DOCSLIB.ORG

Development of the Burial Assemblage of the Eighteenth Dynasty Royal Tombs(1)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Development of the Burial Assemblage of the Eighteenth Dynasty Royal Tombs(1) DEVELOPMENT OF THE BURIAL ASSEMBLAGE OF THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY ROYAL TOMBS(1) Nozomu KAWAI* Introduction As far as it can be determined, no burial in the Valley of the Kings escaped being disturbed to some degree. Only the tomb of Tutankhamun gives us the opportunity to study the burial goods in great detail. The tomb of Tutankhamun is, however, atypical in its small size and scanty decoration. The time in which Tutankhamun lived was also unusual, falling at the very end of Amarna period, when Egyptian society was making transition back to the pre-Amarna traditional order. These factors may have combined to make his burial unusual in many respects. In fact, it is generally accepted that the evidence from the royal tombs in the New Kingdom is insufficient to show comprehensively the overall royal funerary practices of the period. Any synthesis of this material, however, should proceed from the available data as much as possible. Fortunately, some Eighteenth Dynasty royal tombs such, those of Thutmose III, Amenhotep II, Thutmose IV, Amenhotep III, and Horemheb as well as KV 55 were discovered with some of their grave goods still present. Thus, it is very important to compare the contents from the tomb of Tutankhamun with those from other Eighteenth Dynasty royal tombs in order to understand the character of the royal burial assemblage in the Eighteenth Dynasty. Not much attention has been paid to the burial goods found in the royal tombs in the Valley of the Kings. Studies have mainly focused on its ownership, religious texts, decoration and architecture of these tombs(2). The funerary objects from the royal tombs have been published in several excavation reports(3). William C. Hayes(4) and Aidan Dodson(5) have studied royal sarcophagi and canopic equipment of the Eighteenth Dynasty, respectively. Nicholas Reeves has published a useful study of the burial objects from the tomb of Tutankhamun and he slightly discusses some parallels from other royal * Ph.D. Student, Department of Near Eastern Studies, The Johns Hopkins University Vol. XXXV 2000 35 tombs(6). But comparative study of the overall burial assemblage has never been undertaken. Recently, Stuart Tyson Smith wrote an article on the intact private tombs of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Dynasties from Thebes. In it he briefly discusses the royal burial assemblage of the Eighteenth Dynasty in comparison with private tombs(7). He pointed out the numerous similarities among the assemblages of the Eighteenth Dynasty's royal tombs and compared them with private burials of the same period(8). But he only made cursory examination of royal burial assemblages and it was beyond the scope of his study. I suggest an examination of funerary equipment between royal tombs contributes to a deeper understanding of the development of royal funerary beliefs from the archaeological perspective, and sheds light on areas not discussed in the texts. This paper intends to synthesize studies of royal funerary objects and present an overview of them to increase further our understanding of the royal tombs of the Eighteenth Dynasty. Analysis of Objects Since only the tomb of Tutankhamun has largely escaped plundering, the existing archaeological sample of the Eighteenth Dynasty royal tombs is highly subject to bias resulting from the different preservation, albeit accidentally so, of unrepresentative types. It is fully to be expected that certain kinds of artifacts will be overlooked because of some accident of preservation, or some bias in the sample. It is impossible to reconstruct all the royal burial assemblages of this period, but this does not mean that a study of this evidence is not worthwhile. Objects found in a well-documented context such as those from the tomb of Tutankhamun are invested with important information in addition to their mere existence as examples of this or that type of artifact. By looking at regularities and consistencies in the choice of burial goods in the royal tombs we can attempt to gain some insight into the pattern of burial systems. Due to the dearth of material, it may be difficult to discuss the character and development of the royal burial assemblage of the period. But I suggest that the quality of craftsmanship and materials as well as the variation of the same type of object does explain the development of the royal burial system in the course of the Eighteenth Dynasty. I discuss the royal funerary objects by grouping them into several categories for the purpose of this discussion. The first is "objects for the tomb," 36 ORIENT DEVELOPMENT OF THE BURIAL ASSEMBLAGE OF THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY…… and the second is "objects of daily life," which are already grouped by Stuart Tyson Smith in his study on private burial(9). In addition to those two, there is "objects of royal authority," which I consider to be connected the kingship. It should be mentioned, however, that the following discussion does not include the objects for which we cannot make comparisons due to the lack of material. 1) Objects for the Tomb Sarcophagi, Coffins, Shrines and Canopics William C. Hayes has already undertaken a comprehensive study of the royal sarcophagi of the Eighteenth Dynasty through the time of Amenhotep III(10) Sarcophagi were probably introduced for the first time in the reign of Thutmose II, but who the first king actually was is still unknown(11). Hayes pointed out that the size of the royal sarcophagi gradually increased toward the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty and suggested that the size of sarcophagi can be a clue to its contents. Since we know that Tutankhamun had three nested anthropoid coffins on a bier in a sarcophagus, it can be supposed that the sarcophagi of the same size as that of Tutankhamun also contained three anthropoid coffins. It was Thutmose IV who first made a gigantic sarcophagus in the Eighteenth Dynasty. Amenhotep III and Akhenaten followed almost the same size (Table 1). These might have contained three nested anthropoid coffins. As for the design of the coffins, the rishi(12) style had been apparently employed in the royal burial long after it went out of style in private ones. The earliest surviving Eighteenth Dynasty royal coffin is the coffin of Thutmose I (CG 61025) which was uncovered in the royal cache at Deir el-Bahri(13). Unfortunately, it is difficult to determine the original decoration of his coffin since it was completely remodeled and reused by Pinejem I in the Twenty-first Dynasty. The next one is the coffin of Thutmose III (CG 61014), which was also discovered in the royal cache at Deir el-Bahri(14). Almost all the surfaces of the coffin were hacked away, probably due to the chiseling out of gilded ornaments and glass inlays by tomb robbers. Some areas, however, still remain and they show that the coffin was originally decorated with an incised rishi pattern. Evidence from the tomb of Amenhotep III(15), KV 55(16), and Tutankhamun(17) reveals that they had basically similar patterns of inlayed rishi coffins, albeit with some variations. Vol.XXXV 2000 37 The large shrine over the sarcophagus may have been introduced for the first time in the tomb of Amenhotep II. The plan of the burial chamber in his tomb is the first to introduce rectangular rather than the cartouche shape which had been used in earlier royal tombs, and the burial floor for the sarcophagus was cut deeper than other floors of the tomb. Dodson has suggested that these innovations explain the introduction of the large shrine over the sarcophagus(18). The shrines from the tomb of Tutankhamun are the only intact examples. *The unit is cm. This chart is based on the data from W. C. Hayes, Royal Sarcophagi of the Eigteenth Dynasty, Princeton, 1935; E. Thomas, Royal Necropoleis of Thebes, Princeton, 1966; G.T. Martin, Royal Tomb at El-'Amarna I, London, 1974 and O.J. Schaden, JARCE 21 (1984), 53. Table 1. Royal Sarcophagi of the Eighteenth Dynasty The royal canopic equipment has been thoroughly studied by Aidan Dodson(19). The following is a summary of the evidence. The earliest example of a king's canopic equipment dates to the reign of Hatshepsut; a chest bearing Thutmose I's name does exist, but it was made under the reign of Thutmose III. The next example is a chest for Hatshepsut's burial in KV 20. Both chests were made of quartzite, which was also the material used for their sarcophagi. Amenhotep II introduced a wholly new design of royal canopic chest using calcite(20) as a plastic medium and employing images of four protective goddess (Isis, Nephthys, Neith, and Selkis) at the corners of chest, who extend their hands to protect the contents. This type is basically followed by his successors. 38 ORIENT DEVELOPMENT OF THE BURIAL ASSEMBLAGE OF THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY…… Akhenaten also possessed canopic equipment. The corner of his chest is adorned by the images of falcons instead of protective goddesses, but the lid is represented as an image of the king, like those of Amenhotep II. Tutankhamun's canopic equipment is the only complete example from the Eighteenth Dynasty(21). The chest is covered by a gilded shrine with images of four protective goddesses. The lid of the canopic chest is shaped like a shrine with inward sloping sides. The lid of the canopic jar is represented as an image of the king like that of Tutankhamun's predecessors. Within the jar, four coffinettes of beaten gold, inlaid in rishi pattern with colored glass and carnelian, were installed. Black resin had been poured into them, which was probably done before their introduction into the tomb.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pylon and Festival Court of Thutmose II
    Pylon and Festival Court of Thutmose II Originally built by Thutmose II - 1492 BCE to 1479 BCE Modified by Hatshepsut - 1479 BCE to 1458 BCE Modified by Thutmose III - 1479 BCE to 1425 BCE Modified by Amenhotep II - 1427 BCE to 1401 BCE Modified by Thutmose IV - 1401 BCE to 1391 BCE Destroyed by: Amenhotep III - 1390 BCE to 1352 BCE Contains features: Amenhotep II Shrine, Obelisks of Festival Hall Center Pair, Obelisks of Festival Hall East Pair, Obelisks of Festival Hall West Pair, Thutmose IV Peristyle Hall Other works initiated by Hatshepsut: Obelisks of Festival Hall West Pair, Palace of Ma’at, 8th Pylon, Amenhotep I Calcite Chapel, Obelisks at Contra Temple, Obelisks of Wadjet Hall, Wadjet Hall, Red Chapel Other works initiated by Thutmose III: Akhmenu, Contra Temple, Wadjet Hall, 7th Pylon, Thutmose III Shrine, Enclosures and Gates, Sacred Lake, 6th Pylon and Court, 5th Pylon and Court, Obelisks of 7th Pylon, Station of the King and Corridor, Obelisks of Festival Hall Center Pair, Central Bark Shrine, Palace of Ma’at, Obelisks of Wadjet Hall, East Exterior Wall Other works initiated by Amenhotep II: Edifice of Amenhotep II, Station of the Pylon and Festival Court of Thutmose II King and Corridor, Wadjet Hall, Amenhotep II Shrine in its existing state. Other works initiated by Thutmose IV: Obelisk Unique, Thutmose IV Peristyle Hall Other works destroyed by Amenhotep III: Thutmose IV Peristyle Hall, Obelisks of Festival Hall West Pair, White Chapel, Amenhotep II Shrine, Amenhotep I Limestone Chapel Other halls: Akhmenu, Hypostyle Hall, Thutmose IV Peristyle Hall, Wadjet Hall Pylon and Festival Court of Thutmose II Introduction The pylon and “festival court” of Thutmose II originally stood to the west of the fourth pylon.
    [Show full text]
  • Canaan Or Gaza?
    Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections Pa-Canaan in the Egyptian New Kingdom: Canaan or Gaza? Michael G. Hasel Institute of Archaeology, Southern Adventist University A&564%'6 e identification of the geographical name “Canaan” continues to be widely debated in the scholarly literature. Cuneiform sources om Mari, Amarna, Ugarit, Aššur, and Hattusha have been discussed, as have Egyptian sources. Renewed excavations in North Sinai along the “Ways of Horus” have, along with recent scholarly reconstructions, refocused attention on the toponyms leading toward and culminating in the arrival to Canaan. is has led to two interpretations of the Egyptian name Pa-Canaan: it is either identified as the territory of Canaan or the city of Gaza. is article offers a renewed analysis of the terms Canaan, Pa-Canaan, and Canaanite in key documents of the New Kingdom, with limited attention to parallels of other geographical names, including Kharu, Retenu, and Djahy. It is suggested that the name Pa-Canaan in Egyptian New Kingdom sources consistently refers to the larger geographical territory occupied by the Egyptians in Asia. y the 1960s, a general consensus had emerged regarding of Canaan varied: that it was a territory in Asia, that its bound - the extent of the land of Canaan, its boundaries and aries were fluid, and that it also referred to Gaza itself. 11 He Bgeographical area. 1 The primary sources for the recon - concludes, “No wonder that Lemche’s review of the evidence struction of this area include: (1) the Mari letters, (2) the uncovered so many difficulties and finally led him to conclude Amarna letters, (3) Ugaritic texts, (4) texts from Aššur and that Canaan was a vague term.” 12 Hattusha, and (5) Egyptian texts and reliefs.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012: Providence, Rhode Island
    The 63rd Annual Meeting of the American Research Center in Egypt April 27-29, 2012 Renaissance Providence Hotel Providence, RI Photo Credits Front cover: Egyptian, Late Period, Saite, Dynasty 26 (ca. 664-525 BCE) Ritual rattle Glassy faience; h. 7 1/8 in Helen M. Danforth Acquisition Fund 1995.050 Museum of Art Rhode Island School of Design, Providence Photography by Erik Gould, courtesy of the Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design, Providence. Photo spread pages 6-7: Conservation of Euergates Gate Photo: Owen Murray Photo page 13: The late Luigi De Cesaris conserving paintings at the Red Monastery in 2011. Luigi dedicated himself with enormous energy to the suc- cess of ARCE’s work in cultural heritage preservation. He died in Sohag on December 19, 2011. With his death, Egypt has lost a highly skilled conservator and ARCE a committed colleague as well as a devoted friend. Photo: Elizabeth Bolman Abstracts title page 14: Detail of relief on Euergates Gate at Karnak Photo: Owen Murray Some of the images used in this year’s Annual Meeting Program Booklet are taken from ARCE conservation projects in Egypt which are funded by grants from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The Chronique d’Égypte has been published annually every year since 1925 by the Association Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth. It was originally a newsletter but rapidly became an international scientific journal. In addition to articles on various aspects of Egyptology, papyrology and coptology (philology, history, archaeology and history of art), it also contains critical reviews of recently published books.
    [Show full text]
  • Macedonian Kings, Egyptian Pharaohs the Ptolemaic Family In
    Department of World Cultures University of Helsinki Helsinki Macedonian Kings, Egyptian Pharaohs The Ptolemaic Family in the Encomiastic Poems of Callimachus Iiro Laukola ACADEMIC DISSERTATION To be publicly discussed, by due permission of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Helsinki in auditorium XV, University Main Building, on the 23rd of September, 2016 at 12 o’clock. Helsinki 2016 © Iiro Laukola 2016 ISBN 978-951-51-2383-1 (paperback.) ISBN 978-951-51-2384-8 (PDF) Unigrafia Helsinki 2016 Abstract The interaction between Greek and Egyptian cultural concepts has been an intense yet controversial topic in studies about Ptolemaic Egypt. The present study partakes in this discussion with an analysis of the encomiastic poems of Callimachus of Cyrene (c. 305 – c. 240 BC). The success of the Ptolemaic Dynasty is crystallized in the juxtaposing of the different roles of a Greek ǴdzȅǻǽǷȏȄ and of an Egyptian Pharaoh, and this study gives a glimpse of this political and ideological endeavour through the poetry of Callimachus. The contribution of the present work is to situate Callimachus in the core of the Ptolemaic court. Callimachus was a proponent of the Ptolemaic rule. By reappraising the traditional Greek beliefs, he examined the bicultural rule of the Ptolemies in his encomiastic poems. This work critically examines six Callimachean hymns, namely to Zeus, to Apollo, to Artemis, to Delos, to Athena and to Demeter together with the Victory of Berenice, the Lock of Berenice and the Ektheosis of Arsinoe. Characterized by ambiguous imagery, the hymns inspect the ruptures in Greek thought during the Hellenistic age.
    [Show full text]
  • Sources for the War of Reunification at the End of the Second Intermediate Period
    Sources for the War of Reunification at the end of the Second Intermediate Period Archaeological: body of Seqenenre-Taa campaign palace (?) at Deir el Ballas remarkably little else – destruction layers at Nubian forts? Literary: Two stelae set up at Karnak by Kamose Rhind Mathematical Papyrus insert (only source from Hyksos point of view!) Stela at Karnak set up by Ahmose for Ahhotep Tomb autobiographies of soldiers from el-Kab, especially Ahmose, son of Ibana Pictorial: relief scenes from the temple at Ahmose’s pyramid complex at Abydos Fortifications and palace at Deir el-Ballas Stela of Kamose, last king of Dynasty XVII From the stela of Ahhotep at Karnak, set up by Ahmose “She is the one who has accomplished the rites and taken care of Egypt... She has looked after her soldiers, she has guarded her, she has brought back her fugitives and collected together her deserters, she has pacified Upper Egypt and expelled her rebels.” From the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus insert: “Regnal year 11, second month of shomu, Heliopolis was entered. First month of akhet, day 23, this southern prince broke into Tjaru. Day 25 – it was heard tell that Tjaru had been entered. Regnal year 11, first month of akhet, the birthday of Seth – a roar was emitted by the Majesty of this god. The birthday of Isis – the sky poured rain.” Ahmose: first king of the 18th Dynasty Son of Seqenenre and Ahhotep Probably brother of Kamose Reunifies Egypt, extends warfare outside of Egypt Excerpts from autobiography of Ahmose son of Ibana “I followed the sovereign on foot when he rode about on his chariot.
    [Show full text]
  • ROYAL STATUES Including Sphinxes
    ROYAL STATUES Including sphinxes EARLY DYNASTIC PERIOD Dynasties I-II Including later commemorative statues Ninutjer 800-150-900 Statuette of Ninuter seated wearing heb-sed cloak, calcite(?), formerly in G. Michaelidis colln., then in J. L. Boele van Hensbroek colln. in 1962. Simpson, W. K. in JEA 42 (1956), 45-9 figs. 1, 2 pl. iv. Send 800-160-900 Statuette of Send kneeling with vases, bronze, probably made during Dyn. XXVI, formerly in G. Posno colln. and in Paris, Hôtel Drouot, in 1883, now in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, 8433. Abubakr, Abd el Monem J. Untersuchungen über die ägyptischen Kronen (1937), 27 Taf. 7; Roeder, Äg. Bronzefiguren 292 [355, e] Abb. 373 Taf. 44 [f]; Wildung, Die Rolle ägyptischer Könige im Bewußtsein ihrer Nachwelt i, 51 [Dok. xiii. 60] Abb. iv [1]. Name, Gauthier, Livre des Rois i, 22 [vi]. See Antiquités égyptiennes ... Collection de M. Gustave Posno (1874), No. 53; Hôtel Drouot Sale Cat. May 22-6, 1883, No. 53; Stern in Zeitschrift für die gebildete Welt 3 (1883), 287; Ausf. Verz. 303; von Bissing in 2 Mitteilungen des Kaiserlich Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung xxxviii (1913), 259 n. 2 (suggests from Memphis). Not identified by texts 800-195-000 Head of royal statue, perhaps early Dyn. I, in London, Petrie Museum, 15989. Petrie in Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland xxxvi (1906), 200 pl. xix; id. Arts and Crafts 31 figs. 19, 20; id. The Revolutions of Civilisation 15 fig. 7; id. in Anc. Eg. (1915), 168 view 4; id. in Hammerton, J. A.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading G Uide
    1 Reading Guide Introduction Pharaonic Lives (most items are on map on page 10) Bodies of Water Major Regions Royal Cities Gulf of Suez Faiyum Oasis Akhetaten Sea The Levant Alexandria Nile River Libya Avaris Nile cataracts* Lower Egypt Giza Nile Delta Nubia Herakleopolis Magna Red Sea Palestine Hierakonpolis Punt Kerma *Cataracts shown as lines Sinai Memphis across Nile River Syria Sais Upper Egypt Tanis Thebes 2 Chapter 1 Pharaonic Kingship: Evolution & Ideology Myths Time Periods Significant Artifacts Predynastic Origins of Kingship: Naqada Naqada I The Narmer Palette Period Naqada II The Scorpion Macehead Writing History of Maqada III Pharaohs Old Kingdom Significant Buildings Ideology & Insignia of Middle Kingdom Kingship New Kingdom Tombs at Abydos King’s Divinity Mythology Royal Insignia Royal Names & Titles The Book of the Heavenly Atef Crown The Birth Name Cow Blue Crown (Khepresh) The Golden Horus Name The Contending of Horus Diadem (Seshed) The Horus Name & Seth Double Crown (Pa- The Nesu-Bity Name Death & Resurrection of Sekhemty) The Two Ladies Name Osiris Nemes Headdress Red Crown (Desheret) Hem Deities White Crown (Hedjet) Per-aa (The Great House) The Son of Re Horus Bull’s tail Isis Crook Osiris False beard Maat Flail Nut Rearing cobra (uraeus) Re Seth Vocabulary Divine Forces demi-god heka (divine magic) Good God (netjer netjer) hu (divine utterance) Great God (netjer aa) isfet (chaos) ka-spirit (divine energy) maat (divine order) Other Topics Ramesses II making sia (Divine knowledge) an offering to Ra Kings’ power
    [Show full text]
  • Amarna Period Down to the Opening of Sety I's Reign
    oi.uchicago.edu STUDIES IN ANCIENT ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION * NO.42 THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO Thomas A. Holland * Editor with the assistance of Thomas G. Urban oi.uchicago.edu oi.uchicago.edu Internet publication of this work was made possible with the generous support of Misty and Lewis Gruber THE ROAD TO KADESH A HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE BATTLE RELIEFS OF KING SETY I AT KARNAK SECOND EDITION REVISED WILLIAM J. MURNANE THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO STUDIES IN ANCIENT ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION . NO.42 CHICAGO * ILLINOIS oi.uchicago.edu Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 90-63725 ISBN: 0-918986-67-2 ISSN: 0081-7554 The Oriental Institute, Chicago © 1985, 1990 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. Published 1990. Printed in the United States of America. oi.uchicago.edu TABLE OF CONTENTS List of M aps ................................ ................................. ................................. vi Preface to the Second Edition ................................................................................................. vii Preface to the First Edition ................................................................................................. ix List of Bibliographic Abbreviations ..................................... ....................... xi Chapter 1. Egypt's Relations with Hatti From the Amarna Period Down to the Opening of Sety I's Reign ...................................................................... ......................... 1 The Clash of Empires
    [Show full text]
  • BIBLIOTHECA SACRA for July, 1916, Mr
    1918.] ,The Exodus in the Light of Archteology. 543 ARTICLE III. THE EXODUS IN THE LIGHT OF ARCH2EOLOGY. BY THE REVEREND A. E. WHATHAM, LOUISVILlE, KY. IN the BIBLIOTHECA SACRA for July, 1916, Mr. Harold M. Wiener published an article entitled "The Date of the Ex­ odus," and in October, 1917, one on " The Date of the Exo­ dus and the Chronology of Judges." Now Mr. Wiener claims to have shown in his first artkle that the Israelites were defeated by the Egyptian Pharaoh, Merneptah, in the fifth year of his reign, being overthrown outside of Egypt somewhere between its eastern border and the southern border of Canaan. In his second article Mr. Wiener claims to have shown that the Exodus of Israel from Egypt took place in the second year of Merneptah's reign. In other words, Mr. Wiener claims to have shown that the defeat of Israel which is mentioned on the celebrated Mer­ neptah stele took place after the Exodus, and while the Israelites were yet in the wilderness. In opposition to Mr. Wiener's assertions stands a previous statement by the well-known scholars Professors Harris and Chapman, that "a recently-deciphered Egyptian inscription ... shows that the Beqe-Israel were already in Palestine at the time of the Exodus, so that the migration must have been partial and not national" (" Exodus and Journey to Ca­ naan." HDB, vol. i. p. 802). The discoverer of this Egyptian stele, Professor Petrie, Digitized by Google 544 The Exodus in the Light of ArcMology. [Oct. views the defeat of "Israel," to which reference is made on 'this stele, as an overthrow which took place in Palestine while the histork Israel had not yet fled from Egypt (Cont.
    [Show full text]
  • The Image of the 'Warrior Pharaoh'
    The image of the ‘warrior pharaoh’ The mighty ‘warrior pharaoh’ is one of the most enduring images of ancient Egypt and dates to the beginnings of Egyptian civilisation around 3000 BC . It was both a political and a religious statement and emphasised the king’s role as the divine upholder of maat, the Egyptian concept of order. The king is shown triumphing over the forces of chaos, represented by foreign enemies and bound captives. In earlier times, the king, a distant and mysterious being, was held in godlike awe by his subjects. However, by New Kingdom times he was a more earthly, vulnerable figure who fought alongside his troops in battle. The militarism of the New Kingdom gave birth to a new heroic age. To the traditional elements of the warrior pharaoh image was added the chariot, one of the most important innovations of this period. The essential features of the New Kingdom ‘warrior pharaoh’ image include the pharaoh: • leading his soldiers into battle and returning in victory • attacking the enemy while riding in his chariot • wearing war regalia, for example, the blue war crown or other pharaonic headdress • depicted larger than life-size, holding one or more of the enemy with one hand, while he clubs their brains out with a mace (also known as ‘smiting the enemy’) • in the guise of a sphinx, trampling his enemies underfoot • offering the spoils of war to the god Amun, the inspiration for his victory. FIGURE 21 Thutmose III smiting the enemy Another aspect of the warrior pharaoh image that developed over time was the pharaoh as elite athlete and sportsman, a perfect physical specimen.
    [Show full text]
  • Queens Egypt
    | OF QUEENS | EGYPT A new National Geographic exhibition in Washington, D.C., shines a light on the lives (and afterlives) of the royal women of ancient Egypt. From the founding queen of the New Kingdom, Ahmose-Nefertari, to Cleopatra VII, Egypt’s last queen and pharaoh—a span of more than 1,400 years. Martina Minas-Nerpel from Swansea University tells us that “while the king was the unquestioned political and religious figurehead of Egypt, queens had a complex role with more power than is usually recognized. Wife and mother, the Egyptian queen also had divine status, serving as the earthly embodiment of Hathor and thus ‘a regenerative medium for the king in his role as representative of the sun god on earth’ (Silke Roth, 2009).” Now, let’s have a closer look at some of the fabulous artefacts from Queens of Egypt. REPLICA BUST OF NEFERTITI, CA. A.D. 1913–1932. ORIGINAL: 18TH DYNASTY, REIGN OF AKHENATEN, CA. 1353–1336 B.C. RIJKSMUSEUM VAN OUHEDEN, LEIDEN, NETHERLANDS. CAT. F 1932/5.1. PHOTO BY MARK THIESSEN/ NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC. QUEENS OF EGYPT EXHIBITION ORGANIZED BY POINTE-À-CAL- LIÈRE, MONTRÉAL ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY COMPLEX AND MUSEO EGIZIO, TURIN, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY. SHOWING AT THE NATIONAL GEO- GRAPHIC MUSEUM, WASHINGTON, D.C., THROUGH TO 2 SEPT 2019. One of the most famous pieces of Egyptian art ever discovered. This replica bust of Nefertiti was produced soon after the original was discovered in 1912. The distinctive, flat-topped blue crown is unique to Nefer- titi, allowing us to identify the face.
    [Show full text]
  • Amenhotep III's
    Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections Sailing the Great Green Sea? Amenhotep III’s “Aegean List” from Kom el- Hetan, Once More Eric H. Cline George Washington University Steven M. Stannish e State University of New York, Potsdam A Amenhotep III’s “Aegean List,” found on a statue base at his mortuary temple at Kom el- Hetan nearly fifty years ago, is critical for the study of Egypto- Aegean relations during the Late Bronze Age. This article reconsiders the Aegean List’s toponyms and possible function in light of recent archaeological discoveries made at the site as well as the publication of a recently updated version of Elmar Edel’s classic volume on the subject. Among the most important insights in the latter study is the realization that three of the Aegean List’s names were recarved at some point. This article weighs the possibility that the inscription reflects the itinerary of an Egyptian expedition to the Aegean region and raises questions about its proper interpretation. his article began life far away from warm, sunny Egypt, nected with Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye. 4 As part of this on a cold, snowy night in early November at the 2010 article, we will discuss their suggestions, especially those with TSSEA Annual Symposium in Toronto, Canada. The which we find ourselves in some disagreement. 5 symposium’s focus was on Amenhotep III, and one of the pres - ent authors (Cline) had just presented a paper on the king’s for - T A L eign relations that included material on the so- called “Aegean List” (Statue Base List E n) from the mortuary temple at Kom The Aegean List was discovered in the 1960s, inscribed el- Hetan, on which he had previously published.
    [Show full text]