| Author | Message | ||
     Blake Wankel (Blake) (198.81.16.24) |
To All- There is a very interesting little site at Dahshur, very near the Red Pyramid, labeled pyramid no. 50 by lepsius. It dates back to the 4th Dynasty appearently. Does anyone else have more information about it or feel, as I do, that it was linked to the Red Pyramid's complex? Does anyone know if it has been surveyed/examined, if a report has been drawn up, or if any quarry marks have been noted? | ||
| Blake Wankel (Blake) (198.81.17.169) |
If anyone is not sure which one I'm talking about, Mark Lehner drew it on his map of Dahshur in his book "The Complete Pyramids", pg 101, and gave a small blurb about it on that same page, yet he only states that the 'pottery in the area' dates back to Dynasty IV. Blake | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.164) |
Blake, Here is what R. STADELMANN (MDAIK 38, 1982, pp. 382-383) has to say about this pyramid L 50 in Dahchur : -lies ca. 400 m NE of the Red Pyramid. -connected with the Red Pyramid by ramp-like elevations, strewn with limestone fragments. -pool-like excavation surrounded by a bulge (S part lies under road, N part shows two bulges, the outer one higher). -a trench was excavated through the structure : *the terrain had been levelled and covered with a thin (1 cm) layer of grey silt (to walk upon) *over this, a compact mix of sand and pebbles seems to represent material produced by excavating the shaft. *over this, loose sand, which prevented the archaeologists from digging, as it filled the trench and threatened the diggers. Work had to be abandoned at a depth of 1.7 m. *the shaft measures about 40 x 40 m and is filled with loose sand. *5.5 m from the N rim were found a strongly eroded limestone block, brick and 4th dyn. pottery fragments (domestic vases and small offering vessels). The attribution of the very unfinished pyramid remains unknown : an ephemeral 4th dyn. king ? Menkauhor (5th dyn.) ? a 13th dyn. king ? But its building seems to have involved quarrying the Red Pyramid’s casing (the pyramid of Amenemhat II uses a lot of similar material !). I don’t know whether other explorations have taken place at this site. JD PS : on small 4th dyn. pyramids, these have three types of plans : *either a simplified version of the main pyramid (Bent, Khufu’s Trial Passages ; possibly Djedefre’s newly discovered satellite ?) and Djoser’s S Mastaba comes to mind too. *or an even more simplified T-shaped layout (Khufu’s definitive satellite ; Khafre ; Menkaure ; all the later ones). These two types are true satellite pyramids, burials for an aspect of the king (not for his canopics, these are in the main pyramid’s sarcophagus room). I think the satellites are tekenu-burials, possibly associated with the king’s stillborn twin, his afterbirth. *or an angled layout (DP, antechamber, passage towards W burial room) : G I a-c, Menkaure’s two western satellites. From Khufu’s complex we know these to have been queens’ pyramids. | ||
| Blake Wankel (Blake) (198.81.17.59) |
Thanks for the info- I have yet to see that article- he says nothing about any inscriptions found then? | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.78) |
Blake, It's only a paragraph in an article : I'll send you scans. No inscriptions, unfortunately. JD | ||
| jd degreef (80.236.134.104) |
Blake, I tried to send you the scans but... excessive storage allocation... If you have another, suitable e-mail address, let me know ! JD | ||
| Blake Wankel (Blake) (198.81.17.47) |
you can try Martyr10@aol.com Thanks alot! | ||
| Blake Wankel (Blake) (198.81.17.168) |
Thanks JD- I got them! I had to play with the sizes a little, but managed to print them out. Thanks again- Blake | ||
| Charly (62.4.151.157) |
Anyone interested in discussing the Queen's Pyramids of Menkaure? (Why G III-a was converted into a burial and when / How GIII-b and c were supposed to look like when they were finished / Why Khaimerernebti II, the alledged chief queen of Menkaure wasn't burried in one of them) Charly | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.116) |
Sure Charly, what did you have in mind ? JD | ||
| Charly (62.4.140.181) |
JD (sorry about the late reply, been busy) When and why was G III-a converted into the burial of a Queen? There are IMHO only two possibilities; during the reign of Menkaure or during the reign of Shepseskhaf. One question remains (in both cases) unanswerd: "Why would Menkaure abandon his cult-pyramid in favor of a queen?" or "Why would Shepseskhaf alter the purpose of the cult-pyramid of his predesessor?". Apparantly the Queen burried in G III-a was so important that Menkaure's cult-pyramid was transformed in her favor. Only one type of queen could take advantage of such a treatment; a king's mother (fragments of a queen's statue wearing a vulture-crown, symbol of the king's mother in the OK, found nearby, seem to confirm this). If G III-a was altered under Menkaure's reign in favor of that queen it would mean that G III-b and G III-c were already occupied and that these queens didn't give birth to a successor. It also means that the queen of G III-a was originally one of "lower" rank and was probably "raised" in rank after the two others died. This queen could have been Shepseskhaf's mother. If G III-a was altered under Shepseskhaf's reign the consequences remain the same as with Menkaure but now we know for certain that this queen was Shepseskhaf's mother. The theory that Shepseskhaf himself was burried in G III-a is IMHO too farfetched (G. Jéquier). Whatever the reason; the conversion of a royal cult-pyramid into a queen's pyramid remains a unique occurance in the history of AE. Charly | ||
| jd degreef (80.236.134.189) |
Charly, This is going to be a very short discussion, for I completely agree with your posting. I can't imagine that Menkaure would have given up his satellite pyramid, so I suppose that one of Menkaure's successors did this to honor his own mother, a secondary queen of Menkaure. This king may have been Shepseskaf, or an ephemeral successor of Menkaure : the Turin Canon gives two reign lengths (names lost) of 4 and 2 years after [Menkaure]'s 18 (or 28) years. Both durations seem too short for Shepseskaf, who thus seems to have been omitted here ! Manetho has two kings between Mencheres and Sebercheres : "Ratoises, 25 years" could be Djedefre, misplaced ; there then remains one "Bicheris, 22 years". I have long thought that this king himself had been buried in Menkaure's satellite, until I found the queen's statue you mention, listed in PORTER & MOSS. After Sebercheres, Manetho then adds one "Thamphtis, 9 years", who could be tA mw.t njsw.tj, "the Mother of Two Kings", i.e. the mw.t njsw.t-bjtj njsw.t-bjti* Khentkawes. Buried where she is, she must have been yet another queen of Menkaure's ! JD *"mother of two kings of Upper- and Lower Egypt". How do you put njsw.t-bjtj in the dual ? njsw.tj bjtj.j ??? nj.w-sw.t bjtj.j ??? | ||
| Ritva (212.246.56.235) |
Hi, Somewhat off topic... or maybe not. Any ideas why Meresankh III hadn't a burial place prepared for her, either by Khafre or Menkaure? I find it intriguing, that Hetepheres II should take care of her daughter's burial, who after all had been a queen and a king's mother. Besides, Meresankh III died in her fifties, and after Khafre. One would think that her burial would have been prepared way before that age. | ||
| Charly (62.4.151.172) |
JD & Ritva Ritva, very interesting question, but I'm afraid there isn't an easy answer. All I can say is that it isn't an unique occurrence; Khaimerernebti I (alleged wife of Khafre and mother of Menkaure) abandoned her tomb ("Galarza tomb behind Khafre's valley temple) in favour of her daughter Khaimerernebti II (the alleged "chief queen" of Menkaure). Why she abandoned the tomb and why her daughter expanded it for her own use is unknown (there is an interesting hyphothesis however; see below). Both Khaimerernebti I and II were king's mothers, Hetepheres II (also a queen of Khafre, maybe first married to Djedefre) and Meresankh III weren't (according to Dr. Derry Meresankh III was 25 years old when she died, rather unexpected, Hetepheres II died in her late sixties). JD, this brings us to the problem concerning Khaimerernebti II; if she was indeed Menkaure's chief queen, why wasn't she buried in a pyramid? Callendar and Janosi think her burial was planned in one of the subsidiary pyramids but that this wasn't allowed by Shepseskhaf because he was an usurper. The arguments they use are: 1) she had to pay for her own burial 2) a (crown-)prince Khuenre (her son) is mentioned (he has a "re" name; Shepseskhaf forms a break in the tradition started by Djedefre) 3) I would like to add the presence of a "mere" limestone sarcophagus to this; a rather "poor" material for a king's mother (usually red or black granite). Shepseskhaf is usually identified as a usurper (tomb not in Giza and no pyramid) but I think his successor, the almost unknown, Djedefptah (JD, I thought Thamphtis was identified with Djedefptah, not Khentkawes; I could be wrong though) is a more likely candidate. Nothing is known about him except his name (result of damnatio memoriae). To my knowledge only one researcher has tried to identify his tomb, Seipel. He thinks that Khentkawes usurped Djedefptah's tomb but he doesn't give any arguments to support this. I was able to reconstruct some of the possible reasons for attributing LG 100 ("Giza's fourth pyramid") to Djedefptah. 1) The architecture has similarities with the Mastaba el-Faraun (certain blocks have been prepared using a specific technique; the only examples of royal tombs with such blocks are G III-b, G III-c, the Mastaba el-Faraun and LG 100; some mastabas also have this feature, but I wasn't able to find out which ones) 2) Bunefer, daughter of Shepseskhaf, was married to Djedefptah and buried in a rock-cut tomb beside LG 100 (as a rule queens are buried beside their husband). Later she married a rather low-ranking official. 3) After his short reign, Khentkawes ruled for a short period (the fact that a woman was able to reign as a king is also an indication that there was an unusual situation, probably succession problems; Manetho speaks about a period of anarchy at the end of the fourth dynasty). This brings us to Khentkawes; did she rule Egypt as a king and / or was she the mother of two kings (JD, my knowledge of the ancient Egyptian language is rather limited, I'm an Archaeologist, not an Egyptologist but I guess this is what you meant by *"mother of two kings of Upper- and Lower Egypt". How do you put njsw.t-bjtj in the dual ? njsw.tj bjtj.j ??? nj.w-sw.t bjtj.j ???). I know there are different interpretations involving her title. Personally I think she did rule for a short period as a king and that Userkaf was one the two sons who became king. LG 100 has another remarkable feature, it has a lot in common with 5th dynasty solar temples; it has a square socket with a mound on it (the squat obelisks were built later in the 5th dyn. to replace the original mounds). According to most researchers the second step and the limestone casing of LG 100 were added by her sons, so the solar temples influenced the architecture of her tomb. But on the other hand, the use of the special blocks I already mentioned was a fourth dynasty innovation of Menkaure (I don't know if this special technique was still known in the fifth dyn.). G III-b and G III-c were probably meant to become two-stepped structures when the casing was in place (most likely reconstruction according to Janosi). In that case LG 100 is the prototype that inspired the 5 Th dyn. solar temples! But behind the limestone casing is a palace façade decoration, cut into the socket, when was this done if the casing and second step (mound) were added in the fourth dynasty? Colin Reader thinks the palace façade decoration was cut in the second dynasty; the niches are severely weathered, this would not be the case if the were cut in the fourth dynasty because a few years later in the fifth dynasty they were protected by the limestone casing. I agree with this view because there are no other examples in the fourth dynasty of palace façade decoration directed outward (palace façade decoration in the complexes of Menkaure and Shepseskhaf is always directed inward). And the boatpit lies at the Southwest corner of the structure (Southwest is an important direction in the second dynasty royal tombs at Abydos). Platforms (similar to the rock-cut socket of LG 100) are also known from the second dynasty royal tombs at Abydos. IMHO the rock-cut socket of LG 100 could have been a platform in connection with the second dynasty solar cult Colin Reader says to have existed at Giza (in connection with the Sphinx etc….). I'm not sure where to place Khentkawes in relation to Menkaure, she could also be a daughter of this king and maybe a wife of Shepseskhaf. The problem with the fourth dynasty queens (at least a lot of them) is that we don't know to which kings they were married. For example we don't know the names of the kings in connection with Khaimerernebti I and II although we know that they were daughters, wives and mothers of kings. It is very difficult to fit all pieces together, there always seem to be contradictions. One of the reasons is IMO the fact that there are queens buried in Giza whose husband is buried elsewhere; Khafre's successor Bakare (Bicheris?) whose unfinished pyramid is located in Zawyat-el Aryan and Shepseskhaf. The queens married to these two kings are unknown but probably buried in Giza and attributed to other kings like Khafre and Menkaure (for example Khaimerernebti I could have been a queen of Bakare). The two kings had undoubtedly planned a necropolis near their tombs but their successors returned to Giza and the queens of these two short reigning kings were probably buried in Giza because there was no building activity at the sites of their husbands tombs (for example: three of the four known priests of the funerary cult of Shepseskhaf are buried in Giza because there's no necropolis belonging to the Mastaba el-Faraoun). Charly | ||
| Dawn (68.128.50.116) |
Charly, I have 2 questions regarding your last entry, 1. What evidence has been found that would cause you to believe that the daughter of Shepseskaf, Bunefer, was married to Djedefptah? I thought that she was married to Ptah-Shepses and buried in Saqquara. 2. Mark Lehner says in his book that her mastaba (LG100) is built on an intentionally left block of limestone bedrock when the surrounding stone was quarried out to use for building blocks of the pyramids. If the palace facade decorations (with their weathered niches)behind the limestone casing were carved in the 2nd dynasty, wouldn't this mean that the pyramids would have had to have been built in the 2nd dynasty also? | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.124) |
Charly, It seems I forgot to answer your posting, although I found it very rich and interesting, sorry ! -on Khaimerernebti I : did she share her tomb with her namesake, or was the funerary complex reattributed to Khaimerernebti II ? Or did Menkaure remarry one of his father’s (?) queens ? There’s a larger than life bad limestone statue of a queen Khaimerernebti in a lost corner of the Cairo Museum (among brooms and buckets last time I went) : is this one of our two queens, or a 5th dyn. namesake ? Before Menkaure’s reign, only the queens of Khufu had ever obtained a pyramid. Menkaure seems to try and imitate Khufu (fairly obvious in the disposition of his funerary temple, possibly also the complicated layout of his pyramid, the portcullises room etc.) : this may be why he provided his queens with pyramids ? From the lack of a satellite pyramid at Dahchur North and the fact that Khufu’s cult pyramid seems to have been quickly built at the very end of his reign or maybe even while he was being embalmed, one may conclude that this type of structure was one of the last to be added to a funerary complex. Now the position of Menkaure’s satellite, not on the main pyramid’s N-S axis (as at the Bent, Khafre…) seems to take into account the fact that one or even two queens’ pyramids had to be added to the west of it. Unless this hints at the position of the satellite at Khufu’s ? But if the first idea is true, then the queens’ pyramids GIII b-c could well date from the very end of the king’s reign. This is confirmed by the brickwork temples ; the burial room of G III c had only been started and was discovered full of debris, mixed with stone tools. Yet the two pyramids have a cult temple, mostly in brickwork, added, so one supposes they were used. Maybe we could then say that Khaimerernebti II died early during the king’s reign, and was buried in her older namesake’s tomb (variant : it was the same queen, her complex was just expanded). Maybe the expansion even predated Menkaure, if Khaimerernebti I was also the mother of Neferka, Khafre’s successor ??? Two queens were attributed pyramids late during Menkaure’s reign : the first one to die was buried in GII b (where human remains have indeed been found) ; the second one died when GIII c was unfinished (or abandoned because the king had died in the meantime). Maybe she was then buried in GIII a, the royal satellite pyramid, even though a cult place was established alongside the unfinished pyramid originally destined to hold her body (a situation much like that at Dahchur under Snefru). The reason why an unfinished pyramid was out of the question for her (but was acceptable for the queen of G III b) was her role of king’s mother of Shepseskaf ??? -I don’t think Khu-en-Re’s name specifically marks him as a successor, as other courtiers bore -Re names. But if I remember well he was a “king’s eldest son”, so he may have been in line for the throne but died young. This doesn’t make Shepseskaf an usurper. -a limestone sarcophagus for Khamerernebti II was already a great honor, Menkaure’s reign was poorer than Khufu’s, Hetepheres I had an alabaster sarcophagus… -Shepseskaf couldn’t build his monument in Giza : the area with good quality bedrock had been completely occupied by his predecessors. In moving back to Saqqara he may not have wished to move away from his predecessors, but maybe to be closer to a sacred place of the Sokar cult ? -the attribution of the Manethonian Thamphtis is anyone’s guess : “Djedefptah” is possible, but we don’t have anything else on such a person, I think ? Is he really mentioned in the tomb of Bunefer ? NB : Dawn, you’re confusing Bunefer with the wife of the high-priest of Ptah Ptahshepses, who was also the eldest daughter of king Shepseskaf, Kha-Maat (or Maat-kha), BAR I, 115. tA-mw.t nzwt.wj, “the mother of two kings”, is equally valid, but here we do have such a person, Khentkawes I, buried in LG 100. So I prefer this attribution. NB: the reason why Bunefer was buried in Giza may have been the one you give for other burials : “three of the four known priests of the funerary cult of Shepseskhaf are buried in Giza because there's no necropolis belonging to the Mastaba el-Faraoun”. -the fact that Khentkawas I was a regent after the reign of Shepseskaf indicates a dynastic vacuum, but doesn’t imply that another king (Djedefptah) had reigned in between. On fragments of the granite false door of LG 100 she bears a title written as nj-sw.t-bjtj nj-sw.t-bjtj mw.t, which can be interpreted either as mw.t nj.wj-sw.t bjtj.wj “mother of two kings of Upper- and Lower Egypt”, or as nj.sw.t, mw.t nj-sw.t-bjtj “king of Upper- and Lower Egypt, mother of a king of Upper- and Lower Egypt”, i.e. simply as “mother of two kings” or as “king (herself) and mother of a king”. I favor the first hypothesis, as the title is shared with Khentkawes II during the later 5th dyn. -not much is known about this Khentkawes. If she had simply been a queen, the location of her tomb near Menkaure’s pyramid would have made her yet another wife of this king. But as a king herself (she’s said to wear an uraeus on representations from her false door, but this could be a later addition due to a misunderstanding of her titles) she could choose any burial place she wanted. So : *if she was only a regent : >the situation of her tomb makes her a wife of Menkaure. >her importance at the end of the dynasty would also make her Shepseskaf’s mother (they’re in close theological agreement through the architecture of their tombs. >who is the other king she was the mother of ? Possibly Userkaf, whose name is close to that of Shepseskaf. His wife Neferhetepes has often been considered as Djedefre’s daughter of that name, but if he was a late 4th dyn. prince, this appears unlikely. *if she was a king : >we don’t know her family links, she could have been a wife of Menkaure, or Shepseskaf’s queen. >we don’t know who her royal son was (Shepseskaf ? Userkaf ?). On her tomb, LG 100 at Giza, the niched façade could have been smoothened in order to cover it with a casing : this would simulate erosion. Palace façades are popular during the late reign of Menkaure and during that of Shepseskaf (a room with such a decoration in Menkaure’s pyramid : unique ! courtyard of Menkaure’s and Shepseskaf’s funerary temples…). So its presence in an early project for Khentkawes’ tomb isn’t astonishing. As Dawn wrote, the tomb is cut in a remnant of Khafre’s quarry (I think this was a podium left in the middle of the quarry for surveillance). I don’t like to link the structure of LG 100 or the Mastaba Faraun with solar temples, funerary distribution centers, as I refuse the link with the northern podium of Djoser’s complex. JD | ||
| Dawn (68.128.23.139) |
JD & CHARLEY, YES, I WAS THINKING ABOUT WHAT CHARLEY WROTE AND I DIDN'T WRITE MY QUESTION CORRECTLY. CHARLEY WROTE: "BUNEFER, A DAUGHTER OF SHEPSESKAF, WAS MARRIED TO DJEDEFPTAH AND BURIED IN A ROCK CUT TOMB BESIDE LG100". I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT WORDS WERE WRITTEN IN THIS TOMB TO LEAD TO THIS CONCLUSION, AS ALL THE "AUTHORITIES" HAVE LISTED IN THEIR "WHOES WHO" LISTS, THAT BUNEFER WAS THE WIFE OF SHEPSESKAF AND MOTHER OF KHAMA'AT WHO WAS MARRIED TO PHTA-SHEPSES OF SAQQUARA. THIS COMES FROM MARIETTE WHO EXCAVATED THE TOMB OF PHTA-SHEPSES ("MASTABAS, C1, P110.) THE BIOGRAPHY OF PHTA-SHEPSES RECORDED IN HIS TOMB SAYS THAT HE WAS RAISED IN THE HOUSE OF THE WOMEN OF SHEPSESKAF; THAT HIS WIFE WAS KHAMA'AT THE OLDEST DAUGHTER OF A KING (SHEPSESKAF) & DAUGHTER OF BUNEFER. (SHOWING BUNEFER TO BE THE WIFE OF SHEPSESKAF AND NOT THE DAUGHTER AS CHARLEY SAYS). IT GOES ON TO SAY THAT HE SERVED 7 KINGS, MENKAURE, SHEPSESKAF, USERKAF, SAHURE, NEFERIRKARE,RANEFEREF, & NEUSERRE. HIS TITLE WAS HIGH PRIEST OF PTAH. KING NEFERIRKARE GRANTED HIM THE HONOR OF KISSING THE KING'S FOOT INSTEAD OF THE GROUND IN FRONT OF IT AS OTHER COURTIERS DID. SO WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS, JUST WHAT IS WRITTEN ON THIS TOMB THAT CHARLEY SPEAKS OF, LOCATED BESIDE LG100, THAT SAYS BUNEFER WAS THE DAUGHTER OF SHEPSESKAF AND MARRIED TO THE ILLUSIVE DJEDEFPTAH? | ||
| DAWN (68.128.23.139) |
KHAMERER-NEBTI 11 IS DOCUMENTED IN INSCRIPTIONS OF THE GALARZA TOMB OF KHAMERER-NEBTI 1 (TOMB IN CLIFF SOUTHEAST OF 2ND PYRAMID) AS DAUGHTER OF KHAMERER-NEBTI 1, AND IN THE TOMB OF KUN-RE HER SON, AS THE DAUGHTER OF KHAMERER-NEBTI 1 SO I DON'T THINK THAT THEY COULD BOTH BE THE SAME PERSON. [UNLESS SHE WAS SOMEHOW HER OWN MOTHER  ] | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.151) |
Dawn, Please don't post in capitals, as this is considered rude on the Internet. The excerpt from the biography of the high-priest of Ptah, Ptah-shepses, which you mention is : "[...] at the time of Shepseskaf, (I am) he who he raised among the king's children at the Palace, in the king's room, in the residence of the royal family, he who was more honored in front of the king than any other young man, Ptah-shepses. His Majesty gave him the king's eldest daughter, Maat-kha, as spouse, for His Majesty desired her to be with him more than with anyone else, Ptah-shepses..." No mention of Bunefer in this text. But I'd sure like to know what the texts are that mention Djedefptah. Do you by any chance have the inscriptions of the Khaimerernebti I & II tomb, that remarkable woman who may have been her own mother :-) ? JD | ||
| Charly (62.4.201.26) |
Dawn & JD Dawn, I see JD already answered your first question; but I would like to add something about Bunefer; concerning her marriage with Djedefptah. This Djedefptah isn't mentioned in her tomb but he is the only king she could be married too. Since Shepseskhaf was her father and Khentkawes was the last ruler of the fourth dynasty, she must have been married to a king who ruled for a short period of time between these two. (her titles in her tomb identify her as daughter of Shepseskhaf and as a king's wife; see: Grdseloff, B. , "Deux inscriptions Juridiques de L'Ancien Empire", in ASAE 42, 1943, p. 65-70 and also: Schmitz, B. , "Untersuchungen zum Titel s3-nj'swt 'Königssohn'", Bonn, 1976, p. 28 and 110. Found nothing in English Dawn, sorry.) JD, some more info about Djedefptah can also be found in Seipel, W. , Untersuchungen zu den Ägyptischen Königinnen der Frühzeit und des Alten Reiches, Diss, Hamburg, 1980. Coudn't find the reference to the exact page, sorry) As for your second question Dawn: I didn't want to give the impression that the pyramids of Giza predated the fourth dynasty, far from it. But not everyone agrees with Lehner about the location of Khafre's quarries. I think there is still much work to be done concerning the location and attribution of quarries, and not only those of Khafre. JD, I would like to add a few things about the "Galarza Tomb" and it's successive owners Khaimerernebti I and II. Galarza-tomb as burial of Khaimerernebti I (wouldn't be strange) If Khaimerernebti was a wife of Khafre and the mother of the Menkaure (and / or Nebkare, called Bakare by Reisner) one would expect a pyramid as burial because the queens of Khufu and the queen of Djedefre had a pyramid as tomb. However Khafre didn't build pyramids for his queens; they were buried in Mastabas or rock-cut tombs. The proximity of the Galarza-tomb with Khafre's Valley temple and his causeway seem to suggest that Khaimerernebti I was indeed a wife of this king (this is in fact the only reason why this queen is attributed to Khafre; the location of her tomb). The original plan has a lot of similarities with other queen's tombs from approximately the same period; LG 88 Persenet (Khafre?); Rechitre (Menkaure?), Bunefer (Djedefptah): In the floor of one of the rooms in the upper part a sloping passage was cut which ended in the rock-cut burial chamber. Khaimerernebti I is represented in this tomb with the vulture cap, a feature that other alleged queens of Khafre don't posses, which indicates that she was the mother of the successor. Queens buried in such a rock-cut tombs all seem to have had a limestone sarcophagus; it seems that the type of sarcophagus is influenced by the tomb-type; not the status of their occupants. Khaimerernebti I wasn't buried in the Galarza-tomb and her final resting-place is unknown. Galarza-tomb as burial of Khaimerernebti II (very unusual to say the least) At some point in time Khaimerernebti II (daughter of Khaimerernebti I; titles in the tomb say this) was buried here after a series of adaptations took place. The most striking feature is the fact that the burial chamber remained unfinished and that a limestone sarcophagus was placed in a room of the upper apartment which was transformed into a (temporary?) burial chamber. This remarkable feature led to the theory that this was only a temporary tomb and that her pyramid (G III-a?) was still under construction (or rather; still being adapted). In any case, reburial never took place if this theory is correct. (The limestone sarcophagus is probably that of her mother since this type was used in tombs corresponding to the original plan; see above. It has probably nothing to do with status as I wrongly suggested in my previous post, nor with the "poorer" period under Menkaure as you mentioned) The following questions concerning these queens remain: 1) Why and when did Khaimerernebti I abandon her initial tomb? (And where was she eventually buried?) 2) Why and when did Khaimerernebti II took over this tomb from her mother and why wasn't the burial chamber finished? 3) If Khaimerernebti II was indeed married to Menkaure, why wasn't she buried in one of the three subsidiary pyramids? 4) Who were their fathers (kings, but which ones?), husbands (kings, but which ones?) and sons (kings, but which ones?)? For more info about the inscrpiptions concerning both queens and background see: Callendar, V. and Janosi, P. "The Tomb of Queen Khaimerernebti II at Giza, A Reassessment", in MDAIK, Band 53, 1997, p. 1-53. JD, If Lehner is indeed correct about the area containing LG 100 being part of a quarry of Khafre there must be another explanation for the niches of the first building plan. First I would like to take a closer look at the Mastaba el-Faraoun because of it's similarities with LG 100. This tomb also called a "Sarcophagus mastaba" is in fact a representation of an early dynastic shrine (similar to the one depicted on the Tjehennu Pallet). If I recall correctly you also connected this in another thread (Akhet=Tomb) with granaries and possibly the cult of Sokar. So in fact we are dealing with some kind of retro style (the palace façade decoration is also an aspect of this). Maybe LG 100 was supposed to look more like the Mastaba el-Faraoun according to a first plan (which was never finished?). With the exterior palace façade panelling it would even look more like an early dynastic shrine than the Mastaba el-Faraoun which walls have only internal palace façade panelling. In a second building (or rebuilding?) phase the niches were walled over and the second step was added. I still believe there is a connection with the fifth dynasty solar-temples because there are a lot of indications which point in this direction: 1) As I mentioned before; there is a strong resemblance between the groundplan of LG 100 and (a part of) a fifth dynasty solar-temple (of the earlier stages, before the obelisks). In both cases we see a square socket surmounted by a second step (mound). In case of LG 100 the mound lies of centre, probably because the architects feared for the weight would endanger the internal rooms if the mound was placed (partially) above them. 2) It is clear that Khentkawes I was revered in the fifth dynasty as "founder" of that dynasty. The kings were worshipped as sons of the solar-god Re. The much later Westcar Papyrus seems to illustrate this; it says that Rudjedet bore the children of the solar-god who took the appearance of her husband a priest of Re. Thoth informed her that she would give birth to the sons of Re (this is very similar to the story of the announcement of the birth of Christ; where Thoth is replaced by an archangel and Rudjedet with the Virgin Mary). Many scientists believe that the character Rudjedet is based on Khentkawes. Khentkawes doesn't seem to have been married with a king (because she held the office of king herself?) so she had to (or at least her descendants) legitimise her reign by claiming some kind of "divine intervention"; this is probably how the story of Rudjedet came into existence. The Osiris-myth contains similar aspects concerning the origin of Horus. It shouldn't be surprising that the mother of the first kings of the fifth dynasty, who were "sons of Re", eventually received a tomb representing a solar-temple, symbol of her "husband" the god Re. (I see Khentkawes as a daughter of Menkaure rather than a wife, possibly wife of Shepseskhaf and mother of Bunefer?) About the existence of a usurper at the end of the fourth dynasty: There are some interesting elements found during the fifth dynasty that could be interpreted as a reaction against the succession problems at the end of the fourth dynasty. These precautions seem to have been taken to prevent usurpers from taking the throne. All important posts in the government during the fourth dynasty were taken by members of the royal family; in the fifth they are replaced by high officials of non-royal blood. Fifth dynasty kings seem to select only one "chief" queen, who is buried in a pyramid complex beside them and is mother of the successor. "Lesser" queens are buried in mastabas in Sakkara (examples; Nebunebti, Khuit I, Meresankh IV). Sons of queens of equal rank could no longer dispute the throne. This concept was abandoned in the beginning of the sixth dynasty (again multiple queens pyramids) and Teti immediately became the victim of this change (alleged harem-conspiracy and succession struggle). Charly | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.88) |
Charly, Yet another superb posting ! Thank you very much ! I'll try and find the references at the library (ASAE and MFAIK should be no problem, the others I'll see) and reply afterwards. On the change of policy regarding high jobs to princes : Naguib KANAWATI has just been in the spotlight telling that the jobs continued being held by princes, [but not the sons of the king & main queen anymore, I suppose]. JD | ||
| Dawn (68.128.23.140) |
JD & Charley, Thank you very much for the informitive material, inscription quotations, references, and thought provoking questions. Unfortunatly I do not have any answers about Khaimerernebti ll. I would dearly love to have some though. There may be a clue as to who the mother of Khentkawes is though, in the tomb of Meserankh lll. Reisner wrote in the "Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts" Oct. 1927, that he found 2 little princes painted at the feet of Queen Meserankh 111. He said they appeared to have been added at a later date. The inscriptions for the princes were different than the inscriptions for Queen Meserankh being merely painted and not inscribed and painted as hers were. The inscription of one prince read "the King's son of his body, Niuserre-ankh." Reisner said that he reasoned this prince to be the son of King Niuserre. He speculated that the pictures of the princes (the other's name was Duwara)had been added later in Dynasty V to claim the honors of Meserankh 111 being their ancestress. If it is true that this is a son of King Niuserre, and Kentkawes was the founder of the royal bloodline of Dynasty V, being the mother of 2 or three of its first kings, then it could point to Meserankh as being her mother. Her name is not written in the tomb but there are 3 unamed daughters. The name of Kinterkau is written but he was a boy. Another interesting thing in this tomb is that Queen Meresankh 111 is portrayed wearing the panther skin. Because the AE didn't wear animal skins {except for the panter skin worn by the sem priest and by the priestesses of Seshet} I wonder if this meant that she was a priestess of Seshet. The inscriptions on the canopy of her grandmother, Hetepheres 1, say that this Queen was a "follower of Horus" (Shemsu Hor) and "Guide to the King". (Reisner- "Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts" May 1927. Dawn | ||
| jd degreef (80.236.140.43) |
All, I've finally managed to go to the library and copy the very interesting article on the Galarza tomb : Vivienne G. CALLENDER & Peter JANOSI, "The Tomb of Queen Khamerernebty II at Giza", MDAIK 53. Would the people interested in receiving scans please tell me within the next 48 hours, so that I can do a group e-mail on Friday ? JD | ||
| hordjedef@earthlink.net (68.128.23.197) |
JD, Please add me to your group e-mail, re: Galarza tomb. hordejef@earthlink.net Thank you very much for all your hard work. We really appreciate it. Dawn | ||
| Rick (24.25.208.10) |
Sure send me one too. Thanks | ||
| Jon B (212.126.153.207) |
I'm interested in the reference to animal skins and particularly to the Panther skin. Is this used as an alternate name for the Leopard skin, ie are the two terms interchangeable? This photo shows Princess Nefertiabet who was Khufu's daughter wearing a Leopard skin. The piece comes originally from Giza but it is now in the Louvre.  Jon B | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.56) |
Jon, Everybody knows the panther skin worn by priests, which may derive from a hunter's outfit : originally the offered animals had to be hunted first. But here the deceased themselves, both males and females, are wearing the skin. The only reason I can see is that the spots on the skin reminded people of stars : on the statue of Tiy's brother, the 4th prophet of Amon Aanen, the spots are indeed replaced by stars. This also makes me think of the Mesketet sky (from mskA, "skin" ?), and of the panther skin represented on the lid of some 4th dyn. sarcophagi. So IMHO the sky could be represented as a panther skin, the denser spots along the spine then being the Milky Way. The deceased would be wearing a "starry outfit", symbolizing his destination and destiny. Or is the devouring aspect of the sky-panther-goddess meant, and is the outfit apotropaic, destined to repell evil ? JD | ||
| Erik Calero (200.76.234.3) |
Hi Jon, Nice Picture! Do you know what It says? JD? Is the Ox's leg a hieroglyph ? If not, what It means here ? What did the numbers at the right side describe? Thanks in advance Erik Calero | ||
| Erik Calero (200.76.234.3) |
Hi JD, May you add me to the email group about the Galarza Tomb article erik@cmi.com.mx Thanks in advance Erik Calero | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.205) |
JD, More likely, wearing the skin is related to drawing in and becoming enveloped by the powers of the animal, in this case the leopard. While this also can be associated, at least peripherally, with apotropaic qualities, the fundamental thinking IMO is to identify with the animal and to become united with its characteristic powers/qualities. In the case of the leopard, this is a combination of excellent vision, patience, cunning, intelligence and perhaps most importantly, the ability to skillfully and rapidly "cut to the chase" and capture the prey. Are we looking at a version of Shamanism here? Ken | ||
| ken b (12.228.203.205) |
Eric, I'll let JD do the transliteration (it's mostly a count of burial items) but the "ox" leg is a sign for the front leg of a calf. (Was it Herodotus who commented on all the three legged cows in Egypt?) It is traditionally associated with the star group Ursa Major (the Big Dipper). This star group was in the circumpolar region of the northern sky and was associated with the "imperishables", that is, the stars that in their circular travels each night never ventured below the horizon. This is in contrast to southern star groups like Orion and the star Sirius which are part of the "ceaselessly wandering" stars/souls who seasonally travel below the akhet or horizon. In the ceremony of Opening of the Mouth a device with this same shape was one of many instruments held up to the mouth and nose of the mummy to magically awaken/activate the physical remains of the deceased. The point seems to have been to allow certain aspects of the soul-essence of the physically deceased to "come forth by day" so as to continue a presence on the physical plane. IMO this also was part of a reciprocal process whereby the deceased could bestow benefits upon surviving relatives, descendants and custodians of the tomb. Ken | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.133.6) |
Erik, About the inscriptions : -above the lady : "the king's daughter Nefert-Iabet" (="beautiful / young one from the East / at the left"). -inside the frame in front of the princess : a list of offerings (frankincense, first quality oil / essence, green eye-paint, black eye-paint, figs, jSd-fruit, sxp.t-drink, wine, zizyphus-fruit, zizyphus-bread, Hwa-offering). -left and beneath this frame : purification, hand-washing, thigh (best meat), cutlets, goose (meat). -under the offering table and to its right : the offering of 1000s (cloth, birds, ducks / geese, bread, beer, cattle, small cattle). -to the right, list of tissues of which a thousand of each is provided (the numbers are said to refer to he number of threads in the weft). Ken, I'm often extremely suspicious with theories trying to apply observations from Siberian shamans to AE. What you state about the leopard skin is possible, but there are other possibilities. AEs were very poor, and clothes very expensive (I just read an article where the price for the sculpted architrave of a tomb was one small loincloth). So people tended to make their own clothes when they could : marsh people had clothes made of woven grass / reeds / papyrus ; hunters had clothes made of skins. So maybe this is the prime reason for a hunter to wear skin clothes. But the choice of the panther may have had the meaning which you attribute to it, unless it was just a luxury item which the rich used to impress people. The "starry" appearance of the skin may have played a role too. Lion skins are sometimes represented mottled too. JD | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.41) |
All, I've just e-mailed the Galarza tomb article. I hope we'll be able to resume our discussions on the matter after everybody'll have read it. JD | ||
| G. Negro (213.140.12.219) |
Alas, JD! NOT "Siberian shamans", but "Saharan shamans": in fact they are certainly attested in North Africa from the "Round Heads Period", starting about 6000 BC; from the Sahara they much probably transmit their knowledges to the AE during the big migration to the Nile Valley about in 4000 BC. | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.41) |
Giancarlo, You know that a « shaman » is a Siberian sorcerer, and that the term is used by anthropologists to describe « sorcerers » in other cultures, which they think played a similar role. For example, the shaman uses mind-altering drugs to reach a state of ecstasy. I have yet to see anything like this in Ancient Egypt (and if this had existed, the classical authors would no doubt have mentioned it). Greg REEDER has interpreted a part of the Opening of the Mouth ritual as alluding to this, and a mysterious figure hauled along on a sledge during funerals as a priest in a state of drug-induced sleep. But I don’t believe this. As to the Round-Head culture, when I read about Saharan cultures (20 years ago !), I found several books by one Amadou HAMPATE BA, a Peul initiate. He’s said to have visited an exhibition on Saharan art in Paris in the 1950s, and to have amazed people there by being able to explain the religious meaning of the Round Head drawings. Apparently his tribe, the Fulbe, has retained these religious beliefs up to the present day. Since my goal was to explore the links between pre-dynastic Egypt and surrounding peoples, I read HAMPATE BA’s books with great enthusiasm. Alas, I must say I was very disappointed at how little in common there was (as far as I could see) between this Peul religion and that of Ancient Egypt. And this was in sharp contrast with what I discovered when reading about Levantine cultures (Canaan, Syria, Anatolia, Mesopotamia), where there were links nearly at every page. Some Nilotic cultures, essentially the Shilluq, are also very interesting for an Egyptophile in this respect. So I’m willing to believe that there were some links between Egypt and cultures that have now retreated to West Africa, but I also think that these links or influences or imports would date from a very early period, and have been almost erased by later (?) Levantine influences (or common inheritance). On the Round Heads : what are your clues for thinking that these people moved to Egypt ? I thought they were attested in the mountains of the central Sahara : did they leave their characteristic art nearer to Egypt ? Their art is very different from that found in parts of Libya closer to Egypt, AFAIK : is this true ? In this NE Libyan art, I can see parallels with Egypt (canid-headed deities, cow-headed goddess sitting near a cleft in a rock = Anat-like well-goddess ?, two calf front ends fused = Khonsu, etc.). In Round Head art, very little : hierarchy of calves, importance of the calf-restraining rope dangul = AE zA, “protection”… I don’t know enough to state that they had “shamans”, but I’ll trust you on that one, as this would only be the equivalent of the widely attested African sorcerers. JD | ||
| jd degreef (213.177.158.41) |
I didn't notice that this posting was in the Queens' Pyramids discussion : I'm reposting it in a new thread and it would be beter to answer it there ! JD | ||
| Dawn (68.128.23.188) |
JD, Didn't mean to take us so far off the subject with my posting about the tomb of Merisankh III. Just digested your Galarza tomb artical. Extremely informative and much appreciated! Thank you! I thought the author's comments on the Title "mwt njswt bjtj" only being carried by a handful of queens, all of whom had sons whose inheritance of the throne was, to some extent, accidental and pointing to the conclusion that Khamerernebty I was the wife of a King whose son was not due to receive the throne, fits well with the missing king name in the Turin Canon King List between Kafre and Menkaure and as the author says "endorses her candidature as the mother of Mycerinus." But it would seem to eliminate her cadidature as to being the mother of Nebkare (Bakare) if this was the person in line to be the next king and if this was the King whose name is missing in the Turin King list. It also puts a damper on Reisner's imaginative assumption that there "was open revolt of the descendants of Radjedef." and that Bakara was a rebel usurper. ("The Family of Mycerinus" Chapter XI of "Mycerinus: The Temples of the 3rd Pyramid at Giza" - Reisner 1931). But all of the strange anomolies of the Galarza tomb do deffinatley point to (as Callender & Janosi so eloquently say in their article) "the historical implications were much more complex and substantial than is usually realized, and that the puzzling details detected in the tombs of royal wives are the distant reflections of these events." I was pleasantly surprized to see that Khamerernebty I and II were both priestesses of Djuhuty. But I don't know the other god mentioned that they also served- "Tjasepef". But that would get us off the subject again. I completely agree with the author's logic in ascribing the origonal owner of this tomb to Khamerernebty I. Unfortunatley there still are no answers to Charley's 4 questions. Judging by the type of tomb, Reisner says that this tomb was constructed in the early part of the reign of Menkaure. He says "The evidence is clear for Queen Khamerenebty I (that she was still alive during the first part of Menkaure's reign). but he does not say what his evidence is. Perhaps the type of the Galarza tomb which he thought she was buried in. Reisner says that ("In the floor of the temple (of pyramid GIII) was carefully buried a small jar containing model stone vessels bearing the name of the "king's son, Kay" and it is possible that Kay was another of her sons." Meaning Khamerernebty II as he thought she was buried in GIII. I don't know how to fit this in with anything though. (Quotes from Reisner all from same book & chapter listed above.) Thank you again for the wonderful article!!! Anxious to hear everyone's thoughts about it. Dawn |
