet Kiya is a pet name, and the origin of both women is unknown. Who was Kiya born as, and is Nefertiti her birth name. I think that Nefertiti was the name she was born with as it's not an Aten name, which she does not take on until she appears in the historical record. So I really do think we should be looking for someone called Nefertiti who would be suitable to marry a man already king. Alas, there is nobody in the record, so she is either an unamed daughter of AIII and Tiye, or, who knows, a child of the kap, fathered by AIII but with a minor wife, and then we come up against the YL as daughter of AIII and Tiye. Tricky, very tricky.

Edited February 14, 2022 by Wepwawet

[atalante]

On 2/14/2022 at 3:18 PM, Wepwawet said:

I think however that there is an issue with Thutmose, Viceroy of Kush, being ex crown prince Thutmose. The actual title they hold is King's Son of Kush, sometimes abreviated, depending on the context of where an inscription might be, to just King's Son, which of course could cause confusion to us. At Sehel there is an inscription showing viceroy Thutmose standing in front of the throne name of Akhenaten, and he is titled just King's Son. I think it would be confusing even to an Egyptian if the biological son of a king was also his son as the holder of an office, and I don't see any of the known Viceroys being the actual son of a king. But that's not to say there are no exceptions out there. I think it would also be an issue in that if this was prince Thutmose, then he has been essentially thrown out of the royal family as he would still be "Eldest King's son of his body" or at least "King's son of his body", and I cannot see any circumstances where anybody would let go of these titles, a birthright, but then be put in charge of Nubia, a place from which they could raise rebellion to re-take their rightfull throne.

Wepwawet,

Talatat was developed as a construction method -- and this talatat development is what allowed Akhenaten to use rapid construction during his religious revolution. 

A question that deserves attention is:  who developed the engineering for talatat construction?  This engineering advancement was potentially similar to Imhotep's advancement, a millenium earlier, for building with huge stone blocks. By engineering, I mean:  a) guidelines roughly similar to today's municipal building codes; and b) quality control rules for rejecting defective individual blocks.

One reasonable candidate to develop new construction techniques would be the High Priest of "Ptah's skilled workmen".  (e.g. Prince Thutose, HPP)

pages 26-35 in the link I gave previously, https://www.academia.edu/47452110/Akhenatens_Temples_in_Nubia_Evidence_for_Revolution_and_Reform_On_the_Periphery_of_Empire  indicate that talatat construction was developed in Nubia, before talatat construction spread into Egypt's homeland.  e.g  The talatat Aten temples in Nubia were constructed in Akhenaten's years 2 and 3. 

Since Akhenaten was later blotted out of official Egyptian records, then activities of prince Thutmose could easily be officially blotted out, too, for years after Amenhotep III's year 30. 

 

[Wistman]

On 2/14/2022 at 5:44 PM, Wepwawet said:

I don't see a reduction in rank as this would indicate a serious issue with him, and I think that he would have been "dealt with", as Penteware was dealt with after the assassination of Ramesses III. There is also the case that unlike Penteware who was not crown prince and therefore had something to gain by the coup, Thutmose was going to become king anyway. The bier, btw, could easily have also had his HPP title as it is only three hieroglyphs, or he could be named as sem on one side and HPP on the other, but both sides are identical. Aanen was HP at Heliopolis, and there is the decent statue of him dressed as sem-priest of Ra, but the titles on the front of the statue go in the order, Greatest of Seers, Sem-priest in Upper Egyptian Heliopolis and Second Prophet of Amun. "Sem-Priest of Ra in Thebes" is an interesting one.

Nefertiti is a proper name, yet Kiya is a pet name, and the origin of both women is unknown. Who was Kiya born as, and is Nefertiti her birth name. I think that Nefertiti was the name she was born with as it's not an Aten name, which she does not take on until she appears in the historical record. So I really do think we should be looking for someone called Nefertiti who would be suitable to marry a man already king. Alas, there is nobody in the record, so she is either an unamed daughter of AIII and Tiye, or, who knows, a child of the kap, fathered by AIII but with a minor wife, and then we come up against the YL as daughter of AIII and Tiye. Tricky, very tricky.

Yet we remember that Nefertiti is never called King's Daughter.  Nor was Kiya ever referred to as 'heiress', or King's Daughter, or GRW.  Enter Sitamun. 

[Wepwawet]

I think the the use of talatat occurred not consecutively, but concurrently. I don't see why he would use a new method first in Nubia and then in Egypt, and besides, the Gem-pa-Aten and Hwt-bnbn were probably began in Year 1 in order to be ready by Year 2/3. it all has the look of something pre-planned in a way we would see as modern, in that as soon as he became king he "hit the ground running" with a new religion, new way of constructiing buildings and a new style of art. While he did not change his name until Year 5 and there was an evolution of the art, essentially everything was ready to go, so I don't see why all his building projects did not all use talatat straight away.

However, the question of who invented the talatat is very interesting, and I don't have an answer. If it were not Akhenaten himself, then we would have to hope to find the tomb of whoever did invent them as they may have left a clue, something along the lines of part of his biography saying, "I assisted his majesty in raising temples". I doubt it would be a straight forward "I invented a way of making small uniform building blocks". They boasted of their acheivements, but in connection with something the king is otherwise responsible for, such as building temples, they would not take away anything from the king, and only hint that they were involved, even if the entire thing was devised by them.

Whether Thutmose, assuming he was still alive for the purposes of discussion, or any HPP would have been responsible is difficult to answer. Khaemwaset though does give us an example of a priest of Ptah being involved in building, the example being the Serapeum, and what he was doing and interested in anyway. So yes, the HPP at the time of Akhenaten could have been responsible, or somebody under him, and I'm presuming that the relevant "books" covering building and civil engineering were held at temples for Ptah, as various "books" on other topics were held in various temples and Houses of Life, the domain of the lectors, who we know were involved in all manner of things not usually associated with a priest/doctor/magician/teacher/expedition leader. In fact, I think that the lectors are more likely to be behind some of this as they were, I think, the "thinkers", while a sem or HP, usually being a noble, were given a shoe-in, while the lectors had to work to get their positions, they knew how stuff worked, and the sem and HP directed. Perhaps like the relationship between an experienced troop sergeant and a fresh out of Sandhurst troop leader still wet behind his ears.

Of course the big problem is that the king did everything, everybody else just carrying out his orders, and unless we find a helpful biography, we will remain in the dark as to who was responsible for all the aspects of Amarna other than AIII and Akhenaten. Akhenaten could have been one of those rare exceptional people, an ancient Leonardo for instance, even if he were in his early-mid teens on becoming king, as genius has a habit of starting young, but, we don't know.

[Wepwawet]

23 minutes ago, Wistman said:

Yet we remember that Nefertiti is never called King's Daughter.  Nor was Kiya ever referred to as 'heiress', or King's Daughter, or GRW.  Enter Sitamun. 

There's those scenes of Beketaten with Tiye and AIII, and with Tiye and Akhenaten and his family. Beketaten is named as Queen's Daughter, and this can only be Tiye, though not as King's Daughter, the more senior title. So as you are not named as King's Daughter/Son unless your father is living, AIII should be dead in the scene, but this is debated. The only other explanation is that while Tiye was her mother, her father was not AIII. No, no, no, Tiye will not have any child other than by her husband. Nefertiti does not appear in the same scene as AIII, though is with Tiye and Beketaten. Why is she not named as Queen's Daughter, the answer is given that GRW is the senior title, so she will use that, and they do not have to use their full, and often extensive titularly all the time, and even with lower ranked nobles it would be impossible for anything other than on a stela speciffically for the purpose, for instance the Ptolemaic HPP Pedubast III with his over fifty titles and positions, and otherwise he was just named as sem and HPP, or just HPP. In the end result, this can be cut different ways to suit different opinions and we will forever run around in circles.

So Nefertiti could, or could not, be the daughter of a King, as the evidence is inconclusive. Sitamun is a different matter though and we know she was daughter to AIII and Tiye, but, how old was she by the start of the reign of Akhenaten, and how old would she have been by the probable birth of Tutakhaten any time from Year 12 on, depending on if his regmal years are consecutive or concurrent with Neferneferuaten. I think Sitamun would be in her late forties by year 12, and way past the maximum age given for the YL of 35.

[Wistman]

5 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

There's those scenes of Beketaten with Tiye and AIII, and with Tiye and Akhenaten and his family. Beketaten is named as Queen's Daughter, and this can only be Tiye, though not as King's Daughter, the more senior title. So as you are not named as King's Daughter/Son unless your father is living, AIII should be dead in the scene, but this is debated. The only other explanation is that while Tiye was her mother, her father was not AIII. No, no, no, Tiye will not have any child other than by her husband. Nefertiti does not appear in the same scene as AIII, though is with Tiye and Beketaten. Why is she not named as Queen's Daughter, the answer is given that GRW is the senior title, so she will use that, and they do not have to use their full, and often extensive titularly all the time, and even with lower ranked nobles it would be impossible for anything other than on a stela speciffically for the purpose, for instance the Ptolemaic HPP Pedubast III with his over fifty titles and positions, and otherwise he was just named as sem and HPP, or just HPP. In the end result, this can be cut different ways to suit different opinions and we will forever run around in circles.

So Nefertiti could, or could not, be the daughter of a King, as the evidence is inconclusive. Sitamun is a different matter though and we know she was daughter to AIII and Tiye, but, how old was she by the start of the reign of Akhenaten, and how old would she have been by the probable birth of Tutakhaten any time from Year 12 on, depending on if his regmal years are consecutive or concurrent with Neferneferuaten. I think Sitamun would be in her late forties by year 12, and way past the maximum age given for the YL of 35.

Calculating possible age of Sitamun relative to Tutankhamun's possible birth date, we have:

12       yrs              of Akenaten's reign, which began (as far as we know) near simultaneously with her marriage to AIII (his year 30)

(?)  33 +                your estimate of her age pre-GRW status.  How do you calculate that?   

Her birth date isn't recorded; she could have been younger than Thutmose, but older (yes?) than her other attested siblings.  And Tiye brings child-daughter Beketaten to Akhetaten in Akhenaten's year 8.   Shouldn't she be too old to give birth to Beketaten slightly before year 8 if Sitamun was too old to do so in year 12?   Have I erred in this?

[Wepwawet]

1 hour ago, Wistman said:

Calculating possible age of Sitamun relative to Tutankhamun's possible birth date, we have:

12       yrs              of Akenaten's reign, which began (as far as we know) near simultaneously with her marriage to AIII (his year 30)

(?)  33 +                your estimate of her age pre-GRW status.  How do you calculate that?   

Her birth date isn't recorded; she could have been younger than Thutmose, but older (yes?) than her other attested siblings.  And Tiye brings child-daughter Beketaten to Akhetaten in Akhenaten's year 8.   Shouldn't she be too old to give birth to Beketaten slightly before year 8 if Sitamun was too old to do so in year 12?   Have I erred in this?

As there are age ranges here, then without giving every possible combination I'll split the differences between them. So, AIII king at 13, which means no children appearing until some time into Year 2. Sitamun is named as his eldest daughter, so there is a 50/50 chance that she was born by the end of Year 2. She is shown at various ages in KV46, the tomb of Yuya and Thuya, with her as an adult on the backrest of a chair, so she was probably aged no less than 13, and as the tomb seems to have been sealed, bar robberies, around Year 14, she could not be aged more than that otherwise there are difficulties with the age of AIII. This is going to put her at about aged about 28, and not older, in Year 30, and about 43 by the birth of Tutankhaten. So she will be at least 8 years older than the oldest estimate for the YL no matter now this is juggled. The main variables are exactly how old AIII was on accession, the age of Sitamun as an adult in KV46, and when that tomb was sealed. In the other post I should have said she was aged around her mid-forties by the birth of Tutankhamun, so I "mis-wrote" again, naughty.

However, given that they started young, and as she is described as his eldest daughter, I see no reason, putting KV46 and what age she was when it was sealed to one side, that she would not be around age 28 in Year 30. A question here is that seems rather old to not already be married, though there is no evidence of any mariage other than to AIII in Year 30, unless she was the oldest surviving daughter of AIII, and KV46 was sealed in the last decade of the reign of AIII, as some suggest, putting Sitamun only in her teens when she became GRW, and puts into the YL age bracket. And there I went giving multiple possibilities instead of keeping it simple...

Every single thing about Amarna is difficult.

Edited February 16, 2022 by Wepwawet

[Aldebaran]

If one wants to argue that there is no indication that Prince Thutmose died young [with which I strongly disagree] one is obliged to acknowledge that there is absolutely no evidence that Princess Baketaten ever lived to become an adult, even by oriental standards.  She isn't depicted anywhere other than as a child with the bare skull and sidelock typical of royal children.  But Baketaten was a king's daughter and could not become somebody's minor backstairs wife.  She would have to be acknowledged in some prominent fashion, as was the case when a pharaoh had such wives.   That's why Baketaten is a non-starter as the mother of Tutankhamen.   She was so young still in Year 12 of Akhenaten that it would have taken her many years to reach the age of the YL at death, which was about 35.  In fact,  she would have lived well into the reign of Tutankhamen [his name by his Year 4] and would have been shown with him as young kings of the dynasty had been with their mothers, including Thutmose IV, the great-grandfather and Amenhotep III, the grandfather.   But, again, beyond her childhood, Baketaten is never mentioned, never seen. although the daughter of a mighty king who was never persona non grata in the eyes of any subsequent dynasty as he had never persecuted the old pantheon.  After all, his nomen contained that of the god, Amen--same as that of Tutankhamen eventually did.  Baketaten could have become Baketamen as easily as the others who changed their names.

Sitamen was too old to be the YL.  As the eldest daughter of Amenhotep III, had she not been too old for Akhenaten, she would have been married to him, become the next queen of Egypt--instead of becoming a queen of her own father.  If Akhenaten was the new heir, that means that no more older princes were available--and nobody else great enough for Sitamen to marry.  In fact, this had been known for quite some time because Sitamen was already shown as the concubine of her father before she ever became a queen.  Royal concubines had recognizable headdresses.  But, when the princess became a queen, the chair where she was depicted as a concubine became obsolete and was donated to the burial of grandparents Yuya and Thuya.

 

 

[Wepwawet]

2 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

 

Sitamen was too old to be the YL.  As the eldest daughter of Amenhotep III, had she not been too old for Akhenaten, she would have been married to him, become the next queen of Egypt--instead of becoming a queen of her own father.  If Akhenaten was the new heir, that means that no more older princes were available--and nobody else great enough for Sitamen to marry.  In fact, this had been known for quite some time because Sitamen was already shown as the concubine of her father before she ever became a queen.  Royal concubines had recognizable headdresses.  But, when the princess became a queen, the chair where she was depicted as a concubine became obsolete and was donated to the burial of grandparents Yuya and Thuya.

 

 

 

What though do you think of the idea I put forward that Sitamun may have been, or was to be married to Thutmose on his possibly becoming co-regent in Year 30, and so being a Shu and Tefnut for AIII's Sungod. But, Thutmose dies and so he takes Sitamun as GRW if she was perhaps to old for new crown prince Amunhotep. The death of Thutmose may have put all AIII's plans in chaos, so he makes prince Amunhotep co-regent fairly soon, within months, weeks even, and before he has a wife, and Nefertiti is subsequently married to him to provide a new Shu and Tefnut.

It seems to me, and I mention this in my reply to Atalante, that Amunhotep IV hits the ground running on Year 1, something I think odd when he was not destined to become king, therefore a lot of preperation was probably already in place, for instance a new theology, and the invention of the talatat block. AIII has to be the main guiding hand, but I would think that as Thutmose was to succeed him, then I don't think it beyond reason that he had a major part in planning this experiment, an experiment partially derailed by his sudden death, and the work continued by his younger brother who may not have been fully up to speed. Speculation of course, but not unbelievable I think.

Edited February 19, 2022 by Wepwawet

[Wistman]

4 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

If one wants to argue that there is no indication that Prince Thutmose died young [with which I strongly disagree] one is obliged to acknowledge that there is absolutely no evidence that Princess Baketaten ever lived to become an adult, even by oriental standards.  She isn't depicted anywhere other than as a child with the bare skull and sidelock typical of royal children.  But Baketaten was a king's daughter and could not become somebody's minor backstairs wife.  She would have to be acknowledged in some prominent fashion, as was the case when a pharaoh had such wives.   That's why Baketaten is a non-starter as the mother of Tutankhamen.   She was so young still in Year 12 of Akhenaten that it would have taken her many years to reach the age of the YL at death, which was about 35.

If Tiye was able to have a late child successfully (Baketaten) and bring her as an infant into Akhetaten, then Sitamun (as daughter to Tiye) surely was young enough to do likewise and bear more children.  Still, if Sitamun is too old to be YL, then one of AIII/Tiye's other daughters - Iset, Henuttaneb, Nebetah, say - would fit the bill as well, yes?  Is there any impediment to Prince Thutmose having married one of these sisters of his?  If one of them were mother to Tut, might they not fit the age range needed for YL?

Thutmose could have lived past AIII yr30, there is no direct evidence of his death.  There is the bier sculpture, but we've already discussed the lack of HPP title in the inscription, which causes doubt about it .  Other pharaohs than AIII passed the kingship to sons other than their eldest:  Thutmose IV, who was not crown prince, comes to mind, and not much removed from Amenhotep III, wouldn't you say, to be anything but a close precedent.  AIII could have chosen Akhenaten over Thutmose, for reasons indiscernable to us.  To say that this could not have happened seems unwarranted.

The barrier to the notion of Thutmose surviving is the bier, and only the bier, which is an awfully curious item, given the otherwise exalted titulary of Thutmose.

The nominees for KV55 and YL may lie elsewhere than the most obvious.  These suggested, plausible, people are all part of the royal family of AIII/Tiye, and would fit the DNA requirements as parents of Tut.

Edited February 19, 2022 by Wistman

[Wistman]

So I found something that may settle my mind about the schist recumbent bier of Prince Thutmose - a Reference note to an encyclopedia entry about the bier says:

Quote

^ Exhibition Item No. 15, Prince Thutmose ("Thutmose V") on a Bier, Pharaohs of the Sun, Freed, Markowitz, D'Auria, c. 1999 (also from 1999 USA exhibit tour), Exhibit catalog, p. 205; (last 7 hieroglyphs: S-M-Ibis(Thoth)-MS-S-Rudder-Plinth);( Note: the 'X' denotes, the evil, danger, or 'untimelyness' of his death).

I can't access this publication but that last note indicates, if I'm reading it right, that there's a mark on the object that's evidentiary of his death.  @Wepwawet can you confirm that?  It would seem to substantiate his tragic demise.

https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/3678683

Sorry, @Aldebaran, I guess I was chasing a phantom for a moment.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Wistman

[Wepwawet]

4 hours ago, Wistman said:

So I found something that may settle my mind about the schist recumbent bier of Prince Thutmose - a Reference note to an encyclopedia entry about the bier says:

I can't access this publication but that last note indicates, if I'm reading it right, that there's a mark on the object that's evidentiary of his death.  @Wepwawet can you confirm that?  It would seem to substantiate his tragic demise.

https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/3678683

Sorry, @Aldebaran, I guess I was chasing a phantom for a moment.

There is an "X" and this was discussed in the Box 001K thread. The book referenced in the article I have, "Pharaohs of the Sun", and while it does have a picture of the bier and a brief description, it makes no mention of the significance of the "X", neither does any reference I could find, including from the Berlin museum which has information about this find that does not make it into Amarna publications, such as the model sarcophagus the bier was in, which had no inscriptions though.

The hieroglyph "X" comes in two types, Z9 and Z10, the one on the bier being Z9, and both have the same meanings, two of which are applicable here as they are for "destroy" and "break", though they do not signify death, which is sign Z6, a single diagonal with a "pistol grip" at one end. Z9 does not have a crypographic use, so this is something not hidden. What I would like to see are other examples, preferably a picture, or at least a description, neither of which I can find in the sources I have, which is of course not to say that this information does not exist somewhere. It would be something unusual for them to do as they did not mention death in these terms, and "bad things" in general, paricularly in connection with a persons burial. Nobody, except enemies, is said to have died, even if blindingly obvious, no cause of death is ever given. This is why the TA26 deathbed scenes are absolutely unique, ah, and do we have an opening here to the "X" on the model bier, is this another Amarna oddity, or rather an oddity within this family who have dared to show death. Needs more work to sort this "X" out, needs other examples, and some evidence that the person had an unusual death.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Wepwawet

[Wepwawet]

Further. I would have thought that if the "X" did mean that the deceased did die an untimely death, then Dodson would have mentioned this in his 1990 article on Thutmose and other 18th Dynasty princes, and in his subsequent books and articles on this topic, all the way to his latest book, "Nefertiti", published in 2020, where, on Thutmose, he references himself from 1990, so he must still be happy with that article, however, he makes no mention at all of the bier indicating an untimely death. Others, such as Reeves, Redford, Aldred, O'Connor and Cline, Hawass et al specifically writing on Amarna, and others, such as Assmann, Hornung and Ikram writing about death in Ancient Egypt, do not mention this, or allude to this. All I can find, so far, is this quote that is not accompanied by references. It may be a thing, a paper, or papers, may be brought to the table as good evidence, but until then I find it odd that major authorities fail to mention something that is surely important, as it would show that he did die an "unusual" death, and not from natural causes.

Though at the end of the day it is clear that Thutmose died before his time, short of his 30th birthday, so my posts may seem to be splitting hairs, but did he die of, say, plague or a charriot accident, or of a slit throat. Plague, or any illness, or a charriot accident may not be cause to have it marked in some way that his was an "unusual" death, so it needs to be cleared up if this "X" does in fact indicate a potentially violent death, not a mundane accident or illness.

[Wistman]

5 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

Further. I would have thought that if the "X" did mean that the deceased did die an untimely death, then Dodson would have mentioned this in his 1990 article on Thutmose and other 18th Dynasty princes, and in his subsequent books and articles on this topic, all the way to his latest book, "Nefertiti", published in 2020, where, on Thutmose, he references himself from 1990, so he must still be happy with that article, however, he makes no mention at all of the bier indicating an untimely death. Others, such as Reeves, Redford, Aldred, O'Connor and Cline, Hawass et al specifically writing on Amarna, and others, such as Assmann, Hornung and Ikram writing about death in Ancient Egypt, do not mention this, or allude to this. All I can find, so far, is this quote that is not accompanied by references. It may be a thing, a paper, or papers, may be brought to the table as good evidence, but until then I find it odd that major authorities fail to mention something that is surely important, as it would show that he did die an "unusual" death, and not from natural causes.

Though at the end of the day it is clear that Thutmose died before his time, short of his 30th birthday, so my posts may seem to be splitting hairs, but did he die of, say, plague or a charriot accident, or of a slit throat. Plague, or any illness, or a charriot accident may not be cause to have it marked in some way that his was an "unusual" death, so it needs to be cleared up if this "X" does in fact indicate a potentially violent death, not a mundane accident or illness.

Okay, thanks, I appreciate your fulsome response.     But I'm confused now....again.  I'll have to think about it!   This whole thread is like a puzzle box.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Wistman

[Aldebaran]

18 hours ago, Wistman said:

Still, if Sitamun is too old to be YL, then one of AIII/Tiye's other daughters - Iset, Henuttaneb, Nebetah, say - would fit the bill as well, yes?

No.  Isis is also supposed to have been married to her father.  Either she was likewise too old for the heir or there was something wrong with her.  We must not forget that the gene for club foot ran in this family.  And, in a time of death not respecting youth anymore than old age, do  we actually know that the others survived to Year 30?  You'll never be able to rule out Nefertiti being the mother of Tutankhaten.   From my old website:

No matter what arguments people line up against the KV55 individual and the KV35YL being Akhenaten and Nefertiti, it seems an undisputed fact that Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye had a daughter who looked like Nefertiti, possessed the physical attributes evidenced by that lady's portraits [when she was allowed to look like herself and not like a strange version of Akhenaten].  Put differently, Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye were capable of engendering a Nefertiti or someone who resembled her greatly--down to the extraordinarily long, swanlike neck.  Logic and DNA dictate it must be so.  After I had proposed that the KV35YL might be Nefertiti, another woman, Susan James, took a good look at the Elder Lady and concluded that *she* looked like Nefertiti and advocated this identification.  There is no hope for Ms. James' theory now, but perhaps James' perception of a resemblance was not far off the mark.  A mother and a daughter.   Women who have a neck as long as the Younger Lady are not exactly thick on the ground.  I don't know any--but I saw a photo of one who does.  An actress in the Outlander series.  Her name escapes me now.  If a mummy doesn't have that neck, she's not Nefertiti--but if it does, it very likely is she.

 

[Aldebaran]

16 hours ago, Wistman said:

  Quotem 

^ Exhibition Item No. 15, Prince Thutmose ("Thutmose V") on a Bier, Pharaohs of the Sun, Freed, Markowitz, D'Auria, c. 1999 (also from 1999 USA exhibit tour), Exhibit catalog, p. 205; (last 7 hieroglyphs: S-M-Ibis(Thoth)-MS-S-Rudder-Plinth);( Note: the 'X' denotes, the evil, danger, or 'untimelyness' of his death).

It's true.  When the word "HD[i]" is written with the X determinative it means something bad.  "Destroyed", "put into shade"--something on that order.  Unfortunately, ancient Egyptian expressions are not always easy to translate into English.  Even though it seems colloquial, "wasted" would not go amiss.   But there must be a better term :

"something that has been lost or that has ceased to exist."

· departed · gone · no more  · late · lost · perished · fallen  · lifeless ·  defunct ·· inert ·

 

Take your pick.  But there's no need to start conspiracy theorizing.  Illness destroys as well as violence.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Aldebaran