Ch. 29. Reinstating the 18th Dynasty - Thutmose IV to Tutankhamun 395 Chapter 29 Reinstating the 18th Dynasty - Thutmose IV to Tutankhamun This chapter deals with the 18th Dynasty rulers in the unshaded area shown in Table 29.1. The virtual absence of anchor points places more reliance on inscriptional and circumstantial evidence, which has considerable complexity. Table 29.1: 18th Dynasty: Ahmose to Tutankhamun Rulers Regnal years* Dates BCE Lunar or Sothic anchor points Ahmose 25 yr, 4 mo 1676–1651 None known Amenhotep I 20 yr, 9 mo 1651–1630 Sothic heliacal rising at Thebes: Yr 9 III šmw 9 1642 Thutmose I 8 yr, 7 mo 1630–1622 None known Thutmose II 17 yr, 7 mo 1622–1604 None known Hatshepsut 14 + 22 = 36 yr 1604–1590 (sole reign); 1590–1568 (co-regency) Yr 15 Thut. III’s 2nd year: Hatshepsut’s accession as co-regent in 1588, though Thut. III began to reign in 1590. Amun feast II prt 29 on 3rd day after new moon II prt 27 in 1588 Thutmose III 53 yr, 6 mo, 26 d 1590–1536 Yr 2 new moon II prt 27; II prt 29 was 3rd day of Amun feast on Hatshepsut’s co-regency celebration. Yr 23 new moon I šmw 20 (Megiddo) 1568. Yr 24 new moon II prt 30 “stretching-of-the- cord” 10th day Amun feast, 1566. [Yr 33] Sothic heliacal rising at Elephantine III šmw 28, 1558 Amenhotep II 25 yr, 9 mo 1536–1510 Yr 19 new moon III šmw [8] 1517; feast preparations Thutmose IV None known Amenhotep III None known Akhenaten Yr 5 new moon IV prt 13 1459 boundary stela. Probable “stretching-of-the-cord” ceremony Smenkhkare/Neferneferuaten None known Tutankhamun None known * = most months approximate. Amenhotep II was succeeded by Thutmose IV, his second son. The accession date is not known, but his earliest date on a sphinx stela in year one is III 3ḫt 19, 1 so Amenhotep II must have died before that date in 1510 BCE. Egyptologist Betsy Bryan comments, “The number of year dates from the reign of Thutmose IV is small but evenly divided over eight years.” 2 Three documents date to year one, one to year four, possibly one to year five, one to year six, two to year seven, and one to year eight. 3 The latter is 1 E. Hornung, “New Kingdom,” Ancient Egyptian Chronology (eds. E. Hornung, R. Krauss, D.A. Warburton; Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2006) 203. 2 B.M. Bryan, The Reign of Thutmose IV (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991) 5. 3 Ibid., 5.
18
Embed
Reinstating the 18th Dynasty - Thutmose IV to …. 29. Reinstating the 18th Dynasty - Thutmose IV to Tutankhamun 397 coincidence. It speaks of a 26 year reign by Amenhotep II followed
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Ch. 29. Reinstating the 18th Dynasty - Thutmose IV to Tutankhamun 395
Chapter 29
Reinstating the 18th Dynasty - Thutmose IV to Tutankhamun
This chapter deals with the 18th Dynasty rulers in the unshaded area shown in
Table 29.1. The virtual absence of anchor points places more reliance on inscriptional
and circumstantial evidence, which has considerable complexity.
Table 29.1: 18th Dynasty: Ahmose to Tutankhamun
Rulers Regnal years* Dates BCE Lunar or Sothic anchor points
Ahmose 25 yr, 4 mo 1676–1651 None known
Amenhotep I 20 yr, 9 mo 1651–1630 Sothic heliacal rising at Thebes: Yr 9 III šmw
9 1642
Thutmose I 8 yr, 7 mo 1630–1622 None known
Thutmose II 17 yr, 7 mo 1622–1604 None known
Hatshepsut 14 + 22 = 36 yr
1604–1590
(sole reign);
1590–1568
(co-regency)
Yr 15 Thut. III’s 2nd year: Hatshepsut’s
accession as co-regent in 1588, though Thut.
III began to reign in 1590. Amun feast II prt
29 on 3rd day after new moon II prt 27 in
1588
Thutmose III 53 yr, 6 mo, 26 d 1590–1536
Yr 2 new moon II prt 27; II prt 29 was 3rd day
of Amun feast on Hatshepsut’s co-regency
celebration.
Yr 23 new moon I šmw 20 (Megiddo) 1568.
Yr 24 new moon II prt 30 “stretching-of-the-
cord” 10th day Amun feast, 1566.
[Yr 33] Sothic heliacal rising at Elephantine
III šmw 28, 1558
Amenhotep II 25 yr, 9 mo 1536–1510 Yr 19 new moon III šmw [8] 1517; feast
preparations
Thutmose IV None known
Amenhotep III None known
Akhenaten Yr 5 new moon IV prt 13 1459 boundary stela.
Probable “stretching-of-the-cord” ceremony
Smenkhkare/Neferneferuaten None known
Tutankhamun None known
* = most months approximate.
Amenhotep II was succeeded by Thutmose IV, his second son. The accession date
is not known, but his earliest date on a sphinx stela in year one is III 3ḫt 19,1 so
Amenhotep II must have died before that date in 1510 BCE. Egyptologist Betsy Bryan
comments, “The number of year dates from the reign of Thutmose IV is small but evenly
divided over eight years.” 2
Three documents date to year one, one to year four, possibly
one to year five, one to year six, two to year seven, and one to year eight.3 The latter is
1 E. Hornung, “New Kingdom,” Ancient Egyptian Chronology (eds. E. Hornung, R. Krauss, D.A.
Warburton; Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2006) 203. 2 B.M. Bryan, The Reign of Thutmose IV (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991)
5. 3 Ibid., 5.
The Reconstructed Chronology of the Egyptian Kings, M. Christine Tetley 396
inscribed on a Konosso rock stela recording his Nubian campaign.4 Bryan comments,
“Year 8 occurs at Konosso, where it commences a description of the king’s personal
involvement in a military skirmish on the Eastern desert.”5
The second paragraph of Barbara Cumming’s translation starts, “Regnal year 9,
month 3 of winter, day 2. Now his Majesty was in the Southern City in the area of
Karnak….”6 Note, however, that the regnal year nine might be a recent misprint as the
writing of the date is the same as on the hand-copies of the inscription for year eight. The
date cannot be checked because the Konosso inscription has been under water for
decades.7
Wente and van Siclen opposed the eight to nine regnal years for Thutmose IV
and instead proposed a long reign of 33 years (1419–1386 BCE) because Thutmose IV
seemed to have celebrated one if not two jubilees.8 Bryan investigated the length of
Thutmose IV’s reign taking into account year dates, anatomical evidence, astronomical
data, jubilee festivals, careers of officials serving during several reigns, and
chronological indicators mentioned in inscriptions on monuments. She found that the
jubilee evidence was ambiguous and could not be used as a 30-year chronological
indicator,9 concluding “the chronological evidence for Thutmose IV’s reign, taken as a
whole, weighs in favor of a short reign.”10
A Gap of 35 Years Before an Obelisk for Thutmose III is Finished
An inscription on the unfinished Lateran obelisk originally commissioned by
Thutmose III notes that the obelisk was abandoned in the temple workshops for 35 years
until Thutmose IV restored it.11
Neither the year of Thutmose III nor Thutmose IV is
stated.12
The 35 years has to be reckoned from some specific point, and the death of
Thutmose III seems applicable when presumably the obelisk’s construction was
discontinued. That suggests 1536 BCE as the date of Thutmose III’s death. His successor
was Amenhotep II, whose reign of 26 years (without a co-regency) would end in 1510
BCE. The complement (to make 35 years) would be composed of Thutmose IV’s nine
year reign ending in 1501 BCE. Since Thutmose III is not known to have reigned much
longer than eight years, it is possible that the 35-year period was reckoned upon his
death in his ninth year, denoting a specific point in time marking the reigns of both
Thutmose III and his grandson Thutmose IV.
The fact that 35 years spans the time from the death of Thutmose III in 1536
down to the ninth year of Thutmose IV in 1501 seems too remarkable to be merely a
4 D.B. Redford, “On the Chronology of the Egyptian Eighteenth Dynasty,” JNES 25 (1966) 120. Cyril
Aldred reports that Thutmose IV “ruled for little more than 9 years” in “The Second Jubilee of Amenophis
II,” ZÄS 94 (1967) 2; B. Cumming, Egyptian Historical Records of the Later Eighteenth Dynasty
(Warminster: Aris and Phillips, 1984) 251. 5 Bryan, Reign of Thutmose IV, 6.
6 Cumming, Egyptian Historical Records, 251.
7 Personal communication from Betsy Bryan, 16/02/10.
8 E.F. Wente and C.C. Van Siclen III, “A Chronology of the New Kingdom,” Studies in Honor of George
R. Hughes (eds. J.H. Johnson and E.F. Wente; SAOC 39; Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of
Chicago, 1976) 218, 227-30; E.F. Wente, “Age at Death of Pharaohs of the New Kingdom, Determined
from Historical Sources,” An X-Ray Atlas of the Royal Mummies (eds. J.E. Harris and E.F. Wente; Chicago
and London: University of Chicago Press, 1980) 252-54. 9 Bryan, Reign of Thutmose IV, 23, 25.
10 Ibid., 4-25; quote p. 25.
11 The Lateran obelisk at 45.70 m including the base “is the tallest obelisk in Rome and the largest
standing obelisk in the world, weighing over 230 tons.” See “Lateran Palace” at
−1509 8 22 −1509 8 8 1272 12 22 4 20:34 5:25 270 5:26 168 5:27 64 Accession date for Thutmose IV fell no earlier than II šmw 2 and before III 3ḫt 19. I 3ḫt 1 adopted provisionally here
−1446 9 14 −1446 9 1 1336 1 26 1 16:10 5:40 241 5:41 140 5:42 42 Akhenaten died sometime between II 3ḫt 17 and I prt 1–8. Neferneferuaten may have begun to reign in III 3ḫt
The Reconstructed Chronology of the Egyptian Kings, M. Christine Tetley 406
Thus there is a continuous sequence from Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten’s year
one through to year three. A fourth year is not attested. Concerning the length of this
third year, Hornung records that the wine jar labels of years one to two indicate an
average vintage of 50–60 bottles but only three labels come from year three, before they
are dated to a year one.58
This suggests that regnal year three was brief, and the
accession of the next king may have occurred soon after year three began—but sometime
after III 3ḫt 10, probably late in 1445 BCE (−1444).
Another reference to King Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten—this time in
association with Meritaten—was found on two boxes from the tomb of Tutankhamun.59
One of the inscriptions reads, “King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Lord of the Two Lands,
Ankhkheprure Beloved of Neferkepherure, [= Akhenaten] Son of Re, Lord of Crowns,
Neferneferuaten Beloved of Waenre.”
The names of Akhenaten are given alongside the text and the words, “King’s
Chief Wife Meritaten, may she live forever.” 60
Meritaten Mystery
In the tomb of Meryre II, noted earlier, Meritaten appears as the queen and wife
of Smenkhkare, whereas in the above text she is associated both with Akhenaten and
Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten. It is also understood by most scholars that Meritaten
was married to Akhenaten after her mother, Nefertiti, died, and thus became
Akhenaten’s wife and queen, and that she married Smenkhkare later. The implication in
the above text seems to be that Meritaten is the wife of Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten
the incumbent king.
There is no room in the chronology demonstrated by the jar labels for Smenkhare
to have preceded Neferneferuaten. Neferneferuaten’s accession sometime before III 3ḫt
10 fits in with the time that Akhenaten died, a month or two before completing his 17th
year of reign. Yet Smenkhkare was crowned king. It compels the conclusion that
Smenkhkare changed his name to Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten after he became king.
Unfortunately, the jar labels only refer to the king as Ankhkheprure, which is the
prenomen for both Smenkhkare and Neferneferuaten. But the text of TT 139 gives him a
year three, his full name, Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten, and a regnal year number.
So it is not clear in which year he changed his name. Ken Kitchen wrote in 1985: The one certainty about Smenkhkare’s use of royal style is that his nomen was
Smenkhkare (often with the added epithet Djoser-khepru) in his Year 1, but had been
changed to (or had the alternative) Neferneferuaten, with the epithets “beloved of
Neferkheprure,” “beloved of Wanre” or just “ruler” (ḥḳ3), in year 3, as is very clearly
set out on the evidence by Krauss, pp. 92-94.61
Allen notes that “The new king [Smenkhkare] took both Nefer-neferu-aton’s
throne name (without its reference to Akhenaton) and Merit-aton as Chief Queen.”62
The
acceptance of a name change for Smenkhkare to Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten enables
58
Ibid. 59
Allen, “Nefertiti and Smenkh-ka-re,” 11. 60
Lorenz “Smenkhkare Djeserkheperu Ankhkheprure,” citing Murnane, Texts from the Amarna Period;
Allen, “Amarna Succession,” 2 and fig. 2 inscription from Box 1k on p. 4. 61
K.A. Kitchen, “Review of R. Krauss, Das Ende der Amarnazeit—Beiträge zur Geschichte und
Chronologie des Neuen Reiches (HÄB 7; Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1978, repr. 1981)” JEA 71 (1985) 44. 62
Allen, “Nefertiti and Smenkh-ka-re,” 13.
Ch. 29. Reinstating the 18th Dynasty - Thutmose IV to Tutankhamun 407
them to be seen as the same person. Apparently, not a single fragment of a [u]shabti
figure has been found bearing the name of Smenkhkare.63
Vintage Evidence
The most compelling argument that there was no king between Akhenaten and
Smenkhkare/Ankhkheprure, or between Smenkhkare/Ankhkheprure and Tutankhamun,
comes from the combined evidence of the jar labels from the reigns of Akhenaten,
Ankhkheprure, and Tutankhamun. Hornung says, Wine jar labels from Amarna attest sixteen successive wine vintages during the
occupation of the site, 13 corresponding to years 5 through 17 of Akhenaten, whereas 3
vintages correspond to regnal years of his successors. The vintage of Akhenaten’s year 4
occurred in the year before the foundation of the city; wine of year 4 was consumed at
the site before the vintage of year 5 became available. Thus altogether seventeen
successive vintages are attested at Amarna. Up to year 13 of Akhenaten the chief vinters
held the title ḥrj k3mw. The title ḫrj b3ḥ is attested from year 13 through 17 and its use
continued in year 1 and 2 of King Ankhkheprure. The last vintage that is documented at
Amarna dates to regnal year 1; in that year the vinter’s title ḥrj k3mw is reintroduced and
continued to be used as wine jar labels in the tomb of Tutankhamun show.64
There is no interruption to the numbering of the succession recognized by the
other evidence. The jar labels concur with the text of TT 139 giving a year three to
Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten, otherwise Smenkhkare. This is his highest year as
shown by the jar labels. Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten is herewith attributed two years
plus months into his third year, with his reign beginning at the earliest on II 3ḫt 17 and
before I prt 1–8 (when Akhenaten’s 18th year would have begun had he lived).
As noted above the date of III 3ḫt 10 is adopted as a possible accession date for
Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten, which equates to 28 October in 1447 BCE. He died
sometime after the date of III 3ḫt 10 in his third year (which corresponds to 27 October
according to Casperson’s table [Table 29.10]).
Because the accession date of Tutankhamun is not known, Neferneferuaten’s
third year can only be surmised as being short due to the scarcity of wine jar labels
attributed to that year. Therefore, approximate dates for the reign of
Smenkhkare/Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten are assumed.
Table 29.10: Death of Akhenaten and accession of Smenkhkare/Neferneferuaten in
−1446; death of Smenkhkare/Neferneferuaten and accession of Tutankhamun in
−1443 (new moon listing from −1446 to −1445 and −1444 to −1443)
−1444 12 19 −1444 12 6 1338 5 3 2 19:24 6:51 256 6:51 156 6:52 62 Attributing a short 3rd year to Smenkhkare/Neferneferuaten locates Tutankhamun’s accession in II prt