| Author | Message | ||
     jdean25272 (64.12.105.189) |
Hi JD, I've attached the URL and opened a new string: A photo can be seen here: http://condor.depaul.edu/~sbucking/seti.jpg The kings names in the 2nd register up to about the 19th one (Nebhetepre=Mentuhotep I) are representative of the 7th thru 10th dynasties. Nebhetepre also appears on the Turin Canon V, 16. I'd suppose all the fragmentary cartouches from Turin Canon V, 1-15 represent those kings. The kings names at the bottom of Turin Canon IV (fragment 47) which are legible bear very little relation to anything here. How much is known about these kings and why does there seem to be no correlation? Jack | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.65) |
Jack, The list shows a number of kings between Nefer-ka-Re Pepy II (6th dyn.) and Neb-hepet-Re Mentuhotep II (11th dyn.). The list is conspicuous by the absence of the Herakleopolitan kings, but also of the early 11th dynasty Antefs. Looking at the Second Intermediate Period, we see that the list jumps directly from Maa-kheru-Re Amenemhat IV (12th dyn.) to Neb-pehti-Re Ahmosis (18th dyn.). So apparently the scribe who compiled this list only mentioned the kings who ruled over an united Egypt. As a side-note for Francesco, this could be applied to the kings listed for the 2d dyn. ! Notions of legitimacy may not have come into play, as User-ka-Re, Teti’s successor, is named. But a very brief reign such as that of the 5th dyn. king Shepses-ka-Re has been omitted. As to the individual kings : 1. Merenre-Antiemzaf (or : Nemtiemzaf) : -he is mentioned under Pepy II as the “king’s eldest son” (exemption decrees of queen Neith’s chapel and of Menkaure’s cult complex). -his name has been chiselled out on the decree in Neith’s chapel. -his name is destroyed on the Turin Canon, but the reign length is preserved : “1 year”. 2. Neter-ka-Re and Men-ka-Re : -Manetho gives as successor of Menthusouphis (he read Anti or Nemti as Monthu) a queen Nitokris, no doubt Neith-iqert, attested on a small fragment of the Turin Canon, to be placed here. -this queen may have been crowned king as either Neterkare or Menkare : *the first name, Neterkare, sounds like Nitokris or Neith-iqert, and may have been chosen on purpose for this reason. *the second name, Menkare, sounds like that of Menkaure, the 4th dyn. king buried at Giza. Graeco-Roman authors mention a queen buried there, and this could be a conflation between Menkare, Menkaure and the late 4th dyn. king-queen-regent Khentkawes. 3. Nefer-ka and Nefer-es : The Turin Canon then goes on with these two kings (omitted in Abydos), totally unknown to us. 4. Qa-ka-Re Iby and [...] : Their successor in the Canon of Kings is known through a small pyramid at Saqqara, with Pyramid Texts. The use of granite for the sarcophagus may mean that the king still controlled the Aswan area, but it could also have been a reused block. We don’t have the name of Iby’s successor, but then the Canon recapitulates the years of the preceding kings, which must represent a change of dynasties (as after Unas), although I don’t know whether one should say 6-7th or 7-8th. 5. [...] and Nefer-ka-Re : The Abydos list picks up here. Neferkare is known by at least one monument : the false door of a “king’s mother Pepy-ankhenes” mentions a pyramid, the name of which is compounded with the royal name Neferkare, but the pyramid’s name is not the same as that of Pepy II. Pepy-ankhenes may be one of the wives of Pepy II of that name, and Neferkare thus a son of this king. 6. Neferkare-Neby, Djedkare-Shema : The second one may be the Thuosimares from Pseudo-Eratosthenes, who reigned after Apappous (Pepy II), Ekheskosokaras (Merenre-Antiemzaf), Nitokris, Myrtaios (= ?). 7. Neferkare, Merenhor, Seneferka, Nikare : Completely unattested, AFAIK. 8. Neferkare-Tereru : This may be the Thirillos of Pseudo-Eratosthenes. His name may be a misreading of Wadj-ka-Re : a Horus Kha-[bau], king Wadj-ka-Re is known from stelae in Coptos, placed near the tax exemption stela of Pepy II. 9. Neferkahor : Eight stelae dating from year 1 of a Horus Netjer-bau, king Nefer-kau-Hor, were found in Coptos. They record the designation of the local official and husband of the king’s eldest daughter Shemai as vizier and of his son Idi as Overseer of Upper Egypt. Arrangements are made for their funerary cult, by placing their statues in all the temples of Egypt. Nobody seems to have noticed that there was a First Intermediate Period going on :-) ! BTW FIP artistic productions around Herakleopolis are of a much higher level than elsewhere. This shows that between Pepy II and the Herakleopolitan kings there has been a continuity in artistic traditions, i.e. that the ephemeral kings listed here went on ordering sculptures, etc. 10. Neferkare-Pepiseneb, Sneferka-Anu, [...]w-Re, Neferkaure, Horkaure : The second king may be the Semphoukrates from Pseudo-Eratosthenes. 11. Nefer-ir-ka-Re : This may be the Horus Demedj-ib-tawi („Who unites the heart of the Two Lands“), also known from the Coptos decrees, and the last recorded Memphite king : this is when the Herakleopolitans take power, possibly because of an open revolt in Memphis proper ? JD | ||
| Ossama Alsaadawi (217.139.145.7) |
On the top line I read the following word: ‘skr - israel’, or classically ‘skr - osiris’, [O34:V31:D21]-[Q2:D4]. I wonder what does it mean? The great man on the left wears [S7] crown, classically the blue crown, I wonder why? Why not any of other crowns? Ossama Alsaadawi | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Howdy Ossama!  | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Welcome back Ossama... | ||
| jdean25272 (64.12.102.151) |
Hi JD, Thanks for the information. You are right about Nebhepetre, I reversed the letters; but are you sure it is Mentuhotep II? Clayton shows Mentuhotep I (p. 72), however the _Oxford History_ calls the Theban king Nebhepetra Mentuhotep II like you do (p. 119). I'm confused by this variation and also by Oxford's statement the 'king-list in the temple of Seti I at Abydos gives no royal names for the period between the 8th dynasty and the beginning of the Middle Kingdom" (p. 118). Is that true? The following fragment (fragment 44) of the Turin Canon in the same column might indicate a dynastic break occured a few kings after Nitocris and if their reigns were brief it might account for their omission in Manetho's report where he places Nitocris as the last ruler of the 6th dynasty. (Those three kings mentioned after Nitocris might be 7th/8th dynasty kings.) Neterkare might be a spelling for Nitocris, but why would Seti include her when he excluded Hatshepsut later? Nitocris' name is spelled unusually on the Turin Canon and nothing like Neterkare. Isn't it odd that Manetho's spelling of Nitocris is so close to what's on the Turin Canon? Most of them are so different. >-his name is destroyed on the Turin Canon, but the reign length is preserved : “1 year”. 3. Nefer-ka and Nefer-es : The Turin Canon then goes on with these two kings (omitted in Abydos), totally unknown to us.We don’t have the name of Iby’s successor, but then the Canon recapitulates the years of the preceding kings, which must represent a change of dynasties (as after Unas), although I don’t know whether one should say 6-7th or 7-8th.11. Nefer-ir-ka-Re : This may be the Horus Demedj-ib-tawi („Who unites the heart of the Two Lands“), also known from the Coptos decrees, and the last recorded Memphite king : this is when the Herakleopolitans take power, possibly because of an open revolt in Memphis proper ?< Clayton thinks Demedjibtawy is the Horus name for king Wadjkare (p. 70) and would place him in the 8th dynasty. Neferirkare is pretty far along the list, just before Nebhepetre. The 'nefer' and 'wadj' symbols are similar in so far as they are tall and narrow. Looking at the 11th dynasty, _The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt_ places Mentuhotep I and Intef I as the 1st two kings of the 11th dynasty (p. 134). The one glyph that can be partially made out on the Turin Canon V, 12 is 'wah' of Wahankh (Intef II per Clayton). Should I discount the Turin Canon since he seems to be placed in the 1st position? Ossama and Ritva, Hi to both of you. Sincerely, Jack | ||
| jdean25272 (64.12.102.151) |
Pardon me...I didn't mean to exclude Rick. Hi to Rick, too Sincerely, Jack | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.37) |
Hi Jack, >are you sure it is Mentuhotep II ?< The first king following the three Antefs is this Mentuhotep. But there had been a Mentuhotep before the Antefs, who was later considered a king, but who must in reality have been a powerful nomarch. This is Mentuhotep I. If, as a modern historian, one doesn’t want to consider him a king, then Mentuhotep Nebhepetre becomes Mentuhotep I... >Oxford's statement the “king-list in the temple of Seti I at Abydos gives no royal names for the period between the 8th dynasty and the beginning of the Middle Kingdom" (p. 118). Is that true?< Yes, it is, the Herakleopolitan 9-10th dynasties are omitted. Not apparently because they were considered illegitimate, but because they didn’t rule over the whole of Egypt. The legitimate Antefs of early dyn. 11 are left out too, as are the SIP kings, even Ahmosis’ immediate predecessors (Seqenenre, Kamosis). Nitokris : I didn’t mean to say that Nitokris derives from Neterkare, but that the similarity of sounds could mean that Neterkare was her king’s name, whereas Neith-iqert (Turin Canon) was her praenomen, as for Maatkare & Hatshepsut. Nitokris may have been a legitimate king-queen of the past, whereas the more recent Hatshepsut wasn’t recognized as such when the Ramesside king lists were drawn up ? A parallel I could quote is the high-priest of Heliopolis Wadj-nes, who becomes the 2d dyn. king Uneg : althoug they sound very different, the writing of both names is almost the same. So there could be little games when choosing a king's name. So a queen Neith-iqert could choose a royal name Neterkare. But of course this is only a very hypothetical hypothesis for people liking science-fiction. :-) >Clayton thinks Demedjibtawy is the Horus name for king Wadjkare (p. 70) and would place him in the 8th dynasty.< Possible too ! >Looking at the 11th dynasty, _The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt_ places Mentuhotep I and Intef I as the 1st two kings of the 11th dynasty (p. 134). The one glyph that can be partially made out on the Turin Canon V, 12 is 'wah' of Wahankh (Intef II per Clayton). Should I discount the Turin Canon since he seems to be placed in the 1st position?< I’m not sure I understand the question. This Mentuhotep I isn’t Nebhepetre. Antef Wahankh is the successor of Antef Sehertawi JD | ||
| ossama Alsaadawi (217.139.145.7) |
Hi Ritva; Hi Rick, how kind you are. Thank you so much. Thanks Jack. Ossama Alsaadawi | ||
| jdean25272 (64.12.105.52) |
Hi JD, Thanks for this response. Let me take a few minutes to respond. You wrote: >The first king following the three Antefs is this Mentuhotep. But there had been a Mentuhotep before the Antefs, who was later considered a king, but who must in reality have been a powerful nomarch. This is Mentuhotep I. If, as a modern historian, one doesn’t want to consider him a king, then Mentuhotep Nebhepetre becomes Mentuhotep I...< Clayton (_Chronicle of the Pharaohs_, p. 72) mentions "Strictly speaking, the Middle Kingdom starts with the reunification of Egypt under the fourth king of Dynasty 11, Mentuhotep I". The three Intefs (Sehertawy (I), Wahankh (II) and Nakjtnebtepnefer (III)) were hardly more than nomarchs who ruled from Thebes. The Turin Canon supports this view that there were at least three kings, possibly four, preceeding Nebhetepre (Mentuhotep I) - see col. V, lines 12, 13, 14, 15 where a king's name might have been. Both Nebhepetre and Sankhkare can still be seen on the Turin Canon V, 16-17 and Abydos list 2nd register, 19 & 20. Both accounts place them in the same order. The next 11 th dynasty king Nebtawyre (Mentuhotep III) does not appear on Seti's list and does not exist on the Turin Canon. There seems to be another dynasty break at V, 18 & 19. This numbering arrangement of the Mentuhoteps causes some confusion. Hornung calls Nebhepetre Montuhotep I in _History of Ancient Egypt_ p. 48. Right after the dynasty break on the Turin Canon and supported by Seti's list is Sehetepibre (Amenemhet I) - see Abydos list # 21 AND Turin Canon V, 20. He's the founder of the 12th dynasty. So the Abydos list clearly has only TWO kings of the 11th dynasty - Nebhepetre and Sankhkare. Nebtawyre and the Intefs are missing unless they fall before on the Abydos list, but that is unclear from looking at those names in Abydos 2nd register #s 15,16,17,18. I'd agree that the Intefs, and for some reason unexplained Nebtawyre, are not on the Abydos list. Sincerely, Jack | ||
| jdean25272 (64.12.102.164) |
Hi Ossama, >On the top line I read the following word: ‘skr - israel’, or classically ‘skr - osiris’, [O34:V31:D21]-[Q2:D4]. I wonder what does it mean? The great man on the left wears [S7] crown, classically the blue crown, I wonder why? Why not any of other crowns?< You are not talking about the register with the predecessor kings are you? The larger man with the Blue Crown and censer in his hand is the king Seti I with his young son, the future Ramesses II according to a caption in Clayton's _Chronicle of the Pharaohs_, p. 12. I'm not quite sure why a Blue Crown would be appropriate headgear? The inscription along the top is an /Htp-di-nsw/ offering formula. Maybe JD could translate it. The inscription reads in part 'An offering which the king gives before Ptah-Sokar-Osiris ... a thousand of bread and beer and oxen and ducks and linen , etc ... to king x as a gift of Menmaatre (Seti I)'. Sincerely, Jack | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.88) |
Jack, The text reads : "To do the offering-which-the-king-gives (to / of) Ptah-Sokar-Osiris, lord of the Shetayt-shrine, who dwells in Menmaatre (Sethy I)-is-eternal, to the kings of Upper Egypt, the kings of Lower Egypt, by the King of Upper- and Lower Egypt, lord of the Double Country, Menmaatre, the Son of Re Tity*-beloved-of-Ptah, thousands in bread, thousands in beer, thousands in beef, thousands in fowl, thousands in incense, thousands in oil, thousands in cloth, thousands in garments (?), thousands in wine, thousands in divine offerings, as a presentation of the King of Upper- and Lower Egypt Menmaatre." JD *the king's name, Sethy, derives from that of the god Seth, who killed and dismembered Osiris. So the name was hardly fit to represent the king as the cult priest reassembling said deity. So the writing Sethy is replaced by the Isis knot tjt (elsewhere sometimes by the very name of Osiris) : Tity, Usiri... | ||
| Ossama Alsaadawi (217.139.145.7) |
Hi Jack, > The inscription reads in part 'An offering which the king gives before Ptah-Sokar-Osiris I'm not quite sure why a Blue Crown would be appropriate headgear? The inscription along the top is an /Htp-di-nsw/ offering formula < But I read it as: “irt-sw-di-Htp’. Where ‘irt’ has gone? Then, it is (sw-di-Htp) not ‘Htp-di-nsw’. Why it is reversed? Where is this (n) of ‘nsw’? it is only [M23] = sw! Is (sw) = (nsw)? Thankfully, Ossama Alsaadawi | ||
| Ossama Alsaadawi (217.139.145.7) |
Hi Jack, > The inscription reads in part 'An offering which the king gives before Ptah-Sokar-Osiris < In fact I’m very confused. How could you read: [Q3:X1-V28]? Is it ‘ptH’ or ‘ptaH’ or ‘ptah’? From where this (a) came from? Is it (h) or (H) or something else? Then, which ‘ptH’? We have plenty of them. For example: Is is [Q3:X1-V28] = ptH = to create (Faulkner)? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[A2] = ptH = to beg / to ask (Budge)? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[D54] = ptH = to open? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[Z9:D40] = ptH = to engrave? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[Z1] = ptH = ?? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[R8] = ptH = too many meanings!!? Etc, etc; there are too many ptH’s in Egyptology!! Now: [O34:V31:D21] = skr, or ‘sokar’? from where these two (o, a) came from? Please, how would you read [Q2:D4]? Is it “isir” or ‘isr’ or ‘isra’ or “osiris’? There’re too many words that include this [Q2:D4], how could one differentiate between them? Are all of them indicating god Osiris? In Egyptology, [Q2:D4] is god Osiris, but there is one cartouche that includes this word, Budge says that it is ‘Osiris the king of the south and north’! is he a god or king? What is the difference between [Q1] and [Q2]? | ||
| Ossama Alsaadawi (217.139.145.7) |
sorry Jack, it seems there is something wrong with my computer. I'm not able to send the whole message. I try again: In fact I’m very confused. How could you read: [Q3:X1-V28]? Is it ‘ptH’ or ‘ptaH’ or ‘ptah’? From where this (a) came from? Is it (h) or (H) or something else? Then, which ‘ptH’? We have plenty of them. For example: Is is [Q3:X1-V28] = ptH = to create (Faulkner)? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[A2] = ptH = to beg / to ask (Budge)? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[D54] = ptH = to open? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[Z9:D40] = ptH = to engrave? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[Z1] = ptH = ?? or [Q3:X1-V28]-[R8] = ptH = too many meanings!!? Etc, etc; there are too many ptH’s in Egyptology!! Now: [O34:V31:D21] = skr, or ‘sokar’? from where these two (o, a) came from? Please, how would you read [Q2:D4]? Is it “isir” or ‘isr’ or ‘isra’ or “osiris’? There’re too many words that include this [Q2:D4], how could one differentiate between them? Are all of them indicating god Osiris? In Egyptology, [Q2:D4] is god Osiris, but there is one cartouche that includes this word, Budge says that it is ‘Osiris the king of the south and north’! is he a god or king? What is the difference between [Q1] and [Q2]? You added: > I'm not quite sure why a Blue Crown would be appropriate headgear? The inscription along the top is an /Htp-di-nsw/ offering formula < But I read it as: “irt-sw-di-Htp’. Where ‘irt’ has gone? Then, it is (sw-di-Htp) not ‘Htp-di-nsw’. Why it is reversed? Where is this (n) of ‘nsw’? it is only [M23] = sw! Is (sw) = (nsw)? Thankfully, Ossama Alsaadawi | ||
| Ossama Alsaadawi (217.139.145.7) |
You added: > I'm not quite sure why a Blue Crown would be appropriate headgear? < But it must mean something, because all crowns are used as independent glyphs with may different words! For example according to Budge EHD p.126a: [S34-S1] = ankh-Hetch! = a goddess who touches her lips with the tip of her fore-finger! Where is the “white crown of Upper Egypt here”?! | ||
| Sahu (195.186.150.136) |
Ossama, you wrote... "But I read it as: “irt-sw-di-Htp’. Where ‘irt’ has gone? Then, it is (sw-di-Htp) not ‘Htp-di-nsw’. Why it is reversed?" -->The reversal of signs in the ‘Htp-dj-nsw’-formula is pretty common, "always" (can somebody name an exception??!) "nsw", "king", is written in the first position (this is such a "due-to-respect"-thing, the names of gods are also shiftet to a front position...) you wrote: "Where is this (n) of ‘nsw’? it is only [M23] = sw! Is (sw) = (nsw)?" -->Yes, it is. This abbreviation is also very common. The ‘Htp-dj-nsw’-formula is omnipresent for instance on coffins, as you might know. There, the "n" and sometimes also "t" of "nsw" (or "njsw.t", whatever reading you prefer) is most often left away, see for instance this example: http://www.metmuseum.org/explore/newegypt/htm/wk_coff.htm There has been a long (and ongoing?) discussion in egyptology how the ‘Htp-dj-nsw’-formula has to be understood. The question is/was: who gives the offering to whom, the king to the dead which is identified with a god, or does the king (e.q. the state distribution system) together with a god (e.q. the temple distribution system behind the god's name) re-distribute the offerings to the dead??? The god's name is in most cases Osiris, or Ptah-Sokar-Osiris like in our example, often also Anubis, sometimes Osiris and Anubis together, sometimes different deities like Atum or Geb - for Anubis and Geb see this examples: http://www.petrie.ucl.ac.uk/digital_egypt/sedment/2111/coffina.gif http://www.petrie.ucl.ac.uk/digital_egypt/rifeh/archive/uc38046.gif you wrote: "But I read it as: “irt-sw-di-Htp’. Where ‘irt’ has gone?" -->correct, it reads "jr.t Htp-dj-nsw". Here the offering is right about to take place (the king on the left side is performing an incense offering!). So this is in my mind a nominalised infinitive sentence, which might be translated like "the making of an 'offering-which-the-king-gives' etc." Here you can also observe how much the "Htp-dj-nsw" has become a formula and is not to be understood as an "active action" (e.q. not "the king gives an offering"). The formula must be "reactivated" by the "jr.t" ("the making of sth.") to be changed from a factual status to an "actual action" (sorry for my english...)!! What strikes me, is that the sequence of signs in the "Htp-dj-nsw"-formula is here a bit uncommon (the "dj"-bread before the "Htp"). This is not the usual graphic convention. But with a bit of research, one can surely find other examples for that (I guess)... | ||
| Sahu (195.186.150.136) |
Ossama, I just saw one of your earlier postings where you wrote: "On the top line I read the following word: ‘skr - israel’, or classically ‘skr - osiris’, [O34:V31:D21]-[Q2:D4]." For all the bible enthusiasts: this can't be a mention of Israel... Foreign Toponyms are almost always written syllabic and with a "town"- or "desert"-determinative! Besides, I can't really see how the consonants in s-k-r can relate to s-r-l in Israel... The only mention of Israel in Ancient Egypt, as most of you know, is found on the 400-year-stela (or "Israel" stela) of Merenptah... See: http://home-3.tiscali.nl/~meester7/engramses.html#stela The determinativ there is man-and-women-with-plural-strokes, indicating, that "Israel" at that time was no geopolitical unity but an ethnically distinctive group of people... Sincerely, Sahu | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.97) |
Sahu, Excellent postings. As to the sw.t plant, it can be read as sw indeed, but is often also an abreviation for nj-sw.t (read nsw or nzw by some). In titles such as zA-njsw.t ("king's son") or zA.t-,jsw.t ("king's daughter"), njsw.t is generally abridged to sw + t, but a rare variant written n + sw + t sometimes occurs, as here at top right : http://members.optushome.com.au/dingdell/jd/zma1.html JD | ||
| jdean25272 (152.163.204.62) |
Hi JD, Pardon my absence. I have been out of town for a few days. Thanks for posting the translation of the offering formula. I was having trouble posting (like Ossama did) so I divided my comments and only posted part of them. Under this string I wanted to examine the reasons why you think the Herakleopolitan kings of the 9th and 10th dynasties are omitted. You wrote: >the Herakleopolitan 9-10th dynasties are omitted. Not apparently because they were considered illegitimate, but because they didn’t rule over the whole of Egypt. The legitimate Antefs of early dyn. 11 are left out too, as are the SIP kings, even Ahmosis’ immediate predecessors (Seqenenre, Kamosis).< I agree that the Intefs are not on the Abydos king list, but could be on the Turin Canon in the lines mentioned. I agree that Ahmosis' immediate predecessors Seqenenre and Kamose are missing as well. Who are those kings preceeding Nebhepetre on the Abydos list? Those kings on the Abydos list on the 2nd register kings #6-18 could be 9th and 10th dynasty kings (Herakleopolitan kings) or 8th dynasty kings. There's not a clear match for either hypothesis. We can identify Nitocris in the previous column of the Turin Canon (column VI) and she belongs toward the beginning of the 2nd register of the Abydos royal list. The number of kings on the Turin Canon and the Abydos list are not that far apart for this period from the end of the 6th to the beginning of the 11th dynasties. Kaneferre is clearly on the Turin Canon (IV, 20), the 3rd 9th dynasty king. There are several Neferkare's on the Abydos list (11,13,14,16) in the suspected range. He could be any one of them. How is it known that 9th/10th dynasty kings are NOT on the Abydos king list? Sincerely, Jack | ||
| jdean25272 (152.163.204.62) |
Hi Ossama, You have raised a number of good questions. Your comments about Ptah are very interesting. Maybe they could be raised on an appropriate thread. I just finished a book you might be interested in titled _The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation including the Demotic Spells_ edited by Hans Dieter Betz. Ptah is mentioned in those spells with variant spellings including 'Phtha'. This is a digression though. Sincerely, Jack | ||
| Ossama Alsaadawi (217.139.145.7) |
Dear Jack, Thanks for the book’s name. You might remember our discussion here nearly three years ago and how you independently, and so other gentlemen, proved independently that: [Q3] = ph = f, together with other mistakes. In any written language it is impossible to translate any words correctly if one is not able to read its ‘elementary’ alphabets correctly. Please, imagine an Egyptian man who reads the English (L) as ‘th’, the English (z) as ‘f’ and the English (f) as ‘p’. Then you ask him to ‘read’ English words and translate it!! Then he came to you and said ‘I have translated all works of Shakespeare’! Do you trust his translations? For example, he will read (play) as ‘pthay’. But there is no ‘pthay’ in any known language, so he will guess what it means and says ‘O I got it’ it means ‘crocodile’! Things don’t go that way. We MUST read Egyptian basic phonemes correctly first, then we MUST decipher all other Hieroglyphs correctly then after all that we start to translate words then texts. We can’t read ‘ftH’ as ‘ptH’, why? Because, myself being Egyptian, I read ‘ptH’ for more than 15 years and I simply couldn’t know what it means or what is the wisdom behind it. Even Egyptologists differ about its different meanings! But when I realized that it reads actually as ‘ftH’ I realized at once, being an Egyptian, ALL what it means without checking any further documents. It is exactly like when you read an English word ‘sape’ and I spend five years to convince you that it means ‘love’ then you discover that it reads actually as ‘save’! This holds true for other thousands of Egyptian words. If we insist to read and write Egyptian words wrongly then it is our own problem, we lose our merit and the AE’s are quite sure that their valuable texts have not been read yet! Sincerely, Ossama Alsaadawi | ||
| jdean (205.188.209.77) |
How is it known that 9th/10th dynasty kings are NOT on the Abydos king list? Sincerely, Jack | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.73) |
Jack, The Abydos list only provides a selection of the most important kings and ignores the Intermediate Periods (the Theban Antefs as well as the Herakleopolitan rulers for the FIP). It als ignores the (at the time recent) Amarna kings & Hatshepsut, but not the probable 6th dyn. usurper Userkare. JD | ||
| jdean (205.188.209.77) |
Hi JD, I agree with what you are saying, but the notion the FIP (9th/10th dynasty Heracleopolitan rulers) are missing from the Abydos list is confusing. The Turin Canon provides the best data points for comparison. Are you placing Nitocris (near the end of the 6th dynasty) at Abydos List IInd register, 2nd or 3rd king? We know Nebhepetre (Abydos II, 19) is the 11th dynasty king. You've summarised what's known about those intervening kings above which I appreciate: II, 1: Merenre-Antiemzaf (or : Nemtiemzaf) II, 2: Neter-ka-Re II, 3: Men-ka-Re II, 4: Nefer-ka-Re II, 5: Neferkare-Neby II, 6: Djedkare-Shema II, 7: Neferkare II, 8: Merenhor II,9: Seneferka II, 10: Nikare II, 11: Neferkare-Tereru II, 12: Neferkahor II, 13: Neferkare-Pepiseneb II, 14: Sneferka-Anu (?) --> Neferka-Anu II, 15: [...]w-Re (?) --> [...]kau-Re II, 16: Neferkaure II, 17: Horkaure II, 18: Nefer-ir-ka-Re You believe Nefer-ir-ka-Re is the last Memphite king of the 8th dynasty. There are too many kings here. We know the Abydos king-list is abbreviated and the Turin Canon is a fuller list. We have a data point at Turin Canon IV, 17 indicating the end of the 8th dynasty with 955 years separating the beginning of the 1st dynasty to the end of the 8th. The preceeding 3 lines in the columns do not list king's names. The Archaic Period (dyn 1&2) & Old Kingdom (dyn 4-8) lasted 955 years. The 7th dynasty was quite short, possibly five kings who reigned 75 days (Manetho), and is more of an interregnum (Turin Canon). The 8th dynasty certainly lasted longer (possibly 20 years according to Clayton, p. 70), but are they represented on the Turin Canon? Are the above (II,5? to II,18) 8th dynasty kings? How do you know for sure? Couldn't II,15 [...]kau-Re possibly be Nebkaure Akhtoy, a Heracleopolitan king? Couldn't any of the Neferkare's be Kaneferre, who was probably the 3rd king of the 9th dynasty according to Clayton p. 71? Thanks, Jack | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.103) |
Jack, I'd tend not to distinguish between the 7th and 8th dynasties, considering these kings as the legitimate continuation of the Old Kingdom dynasties, ruling over a still unified Egypt. From the moment the kingdom falls apart, the Abydos list stops naming the rulers, whether they were Herakleopolitan or Theban, even though the Antefs were held in high regard. The list resumes with Menthuhotep "II", who reunified the country. I can't imagine that some of the Herakleopolitans (and why only some of them ?) would be named and not Antef Wahankh, Sehertawi and Nekht-neb-tep-nefer ! Especially since the Herakleopolitans had looted the sacred district in Abydos, as mentioned in the Teaching for Merykare, a work well known at the Ramesside Period, I suppose ! BTW a transcription and translation of the Turin Canon of Kings can be found here : http://www.ancient-egypt.org/glossary/tc/main.html JD |
