Amarna, Before and After

[Aldebaran]

23 hours ago, Kenemet said:

I think that the young estimate of KV55 is a reasonable conclusion based on Strouhal (and based on his very detailed observations of the bones.  Do we know how Hawass came to his conclusion?

Elder Lady does bring about a good point -- that these measurements are based on a statistical sample and that there are still outliers.  

It's possible that Dr. Smith did not look inside the skull for any cranial obliteration there.  Nor did he use x-rays.  My brief research into the subject has indicated that the closure begins in the inner part of the sutures and gradually works it way to the outer, endo and ecto.  Paper explaining, below.  But a CT scan which the Hawass team used sees everything, all views.  One has to admit that they were the first to use this diagnostic tool on KV55.  Also another paper by Hawass et al,  the 2010 one. "Ancestry and Pathology, etc"  that included the DNA results, reported that KV 55 had a degenerated hip, something usually occurring in older people but also to young men who suffer accidents, mainly on motorcycles.  That may have come into play in the age estimate--but I don't really know.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0379073819305237

Edited September 1 by Aldebaran

[Aldebaran]

On 8/29/2024 at 11:21 AM, Wepwawet said:

Crown Prince Thutmose would I suspect have been in his mid+ twenties by the time he vanishes, put at year 30, but the record is totally silent and I don't know why authors put forward this date, bettern than saying nothing ?

Anything is possible, but--and we have been over this before, probably several times--his only funerary items seem to me those of a kid.  Yes, he was a sem priest but one needn't have grown up to get that title.  From the evidence, it looks like a pharaoh's eldest son got it automatically.  Khaemwast, eldest prince of Ramesses II was sem of Ptah--but he did reach adulthood--but didn't manage to succeed.  Another Khaemwast, eldest son of Ramesses III was also a sem but his tomb, QV44, shows him only a boy with a shaved skull.  At least for the purposes of this tomb, he did not grow up.  There is a parade of the sons of Ram.  III, supposedly from the reign of Ram. Vi, but this son from QV44 is shown as the 8th son, not the first, but is marked "deceased".  However in the tomb he is "first" and I suppose seven sons can have predeceased him.  Not sure and will have to read a paper I know of about the sons again.  Regardless, this Khaemwast is a kid sem-priest so no guarantee that Prince Thutmose ever reached adulthood, either.  Yes, Princess Sitamen was the eldest daughter but Amenhotep III can have had several more daughters by Queen Tiye before Thutmose ever saw the light of day.  Thutmose and Sitamen need not have been especially close in age.  But that is an open question as we do not know when any of these royal kids were born.  An old but thorough overview about two sons of Ramesses III and their tombs in the VOQ.

https://dn790002.ca.archive.org/0/items/twothebanprinces00camp/twothebanprinces00camp.pdf

 

Edited September 1 by Aldebaran

[Kenemet]

3 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

It's possible that Dr. Smith did not look inside the skull for any cranial obliteration there.  Nor did he use x-rays.  My brief research into the subject has indicated that the closure begins in the inner part of the sutures and gradually works it way to the outer, endo and ecto.  Paper explaining, below.  But a CT scan which the Hawass team used sees everything, all views.  One has to admit that they were the first to use this diagnostic tool on KV55.  Also another paper by Hawass et al,  the 2010 one. "Ancestry and Pathology, etc"  that included the DNA results, reported that KV 55 had a degenerated hip, something usually occurring in older people but also to young men who suffer accidents, mainly on motorcycles.  That may have come into play in the age estimate--but I don't really know.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0379073819305237

I wish that age estimation was a more fixed science (humans are so variable, alas.)  As I said, my initial impression is that the 40 year age range is roughly in the ballpark for this skull... but again, all I'm going on are photos and not a hands on examination.  Strouhal's markers for age estimate are what I was taught (last century.)

I'd love to see a criminal forensics scientist get their hands on the bones and give their opinion.

 

 

[Kenemet]

56 minutes ago, Aldebaran said:

Anything is possible, but--and we have been over this before, probably several times--his only funerary items seem to me those of a kid.  Yes, he was a sem priest but one needn't have grown up to get that title.  From the evidence, it looks like a pharaoh's eldest son got it automatically. 

I believe that the "person who is expected to bury the pharaoh" is the one who gets the sem-priest title.  

[Wepwawet]

2 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

Yes, he was a sem priest but one needn't have grown up to get that title

This is how I arrive at an admittedly rough estimate of crown prince Thutmose being in his mid to late twenties at death.

The depiction of him officiating as sem at the burial of Apis I with Amunhotep III does indeed show a person not that old, even AIII looks quite young. Thutmose, no matter being dressed as a sem, looks, compared to AIII, still a minor, and I'm sure as the king's eldest son can be given the title sem when a commoner would have to work their way through the ranks of professional priests. However, on the cat sarcophagus he is twice given the titles of wer-kherep-hemut sem (High Priest of Ptah and sem-priest). I doubt that a minor would be made HPP, it's an executive job, not an honorific, and on top of this Thutmose is also named as Overseer of the Prophets of Upper and Lower Egypt, also an executive position.

Unfortunately there is no evidence for when Apis I died, but as they live for + or - 20 years, and Apis II died either late in the reign of Amunhotep III or early Amunhotep IV, then we could reasonably go back 20 years from, for the sake of argument, year 38 of AIII, this avoids the co-regency question as if there was one, the Apis II has died in the reign of both kings. So we could roughly go back to year 18 for the death of Apis I, or maybe 15. However, due to the lifespan of the bulls, I doubt Apis I died much after year 20, unless it had an above average lifespan. Apis I is the first to be buried in a tomb, but the Apis bull had been around since the 1st Dynasty, so there would have been an Apis before Apis I, just not given a tomb, at least not that we have found. When did (Apis I-) die, no idea, but probably either in the reign of Thutmose IV or very early in the reign of AIII.

What I'm trying to get at here is that providing crown prince Thutmose was actually old enough to officiate in actuality, say at least thirteen + or -, then going by the presumed year of the death of Apis I, and yes I know it is all very rough, he would have been born within the first eight years of the reign of AIII, who, along with Tiye, may not have been old enough to produce offspring until about year 3. This gives around a five year period for Thutmose to have been born, and we have no idea if he was the first born, maybe Sitamun was older, or the first son to survive infancy.

It's late for me and I know I could have made this more coherent, but I've typed it out and don't want to delete it and try again tomorrow. I hope though that the main point I'm making is reasonably clear, and it is that by my reckoning Thutmose was only around thirteen + or - around year 18, and therefore around 25 by year 30, the year given for his dissapearance.

Edited September 1 by Wepwawet

[Aldebaran]

23 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

The depiction of him officiating as sem at the burial of Apis I with Amunhotep III does indeed show a person not that old, even AIII looks quite young. Thutmose, no matter being dressed as a sem, looks, compared to AIII, still a minor, and I'm sure as the king's eldest son can be given the title sem when a commoner would have to work their way through the ranks of professional priests. However, on the cat sarcophagus he is twice given the titles of wer-kherep-hemut sem (High Priest of Ptah and sem-priest). I doubt that a minor would be made HPP, it's an executive job, not an honorific, and on top of this Thutmose is also named as Overseer of the Prophets of Upper and Lower Egypt, also an executive position.

Only if you take them literally.  xrp means overseer, this time of craftsmen but that goes with sem of Ptah as that was the god of craftsmen [Hmwt]  That is not really a priestly title and all of it can be honorific.  The actual high priest of Ptah was the mAA wr--the Great Seer.  Also. I always keep in mind that there was the wig of a sem priest found with those three mummies in the KV35 side chamber.  Fletcher, in her infinite wisdom, thought it was a wig belonging to the Younger Lady--but there is no depiction of any grown Amarna lady with a wig with a long braid hanging from it that exists.  I think it belonged to the prince, was put in his wrappings.  He wouldn't be the only mummy with real hair on his head [a loosened braid] to have a wig found among his bandages.  We'll find out someday who that lad was--if I can manage to live that long.

[Wistman]

17 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

Only if you take them literally.  xrp means overseer, this time of craftsmen but that goes with sem of Ptah as that was the god of craftsmen [Hmwt]  That is not really a priestly title and all of it can be honorific.  The actual high priest of Ptah was the mAA wr--the Great Seer.  Also. I always keep in mind that there was the wig of a sem priest found with those three mummies in the KV35 side chamber.  Fletcher, in her infinite wisdom, thought it was a wig belonging to the Younger Lady--but there is no depiction of any grown Amarna lady with a wig with a long braid hanging from it that exists.  I think it belonged to the prince, was put in his wrappings.  He wouldn't be the only mummy with real hair on his head [a loosened braid] to have a wig found among his bandages.  We'll find out someday who that lad was--if I can manage to live that long.

With all due respect, do you have any citations for those bolded parts?  Specifically relative to HPP known as mAA wr.  I need to see that.

 

Edited September 3 by Wistman

[Aldebaran]

4 hours ago, Wistman said:

Only if you take them literally.  xrp means overseer, this time of craftsmen but that goes with sem of Ptah as that was the god of craftsmen [Hmwt]  That is not really a priestly title and all of it can be honorific.  The actual high priest of Ptah was the mAA wr--the Great Seer.

And

With all due respect, do you have any citations for those bolded parts?  Specifically relative to HPP known as mAA wr.  I need to see that.

 

 

The last is not correct!  I can't believe I wrote it.  The mAA wr [later transcribed as wr mAA] was the high priest of Ra at Heliopolis--nothing to do with Ptah.  The rest is correct.  Don't you have an Egyptian dictionary?  Even Wiki mentions several times that Ptah was the patron of craftsmen.  

Now, as regards Prince Thutmose in the text of the cat sarcophagus.  As far as I can tell there he is "xrp Hmt".  But the second word, written with the sign U24 alone, has no determinative so I am not sure if it means "overseer of craft" or "overseer of craftsmen".  Regardless, I am sure it has to do with being a sem-priest of Ptah  Here is another sem of Ptah and he wears the same wig [in a naos] that Crown Prince Thutmose wears on his funerary bier and which was found near the prince in KV35.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptahmose_I_(High_Priest_of_Ptah)#:~:text=Ptahmose was High Priest of,III of the 18th Dynasty.&text=Ptahmose inside a naos%2C in Cairo (CG 70038).&text=He held the titles of,and High Priest of Ptah.

That man, Ptahmose, has the same title as Prince Thutmose, "xrp Hmt".

On another line of the cat sarcophagus the Prince Thutmose is styled "wr imi-rA Hmw nTr" or "great one and leader of the prophets [priests] of the north and the south" and then again "xrp Hmt" [no det. this time. either] followed by "sm".  Other than "king's son", those are all his titles there.  The stone box is "iri Xri-a n sA nsw" or "made with the ? of the king's son".  "Xri-a" has several but similar connotations.  It can mean "under the supervision" or "under the leadership" of some person.  Yes, it's all very grand but not necessarily to be taken as the literal truth--anymore than Amenhotep III was a god.

We were discussing the age at death of KV55.  I think he is Akhenaten who was 15 in Year 30 of his father.  Meanwhile Prince Thutmose had died.  But we don't know when.  All we know [or can surmise] is that their father, AIII had to be a young successor as his own father, Thutmose IV, died around the age of 30.  So, at very most, his successor was about 15 when the father passed from life.  But I think he was younger as, at first, he was shown with his mother [in a tomb] and not a wife.  At 15, an ancient Egyptian can have been already married.  Yet A III was then married to a little girl of 9--had to be.  For Tiye to fit to the appearance of her mummy, there not only had to be a coregency but she must have been a child bride, too.  She was married for 37 years but has dark hair and not very worn teeth.  That is not a woman of 60 and even 50 seems a stretch.  Anyway, she is not going to bear any children for awhile in her marriage.  Let's say Tiye was 14 in Year 7 of her husband.  When does she have Prince Thutmose?  Between Year 7 and Year 30 there are 23 years.  Yes, there could have been a grown son by then [older than Akhenaten] but it all depends on when the first heir was born and when he died--both unknown factors.

 

Edited September 3 by Aldebaran

[Myles]

Hold it and offer it away tomorrow.  

[Wistman]

20 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

The last is not correct!  I can't believe I wrote it.  The mAA wr [later transcribed as wr mAA] was the high priest of Ra at Heliopolis--nothing to do with Ptah.  The rest is correct.  Don't you have an Egyptian dictionary?  Even Wiki mentions several times that Ptah was the patron of craftsmen. 

 

Of course I know about Ptah and his appellations, that is why I questioned you about your statement relative to the HPP not being designated as wr xrp.w Hmw.wt - or even wr xrp Hmw.wt - but rather, as you put it, mAA wr.

[Aldebaran]

On 9/3/2024 at 12:51 PM, Aldebaran said:

On another line of the cat sarcophagus the Prince Thutmose is styled "wr imi-rA Hmw nTr" or "great one and leader of the prophets [priests] of the north and the south" and then again "xrp Hmt" [no det. this time. either] followed by "sm".  Other than "king's son", those are all his titles there.  The stone box is "iri Xri-a n sA nsw" or "made with the ? of the king's son".  "Xri-a" has several but similar connotations.  It can mean "under the supervision" or "under the leadership" of some person.  Yes, it's all very grand but not necessarily to be taken as the literal truth--anymore than Amenhotep III was a god.

I have to admit I haven't given this Prince Thutmose stuff much thought previously as there are already too many vexing mysteries of the Amarna Age to occupy one, but now that I've begun I may as well go on.  Outside of what appear to be some of burial items, previously discussed at length [including some vases in the Louvre] and perhaps an item found in KV62 naming a Thutmose, there is nothing much found of the prince, especially if he really had grown up and actually performed some real duties associated with being a priest of Ptah, whatever they were.  Where is his statue dressed like Ptahmose in the naos I gave the link to?  There is an erased smaller figure with Amenhotep III in a relief.  That may have been he or Akhenaten.  One can't know now.  

Prince Khaemwaset, son of Ramesses II, had this same title associated with Ptah and he has images to show it.  He was an adult.

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

Anyway, I calculated in a previous post that, if Prince Thutmose had been the first child of Queen Tiye, he could have been 23, at most, by Year 30 of his father.  But he had surely died before that year.  Unless they grew to manhood, the sons of the pharaohs never have much to indicate their existence.  It is understandable, given the many illnesses of children and their high mortality rate in those times.  Why advertise them, when one didn't know their fate from month to month?  Yes, they were the important ones, much more so than the daughters, but they also were not advertised as children until the Amarna era.  If one sees royal children before that, it is usually associated with a nurse or tutor.

That cat sarcophagus might have been buried with a grown prince, fashioned "Xri-a" [lit. "under the arm"] but if for a mere boy with an honorary title, that would have been pretty cute.  Either way, there was probably nothing in the education of royal princes preparing them to actually supervise or be generally in charge of craftsmen.  The title "wr xrp Hmww" was primarily for Ptah, as his servitor.

 

Edited September 4 by Aldebaran

[Aldebaran]

This is the image I mentioned, above, following behind Amenhotep III at, I think, the Third Pylon.  The "ghost figure" has been attempted to be made into a fan, an ankh with an arm, and some offerings.

 

[Wistman]

On 9/3/2024 at 2:51 PM, Aldebaran said:

The last is not correct!  I can't believe I wrote it.  The mAA wr [later transcribed as wr mAA] was the high priest of Ra at Heliopolis--nothing to do with Ptah.  The rest is correct.  Don't you have an Egyptian dictionary?  Even Wiki mentions several times that Ptah was the patron of craftsmen.  

Now, as regards Prince Thutmose in the text of the cat sarcophagus.  As far as I can tell there he is "xrp Hmt".  But the second word, written with the sign U24 alone, has no determinative so I am not sure if it means "overseer of craft" or "overseer of craftsmen".  Regardless, I am sure it has to do with being a sem-priest of Ptah  Here is another sem of Ptah and he wears the same wig [in a naos] that Crown Prince Thutmose wears on his funerary bier and which was found near the prince in KV35.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptahmose_I_(High_Priest_of_Ptah)#:~:text=Ptahmose was High Priest of,III of the 18th Dynasty.&text=Ptahmose inside a naos%2C in Cairo (CG 70038).&text=He held the titles of,and High Priest of Ptah.

That man, Ptahmose, has the same title as Prince Thutmose, "xrp Hmt".

On another line of the cat sarcophagus the Prince Thutmose is styled "wr imi-rA Hmw nTr" or "great one and leader of the prophets [priests] of the north and the south" and then again "xrp Hmt" [no det. this time. either] followed by "sm".  Other than "king's son", those are all his titles there.  The stone box is "iri Xri-a n sA nsw" or "made with the ? of the king's son".  "Xri-a" has several but similar connotations.  It can mean "under the supervision" or "under the leadership" of some person.  Yes, it's all very grand but not necessarily to be taken as the literal truth--anymore than Amenhotep III was a god.

We were discussing the age at death of KV55.  I think he is Akhenaten who was 15 in Year 30 of his father.  Meanwhile Prince Thutmose had died.  But we don't know when.  All we know [or can surmise] is that their father, AIII had to be a young successor as his own father, Thutmose IV, died around the age of 30.  So, at very most, his successor was about 15 when the father passed from life.  But I think he was younger as, at first, he was shown with his mother [in a tomb] and not a wife.  At 15, an ancient Egyptian can have been already married.  Yet A III was then married to a little girl of 9--had to be.  For Tiye to fit to the appearance of her mummy, there not only had to be a coregency but she must have been a child bride, too.  She was married for 37 years but has dark hair and not very worn teeth.  That is not a woman of 60 and even 50 seems a stretch.  Anyway, she is not going to bear any children for awhile in her marriage.  Let's say Tiye was 14 in Year 7 of her husband.  When does she have Prince Thutmose?  Between Year 7 and Year 30 there are 23 years.  Yes, there could have been a grown son by then [older than Akhenaten] but it all depends on when the first heir was born and when he died--both unknown factors.

I suppose it is worth mentioning that Prince Thutmose was not the only Thutmosid HPPM who intended to be buried with his pet.  Two preceding HPPM's did so as well, only for them it was with their pet monkeys:  Sennefer I, served during reign of Thutmosid IV, and Ptahmose II, son of the vizier Thutmose, also served under TIV.  It is conceivable that there may have been others, but the epigraphic evidence hasn't survived.  All to say that Prince Thutmose's cat coffin doesn't seem to signify anything about his youth, as it may have been a temporal custom of the HPPMs in that era.

I have yet to see any evidence to discount as only honorific the titles given to the HPPM's or Prince Thutmose.  In Ptolemaic times, a boy at 14 was old enough to obtain the office of HPPM, see the Pasherenptah stela in the British Museum (EA 886)  That's a long way away from D18, but it is evidence of a minimum age, which btw was an age of manhood in AE, and of the capacity to father a child.  The rituals and performances of office required of a Sem priest or HPPM would demand a certain maturity of mind and capacity of intellect and training to a degree to ensure competence.  Traditionally the HPPM's office of authority would pass from father to son (though not always; Prince Thutmose was such an exception).  Additional to hereditary principle, a selection considering the abilities and knowledge of the possible candidates as well was initiated.  IOW, the eldest son didn't automatically follow his father in the office.  If the son of the HPPM could not undertake his duties, due to sub-minimum age or other factors, the pharaoh could appoint someone of his choosing who displayed competence.  Similar issues of performative ability would apply to a Sem priest, who had to perform rituals at funerals of the dead, and they had to be done perfectly.

Dismissing the significance of "wr imi-rA Hmw nTr" or "Great One and Leader of the Prophets of the North and the South" out of hand is strange to me.  This is an enormous title of power and hardly an empty honorific to be bestowed on a child.  Rather it implies maturity of mind and competence in Prince Thutmose and seems to defy any notions of pale youth.

Finally, el Sharkawy in 2007 updated and refined Wildung's List of the High Priests of Ptah.  In it, he shows Prince Thutmose son of AIII followed by Ptahmose IV, son of Prince Thutmose and grandson of AIII.  However, this should be viewed with caution due to (according to el Sharkawy) a purported mis-identification by Wildung (who thought Ptahmose IV was the son of the earlier vizier Thutmose) as well as having six HPPM's during AIII's reign, dissimilar to most other pharaohs' reigns.  El Sharkawy being focused on the Ptah priesthoods doesn't address the co-regency or any other niceties of the AIII/Amarna era, so confusion abounds.  But it is out there nevertheless, however it's hardly unchallengeable.  I'll give a link to it so everybody can see, the focus would be on HPPMs 39, 40:

https://www.academia.edu/10019738/A_New_List_of_the_High_Priests_of_Ptah_at_Memphis_PART_1_Abgadiyat_3_Alexandria_2008_21_47

[Aldebaran]

56 minutes ago, Wistman said:

I suppose it is worth mentioning that Prince Thutmose was not the only Thutmosid HPPM who intended to be buried with his pet.  Two preceding HPPM's did so as well, only for them it was with their pet monkeys:  Sennefer I, served during reign of Thutmosid IV, and Ptahmose II, son of the vizier Thutmose, also served under TIV.  It is conceivable that there may have been others, but the epigraphic evidence hasn't survived.  All to say that Prince Thutmose's cat coffin doesn't seem to signify anything about his youth, as it may have been a temporal custom of the HPPMs in that era.

This is quite an exaggeration of the situation, I'm afraid, as the author of the paper to which you supplied the link never actually said a pet monkey was found.  All he wrote was "he would like to be combined with his private monkey" [something like that] in each instance because a monkey was depicted in the tomb [as he specifies in one case].  In fact, monkeys were often depicted in tombs as pets--but it hardly follows that the actual pet was part of the burial.  The author only points to one presumed pet being included and that is in the case of the same Prince Thutmose of this discussion.

In the example of the Prince Khaemwaset, son of Ramesses III, that I pointed out earlier as having been a sem of Ptah while only a prepubescent child [QV44] this author of the paper mentions he was not an actual high priest--but then avers he also served in the reign of his brother, Ramesses IV.  He says this because there was a stone sarcophagus found in QV44 with an inscription of Ramesses IV on it.  Of course, the tomb was a jumble of intrusive stuff when discovered by Schiaparelli.  I thought this business of "being buried by a brother" quite strange and have searched fruitlessly for this inscription, although I have a photo of the sarcophagus.  At one time Khaemwaset was "eldest king's son".  So how does he live into the reign of a brother, Ramesses IV, without succeeding, himself??  And why is he still depicted as a boy in QV44 when it would have been easy as pie to paint a wig over his shaven skull for his burial?  When they achieved puberty and after, the princes wore wigs like an adult but with the princely lock still attached to said wig.  See QV55, the tomb of another son of Ramesses III.  Also, no priestly wig on the sarcophagus.

Which brings me to a point about Prince Thutmose.  Isn't he only styled "sem" while he lies on his funerary bier?  Did he get a demotion?  What about the piece where he is shown as a miller? Will have to check.  All the items were not actually found in situ so their provenance is secure.  Same prince for sure??

Edited September 5 by Aldebaran

[Aldebaran]

I checked at the Louvre site:

https://collections.louvre.fr/en/ark:/53355/cl010005718

 

 

On one side of the "miller" statue it says only "sem" but on the other side it looks like "Hm nTr" [priest] is there.

Edited September 5 by Aldebaran

[Wepwawet]

The artifacts that unambiguously tie crown prince Thutmose to Amunhotep III are all from the tomb chapel of Apis I. Primarily this is the depiction of him with his father, naming him and showing him as a sem priest of Ptah, other evidence from this chapel consists of jars with his name. The other evidence, the mostly damaged statue, the statue of him as sem priest and miller, the funeral bier and the cat sarcohagus, while naming him, do not state who his father was. How then can we know that they do in fact portray Thutmose the eldest son of Amunhotep III. This can be done by seeing if any other king's son by the name of Thutmose was ever sem, HPPM, or both. The answer, which can be checked in the link provided by @Wistman, is that Thutmose son of Amunhotep III is the only one. As there is no dispute within Egyptology about identifying the prince named Thutmose on these artifacts with Thutmose son of Amunhotep III, then it would need compelling evidence to overturn this view.

Can the title of HPPM be used as an honorific. I've looked at this over the years and have never found any evidence that it ever was, if there is, I would like to see it.

On the cat sarcophagus Thutmose is also named as Overseer of the Prophets of Upper and Lower Egypt. Is this an honorific, again I find no evidence that it is, indeed I find the opposite, that it is in fact an executive position of considerable power. The holder of the title had authority over all the priesthoods, he acted like a Pope. What he is doing is taking a burden off the king, who cannot do everything. The king technically is the only priest, all those we call priest, hem-netjer are, as the title says, servants of the god, not interlocutors between the god and the people as are our priests. Therefore the overseer is acting for the king in tying all these priests together, no matter which god they serve, and seeing that they do in fact act for the king in absentia, for the king cannot be in every temple in Egypt at the same time. In the OK this overseer was a member of the king's family, the title then going to a vizier, if not a member of the king's family anyway. This situation continued until the reign of Thutmose III, who gave the title to the First Prophet of Amun, and giving them even more power. Then, under Amunhotep III this title is removed from the Amun priesthood and given to crown prince Thutmose, thus removing considerable power from them. The title of Overseer of the Prophets of Upper and Lower Egypt was then kept by the HPPM until the reign of Ramesess II, when he gave the title back to the Amun priesthood, and, I suggest, contributed to them getting too big for their boots by the end of the NK and usurping the power of the king. I suggest that this title was never an honorific for any holder, including crown prince Thutmose, for it, like the position of HPPM was a position of real power. When reading about the Ptah priesthood it is often said by numerous authors that the HPPM held the authority of a Pope, yet do not really explain this. It comes from the period of time, not that long, when the HPPM was also the overseer of all priests.

Main reference for the information on the Overseer of the Prophets of Upper and Lower Egypt comes from "The Priests of Ancient Egypt" by Serge Sauneron, pages 176-177 of the 2000 English edition.

There is a side issue here, actually one of greater importance IMO. It is Akhenaten, we are told, that took steps against the Amun priesthood, yet we see a large chunk of their power taken by Amunhotep III and restored, after many centuries, to a son of the king. Authors such as Kozloff, Kline and O'Connor, Hornung, Dodson et al, while pointing out that Akhenaten's "revolution" does not spring from nothing, do not, as far as I have read unless I missed something in many books, tie in this return of power over all priests to the royal family to what Akhenaten did later.

Edited September 5 by Wepwawet
typos

[Wepwawet]

3 hours ago, Wistman said:

In Ptolemaic times, a boy at 14 was old enough to obtain the office of HPPM, see the Pasherenptah stela in the British Museum (EA 886)

He was, I believe, a member of the "Pedubast Dynasty" who were hereditary HPPM all through the Ptolemaic Period, so he would have inherited the title on the death of his father, or uncle, as happened, if the former HPPM had no son. The Ptolemies had greatly curtailed the power of all the priesthoods, so the HPPM had been reduced to the status of a bishop with control over his own cathedral and not much else, though they still held land, and I would think considerable revenues from the Apis festivals, massively popular during this period.

Edited September 5 by Wepwawet

[Aldebaran]

23 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

I checked at the Louvre site:

https://collections.louvre.fr/en/ark:/53355/cl010005718

 

 

On one side of the "miller" statue it says only "sem" but on the other side it looks like "Hm nTr" [priest] is there.

Nope.  I got a better look and it doesn't say "Hm nTr" It says " I am the servant of this noble god, his miller".  "Hm" means "servant" as well as "priest" but, actually, in the title of Hm-nTr the nTr glyph comes before the Hm sign.  So no office on this piece, either, except "sm".

Edited September 6 by Aldebaran

[Aldebaran]

23 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

The artifacts that unambiguously tie crown prince Thutmose to Amunhotep III are all from the tomb chapel of Apis I.

I have not had the interest in Prince Thutmose that you evidently have and so I must catch up.  I know I read Dodson's paper on the  prince before but I went over it again today.  He mentions the tomb chapel where Mariette wrote that Amenhotep III was depicted with his son--but does not give me the impression that he believes all the items came from this chapel.  Just says the cat sarcophagus was found at Mit Rahinna, once Memphis.  Dodson also noticed the differences between the titles of the prince on the sarcophagus and those other items but opines they suggest a promotion for him.  

And one still has to deal with that sem priest wig found in KV35 near the three mummies in the side chamber.  Who can it have belonged to but the boy?

Edited September 6 by Aldebaran

[Aldebaran]

And it certainly would be nice to know who this BM statue was supposed to represent.

[Aldebaran]

20 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

Dodson also noticed the differences between the titles of the prince on the sarcophagus and those other items but opines they suggest a promotion for him.  

No, the items can't suggest that. One doesn't receive any more promotions after being laid out on ones funerary bier.  That piece and the miller one only have the prince as a sem.  They don't suggest to me to be representing a grown man.  Khaemwaset, son of Ramesses III, was also a sem and so one must believe a mere boy could have this title.  But I have to agree with Wepwawet that the titles on the cat sarcophagus don't seem to be honorary.  They really do appear to belong to someone who was an actual high priest of Ptah,  Prince Thutmose, son of Amenhotep III, is said to have been very well attested.  Maybe too well.

Something is not right.  Could the sarcophagus be a fake?  I hate to suggest it but....Or maybe there was an older prince Thutmose of Dynasty 18 who was an actual high priest.  Perhaps he was the son of Amenhotep III.  Or perhaps the younger son belonged to someone else--or vice versa.  With four kings named Thutmose, it would not be surprising if there was another prince by that name.  What about Thutmose II--was he ever a priest before succeeding?  Is it possible?

I checked to see if anyone though the sarcophagus might be a falsification.  This came up.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/zaes-2014-0010/html?lang=enww.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/zaes-2014-0010/html?lang=en

There may be others.

Edited September 7 by Aldebaran

[Aldebaran]

When I tried to click on the above link from here, I got an "access denied" message, although I was obviously able to see the page before.  So I went back to the other window, which I had left open, and copied this:  Wish I could read it but it's pretty expensive without university access.

Summary

The so-called cat’s coffin of prince Thutmose (Egyptian Museum Cairo, CG 5003), which was allegedly found during an excavation at Mit Rahina in 1892, is a curious monument. Whilst prince Thutmose is commonly regarded as a son of Amenhotep III, this coffin so far delivers the only known example for him as “eldest king’s son” and high priest of Ptah at Memphis. But, for several reasons, its authenticity seems to be very dubious.

Keywords: Amenhotep III; Cairo; Egyptian Museum CG 5003 (JE 30172); cat; coffin; fake; High Priest of Memphis; Thutmose

Published Online: 2014-12-15

Published in Print: 2014-12-1

© 2014 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston

Title:  Alles fur die Katz

author:  Heino Hohneck

Edited September 7 by Aldebaran

[Wistman]

8 hours ago, Aldebaran said:

When I tried to click on the above link from here, I got an "access denied" message, although I was obviously able to see the page before.  So I went back to the other window, which I had left open, and copied this:  Wish I could read it but it's pretty expensive without university access.

Summary

The so-called cat’s coffin of prince Thutmose (Egyptian Museum Cairo, CG 5003), which was allegedly found during an excavation at Mit Rahina in 1892, is a curious monument. Whilst prince Thutmose is commonly regarded as a son of Amenhotep III, this coffin so far delivers the only known example for him as “eldest king’s son” and high priest of Ptah at Memphis. But, for several reasons, its authenticity seems to be very dubious.

Keywords: Amenhotep III; Cairo; Egyptian Museum CG 5003 (JE 30172); cat; coffin; fake; High Priest of Memphis; Thutmose

Published Online: 2014-12-15

Published in Print: 2014-12-1

© 2014 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston

Title:  Alles fur die Katz

author:  Heino Hohneck

I'd like to see that paper too.  I've just read that it's in German.  So some translation will be required if accessed.  Not easy to get.

[Wepwawet]

I buy books from De Gruyter on an as needed basis, but only those on a single topic, so I'm not going to buy a book for one article. This article is not available anywhere online without paying for the entire book. I also don't see this article referenced in books covering AIII and Amarna published since 2014.

[Kenemet]

On 9/5/2024 at 1:51 PM, Aldebaran said:

At one time Khaemwaset was "eldest king's son".  So how does he live into the reign of a brother, Ramesses IV, without succeeding, himself?? 

It's quite possible that he did NOT want the throne for various reasons -- or that something happened and the royal family decided that he should not be on the throne.  This has happened in European royal houses; I don't see why it would be impossible in ancient Egypt.

(here's a recent case of abdication: https://www.royal-house.nl/members-royal-house/princess-beatrix/abdication#:~:text=On 28 January%2C shortly before,abdicate on 30 April 2013.)

 

Also, is it possible that "eldest son" simply refers to "eldest living son" and is passed along to the oldest surviving child?

Edited September 8 by Kenemet