Causing His Name to Live Culture and History of the

Founding Editor M. H. E. Weippert

Editor-in-Chief Thomas Schneider

Editors Eckart Frahm, W. Randall Garr, B. Halpern, Theo P. J. van Hout, Irene J. W inter

VOLUME 37

William J. Murnane 1945–2000 Causing His Name to Live

Studies in Egyptian Epigraphy and History in Memory of William J. Murnane

Edited by Peter J. Brand and Louise Cooper

LEIDEN • BOSTON 2009 This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Causing his name to live : studies in Egyptian epigraphy and history in memory of William J. Murnane / edited by Peter J. Brand and Louise Cooper. p. cm. — (Culture and history of the ancient Near East, ISSN 1566-2055) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-90-04-17644-7 (hard cover : alk. paper) 1. Egypt—History—New Kingdom, ca. 1550-ca. 1070 B.C—Sources. 2. Egypt—History—To 332 B.C.— Sources. 3. Inscriptions, Egyptian. 4. Egypt—Antiquities. I. Brand, Peter James. II. Murnane, William J. III. Title. IV. Series.

DT87.C34 2009 932’.014—dc22 2009020675

ISSN: 1566-2055 ISBN: 978 90 04 17644 7

Copyright 2009 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands table of contents v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Bibliographical Abbreviations ...... vii List of Figures ...... ix Acknowledgements ...... xiii

Introduction ...... 1

A Fond Remembrance: William Joseph Murnane, Jr. March 22, 1945–November 17, 2000 ...... 5 Lorelei H. Corcoran

The Amarna Succession ...... 9 James P. Allen

Note archéologique et épigraphique sur les architraves de la grande salle hypostyle du temple d’Amon-Rê à ...... 21 Michel Azim et Vincent Rondot

Usurped of Merenptah at Karnak and ...... 29 Peter J. Brand

Quantifying Regalia: A Contextual Study into the Variations and Significance of Egyptian Royal Costume Using Relational Databases and Advanced Statistical Analyses ...... 49 Amy Calvert

The Long Coregency Revisited: Architectural and Iconographic Conundra in the Tomb of Kheruef ...... 65 Peter F. Dorman

The Death of Meketaten ...... 83 Jacobus van Dijk

Images of Amenhotep IV and in the Style of the Previous Reign ...... 89 Earl L. Ertman

Two Semi-Erased Kushite Cartouches in the at South Karnak ...... 95 Richard A. Fazzini

Un assemblage au nom d’Amenemhat Ier dans les magasins du temple de Louxor ...... 103 Luc Gabolde

Under a Deep Blue Starry Sky ...... 109 Marc Gabolde

The Festival on Which Went out to the Treasury ...... 121 Helen Jacquet-Gordon

A Sandstone Relief of in the Liverpool Museum from the Luxor Temple Colonnade Hall ...... 125 W. Raymond Johnson vi table of contents

Egyptian New-Kingdom Topographical Lists: An Historical Resource with “Literary” Histories ...... 129 Kenneth A. Kitchen

A Reconstruction of Senwosret I’s Portico and Some Structures of at Karnak ...... 137 François Larché

The Land of Ramesses ...... 175 Donald B. Redford

Bibliography of William J. Murnane ...... 179 Plates ...... 183 Index ...... 231 bibliographical abbreviations vii

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ABBREVIATIONS

ÄAT Ägypten und Altes Testament. Studien zu DG géographiques contenus dans les textes Geschichte, Kultur und Religion Ägypten hiéroglyphiques (Cairo: Société Royale und des Altes Testament. Wiesbaden de Géographie d’Égypte, 1925-1931) ADAIK Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archäolo- Gauthier, Gauthier, H. Le Livre des rois d’Égypte, gischen Instituts Kairo. Ägyptologische LdR recueil de titres et protocoles royaux I-V. Reihe. Hamburg and New York MIFAO 17-21 (Cairo: Imprimerie de AO Acta Orientalia. Copenhagen l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orien- ASAE Annales du Service des Antiquités de tale, 1907-1917) L’Égypte. Cairo GM Göttinger Miszellen: Beiträge zur ägyp- ASE Archaeological Survey of Egypt. tologische Diskussion. Göttingen London HÄB Hildesheimer Ägyptologische Bei- BÄBA Beiträge zur ägyptischen Bauforschung träge. Hildesheim und Altertumskunde. 11 vols (Cairo, IEJ Israel Exploration Journal. Tel Aviv Zurich & Wiesbaden: Schweizerisches IFAO Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Institut für ägyptische Bauforschung und Cairo. Altertumskunde in Kairo, 1938-1997) JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society. Barguet, Barguet, P. Le temple d’Amon-rê à New Haven Karnak Karnak (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Insti- JARCE Journal of the American Research Center tut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, in Egypt. Boston & New York 1962) JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology. BdE Bibliothèque d’Étude. Institut Français London d’Archéologie Orientale. Cairo JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies. Chi- BES Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar. New cago York JSSEA Journal of the Society for the Study of BIE Bulletin de l’Institut Égyptien. Alexan- Egyptian Antiquities. Toronto dria. Karnak Cahiers de Karnak. 12 vols (Paris: ERC, BIFAO Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Ar- 1980—present). Centre Franco-égyptien chéologie Orientale. Cairo d’études des temples de Karnak. BiOr Bibliotheca Orientalis. Leiden Key Plans Nelson, H. H. Key Plans Showing Loca- BMMA Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of tions of Theban Temple Decorations. OIP Art. New York 56 (Chicago: Oriental Institute, 1941) BSEG Bulletin de la Société d’Égyptologie de KMT KMT: A Modern Journal of Ancient Genève. Geneva Egypt. BSFE Bulletin de la Société Française d’Égyp- KRI I-VII Kitchen, K. A. Ramesside Inscriptions, His- tologie. Paris torical and Biographical. I-VII (Oxford: CG/CGC Catalogue général des antiquités égypti- Blackwell, 1969-1990) ennes du Musée du Caire. Cairo LÄ I-VII Helck, W. et al. Lexikon der Ägyptologie. CdÉ Chronique d’Égypte. Brussels 7 vols (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, Champol- Champollion, J.F. Notices descrip- 1972-1992) lion, ND tives conformes aux manuscrits autographes LD Lepsius, K. R. Denkmäler aus Ägypten rédigés sur les lieux par Champollion le und Äthiopien. Abteilung I-VI in 12 Jeune. 2 vols (Paris: Didot, 1844-1889) vols (Berlin: Nicolaische Buchhandlung, EEF/EES Egypt Exploration Fund/Society. 1849-1858 & reprint Geneva: Éditions de London Belles-Lettres, 1973) EEM Egypt Exploration Society Memoir. LDT Lepsius, K. R. Denkmäler aus Ägypten und London Äthiopien: Texte. I-IV (eds.). Naville, E. ERC Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations. et al. (Berlin & Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1897- Paris. 1913) FIFAO Fouilles de l’Institut Français d’Ar- MÄS Münchener Ägyptologische Studien. chéologie Orientale du Caire. Cairo Berlin & Munich Gauthier, Gauthier, H. Dictionnaire des noms MDIK/ Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäo- viii bibliographical abbreviations

MDAIK logischen Instituts, Abteilung Kairo. Wb. Erman, A. & Grapow, H. Wörterbuch Cairo der ägyptischen Sprache. 6 vols (Berlin: MIFAO Mémoires publiés par les membres de Akademie-Verlag, 1926-1963) l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orien- WVDOG Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen tale. Cairo der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft MMAF Mémoires publiés par les membres de ZÄS Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und la Mission Archéologique Française au Altertumskunde. Leipzig & Berlin Caire. Cairo ZDMG Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländis- MMJ Metropolitan Museum Journal. New York chen Gesellschaft. Lepzig and Cairo NARCE Newsletter of the American Research Center in Egypt. New York Other Abbreviations OIP Oriental Institute Publications. Chi- cago ad loc. ad locum, at the location of OLA Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta. ARCE American Research Center in Egypt. Leuven Cairo OLZ Orientalische Literatur Zeitung. Berlin cat. catalog entry number PM I-VII Porter, B. & Moss, R. L. B. Topographical cf. confer Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hiero- CFEETK Centre Franco-égyptien d’études des glyphic Texts Reliefs and Paintings. 7 vols temples de Karnak. Luxor, Egypt. (Oxford: Griffith Institute, 1927-1952) chpt(s). chapter(s) PM I-III.22 Porter, B., Moss, R. L. B., Burney, E. W. cm. centimeter & Málek, J. Topographical Bibliography CNRS Centre National de la Recherche Scien- of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, tifique. Paris Reliefs and Paintings. 3 vols. second edi- EAP Egyptian Antiquities Project. ARCE. tion (Oxford: Griffith Institute, 1960- Cairo 1978) e.g. exempli gratia, for example RecTrav Recueil de travaux relatifs à la philologie et ed(s). editor(s) à l’archéologie égyptiennes et assyriennes. et al. et alii, and others Paris fasc. fascicle RdE Revue d’Égyptologie. Cairo and Paris ff. and following pages RIK I-IV Epigraphic Survey. Reliefs and Inscriptions fig(s). figure(s) at Karnak Temple. 4 vols (Chicago: Uni- ibid. ibidem, in the same place versity of Chicago Press, 1936-1986) idem. by the same author RILT 1-2 Epigraphic Survey. Reliefs and Inscrip- i.e. id est, that is tions at Luxor Temple. 2 vols (Chicago: IFAO L’institut Français d’Archéologie Orien- University of Chicago Press, 1994-98). tale. Cairo RITANC Kitchen, K. A. Ramesside Inscriptions, JE Journal d’Entrée, Egyptian Museum, I-II Translated and Annotated: Notes and Cairo Comments. 2 vols (Oxford: Blackwell, KV Kings’ Valley 1993-1999) m. meter RITA I-II Kitchen, K. A. Ramesside Inscriptions, n.d. no date Translated and Annotated: Translations. neg. photographic negative 2. vols (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993-1994) n(n). note(s) SAK Studien zur Altägyptische Kultur. Ham- no(s)./ n° number(s) burg op.cit. opus citatum, the work cited SAOC Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization. pl(s). plate(s) Chicago QV Queens’ Valley TTS Tutankhamūn Tomb Series. Ox - SR Special Register, Egyptian Museum, ford Cairo Urk. IV Sethe, K. & Helck, W. Urkunden des s.v. sub verbo, under the heading of aegyptischen Altertums IV. Urkunden TN Temporary Number, Egyptian Museum, der 18. Dynastie. Hefte 1-22 (Leipzig & Cairo Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1908-1909, TT Theban Tomb 1927-1930 & 1955-58) trans. translated by VA Varia Agyptiaca. San Antonio viz. videlicet, namely list of figures ix

LIST OF FIGURES

James P. Allen Fig. 1. Inscription on Jar 405 from the Tomb of Tutankhamun. Fig. 2. Inscription on Box 1k from the Tomb of Tutankhamun. Fig. 3. Stela Berlin 17813. Fig. 4. Unfinished Stela Berlin 20716. Fig. 5. Block from Hermopolis naming Tutankhamun and [Ankhesenpa]aten. Fig. 6. Nurse and Child from Room Gamma.

Michel Azim et Vincent Rondot Fig. 1. Plan du magasin SB au sud de la salle hypostyle (relevé V. Rondot, mai 1983). Fig. 2. La salle hypostyle vue depuis le sud en 1912 avec, devant sa porte latérale, plusieurs des grands blocs descendus par Legrain ; on notera, au premier tiers gauche de la photographie, la présence des deux dernières demi-architraves reposant sur le mur sud (Collection M. Pillet, CNRS-MOM, 1912, inv.. B028-16). Fig. 3. Nouvel établissement des textes des architraves N° 31, sup. et 31, inf. (d’après V. RONDOT, Les architraves, p. 18*). Fig. 4. Photographie G. Legrain 1899. Archives Lacau A XX 12. Détail agrandi de l’architrave. Fig. 5. Fac-similé schématique du texte lisible sur la photographie d’archives Lacau A XX 12.

Peter J. Brand Fig. 1. Cartouches of Merenptah surcharged by Seti II from a war scene at the north end of the west exterior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. The surface of the has not been cut back as have others on this wall. Location: PM II2, p. 132 (491). Fig. 2. Drawing of the same cartouche. No trace of Amenmesse’s name as claimed by Yurco was found after repeated collations. Fig. 3. Cartouches of Seti II carved over thoroughly erased originals from a gateway in central Karnak. Loca- tion: PM II2, p. 95 (272). The original author in this case was Amenmesse based on traces from another cartouche in the same series identified by Roy Hopper. Fig. 4. Bandeau text from central Karnak usurped by Seti II. No trace of the original name can be detected, although its original author is probably Merenptah. Location: PM II2, p. 88 (237). Fig. 5. Bandeau text of Merenptah usurped by Amenmesse from a pier in the second court of the Rames- seum. Location: PM II2, p. 435, pillar E(b); Leblanc et al., Le Ramesseum IX-1, pl. 9. Fig. 6. Detail of figure 5. the prenomen cartouche usurped by Amenmesse. Traces of plaster used to cover Merenptah’s titulary remain. Fig. 7. Architrave fragment from the “Mansion of Nepkhepurure at Thebes” found at Karnak. The prenomen of was carefully erased by while that of Tutankhamen was left intact. O. Schaden, NARCE 127 (1984), p. 57, fig. 25-2. Fig. 8. Another erased cartouche of Ay. Distinct traces of his prenomen can still be made out. Fig. 9. Another architrave fragment from the “Mansion of Nebkhepurure at Thebes.” The distinctive epithets of Ay’s Horus and Two Ladies names have been erased though traces remain. O. Schaden, NARCE 127 (1984), p. 56, fig. 7-2. Fig. 10. Scene of Merenptah kneeling between the paws of a criosphinx from the north end of the east interior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. Location: PM II2, p. 131 (482). Fig. 11. Detail of figure 10. Merenptah’s names have been subject to hacking, but thedamnatio memoriae was never completed and no other royal names were carved in their stead. Fig. 12. Seti II driving the four calves before Amen-Re in a scene from the west interior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. Location: PM II2, p. 132 (490, II.5). Fig. 13. Detail of figure 12. cartouches and Horus name of Seti II carved over erased originals on the west interior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. x list of figures

Fig. 14. Erased cartouche of Merenptah surcharged by Seti II on a loose block from the war scenes on the west exterior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. Le Saout, Karnak 8 (Paris: ERC, 1987), p. 231. Fig. 15. Drawing of figure 14. My own collation did not find as many traces of Merenptah’s prenomen as Le Saout’s did. Cf. Le Saout, Karnak 8 (Paris: ERC, 1987), p. 231. Fig. 16. Erased marginal inscription of Merenptah along the base of the west interior wall of the Ramesside forecourt at Luxor Temple beneath a procession of Ramesses II’s daughters. Location: PM II2, p. 308 (28). Fig. 17. Erased marginal inscription of Merenptah along the base of the west half of the south wall of the Ramesside forecourt at Luxor Temple beneath a procession of Ramesses II’s sons. A statue may have once stood in front of the un-erased segment in the middle of the photo. Location: PM II2, p. 308 (30). Fig. 18. Part of an erased marginal inscription of Merenptah below an intact one of Ramesses II from the west wing of the facade of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor. The phrasesA nb xaw has been incompletely erased. More thorough was the treatment of the king’s nomen cartouche on the right, although the mr-hoe and -figure are discernable. Location:PM II2, p. 309 (31); Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 143A. Fig. 19. Erased nomen cartouche of Merenptah from the east wing of the facade of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. Cf. Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 143B. Fig. 20. Part of a damaged and erased prenomen cartouche of Merenptah from the west wing of the facade of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. Cf. Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 143A. Fig. 21. Facimile drawings of erased cartouches of Merenptah on the facade of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple, after Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 143. Cf. fig.s 19-20. Fig. 22. Erased bandeau text of Merenptah from the dado of the west interior wall of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. Ramesses IV later carved another bandeau text in its place. The partially erased ram-glyph of Merenptah’s prenomen is visible beneath the D-cobra at the left end of the photograph. Location: PM II2, p. 314 (78); Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 173. Fig. 23. Large cartouches of Seti II surcharged over erased ones of Merenptah on a column in the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. A Htp-sign is discernable beneath the group PtH of Seti’s nomen on the left. None of these traces are shown in the Epigraphic Survey’s drawings of the columns. Cf. Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 194. Fig. 24. A nomen cartouche of Seti II surcharged over an erased cartouche of Merenptah from marginal deco- ration on a column in the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. A diagonal line between the two reed leaves may stem from a squatting deity figure in Merenptah’s nomen. Fig. 25. An erased bandeau text of Merenptah from the base of the east interior wall of the solar court at Luxor Temple. Location: PM II2, p. 317 (96). Fig. 26. Block from the war scenes on the west exterior wall of the Cour de la Cachette showing Crown Prince Seti riding in a chariot. The first part of the Prince’s titulary has been erased. Le Saout, Karnak 8 (Paris: ERC, 1987), p. 232. Fig. 27. Detail of fig 26. The erased protocol of Crown Prince Seti,iry-pat %wtXy. Fig. 28. Partly hacked cartouches of Merenptah from a Cour de la Cachette block. The relief was later plastered over by Seti II who cut a new inscription over it. The pattern of hacking to Merenptah’s cartouches is consistent with an uncompleted damnatio memoriae by Amenmesse rather than keying for plaster by Seti II prior to carving a new relief in its place. Cf. figs. 10-11.

Amy Calvert Fig. 1. Detail of Medinet Habu Epigraphic Survey plate 121. Fig. 2. Photograph of same showing preserved paint. Fig. 3. Detail of Ramses III wearing feathered back apron. Fig. 4. Detail of Ramses III wearing falcon shirt in battle. Fig. 5. Ramses III wearing a falcon shirt. Fig. 6. Detail of Ramses III in QV 55 wearing red textile shirt topped by a falcon shirt. Fig. 7. Details of Ramses III at Medinet Habu showing preserved sections of red textile shirts. Fig. 8. Ramses II wearing red textile shirt topped by a falcon shirt at his temple at Abydos. Fig. 9. Example of high positive correlation: horns, feathers, and multiple uraei with nms. Fig 10. Example of high negative correlation: fans and divine interaction. Fig. 11. Main Layout: tab. Fig. 12. Main Layout: Text tab. list of figures xi

Fig. 13. Main Layout: Context tab. Fig. 14. Main Layout: Context tab with both types of actors. Fig. 15. Main Layout: Divine actor screen (related to Fig. 14). Fig. 16. Main Layout: Human actor screen (related to Fig. 14). Fig. 17. Main Layout: Chariot tab. Fig. 18. Main Layout: Visual tab. Fig. 19. Dichotomous Layout. Fig. 20. Search for images of the king wearing selected attributes. Fig. 21. Results of search. Fig. 22. Example of a ‘multi’ apron. Fig. 23. Example of a ‘flanking’ apron. Fig. 24. Early version of the Dichotomous Layout.

Peter F. Dorman Fig. 1. Plan and section of the tomb of Kheruef. From Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pl. 3. Fig. 2. Amenhotep IV offers a libation to his parents. From Epigraphic Survey,Kheruef , pl. 13. Fig. 3. Schematic timeline for a hypothetical long coregency between Amenhotep III and Akhenaton. Fig. 4. Lintel and upper jambs of the entrance doorway of the tomb of Kheruef. From Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pl. 8. Fig. 5. Lintel and upper jambs of the second doorway of the tomb of Kheruef. From Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pl. 67. Fig. 6. Usurped cartouches on the cornice of the doorway of the first pylon of Soleb Temple. From Schiff Giorgini, et al., Soleb V: Le temple: bas-reliefs et inscriptions, pl. 23.

Jacobus van Dijk Fig. 1. The so-called birth scene in Room γ of the Royal Tomb at Amarna Fig. 2. Parallel scene in Room α of the Royal Tomb at Amarna Fig. 3. A reconstruction by G. Legrain of the two columns of text inscribed in front of the woman holding the child in Room γ Fig. 4. G. T. Martin’s reconstruction of the same columns of text Fig. 5. Martin’s drawing of the scene, including the two columns of text Fig. 6. M. Gabolde’s reconstruction of the same columns of text Fig. 7. New reconstruction of the same columns of text Fig. 8. Detail of G. Jéquier’s photograph of the scene reconstructed in Fig. 7

Earl L. Ertman Fig. 1. Amenhotep IV kissing the ground: Karnak talatat assemblage A 0081, after R. Vergnieux and M. Gon- dran, Aménophis IV et les Pierres du soleil. Ahkénaton retrouvé (Paris: Arthaud, 1997), pp. 170-1. Fig. 2. Nefertiti kissing the ground: Karnak talatat assemblage A 0081, after R. Vergnieux and M. Gondran, Aménophis IV et les Pierres du soleil. Ahkénaton retrouvé (Paris: Arthaud, 1997), pp. 170-1. Fig. 3. After the Epigraphic Survey, The Tomb of Kheruef, pl. 9. Fig. 4. Brussels E 2157, relief of Tiy from the tomb of Userhet. Drawing by Elaine Taylor. Fig. 5. Nefertiti in the Window of Appearances, TT 55, Tomb of Ramose. Photograph courtesy of George Johnson. Fig. 6. Nefertiti talatat ©CNRS/CFEETK—A. Bellod.

Richard A. Fazzini Fig. 1. Detail of a Dynasty XXV stela found in front of the south wing of the Second Pylon of the Amun Temple at Karnak. Photograph by B. V. Bothmer. Fig. 2. The prenomen of in the crypt under the main sanctuary of the Temple of Mut. Drawing by J. van Dijk and R. Fazzini. Fig. 3. Schematic plan by C. Van Siclen of the rear half of the Temple of Mut. The dotted line indicates the Tuthmoside platform. Fig. 4. The crypt under the main sanctuary of the Temple of Mut and the shaft before it. Photograph by M. McKercher. Fig. 5. Fragmentary offering table found at the bottom of the shaft before the crypt under the main sanctu- ary of the Temple of Mut. Photograph by M. McKercher. xii list of figures

Fig. 6a-b. Photograph and drawing of the front part of a cartouche of ^…found in the rear of Temple A. Drawing by R. Fazzini. Photograph by M. McKercher. Fig. 7. Two well-preserved faces in relief in the rear of Temple A. Photograph by M. McKercher.

Luc Gabolde Fig. 1. Assemblage de blocs d’Amenemhat Ier dans les magasins du temple de Louxor

Marc Gabolde Fig. 1. An inlay fragment of the ‘sky’-sign discovered among the finds from KV 55 (Egyptian Museum in Cairo). Fig. 2. Original inscription from the canopic jars of KV 55 with the titulary of (drawing by the author based upon the reconstruction of Krauss, MDAIK 42 (1986), p. 72, Abbildung 7). Fig. 3. First step of the erasure of the name of Kiya. Her titulary is hacked out and the ‘sky’ sign is cut. Fig. 4. Second step of change: the right corner of the ‘sky’-sign is moved to the left and a calcite fragment is inserted in its place. Fig. 5. Reconstruction of the inscribed panel of the canopic jars from KV 55 in accordance with the identity of the last owner. Fig. 6. Last step of change, the remaining royal cartouches are erased and the ‘sky’-sign removed. Part of the calcite inlay is broken during the process. The names of the god were removed as well to prevent any confusion (the Aten could not have viscera). Fig. 7. View of the panel after the last change. A fragment of the ‘sky’-sign was left in the tomb and recovered later by the excavators. Fig. 8. Schematic drawing of traces from the gold sheet fragment ‘D 6’ from the coffin from KV 55. Fig. 9. Nomen from pectoral Carter 261 p 1. top, from left to right: enlarged detail scanned from the pho- tography of T. G. H. James and A. De Luca, Toutankhamon (Paris: Gründ, 2000), p. 227; traces of defaced and re-engraved cartouches; traces of re-engraved cartouche; traces of defaced cartouche; bottom, from left to right, drawing of traces of both defaced and re-engraved cartouches; traces of re-engraved cartouche; traces of defaced cartouche; reconstruction of original cartouche. Fig. 10. Cartouche in Selkis coffinette (Carter 266g = JE 60691) line 7. top: scan from catalogueThe Treasures of Tutankhamun, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1976, cat. no. 45, between plates 26 and 27; middle left: traces of both first and second engraved names; bottom left: traces of second engraved name; middle right: traces of first engraved name; bottom right: reconstructed first name taking advantage of the reading of Carter 261 p 1.

W. Raymond Johnson Fig. 1. Liverpool Museum 1967.35. Courtesy of National Museums Liverpool (Liverpool Museum). Fig. 2. The barge of Mut (detail of prow) being towed by the barge of the queen, Luxor Temple Colonnade Hall western wall. photo by Ray Johnson. list of figures xiii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express my gratitude to Richard Fazzini, who first suggested the idea of organizing a memo- rial volume in honor of Bill Murnane in early 2001. He has given me his advice and support for the project ever since. To Jacobus van Dijk, I am grateful for his assistance and encouragement in start- ing the project as the initial coeditor, and later for securing Brill’s agreement to publish the work. I am indebted, also, to my coeditor and doctoral student Louise Cooper for her invaluable editorial and organizational contributions. Thanks also go to Jennifer Pavelko, my editor at Brill. I must also express my profound gratitude to all of the contributors to this volume for their submissions and for their patience and forbearance during the long publication process. Their contributions stand as a fitting tribute to Bill Murnane’s eclecticism and insightfulness as a scholar. Finally, I am very grateful to Bill’s sister, Annie Miles, and especially to his beloved mother, Marie Murnane, for their support and encouragement.

Peter J. Brand April 2009 xiv list of figures introduction 1

INTRODUCTION

For all who knew him, Bill Murnane’s unexpected stranded on the mountain overnight! Another of death in 2000 came as both a great shock and a his favorite “war stories” was how he and Charles double tragedy. Not only had we suddenly lost C. Van Siclen perfected the culinary art of “one one of the foremost Egyptological scholars of his pot spaghetti,” by boiling the noodles in the generation, but a dear friend well known to col- tomato sauce, during their expedition to record leagues around the world for his kindness and the boundary stelae of at Amarna. All generosity. Bill was unfailingly a gentleman who who met him soon learned, too, of Bill’s great pas- freely gave of his time and expertise to all who sion for Grand Opera. He once proudly confessed: asked it, be they scholars, students, tourists or “I own fifteen complete recordings of Wagner’s members of the general public. entire Ring cycle on vinyl records and CDs, not Even when engrossed in his fieldwork for the including separate recordings of the individual Epigraphic Survey and later for his own Karnak operas and discs with arias by various divas!” Hypostyle Hall Project, Bill was never too busy Among Bill Murnane’s most appealing schol- to answer questions posed by tourists, respond- arly qualities were his rigorous approach to the ing in Arabic, English, French, German or Span- evidence and his open mindedness. These twin ish depending on the questioner’s native tongue. virtues were especially important in his favorite Having grown up in Venezuela, he spoke Spanish subject, the Amarna period. He would tell his fluently, and happily lent his expertise to Spanish students: “remember, we’re having an ongoing speakers, whether to give the wife of a high-rank- conversation about these issues; we’re not in the ing Spanish dignitary a private tour of the Tomb business of revealing truth.” He was always willing of Queen or to advise a new Argentinean to reconsider the evidence and even change his expedition on their epigraphic work in the tomb mind about cherished, long-held views. Bill was of Neferhotep in Gurnah in his final years. a consummate field epigraphist who delighted Bill’s knowledge of was encyclope- in such conundrums as usurped cartouches and dic. Simply put, he was a walking reference work palimpsest inscriptions. He was also one of the who could cite on demand relevant bibliography, deans of history and historiography in Egyptol- ancient textual references and monumental art ogy, both as a thoughtful and meticulous scholar and inscriptions from his prodigious memory. He and a passionate and devoted mentor to students loved to “talk shop” about all aspects of Ancient at the University of Memphis.1 Bill was a master Egyptian history, especially the Amarna Period. of applying epigraphic data and analysis to the Leisurely discussions over lunch and dinner, interpretation of Egyptian history. He could also during breaks in fieldwork or in his office after make the most arcane subjects accessible to wider class soon brought out his extensive lore on Egyp- audiences of students, tourists and the public. tology, always illustrated with funny anecdotes In explaining the complex succession of usurpa- about his own experiences and the many color- tions and recut inscriptions at Karnak during the ful personalities he encountered throughout his Ramesside Period, for example, he would often career. One of his favorite stories was a hysteri- quip: “the is the story of who did cal account of how he once climbed the gebel in what to whose monuments!” Gurnah to sing the great love aria of Radames Bill Murnane made huge contributions to the from the opera Aida at sunset, only to incite recording and analysis of Egyptian monumen- every dog on the west bank to barking. He was tal inscriptions through his tenure with the Epi- then pinned down by gunfire from locals, who graphic Survey of the University of Chicago2 and presumed him to be a jackal, and he remained through the Karnak Project

1 One of his final contributions to scholarship was as of the Eighth International Congress of Egyptologists Cairo a panellist for the millenium debate on history writing in 2000, Vol. 2, History and Religion, eds. Z. Hawass and Egyptology at the Eighth International Congress of Egyp- L.P. Brock (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, tology held in Cairo in the spring of 2000. W.J. Murnane, 2003), pp. 15-19. “Millennium Debate: Response to D.B. Redford,” in Egyp- 2 Among the Epigraphic Survey’s volumes to which he tology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: Proceedings contributed through fieldwork and editorially are: Epigraphic 2 introduction which he founded at the University of Memphis.3 such as reliefs from the Triple Shrine at Luxor Bill also took the initiative to edit, correct and and the Eighth Pylon at Karnak. His meticulous publish the complete set of Harold H. Nelson’s and exacting approach to the documentation and drawings of the reliefs and hieroglyphic texts from analysis of such inscriptions is reflected in his the interior wall scenes in the Karnak Hypostyle study of erased figures of Tutankhamun on the Hall which had sat largely forgotten in the archives Third Pylon at Karnak.7 of Chicago House after Nelson’s death.4 Bill Murnane made invaluable advances to our The bibliography of Bill’s works highlights understanding of the history and chronology of other contributions he made to the publication pharaonic Egypt. Most fundamental was Ancient and interpretation of ancient sources, especially Egyptian Coregencies (Chicago: Oriental Institute, epigraphic data. These include publication of frag- 1977), his wide ranging study of this important ments of an important inscription of and controversial historical phenomenon from from her famous at Karnak and the Old Kingdom down to the Roman emper- a funerary cone from a New Kingdom private ors who ruled Egypt in the guise of . tombs at Thebes.5 Most important is the volume He revisited the coregency debates concerning he co-authored with Charles C. Van Siclen con- the Middle and New Kingdom in several articles, taining the definitive documentation, translation always keeping an open mind for new data and and analysis of the texts of the several bound- interpretations and modifying some of his own ary stelae of Akhenaten at Amarna with all their earlier conclusions.8 Sadly, a thoroughly revised editions and colophons.6 His work also called and updated edition of his first book was only in attention to historically interesting temple reliefs the planning stages when he died. which often seem to hide in plain sight on the Another important contribution was The walls of as yet unpublished Theban monuments, Road to Kadesh, SAOC 42 (Chicago: University

Survey, The I, Scenes of King Herihor in Translations and Commentary; and idem, Murnane† and the Court, OIP 100 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Brand, The Great Hypostyle Hall in the Temple of Amun 1979); idem, The Temple of Khonsu II, Scenes and Inscrip- at Karnak, Vol. 2. The Gateways. Finally, his contribution tions in the Court and the First Hypostyle Hall, OIP 103 to an eventual publication of the war scenes of Ramesses (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981); idem, The II on the south exterior wall of the Karnak Hypostyle Hall Tomb of Kheruef: Theban Tomb 192,OIP 102 (Chicago: will also be honored. University of Chicago Press, 1980); idem, The Battle Reliefs 4 H.H. Nelson, The Great Hypostyle Hall in the Temple of King Sety I, RIK 4 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, of Amun at Karnak, Volume I, Part 1. The Wall Reliefs, ed. 1985); idem, The Festival Procession of Opet in the Colonnade W.J. Murnane, OIP 106 (Chicago: University of Chicago Hall, RILT 1 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984); Press, 1981). idem, The Facade, Portals, Upper Register Scenes, Columns, 5 W.J. Murnane, “Unpublished Fragments of Hatshep- Marginalia, and Statuary in the Colonnade Hall, RILT 2 sut’s Historical Inscription from Her Sanctuary at Karnak,” (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998). He is also Serapis 6 (1980), pp. 91-102; idem, “A Hitherto Unpublished listed as a participant in the prepration of the Epigraphic Funerary Cone,” GM 19 (1976), pp. 39-40. Survey’s latest volume: Medinet Habu IX, The Eighteenth 6 W.J. Murnane and C.C. Van Siclen, The Boundary Stelae Dynasty Temple, Part I: The Inner Sanctuaries(Chicago: of Akhenaten (London: Kegan Paul International, 1993). University of Chicago Press, forthcoming). 7 W.J. Murnane, “The Bark of Amun on the Third Pylon 3 In addition to articles published during his lifetime at Karnak,” JARCE 16 (1979), pp. 11-27; idem, “False Doors and after his death, some forthcoming volumes of the and Cult Practices Inside Luxor Temple,” in Mélanges Gamal Karnak Hypostyle Hall Project will be published in his Eddin Mokhtar Vol. II, ed. P. Posener-Kriéger (Cairo: Institut name: W.J. Murnane, “Egyptian Monuments and Histori- Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 1985), pp. 135- cal Memory,” KMT 5.3 (Summer 1994), pp. 15-24, 88; idem, 148; idem, “Tutankhamun on the Eighth Pylon at Karnak,” “ and The Building of the Great Hypostyle Hall VA 1 (1985), pp. 59-68. at Karnak Revisited,” Iubilate Conlegae: Egyptological Stud- 8 E.g., W.J. Murnane, “The Hypothetical Coregency ies in Memory of A.A. Sadek, VA 10 (1995), pp. 163-168; Between Amenhotep III and Akhenaton: Two Observa- idem, “Reconstructing Scenes from the Great Hypostyle tions,” Serapis 2 (1970), pp. 17-21; idem, “The Earlier Reign Hall in the Temple of Amun at Karnak,” in Essays in of Ramesses II and His Coregency with Sety I,” JNES 34 Honour of Prof. Dr. Jadwiga Lipińska, ed. A. Niwinsky and (1975), pp. 153-190; idem, “The Earlier Reign of Ramesses A. Majewska, Warsaw Egyptological Studies vol. 1 (Warsaw: II: Two Addenda,” GM 19 (1976), pp. 41-43; idem, “In Polish Academy of Sciences, 1997), pp. 107-117; idem†, Defense of Middle Kingdom Double Dates,” BES 3 (1981), “A Forest of Columns: The Karnak Great Hypostyle Hall pp. 73-82; idem, J.P. Allen, J. van Dijk, “Further Evidence Project,” KMT 12.3 (Fall 2001), pp. 50-59; idem†, P.J. Brand, for the Coregency of Amenhotep III and IV: Three Views J. Karkowski, and R. Jaeschke, “The Karnak Hypostyle Hall on a Graffito Found at Dahshur,”Amarna Letters 3 (1994), Project (1992-2002),”ASAE 78 (2004), pp. 79-127. pp. 26-31, 152; idem†, “Coregency,” Oxford Encyclopedia Currently in preparation are two further volumes: of , vol. 1, ed. Donald B. Redford (Oxford: W.J. Murnane†, P.J. Brand, The Great Hypostyle Hall in the Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 307-311. Temple of Amun at Karnak, Vol. 1, Part 2. The Wall Reliefs: introduction 3 of Chicago Press, 1985), Bill Murnane’s study work.10 A hallmark of all his writings was lucid of Egypt’s relations with Western Asia from the and elegant prose married to incisive, prescient Amarna Period down to the early Nineteenth analysis of the evidence. Dynasty written to accompany the Epigraphic The essays in this volume reflect Bill Mur- Survey’s definitive edition of the battle nane’s wide variety of interests, especially his- reliefs at Karnak. His masterful elucidation and torical and epigraphic issues. Lorelei H. Corcoran analysis of the complex range of evidence for the offers a fond remembrance of Bill and his legacy origins of the Egyptian-Hittite conflict found in as a scholar and teacher based on the eulogy she the Amarna letters and in numerous other Egyp- gave at his funeral in November 2000. tian and Akkadian sources had, in Donald Red- Subjects from the Amarna period loom large, as ford’s words, left us all in Bill’s debt. The book was they did in Bill’s own research and thinking, espe- so successful that it quickly sold out and a second cially the events at the close of Akhenaten’s reign revised edition was published in 1990. and its aftermath. He would be delighted by the Bill Murnane was one of the foremost experts studies devoted to his favorite period of Egyptian on the Amarna Period, as reflected in books history. James P. Allen investigates the complex and articles published throughout his career. In problem of the royal succession in a study Akhen- addition to his studies on the hotly debated core- aten’s three immediate successors, , gency of Amenhotep III and Akhenaten and his the female pharaoh , and Tut- monograph on the Amarna Boundary Stelae, his ankhamun, as he reaches new conclusions about Texts from the Amarna Period in Egypt (Atlanta: the parentage of the latter. Peter Dorman revisits Scholars’ Press, 1995), provides a comprehensive the hotly debated coregency between Amenhotep set of excellent translations of important texts III and Akhenaten. Dorman uses the Theban tomb from the reign of Amenhotep III down to that of of Kheruef as a lens through which he establishes a Horemheb together with a survey of the historical chronological structure for Akhenaten’s reign and problems of the Amarna age. A large corpus of tests the coregency against it. In an addendum, he his articles and book reviews considered various integrates the evidence from Soleb Temple into aspects of the age ranging from the accession date this picture. of Akhenaten to the epigraphic complexities of Jacobus van Dijk’s study on the death of Prin- Soleb Temple and the enigmatic events at the end cess Meketaten reconsiders the funerary scenes of the Amarna Period.9 in room γ of the royal tomb at Amarna and gives Among Bill’s other important contributions a new reconstruction of the broken text glossing to scholarship and the public’s knowledge of the figure of a nurse who caries an infant from Ancient Egypt are his excellent gazetteer The Pen- the death chamber. He concludes with a new guin Guide to Ancient Egypt (Harmondsworth: interpretation of who this infant represents. Earl Penguin, 1983, revised 1996) which still enjoys Eartman offers an art historical and iconographic a wide following. Another is United With Eter- study on a representation of Nefertiti on a talatat nity: A Concise Guide to the Monuments of Medi- block from one of Akhenaten’s early temples at net Habu (Cairo: American University in Cairo Karnak which shows a continuity of artistic style Press,1980). The wealth of other scholarly articles with the reliefs of Amenhotep III. and book reviews is too numerous to survey here. Marc Gabolde’s offering combines Bill Mur- A final representative example of his meticulous nane’s interests in the Amarna Period and monu- analysis and thought-provoking interpretations mental epigraphy through a careful analysis of of Egyptian history is his study of the introduc- erasures, alterations and usurpations of inscrip- tion to Thutmose III’sAnnals from Karnak. The tions on three objects: a canopic jar and the golden title of this gem also betrays a playful sense of coffin from KV 55 and one of the gold coffinettes humor that could appear in even his most erudite from Tutankhamun’s burial. He identifies the

9 E.g., W.J. Murnane, “On the Accession Date of Reconsidering the Temple in Nubia,” Amarna Akhenaton,” in Studies in Honor of George R. Hughes, Janu- Letters 4 (Fall, 2000), pp. 6-19, 160; idem†, “The End of the ary 12, 1977, eds. J.H. Johnson and E.F. Wente, SAOC 39 Amarna Period Once Again,” OLZ 96 (2001), pp. 9-22. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), pp. 163-167; 10 W.J. Murnane, “Rhetorical History? The Beginning idem, “The Return to Orthodoxy,” in Pharaohs of the Sun, of Thutmose III’s First Campaign in Western Asia,”JARCE eds. R. Freed, Y. Markowitz, and S. D’Auria (Boston: Museum 26 (1989), pp. 183-189. of Fine Arts, 1999), pp. 177-185; idem, “Soleb Renaissance: 4 introduction original owners of all three objects and names the cartouches from Kushite monuments from the individual buried in KV 55. W. Raymond Johnson precinct of Mut at Karnak Temple. traces the history and original location of a frag- Luc Gabolde investigates a group of blocks from ment of relief decoration of Tutankhamun now the storage magazines of Luxor Temple inscribed in the collections of the Liverpool Museum. for Amenemhet I and their relevance to the early Bill dedicated most of his professional life to history of Karnak temple. Helen Jacquet-Gordon the scientific recording and interpretation of the reconstructs the origins and history of the “Fes- standing monuments of Thebes, especially the tival on which Amun went out to the Treasury” temples of Karnak and Luxor, during his tenure which centered around the Treasury of Thutmose with the Epigraphic Survey and later with his own I in North Karnak. François Larché presents a Karnak Hypostyle Hall Project at the University major synthesis of a large corpus of archaeologi- of Memphis. It is appropriate, then, that several cal and epigraphic data to reconstruct the monu- of the articles dedicated to his memory deal with ments of Senwosret I and Amenhotep I at Karnak, these same monuments to which he devoted so including their eventual dismantling and reuse by many of his own energies. various Eighteenth Dynasty pharaohs. Michel Azim and Vincent Rondot present Bill Murnane also excelled in the realm of his- archaeological and epigraphic notes on a “lost” torical and textual studies. In honor of his impor- architrave of the Karnak Great Hypostyle Hall. tant contributions to these disciplines, Kenneth Peter J. Brand examines cartouches of Merenptah A. Kitchen offers methodological analysis on erased by Amenmesse and usurped by Seti II at the historical and literary aspects of New King- Karnak and Luxor. dom topographical lists. Finally, Donald B. Red- Bill’s former graduate student Amy Calvert ford examines the literary and lexicographic gives a précis of her doctoral study on the use of background in Egyptian texts to the “Land of a computer database for analyzing the complex Ramesses” of the Hebrew Bible. The book closes iconography of royal costume in New Kingdom with a compilation of Bill Murnane’s own pub- temple reliefs from Medinet Habu and else- lications. where. Richard Fazzini considers two semi-erased a fond remembrance: william joseph murnane, jr. 5

A FOND REMEMBRANCE: WILLIAM JOSEPH MURNANE, JR. MARCH 22, 1945NOVEMBER 17, 20001

Lorelei H. Corcoran University of Memphis

On November 17, 2000, we lost a beloved col- Luxor, Egypt, shortly before he received his doc- league. William Murnane died unexpectedly of torate from the University of Chicago in 1973. heart failure at Baptist Memorial Hospital East in As field epigrapher, and then as senior Epigra- Memphis, Tennessee. Bill held a Dunavant Pro- pher until 1986, Bill helped document the texts fessorship in the History Department and was and scenes on the walls of the major temples of research associate of the Institute of Egyptian Art Karnak, Khonsu, and Luxor, and at the small & Archaeology at the University of Memphis. He temple at Medinet Habu. He also contributed to was also director of the Great Hypostyle Hall Proj- the commentaries and translations of the land- ect at Karnak Temple, Luxor, Egypt. mark folio publications of the Oriental Institute. Among his scholarly monographs, several are With Charles van Siclen he lived under difficult recognized as standard references by historians conditions at Amarna in Middle Egypt, a place and philologists alike. These includeAncient Egyp- Bill would have described as “a spot where God tian Coregencies (Chicago, 1977), The Road to left his shoes.” The two of them braved challeng- Kadesh (Chicago, 1985; revised 1990), and Texts ing circumstances to locate and copy the texts from the Amarna Period (Atlanta, 1995; revised at Akhenaten’s capital city, and to publish them 1998). Other publications, including The Penguin in The Boundary Stelae of Akhenaten (London, Guide to Ancient Egypt (London, 1983; revised 1993). 1996) and United with Eternity (Chicago, 1980), Bill’s dream of sharing his knowledge and a comprehensive guide to the mortuary complex experiences with students as a faculty member of Ramses III, are known to a wider audience. at a university came true in 1986 when he was Dog-eared editions of these texts are carried appointed Visiting Associate Professor of Egyp- throughout Egypt by tourists who are guided tology at the University of California, Berkeley. In by Bill’s encyclopedic knowledge of the ancient 1987 he was hired by the History Department of monuments, every one of which he had person- the University of Memphis (then Memphis State ally visited. University). According to Rita Freed, fellow Egyp- Of Bill, her friend of over thirty-five years, Cyn- tologist in the Art Department at the time, “When thia Sheikholeslami wrote, “He was unfailingly the History Department hired Bill those of us at a gentleman, perpetually kind and patient, and the Egyptian Institute couldn’t believe our good yet unassumingly modest with a gentle sense of fortune. To count a scholar of his stature in our humor. He was also one of the best of the Egyp- ranks immediately catapulted a fledgling aca- tologists of our generation.” demic program to international prominence.” Born in New York, but raised in Venezuela, Bill Bill was promoted to full professor in 1994. returned to the U.S. and attended St. Anselm’s Throughout his faculty career, one of the world’s College. He showed an early interest in Egyptian foremost experts taught a wide range of courses— language and wrote letters home to his sister, from undergraduate surveys in World Civilization Annie, in . His professional to graduate seminars on the Amarna Period—in career began however in 1972 when he joined the which he helped students to decipher the com- staff of the Epigraphic Survey at Chicago House, plexities of ancient history. Those who studied

1 This text was first read as a eulogy at the memorial was originally published (in an adapted form) in KMT, service for William Murnane on November 20, 2000, at the A Modern Journal of Ancient Egypt, Volume 12, Number Memphis Funeral Home, Poplar Chapel, Memphis, TN. It 1 (Spring 2001) and appears here with permission. 6 lorelei h. corcoran with him will always treasure his comprehensive- hieroglyphs on crumbling sandstone walls. Bill if-intimidating reading lists. had projected twenty more years at the Hypostyle His role as a mentor to his students was marked Hall; he considered this work to be vitally impor- by those qualities Rita Freed attributed most tant and recognized it as his personal responsi- closely to him, “his brilliance, his patience, and bility and legacy. The Institute of Egyptian Art his generosity” with his time, his ideas and his & Archaeology honored its commitment to the library. In 1992 his master’s student, Peter Brand, project by appointing Peter Brand as director to left Memphis to study Egyptology at the Uni- complete Bill’s planned goals. One of Bill’s col- versity of Toronto where he went on to receive lection of quaint phrases seems appropriate in a Ph.D. in 1998. Bill beamed with obvious pride this context as he used it often about some excep- when he presented to his Memphis colleagues a tionally difficult or daunting task, “If generosity copy of the publication of Peter’s dissertation on a means giving, I give it to you.” topic inspired by the work Peter had shared with James Allen struggled to accept the news Bill on the Hypostyle Hall Project. of Bill’s passing. “It can’t be true,” he argued Bill Murnane’s achievements as an eminent defensively against fate on behalf of his long- scholar were acknowledged by his receipt of time friend, “because Bill hasn’t yet completed numerous awards and prestigious grants. He the general textbook of Egyptian history he had won three University faculty research awards. In contracted to write,” on which he was working 1994, he was awarded the Distinguished Research and had already titled, Kings and Mortals. An Award of the College of Arts and Sciences. In 2000 apt title, another friend remarked, for “Bill was he was presented with the University of Memphis’ a prince among men.” Richard and Helena Jae- highest distinction: the Eminent Faculty Research schke wrote that they had “felt honored to know Award. and work with such an eminent Egyptologist, but Bill’s commitment to professional service would miss his friendship far, far more.” Bill’s extended beyond the University, where he served compassionate humanity touched some who had on numerous politically significant academic met him in person only once, and others who committees, such as the Faculty Senate, and as had never met him such as the members of an the University’s representative to the American international Egyptological internet discussion Association of University Professors. Bill was a group with which he graciously corresponded. member of the editorial boards of journals, in par- Although the list of his publications on esoteric ticular JARCE, JEA and KMT, as well as a member scholarly subjects is prolific, Bill enjoyed sharing of the grant review boards of the National Endow- his knowledge and ideas in on-screen interviews ment for the Humanities and the Michela Schiff with television’s The Learning Channel and The Giorgini Foundation. Bill’s international reputa- History Channel, even offering a “historical intro- tion is evident from the outpouring of reminis- duction” to the films “Ben Hur” and “Spartacus” cences and condolences the Egyptian Institute for a local Memphis film series. His last public received from colleagues all over the world. lecture was for the Southern California Chapter For over twenty years Bill served as the direc- of the American Research Center in Egypt. tor of the Karnak Great Hypostyle Hall Project: On my first visit to Egypt in 1983, Bill Mur- its mission to document the disappearing record nane gave me a one-on-one introduction to of texts and scenes on one of the most frequently Luxor Temple that I will always treasure. He visited monuments in Egypt. His interest in the also instructed me on the practicalities of get- project began during his “free time” as a staff ting about Egypt (when I proposed to him my member of Chicago House. The project went day’s itinerary he responded, “Ah, the courage with him to the University of Memphis. Sup- of these Western women”). Ever polite, he was ported by private donations and two major and adamantly protective, and stated emphatically, increasingly competitive grants from the National “The fare for the ferry to the west bank is only Endowment for the Humanities, Bill took stu- 2 1/2 cents. Don’t let them tell you otherwise.” dents to work with him in Egypt, some of whom Inevitably, I fell ill on my visit and, while suffering had never left the U.S. before. He guided them in my room at Chicago House, having actually through daily life in Egypt and bouts of “ selected the lemon tree in the back garden beneath tummy” as kindly and generously as he instructed which I wished to be buried, Bill appeared with them in the intricacies of identifying deteriorating a bottle of ginger ale. He shook his head with a fond remembrance: william joseph murnane, jr. 7 an impish grin, “The worst part,” he said, from Cynthia Sheikholeslami, wrote of Bill, “The experience, “is that you’ll feel so bad you’ll wish most earnest wish of the ancient Egyptian was you would die . . . but you won’t!” A decade later, that his name, the most intimate sign of him- I would work together with Bill on the Hypostyle self, would be remembered forever. I am sure that Hall Project. Although he was a passionate fan of Bill’s name will live always amongst those of us opera and classical music, those who spent 24/7 who were fortunate enough to have been counted with him out in the field also knew that Bill had his friends, and amongst all Egyptologists now unexpected tastes in other forms of music. None and in the future who benefit from his scholarly of us will forget Bill’s rendition of Screamin’ Jay publications.” Hawkins’ “I put a spell on you.” Indeed, we miss him dearly. 8 lorelei h. corcoran the amarna succession 9

THE AMARNA SUCCESSION

James P. Allen Brown University

Bill Murnane had many admirable qualities, but Most of the questions in this shadowy period the one that impressed me most was his open- center on the identity behind two sets of phara- mindedness as a scholar. Bill was always concerned onic cartouches, both characterized by the element about facts, and he valued them much higher than n-prw-r in the prenomen. One set, belonging theories. He was always ready to embrace new to a king named Smenkhkare, always has the form interpretations if they could be shown to be more (n-prw-r)| (smn--r sr-prw)|; the other, of consistent with the facts than previous ones, even a king named Neferneferuaten, regularly appears at the expense of his own theories, published or as (n-prw-r plus epithet)| (nfr-nfrw-jtn plus otherwise. This article treats a subject for which epithet)|; the epithets usually identify this king as hard facts are few and theories many. It concerns “desired of Akhenaten,” using one of the two parts a period of Egyptian history that interested Bill of Akhenaten’s prenomen (nfr-prw-r w-n-r)|. more than any other, one that his own work has In the second set, elements of both cartouches are significantly elucidated. I don’t know whether he occasionally marked as feminine: the pre nomen would have agreed with its interpretations or not, as nt-prw-r and the relative form “desired” but I wish he were here to discuss them with. in the epithets as mrt; in addition, the epithet “desired of Waenre” in the nomen is occasionally **** replaced by At n h(j).s “effective for her husband,” The scene of foreign tribute in the tomb of and the names can be followed by the feminine Merire II at Amarna, often called the “durbar,” attributes n.tj Dt “alive forever” and mAt rw provides the last clear view we have of the Amarna “justified.”3 Period before the accession of Tutankhamun. Both sets of cartouches are associated with Dated to the second month of Akhenaten’s twelfth Akhenaten. In the case of Smenkhkare, the two regnal year, it shows Akhenaten and Nefertiti kings appear together on one object only, a together with their six daughters, , calcite jar from the tomb of Tutankhamun on Meke taten, Ankhes enpaaten, Neferneferuaten Jr., which Smenkhkare’s cartouches follow those of Neferneferure, and Setepenre.1 The scene provides Akhenaten, both subsequently erased (Carter 405, the last securely dated appearance of all seven Fig. 1).4 Evidence for Neferneferuaten’s associa- women as well as the first dated attestation of tion with Akhenaten is more substantial: apart the later name of the Aten.2 Between this point from the epithets noted above, her cartouches and the accession of Tutankhamun, the events of follow his on at least two objects, a box from the Amarna history are much less lucid. tomb of Tutankhamun (Carter 1k, Fig. 2) and a

1 N. de Garis Davies, The Rock Tombs of el Amarna, II. Paris: Université Lumière-Lyon 2, 1998), pp. 110-18. The Tombs of Panehesy and Meryra II, ASE 14 (London: I thank M. Gabolde for his comments on an earlier draft of EEF, 1905), p. 38 and pl. 38. The second month of Akhen- the present article. aten’s regnal years was 2 prt; his accession took place in 1 prt: 3 J.P. Allen, “Nefertiti and Smenkh-ka-re,” GM 141 W.J. Murnane, “On the Accession Date of Akhenaten,” in (1994), pp. 7-17; M. Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon , Studies in Honor of George R. Hughes, eds. J.H. Johnson and pp. 147-62, 213-219. E.F. Wente, SAOC 39 (Chicago: Oriental Institute of the 4 C.E. Loeben, “No Evidence of Coregency: Zwei getilgte University of Chicago, 1976), pp. 163-67. Inschriften aus dem Grab von Tutanchamun,” BSEG 15 2 The Aten’s name was changed sometime after its last (1991), pp. 82-90; idem, “No Evidence of Coregency: Two attestation in the colophon of the Later Proclamation on Erased Inscriptions from Tutankhamun’s Tomb,” Amarna boundary stelae A and B at Amarna, dated to the last day Letters 3 (1994), pp. 105-109. See Gabolde, D’Akhenaton of Month 12 in Regnal Year 8. It is possible that the change à Toutânkhamon, pp. 224-26. Fig. 1 is based on Loeben’s occurred even later than Regnal Year 12: see M. Gabolde, reconstruction; darker signs represent those for which traces D’Akhenaton à Tout ânkhamon (Collection de l’Institut are preserved. d’Archéologie et d’Histoire de l’Antiquité vol 3 (Lyon & 10 james p. allen

that once displayed his cartouches side by side with those of Akhenaten. The juxtaposition, how- ever, is not conclusive proof of a coregency;7 the jar could have been dedicated by Smenkhkare in memory of his deceased predecessor. Examples of Neferneferuaten’s cartouches together with those of Akhenaten are subject to the same caveat. A relief found at Memphis, apparently showing a male king behind a larger figure, has often been cited as evidence of a coregency between Smen- khkare (as the smaller figure) and Akhenaten (as the larger).8 The identification of the smaller figure as Smenkhkare was based on a second block from the same site, which preserves the ends of his cartouches and that of a queen, probably Meri- taten.9 The cartouches, however, are juxtaposed Fig. 1. Inscription on Jar 405 from the Tomb of Tutankha- directly with those of the Aten, at the same level mun. and approximately the same size, which must indicate that Smenkhkare was depicted as the pri- mary figure in the scene below.10 Both blocks are fragmentary stela found at Amarna.5 Smenkh- preserved only in drawings; additional drawings kare and Neferneferuaten are each associated as of the first block, recently published, indicate that well with Meritaten as chief queen, the former the scene probably depicted an Amarna princess in a scene in the tomb of Merire II at Amarna behind one of her parents.11 and the latter (together with Akhenaten) on the Several stelae from the end of the Amarna period box just cited.6 show a male and female king, who must be Akhen- At least one of these kings have served for a aten and Neferneferuaten (Figs. 3-4).12 These have time as coregent with Akhenaten. The primary been interpreted as anachronistic scenes carved evidence for Smenkhkare as coregent is the jar after Akhenaten’s death, 13 but the nature of the

5 J.R. Harris, “Neferneferuaten Regnans,” AO 36 SAK 2 (1975), p. 158. If so, it is unlikely that he was facing (1974), p. 13 (1a); Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkh- another figure of comparable size on the other side of the amon, pp. 178-83, 162-66 and pl. 24a. On the stela, the Aten. dual cartouches of Neferneferuaten are carved over an 11 J. Málek, “The ‘coregency relief’ of Akhenaten and original single cartouche of Nefertiti and a col umn of text Smenkhkare from Memphis,” in Studies in Honor of Wil- identifying a daughter of Akh enaten, probably Meritaten: liam Kelly Simpson, ed. by P. Der Manuelian (Boston, J.P. Allen, “Two Altered Inscriptions of the Late Amarna 1996), vol. II, pp. 553-59. The identification of the smaller Period,” JARCE 25 (1988), pp. 117-21; M. Gabolde, “Le droit figure as a woman was suggested by B. Löhr,SAK 2 (1975), d’aînesse d’Ânkhesenpaaton (À propos de deux récents pp. 156-57. articles sur la stèle UC 410),” BSEG 14 (1990), pp. 33-47. See 12 Berlin 17813: here Fig. 3, reproduced from Gabolde, BSFE also W.J. Murnane, Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, SAOC 40 155 (2002), p. 38. Berlin 20716: here Fig. 4 (author’s draw- (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), pp. 173-75. Fig. ing). The sex of the junior king was first noted by J.R. Harris, 2 here is based on Gardiner’s hand copy, available at http:// “Nefertiti Rediviva,” AO 35 (1973), pp. 5-9. On the “Core- www.ashmolean.museum/gri/carter/001k-c001k-3.html. gency Stela” (UC 410 + Cairo JE 64959), the secondary addi- 6 Davies, Amarna II, pl. 11; Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à tion of Neferneferuaten’s cartouches over that of Nefertiti Toutânkhamon, pp. 178-83. Gabolde argues that the names (see n. 5, above) seem to refer to the figure below them: R. of Neferneferuaten and Meritaten on the box denote the Krauss, “Neues zu den Stelenfragmenten UC London 410 + same person, but a reference to two individuals remains the Kairo JE 64959,” BSEG 13 (1989), pp. 83-87; Allen, JARCE simplest and most transparent interpretation of the evidence: 25 (1988), pp. 117-21; Gabolde, BSEG 14 (1990), pp. 33-47, see W.J. Murnane, “The End of the Amarna Period Once and D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 162-66. Nothing but Again,” OLZ 96 (2001), col. 18. the figure’s rear lower leg is preserved, but it presumably 7 See Murnane, Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, pp. 213- represented Nefertiti in the original and therefore a female 15. king in the altered version of the stela. See the drawing in 8 P.E. Newberry, “Akhenaten’s Eldest Son-in-Law Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pl. 24a. Ankhkheperurē,” JEA 14 (1928), p. 8 Fig. 3. 13 M. Gabolde, in Das Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges: 9 Newberry, JEA 14 (1928), p. 8 Fig. 4. For the seated Echnaton und das Ende der Amarnazeit , eds. A. Grimm woman at the end of the queen’s cartouche, cf. Harris, AO and S. Schoske, Schriften aus der Ägyptischen Sammlung 36 (1974), pp. 13 (1a) and 17 (2a, 2d). 10 (Munich: Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst, 2001), 10 The scene seems to depict the king presenting a building pp. 29-30; idem, “La parenté de Toutânkhamon,” BSFE 155 to the Aten: see, however, B. Löhr, “Ahanjāti in Memphis,” (2002), pp. 38-39. the amarna succession 11

Fig. 3. Stela Berlin 17813.

Fig. 4. Unfinished Stela Berlin 20716. Fig. 2. Inscription on Box 1k from the Tomb of Tutankha- mun. 12 james p. allen interaction between the two individuals indicates If Smenkhkare also served as Akhenaten’s core- that they were depicted as living. It is therefore gent, however, then Neferneferuaten’s reign must likely Nefer neferuaten’s reign was at least partly have coincided completely with that of Akhen- contemporary with that of Akhenaten. aten. Given the probable length of Smenkhkare’s Akhenaten’s reign probably ended in his Regnal reign, any coregency between him and Akhen- Year 17, to judge from two jar labels with that aten could not have lasted for more than a few date: one was found in the king’s burial com- months, since he appears in place of Akhenaten plex in the Royal Tomb at Amarna; on the other, in the tomb of Merire II. the higher date was replaced by Regnal Year 1 The data therefore indicate that Nefernefer- of another king.14 The highest date known for uaten became king sometime in the period of Neferneferuaten is Regnal Year 3, in a graffito Akhenaten’s Regnal Year 15-17 and that she was from the tomb of Pairi at Thebes (TT 139).15 The succeeded by Smenkhkare, who ruled less than a sole date associated with Smenkhkare—Regnal year. This gives a maximum of three to four years Year 1, in a label on a jar of wine from “the house and a minimum of one year or less between the of Smenkhkare”—could come from the reign of death of Akhenaten and the accession of Tutan- Tutankh amun; even if it is Smenkhkare’s, it is khamun. doubtful that he ruled for more than a year.16 Tutankhamun’s age at death has been esti- Depending on the length of Neferneferuat- mated as young as 16-17, but the most recent en’s coregency with Akhenaten, the accession examination of his mummy seems to confirm the of Smenkhkare could have occurred as early as usual estimate of nineteen years.19 With a reign of the year of Akhenaten’s death or at most three nine years, he must have become king at the age of years later. The graffito dated to Regnal Year 3 of ten or eleven.20 Depending on the length of time Neferneferuaten was written by a “lay-priest and between Akhenaten’s death and his accession, this scribe of god’s offerings of Amun in the temple places his birth between Akhenaten’s Regnal Year of Ankhkheperure in Thebes.” The existence of 7 at the earliest and 11-11 at the latest. offerings to Amun in this structure—perhaps her Smenkhkare’s age at death is less certain and mortuary temple—has long been seen as evidence can only be estimated if the body buried in Tomb that her reign extended for a time beyond that 55 of the is his—a vexed ques- of Akhenaten, in whose final years the name of tion. Two physicians who examined the body Amun had been proscribed.17 Further indications shortly after its discovery identified it as female, of her sole reign may exist in a few of her car- but they seem to have been influenced by the fact touches that bear unique epithets not associated that the tomb’s excavator, Theodore M. Davis, with Akhenaten: mr jtn “desired of the Aten” and believed the burial to be that of Akhenaten’s pA m At-jtn “the incarnation of Akhetaten,” in mother, Queen Tiya; subsequent examinations the prenomen; and A “ruler,” in the nomen.18 have consistently identified the remains as those

14 G.T. Martin, The Rock Tombs of El-Amarna, Part VI: “effective for her husband” might also date from a time The Royal Tomb at El-Amarna, vol. II: The Reliefs, Inscrip- after Akhenaten’s death: parallels for its phraseology, noted tions, and Architecture, ASE 39 (London: EES, 1989), p. 27, by Gabolde (op.cit., pp. 156-57), concern Isis’s relation- p. 60 no. 522 and n. 3; J.D.S. Pendlebury, The City of Akhen- ship to her deceased husband, Osiris: see Gabolde, in Das aten, Part III: The Central City and the Official Quarters, Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges, p. 28, and BSFE 155 (2002), EEM (London: EES, 1951), vol. II, pl. 95, no. 279. The latter p. 39. In at least one instance, however, Nefer neferu aten’s jar was originally labeled rnpt- sb 17 bjt [ … ] “Regnal Year nomen with this epithet follows the prenomen identifying 17: honey [ … ]”; this was erased and the label rnpt-[ sb] 1 her as “desired of Neferkheperure” (Gabolde, D’Akhenaton j[rp … ] “Regnal Year 1: w[ine … ]” added beneath it. à Toutânkhamon, p. 154). 15 A.H. Gardiner, “The Graffito from the Tomb of Pere,” 19 F.F. Leek, “How Old Was Tutankhamūn?,” JEA 63 JEA 14 (1928), pp. 10-11 and pls. 5-6. (1977), pp. 112-15; SCA press release dated March 8, 2005: 16 Pendlebury, City of Akhenaten III, vol. II, pl. 86, no. 35. http://guardians.net/hawass/press_release_tutankhamun_ For the probable length of Smenkhkare’s reign, see Gabolde, ct_scan_results.htm. D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 219-21. 20 The length of Tutankhamun’s reign is based on wine- 17 Neferneferuaten is also associated with gods of the jar dockets from his tomb: J. Černý, Hieratic Inscriptions traditional pantheon on a pectoral from the tomb of Tut- from the Tomb of Tutankhamūn , TTS 2 (Oxford: Griffith ankhamun, Carter 261p(1), which depicts Nut and mentions Institute, 1965), pp. 3 and 23-24, nos. 19 and 23-24. For the Onnophris: see Gabolde, in Das Geheimnis des goldenen docket of Regnal Year 10, see P. Tallet, “Une jarre de l’an Sarges, p. 29. 31 et une jarre de l’an 10 dans la cave de Toutânkhamon,” 18 Allen, GM 141 (1994), p. 9; Gabolde, D’Akhenaton BIFAO 96 (1996), pp. 375-82. For Tutankhamun’s age at à Toutânkhamon, pp. 157-61. The epithet At n h(j).s accession, see also Gabolde, BSFE 155 (2002), pp. 35-36. the amarna succession 13 of a man, who died probably between the ages of these two ages he may just have reached puberty, eighteen and twenty-five.21 Royal attributes on the but it seems unlikely that he would have fathered coffin and mummy indicate that the body was that children at so early an age. Moreover, talatat from of a king. Since it is male, the king cannot have Karnak with the image of Meritaten are almost been Neferneferuaten and must therefore have certainly earlier than Regnal Year 5.25 been either Akhenaten or Smenkhkare. Despite the clear association of the coffin and Substantial epigraphic evidence seems to favor burial equipment with Akhenaten, the body itself Akhenaten. Canopic jars and magic bricks found must therefore be that of another male pharaoh, in the Theban tomb were intended at one point who can only have been Smenkhkare.26 Its age for him, though his name was later expunged.22 at death places his birth some eight years before The coffin itself bears pharaonic titularies but was Akhenaten’s accession at the earliest (assuming long thought to have been made for Kiya, Akhen- that he succeeded Akhenaten within a year and aten’s junior wife, and subsequently altered for the died at twenty-five) and in Akhenaten’s Regnal burial of a king.23 A recent examination, however, Year 2 at the latest (assuming that he came to has demonstrated that it was intended originally the throne three years after Akhenaten and died for Akhenaten himself, and later altered primar- at eighteen). ily by excising the names within the pharaonic Tut ankh amun is attested before his accession as cartouches.24 The burial would therefore seem to zA-nswt n t.f mry.f twt-nw-jtn “king’s son of his be that of Akhenaten, removed from his original body, his desired, Tutankhuaten,” on a block found resting place in the Royal Tomb at Amarna and at Hermopolis (Fig 5).27 In general use, the term reinterred in the Valley of the Kings. zA “son” can denote not only a first-generation The body’s probable age at death, however, male child but also a grandson, great-grandson, or argues against this identification. If Akh enaten son-in-law.28 The inscription could have referred died between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five to Tutankh amun as “son-in-law” of Akhenaten in his seventeenth regnal year, he would have been if he had already been married to Akhenaten’s one to eight years old at his accession. The earliest daughter, Ankhesenpaaten, before his accession. dated mention of his eldest daughter, Meritaten, The association of these two royal children, if not occurs in the Early Proclamation on boundary their marriage, at that time is probably attested stelae K and X at Amarna, dated to Month 4 of by the left half of the block, which records her Regnal Year 5. If this coincides with her birth, she titulary: zAt-nswt n t.[f mr]t.f zyt At n nb tAwj must have been conceived at the latest in Month 7 [n.s-n-pA]-jtn “king’s daughter of [his] body, his of Regnal Year 4, when Akhenaten himself would desired, the greatly blessed one of the lord of the have been five to twelve years old. At the higher of Two Lands, [Ankhesenpa]aten.”29 Since the two

21 R. Germer, “Die Mumie aus dem Sarg in ‘KV 55’,” in Re-Harakhti (see n. 24, above) could have been made at that Das Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges, pp. 58-61. See also Mur- time, prompted by the removal of the coffin from the royal nane, OLZ 96 (2001), col. 22. Davis was also influenced by sarcophagus, on whose corners Nefertiti is depicted. The the arrangement of the body in the coffin, with one arm on excision of Akhenaten’s names from the coffin’s cartouches, the chest and the other by the side, normally the posture of a as well as their erasure on the magic bricks, could have been female mummy. In the face of the consistent identification done subsequently, when these items were appropriated for of the body as male, this anomaly remains unexplained. the burial of Smenkhkare. 22 For the canopic jars, see M. Gabolde, “Under a Deep 27 G. Roeder, Amarna-Reliefs aus Hermopolis: Ausgrabun- Blue Starry Sky,” in the present volume; for the bricks, gen der Deutschen Hermopolis-Expedition in He rmopolis H.W. Fairman, “Once Again the So-Called Coffin of Akhen- 1929-1939, ed. R. Hanke, Pelizaeus-Museum zu Hildesheim, aten,” JEA 47 (1961), p. 37. Wissenschaftliche Veröffent lichung 6 (Hildesheim: Verlag 23 As argued by R. Hanke, Amarna-Reliefs aus Hermopolis: Gebrüder Gerstenberg, 1969), pls. 105 (56–VIIIA) and 106 Neue Veröffentlichungen und Studien, HÄB 2 (Hildesheim: (831-VIIIC). For the join of the two halves, see Gabolde, Gerstenberg Verlag, 1978), pp. 171-74 and 195. in Das Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges, p. 26, and BSFE 155 24 A. Grimm, in Das Geheimnis des goldenen Sarges, (2002), p. 40, from which Fig. 5 here is adapted. Gabolde’s pp. 101-120. The inscription on the foot was originally drawing indicates traces of an earlier text under the three addressed to Akhenaten by Nefertiti and was changed so that righthand columns, but Roeder’s photograph shows only the deceased himself addressed “My father Re-Harakhti.” This incidental damage and no signs of erasure. supersedes my arguments in JARCE 25 (1988), 121-26. 28 D. Franke, “Verwandschaftsbezeichnungen,” LÄ VI, 25 For the talatat, see D.B. Redford, Akhenaten, the Heretic col. 1033. King (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), 79. 29 The third column shows onlyj [t]n. Roeder restored 26 It is nonetheless possible that the coffin originally con- Akhenaten’s cartouche in the lacuna above, and read the tained the body of Akhenaten when it was moved to KV 55. name as mr[t]-j[t]n. Ankhesenpaaten, however, is the only The alteration of the text on the foot, changing an address Amarna princess with whom Tutankh amun is associated, to Akhenaten by Nefertiti into one of Akhenaten himself to and the lacuna suits the first part of her name. The space 14 james p. allen

Fig. 5. Block from Hermopolis naming Tutankhamun and [Ankhesenpa]aten.

titularies face one another closely, the figures asso- coexistence, if not coregency, is now generally ciated with them must have done the same, in an considered improbable. Although it was revived intimate interaction of some sort. a few years ago on artistic grounds,30 the theory Despite this relationship, however, in the has now been disproved decisively by analysis of context of Amarna the additional phrase n t.f the decoration of the tomb of Kheruef (TT 192).31 mry.f “of his body, his desired” probably indi- Aya calls Tutankhamun zA.f “his son” on blocks of cates a more direct, lineal descent from a king. a structure in Karnak begun by Tutankhamun and Akhenaten’s daughters are regularly called zAt- completed by Aya.32 This reference cannot have nswt nt t.f mrt.f “king’s daughter of his body, denoted literal parentage, because the Hermopolis his desired,” where the phraseology refers to a block identifying Tutankh amun as a king’s son child sired by the king himself. The same wording was carved before either man came to the throne; also precedes the names of his granddaughters; nor was Aya the father-in-law of Tutankhamun. in that case it may indicate merely lineal descent He could have been Tutankhamun’s grandfather from the king, unless Akhenaten fathered his own or great-grandfather—most likely maternal, since grand children, as has been suggested. The latter he came to the throne only after Tutankhamun— possibility will be examined below; in any case, but this possibility is unenlightening because no the terminology on the Amarna block identifies children of Aya are known. The reference to Tut- Tutankhamun as at least a direct lineal descen- ankhamun as “his son” may merely reflect Aya’s dant, if not the son, of a king rather than merely pre-pharaonic title jt-nTr “god’s father” (retained the son-in-law of one. in his pharaonic nomen), which commemorated If the term zA “son” was meant literally, the his role as mentor of Akhenaten—a function he king in question would seem to be either Akhen- may also have exercised for Tutankhamun. aten or Smenkhkare. Neferneferuaten is also a Among Akhenaten, Neferneferuaten, and possibility, even though the Hermopolis block Smenkh kare, the first seemsa priori the likeliest uses the masculine pronoun f “his” in referring candidate for Tutankhamun’s parent, and is gen- to this king. She would then have been Tutankha- erally considered as such. He could certainly have mun’s mother rather than his father, but the sired Tutankhamun in his Regnal Year 7, since inscriptions of Hatshepsut provide a precedent he had already produced at least two daughters for the use of masculine pronouns to refer to a by that time. The chief difficulty with this theory, female pharaoh. Akhenaten’s father, Amenho- however, is Akhen aten’s appointment of a female tep III, could have sired Tutankhamun only if coregent before his death. Egyptian history dem- he lived on after Akhenaten’s accession. Once a onstrates that the son of a pharaoh had first claim central theory in the history of Amarna, such a to the throne—if not the son of the chief queen, beneath j[t]n probably contained a seated figure, comparable pp. 65-82. For Tutankhamun’s use of the term “father” to that at the end of Tutankhamun’s name on the right. in reference to Amen hotep III, see D. Redford, “Once 30 W.R. Johnson, “Amenhotep III and Amarna: Some Again the Filiation of Tutankhamun,” JSSEA 9 (1978-79), New Considerations,” JEA 82 (1996), pp. 65-82. pp. 111-15. 31 P. Dorman, “The Long Coregency Revisited: Architec- 32 O.J. Schaden, “Report on the 1978 Season at Karnak,” tural and Iconographic Conundra in the Tomb of Kheruef,” NARCE 127 (1984), p. 46 and pls. 2-4. the amarna succession 15 then one by another woman within the imme- sometimes with the king identified as Akhenaten diate royal family. It is possible that Akhenaten and occasionally with the additional specification deliberately repudiated this tradition in appointing ms.n jmt-nswt wrt (nfr-nfrw-jtn nfrtj-j.tj)| n.tj Neferneferuaten as coregent, but in the absence of “born of Chief Queen Neferneferuaten Nefer- any evidence to that effect such a motive is mere titi, alive” (and variants).35 These titles tradition- speculation. Nefer neferuaten’s coregency therefore ally have been understood as a statement that most likely indicates that Akhenaten was not the Akhenaten sired his own granddaughters.36 Since father, nor the grandfather, of Tutankhamun, and Nefertiti is clearly cited in the granddaughter’s the same is true for his relationship with Tut an- titularies only as parent of the senior Meritaten khamun’s predecessor, Smenkhkare. or Ankhesen paaten, however, the same could be In fact, the history of Amarna suggests a deter- true for Akhenaten, and it has been argued that mined but frustrated effort on the part of Akhen- the junior daughters were fathered not by Akh- aten to produce a male heir. With his chief queen, enaten but by his sons-in-law Smenkhkare and Nefertiti, he had six daughters by Regnal Year 12. Tutankhamun, or were Akhenaten’s daughters His marriage to Kiya, which occurred before the by Kiya.37 name-change of the Aten between Regnal Years The suggestion that Meritaten Jr. and Ankhes - 8-12, can be understood as partly if not primarily enpaaten Jr. were daughters of Kiya is improb- motivated by the need to beget a son, even by a able, since one or the other of their names replaces wife other than the chief queen; she too, however, that of Kiya’s daughter in scenes where Kiya’s gave him only a daughter.33 In a final attempt own name was altered to that of Meritaten or to sire a male successor, Akhenaten may then Ankhesenpaaten. Moreover, the name of Nefer- have turned to his oldest daughters, at least two titi’s fourth daughter, Neferneferuaten Jr., indi- of whom produced daughters before the end of cates that daughters designated as “Jr.” were his reign: Meritaten and Ankhesenpaaten, who named after their own mother. The possibility appear with their daughters, respectively Merit- that Akhenaten’s granddaughters were fathered aten Jr. and Ankhesenpaaten Jr., in altered reliefs by Smenkhkare and Tutankhamun depends in from Amarna that originally depicted Kiya with part on when the reliefs naming the daughters her daughter.34 were recarved. The parentage of Akhenaten’s granddaughters Decoration of the monuments to which the seems clear from their titles but has been the sub- altered reliefs belonged was begun in the first ject of debate nonetheless. The granddaughters half of Akhenaten’s reign but largely completed are regularly identified asz At-nswt nt t.f mrt.f after the name-change of the Aten.38 The recarv- N tA Srjt ms.n zAt-nswt nt t.f mrt.f N “King’s ing to honor the junior daughters must then be daughter of his body, his desired, N Jr., born somewhat later still, certainly no earlier than the of King’s daughter of his body, his desired, N,” second half of Akhenaten’s reign.39 The altered

33 Kiya’s name occurs in conjunction with the early (234-VI) and 106 (451-VIIA). See D. Redford, “Studies on name of the Aten on a vase in the Metropolitan Museum Akhenaten at Thebes, II,”JARCE 12 (1975), pp. 11-12. of Art (MMA 20.2.11): Fairman, JEA 47 (1961), p. 29. For 36 E.g., H. Brunner, “Eine neue Amarna-Prinzessin,” her daughter see Hanke, Amarna-Reliefs aus Hermopolis, ZÄS 74 (1938), pp. 104-108; J.A. Wilson, “Akh-en-aton and pp. 190-92. Her name is lost, but Gabolde has suggested she Nefert-iti,” JNES 32 (1973), pp. 235-36; R. Krauss, Das Ende was the “king’s daughter” named Baketaten, who appears with der Amarnazeit: Beiträge zur Geschichte und Chronologie Queen Tiya in the tomb of Huya at Amarna: M. Gabolde, des Neuen Reiches, HÄB 7 (Hildesheim, Gerstenberg Verlag, “Baket aton fille de Kiya?,” BSEG 16 (1992), pp. 27-40; 1978), pp. 114-17. N. de G. Davies, The Rock Tombs of el Amarna, Part III: 37 W. Helck, “Die Tochterheirat ägyptischer Könige,” CdE The Tombs of Huya and Ahmes, ASE 15 (London: EEF, 44 (1969), pp. 24-25; idem, “Tochterheirat,” LÄ VII, cols. 1905), pls. 4, 6, 9, and 17-18. 15-16; J.R. Harris, “Kiya,” CdE 49 (1974), p. 30 n. 6. See also 34 Hanke, Amarna-Reliefs aus Hermopolis, pp. 142-45 Redford, JARCE 12 (1975), p. 12; G. Robins, “ mt nsw wrt and 150-53. The term “Jr.” is used here as a translation of Meritaton,” GM 52 (1981), pp. 75-81. the phrase tA-Srjt “the younger,” always appended to the 38 J.D.S. Pendlebury, The City of Akhenaten, Part I: Exca- eponymous names of the daughters’ daughters. Gabolde, vations of 1921 and 1922 at El-Amarneh, EEM 38 (London: D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 285, regards the grand- EES, 1923), pp. 148-56. Of 79 instances, Pendlebury recorded daughters as “phantom children,” invented to replace Kiya’s 25 with the early name and 64 with the later name (in 10 daughter in the altered reliefs. This is based primarily on instances the early name was changed to the later). The blocks the belief that the daughters were too young to have had from Hermopolis show a similar ratio (23 early vs. 55 late): children before Akhenaten’s death, but the altered reliefs Roeder, Amarna-Reliefs aus Hermopolis, pls. 1-201. must be regarded as prima facie evidence to the contrary. 39 The reliefs could not have been recarved until after the This question will be addressed in what follows. death —or disappearance—of Kiya, whose name and image in 35 E.g., Roeder, Amarna-Reliefs aus Hermopolis, pls. 19 them were replaced by those of Meritaten and Ankhesenpaaten. 16 james p. allen scenes depicted Akh enaten with his daughters and granddaughters, and the complex from which most of the reliefs derive was evidently abandoned before his death.40 Tutankhamun therefore could not have fathered Ankhesenpaaten Jr., since he did not reach puberty until after his accession. This in turn makes it unlikely that Smenkhkare sired Merit aten Jr., even though he would have been old enough to do so in Akhenaten’s final years; in any case, he and Meritaten are not attested as husband and wife before he became king. The weight of evidence thus indicates that Akhenaten himself was the father of his two granddaughters. The altered reliefs showing him with Meritaten or Ankhesenpaaten and their daughters suggest as much in the hieroglyphic filiations of the granddaughters. The scenes them- selves originally depicted Akhenaten with his wife Fig. 6. Nurse and Child from Room Gamma. and daughter;41 the altered reliefs can be read in the same manner, despite the fact that they identify the senior women only as zAt-nswt “king’s daughter” rather than jmt-nswt “king’s wife.”42 away from the chamber in which Akhenaten Akhenaten’s final attempts to father a male heir and Nefertiti are depicted mourning the body of may not have been limited to his relationship with Meketaten. 44 In front of the nurse and child, two Merit aten and Ankhesenpaaten. Scenes in Room partly-destroyed columns of hieroglyphs give the gamma of the Royal Tomb at Amarna depicting name [ … ]t ms.n [ … ] (nfr-nfrw-j[tn] nfrtj-j.tj)| the death of their sister, Meketaten, indicate that n.tj Dt n (Fig. 6).45 Despite the usual assump- she died in childbirth.43 No husband of hers is tion that this identified a grandchild of Nefertiti, known; apart from mere speculation, the likeliest the lacuna in the first column has room enough candidate for the father of her child is also Akhen- only for the titulary of one of her children.46 More- aten. The child itself is also unknown, although over, the hieroglyphs face right and therefore per- it has often been identified as the one shown on tain to the nurse, who faces in the same direction, Wall A of Room gamma being carried by a nurse and not to the child, who is turned to the left.47

No clear evidence exists for the date of that event. Thep r tA Tomb at Amarna have been reconstructed (on paper) as part Spst “house of the noblewoman” cited in a wine-jar docket of her sarcophagus, with an interior width of 50 cm (1 ft. 7 of Regnal Year [1]6 cannot be linked with certainty to Kiya, in.) and a maximum interior length of 3½ feet, probably too despite arguments to the contrary: e.g., Gabolde, D’Akhenaton small for a woman capable of childbirth: Gabolde, D’Akhe- à Toutânkhamon, p. 169. Gabolde (loc.cit.) also dates the recarv- naton à Tout ânkhamon, pp. 132-34 and pls. 16-17. It is pos- ing after thedeath of Mek et aten, which occurred after her last sible, however, that the fragments belonged to Meketaten’s dated appearance in Regnal Year 12, because she does not canopic chest (ibid., p. 132 n. 1059); the long inscription on figure in the altered reliefs. This has some validity, though the side of the lid reconstructed on Gabolde’s pl. 17b could it is an argument from silence. have turned the corner at each end (cf. his pl. 17a) on the 40 Pendlebury, City of Akhenaten I, p. 165. shorter lid of a canopic chest. 41 E.g., Roeder, Amarna-Reliefs aus Hermopolis, pl. 29. 44 Martin, Royal Tomb II, pp. 43-45, pls. 63-65. 42 As noted by G. Robins, GM 52 (1981), p. 75. The rea- 45 Martin, Royal Tomb II, pls. 63-64; Fig. 6 here is repro- sons for this discrepancy are unclear. Since Akh enaten’s duced from Martin’s pl. 63. The name in the first column concern was to produce a male heir, he could have tried ended in the determinative of a seated person. Gabolde, to do so with his daughters without naming them “king’s D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 118-19, has interpreted wife,” since they were already allied to the royal line as “king’s the t before this sign as the feet of a quail-chick w, but Mar- daughters,” a relationship closer than that of “king’s wife.” tin’s pl. 63 shows a t and the sign seems clear in Bouriant’s For a son born to such a union, his status as zA-nswt n photograph (Martin’s pl. 64), as does the head of the deter- t.f “king’s son of his body” would have been enough to minative, pace C. Vandersleyen, “Les scènes de lamentation secure his succession. des chambres alpha et gamma dans la tombe d’Akh én aton,” 43 Martin, Royal Tomb II, pp. 42-48, pls. 63-71. The pri- RdE 44 (1993), p. 193. mary evidence for this interpretation is the booth in which 46 As pointed out by Gabolde, D’Akh enaton à Toutânkha- Meketaten is shown being mourned by the royal family (ibid., mon, p. 119, pace Martin, Royal Tomb II, p. 44. pls. 68-69), which has been most plausibly interpreted as a 47 Cf. Martin, Royal Tomb II, p. 44 n. 6, pace op.cit., birth pavilion (ibid., pp. 45-48). Fragments from the Royal p. 44. The orientation of the remaining signs is clear in the the amarna succession 17

The inscription here is virtually iden tical to that after the birth of Meritaten Jr., the latter must which identifies the figure of Akh enaten’s eldest have been at least some nine months or so old daughter on Wall B in the same room and can be by the time of Meketaten’s death—and probably restored on that basis as [zAt-(n)swt n t.f mrt.f even older, if the woman and child in the earlier [mr]t-[jtn] ms.n [ jmt-nswt wrt … ] (nfr-nfrw- scene of Room alpha are also Meritaten and her j[tn] nfrtj-j.tj)| n.tj Dt n “[King’s daughter of daughter. She could not have been more than his body, his desired, Meri]t[aten], born of the three years old, however, since she is shown nurs- [Chief Queen … ] Neferneferu aten Nefertiti, ing: Egyptian children were weaned by the age alive forever continually.”48 of four.52 To all appearances, the “durbar” scene Since Meritaten is shown nursing the child on of Regnal Year 12 shows Akhenaten’s two oldest Wall A, it is probably her own daughter, Merit aten daughters before either became pregnant. Meri- Jr. Similar figures of a nurse and child, without taten Jr. was therefore born at the earliest nine accompanying text, appear in the earlier reliefs of months later, in Month 11 of Regnal Year 12. Her Room alpha, in which the nurse is shown walking birth could not have occurred much later than away from a chamber in which Akhenaten and this, since Meketaten’s pregnancy, the birth of Nefertiti are mourning.49 Martin has interpreted Ankhesenpaaten Jr., and the recarving of Kiya’s the scenes in this room as those of Kiya’s death in reliefs to depict the granddaughters with their childbirth, but Gabolde has made a more plausible mothers all had to take place before the end of case that they depict the deaths (from other causes) Akhenaten’s reign. of the two youngest and Nefertiti, Neferneferure Akhenaten’s granddaughters were probably and Setepenre, who are not depicted with their sis- born not long after their mothers reached puberty. ters in the reliefs of Room gamma.50 If the nursing Egyptian women usually married at thirteen,53 woman here is also Merit aten, as seems likely, the and it seems like liest that Akhen aten would have death of Meketaten must have occurred not long turned to each of his three oldest daughters as after theirs. Meket aten’s child remains unknown, they reached that age. The date of those events and presumably died with its mother.51 can only be estimated. It is often assumed that the The events depicted in Rooms alpha and daughters first appeared on Akhenaten’s monu- gamma are not dated but must have occurred ments at their birth, but this cannot have been the after Month 2 of Regnal Year 12, the last dated case at least with Meketaten, the daughter whose appearance of the three deceased daughters first appearance can be dated most closely. Only alive. The scenes in Roomgamma suggest that Meritaten is mentioned in the text of the Early Akhenaten first attempted to produce an heir with Proclamation on the Amarna boundary stelae, Meritaten (who had given birth to a daughter), dated to Month 4 of Regnal Year 5; the Later then impregnated Meketaten (who died in child- Proclamation of Regnal Year 6, Month 4, men- birth), and had yet to turn to Ankhesenpaaten tions Meketaten as well.54 If Meketaten was born (who would produce a daughter in turn). Since sometime in the interval, she would have reached his union with Meketaten probably occurred only thirteen at the earliest after Akhenaten’s death,

photograph on Martin’s pl. 64 and is reproduced correctly child shown in Rooms alpha and gamma is unrelated to in Martin’s pl. 63. the cause of the deaths depicted there. It may then have 48 The parallel text is on Martin,Royal Tomb II, pl. 68. been included as an affirmation of life in the midst of death; Both inscriptions are characterized by the determinative significantly, in both instances the nurse carries her child following the daughter’s name and the position of the final away from the death scene, in the direction opposite to t before it, features absent from the names of the other two that of the deceased and mourners: see Murnane, OLZ 96 daughters on Wall B; the determinative may reflect Meri- (2001), pp. 15-16. taten’s seniority among the daughters, but it could also derive 52 To judge from the Instruction of Ani: tw.k msw.tw from her status as a mother, unique among Akhenaten’s m t jbdw.k … mnd.s m r.k m 3 rnpwt “you were born daughters at the time when the reliefs in Room gamma were after your months (of gestation) … and her breast was in carved. In the parallel text Nefertiti has the titles jmt-nswt your mouth for three years”: J.F. Quack, Die Lehren des wrt mrt.f nbt tAwj “Chief Queen, his desired, lady of the Ani, OBO 141 (Freiburg and Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Two Lands.” The lacuna above her name on Wall A has Ruprecht, 1994), p. 315. room enough only for mrt.f “his desired” or nbt tAwj “lady 53 E. Feucht, Das Kind im Alten Ägypten (Frankfurt and of the Two Lands” but not both. New York, 1995), pp. 32-33. 49 Martin, Royal Tomb II, pls. 58-60. 54 See W.J. Murnane and C.C. Van Siclen III, The Bound- 50 Martin, Royal Tomb II, pp. 39-40; Gabolde, D’Akhe- ary Stelae of Akhenaten, Studies in Egyptology [19] (London naton à Toutânkhamon , pp. 107-110. and New York: Kegan Paul International, 1993), p. 175. 51 The evidence advanced here indicates that the nursing 18 james p. allen and her younger sister Ankhesenpaaten would that she died as a queen, not a pharaoh.59 Gen- have come of child bearing age even later. Since eral opinion now seems to favor Meritaten; for the latter bore a daughter during the reign of her what it is worth, Manetho’s tradition that a king father, she must have reached thirteen at the latest of the late Eighteenth Dynasty was succeeded by in Regnal Year 16-17. This places Ankhesenpaat- “his daughter Akenkherēs” points to a daughter en’s birth no later than Regnal Year 3-4, and that rather than Nefertiti.60 The chief difficulty with of her older sisters even earlier.55 Meritaten’s candidacy is the fact that her car touche If Meketaten’s first dated appearance in the appears with the title jmt-nswt wrt “Chief Queen” Later Proclamation of Regnal Year 6 does not in conjunction with those of both the coregent indicate that she was born sometime in the pre- Neferneferuaten and Smenkhkare (in the latter ceding year, it must reflect some other important instance also with their figures). The first juxta- event in her early life; it is hardly feasible that her position seems clearly to identify Meritaten and omission from the text of the Early Proclamation Neferneferuaten as two different individuals, while was merely arbitrary. The event that best suits the the second would involve an unprecedented— other evidence is her weaning.56 Celebrating her and for the Egyptians, perhaps unthinkable— fourth birthday between Month 4 of Regnal Years “demotion” of a pharaoh if Meritaten had indeed 5 and 6, she would have reached the age of thirteen served as Akhenaten’s coregent.61 in Regnal Year 14 or 15 and subsequently died in Overlooked in the discussion of the coregent’s childbirth no later than the first month of Regnal identity is the significance of her nomen, Nefern- Year 16. On that basis, the birth of Merit aten Jr. eferuaten—although this was adduced by propo- can be dated between the end of Regnal Year 12, nents of Nefertiti as evidence for her candidacy, at the earliest, and the beginning of Regnal Year since she used that name as part of her own from 15, at the latest. In the most likely sequence of at least Akhenaten’s Regnal Year 5 onward. Inso- events, Meritaten Jr. was born in Regnal Year 14 far as can be determined, the primary element or 15, Meketaten died in childbirth in Regnal Year in the nomen of a pharaoh always corresponds 15, and Ankhesenpaaten Jr. was born in Regnal to the name he (or she) bore before coming to Year 16 or 17.57 the throne; from the Eighteenth Dynasty onward, The final stage in Akhenaten’s efforts to plan for epithets were usually added to this name in the his succession was the appointment of a coregent, pharaoh’s cartouche, but Akhenaten provides the probably also in Regnal Year 16-17. The identity only example of a complete and consistent change of this female ruler has been the subject of intense of the nomen’s primary element, and even he used debate. Speculation has centered on two women his birth name, Amenhotep, at his accession. The from Akhenaten’s immediate family, Nefertiti and evidence of this tradition argues that the core- Meritaten. First proposed in 1973,58 Nefertiti’s gent bore the name Neferneferuaten before her candidacy was in the ascendant for a time until coronation, and since it now seems clear that the the publication of a shawabti of hers, evidence coregent was not Nefertiti, she must have been the

55 This makes it impossible for the body from KV 55 to and “Nefertiti Rediviva,” AO 35 (1973), pp. 5-13. be Akhenaten’s. He could not have fathered his three older 59 C.E. Loeben, “Eine Bestattung der großen königlichen daughters before Regnal Year 4 and died thirteen years later Gemahlin Nofretete in Amarna? Die Totenfigur der Nof- at the age of twenty-five or less. retete,” MDAIK 42 (1986), pp. 99-107, and most recently, 56 The significance of this event can only be surmised: “Une inhumation de la grande épouse royale Néfertiti à perhaps it was seen as the beginning of her existence as an Amarna? La figurine funéraire de Néfertiti,”Égypte Afrique independent individual. The onset of puberty is also possible et Orient 13 (1999), 25-30. A recent article has proposed but less likely, since Merit aten would have reached that stage that the two pieces reconstructed by Loeben as a single sha- before Meketaten yet did not bear a child until some six wabti of Nefertiti belonged instead to two separate shawabtis, years later, at the earliest in Regnal Year 12. one of Nefertiti and the other of Meritaten: J.-L. Bovot, “Un 57 This scenario places the birth of Meritaten within chaouabti pour deux reines amarniennes?,” Égypte Afrique the first two years of Akhenaten’s rule, if not before his et Orient 13 (1999), 31-34. accession. During that period, Nefertiti does not appear 60 First proposed by R. Krauss, Das Ende der Amarnazeit, in his reliefs. Her absence, however, does not necessarily pp. 43-53, and argued more recently and extensively by indicate that she was married to Akhenaten only later. It M. Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon , pp. 147-85. may be conditioned instead by the traditional character of “Akenkherēs” is evidently the Greek form of the coregent’s the reliefs, which stress the new regime’s continuity with throne name Ankh(et)kheperure. the preceding one. Nefertiti is only attested in reliefs carved 61 See n. 6, above. Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, in the later, innovative Amarna style. pp. 187-226, explains the “demotion” of Meritaten as political 58 J.R. Harris, “Neferneferuaten,” GM 4 (1973), pp. 15-17, expediency, but this is unconvincing. the amarna succession 19 only other woman known by that name: Akhe- serve as the prospective mother of Akhenaten’s naten’s fourth daughter, Neferneferuaten Jr.62 heir. Her appointment as coregent probably To judge from the epithet “effective for her hus- dates to the same one- or two-year period. Part band,” Neferneferuaten served as Akh enaten’s wife of her three-year reign must then have occurred as well as his coregent.63 Meritaten, in turn, filled after the death of Akhenaten. It is undoubtedly the role of the coregent’s (or coregents’) chief within that period of sole rule that her association queen, while Ankhesenpaaten acted as senior with the traditional gods appeared, along with “king’s daughter,” the function formerly exercised her Osirian epithet At n h(j).s “effec tive for her by Meritaten.64 Akhenaten’s motive for the pro- husband” and her less common “Akhenaten-less” motion of his youngest surviving daughter over cartouches. This in turn places the short reign of her two older sisters can only be the subject of Smenkhkare after that of Akhenaten (and her).66 speculation. If she was in fact his wife, he may yet Since Smenkhkare probably ruled less than a year, have hoped to produce a male heir, which neither Tutankhamun’s accession can therefore be dated Meritaten nor Ankhesenpaaten had given him; more narrowly to sometime between one and two her status as coregent would also enhance the years after the death of Akhenaten, and his birth claim of any son born to such a union. Should he to Akhenaten’s Regnal Year 9 or 10. succeed Akhenaten while still a child, the pres- On the basis of the arguments advanced here, ence of a senior coregent would serve to safe- neither Smenkhkare nor Tutankhamun could guard that right, as Hatshepsut’s coregency had have received their right to the throne by descent done for Thutmose III earlier in the dynasty. If from Akhenaten or any of his wives or daugh- the union produced no son, however, Akhenaten ters. Tutankhamun’s status before his accession could still count on a successor from his own as the son of a king can therefore derive only direct lineage. from Smenkhkare. The probability that the body The calculations argued above indicate that from KV 55 is that of Smenkhkare enhances Neferneferuaten Jr.’s three older sisters were born this relationship, since physical examination has by Regnal Year 4. If she was born within a year indicated that its owner was a close relative of of them, as seems likely,65 she would have turned Tutankhamun. 67 thirteen in Regnal Year 16-17, allowing her to

62 The absence of tA Srjt “Jr.” from the coregent’s cartouche was originally made for Neferneferuaten as king, most nota- does not necessarily argue against this identification. It may bly her four royal canopic coffins: J. Allen, “The Original have been considered inappropriate for a king’s nomen but Owner of Tutankhamun’s Canopic Coffins,” to appear in could also have been otiose after the death of the senior the forthcoming Festschrift for P. Silverman, ed. by Neferneferuaten. The date of Nefertiti’s death is unknown; Z. Hawass and J. Houser-Wegner; see also Gabolde, D’Akhen- her last appearance is in the scenes in Room gamma described aton à Toutânkhamon , p. 185. The appropriation of this above, sometime after her last dated appearance in Reg nal and other elements of her burial equip ment indicates that Year 12. It has been argued that she survived until the end of Smenkhkare denied her a pharaonic burial. Whether she or Akhenaten’s reign or even beyond (see Gabolde, D’Akhenaton was the queen of the notorious daamunzu à Toutânkhamon , p. 171) but the evidence is unclear and she episode—for which, see Gabolde, op.cit., pp. 187-212—is a could have died before the appointment of Neferneferuaten question outside the parameters of the present article. It as coregent: see n. 64, below. should be noted, however, that if it was she, her request for 63 Neferneferuaten Jr. and another daughter are attested a Hittite prince—“To me he will be husband, but in Egypt earlier with the title jmt-nswt zAt n t.f, but these do not he will be king”—does not necessarily imply her “demotion” necessarily indicate that they were “king’s wife” at the time: from pharaoh to king: she could have had in mind a core- see Robins, GM 52 (1981), pp. 75-76. If they are not simply gency like that she had just shared with Akhenaten. This errors, they are perhaps to be read as “daughter of the king’s is different from the case of Meritaten, who clearly served wife and of his body.” as queen to Smenkhkare after the death of her father, a 64 See M. Gabolde, BSEG 14 (1990), 45. Merit aten’s “demotion” improbable if she, rather than Neferneferuaten service as chief queen may also be reflected in her appar- Jr., had been Akhenaten’s coregent. ent designation as “mistress” of the royal house in Amarna 67 D.E. Derry, “Note on the skeleton hitherto believed to Letter EA 11: see Gabolde, D’Akhen aton à Tout ânkhamon, be that of King Akhenaten,” ASAE 31 (1931), pp. 115-19; p. 175. Together with her role as chief queen, this seems R.G. Harrison, “An Anatomical Examination of the Phara- clear evidence that Nefertiti had already died. onic Remains Purported to be Akh en aten,” JEA 52 (1966), 65 Since her name reflects the initial epithet of her mother’s pp. 113-116; R.C. Connolly et al., “Kinship of Smenkh kare cartouche, she must have been born after the epithet was and Tutankh amun affirmed by Serological Micromethod,” adopted. Its first dated appearance is in the Early Proclama- Nature 224 (1969), pp. 325-26; R.C. Connolly et al., “Serological tion of Regnal Year 5, but it also appears in reliefs at Karnak, evidence for the parentage of Tutankh amūn and Smenkh- which are probably earlier: R.W. Smith and D.B. Redford, karē,” JEA 62 (1976), pp. 184-86. Cf., however, E.S. Melt- The Akh enaten Temple Project, vol. I: Initial Discoveies zer, “The parentage of Tutankh amūn and Smenkhkarē,” (Warminster: Aris and Phillips, 1976), p 80. JEA 64 (1978), pp. 134-35; R, Germer, Das Geheimnis des 66 Some of the material used for Tutankhamun’s burial goldenen Sarges, p. 60. 20 james p. allen

Smenkhkare’s adoption of the primary ele- “Lord of the Two Lands” seem possible: jt jt.f “his ment of Neferneferuaten’s prenomen and of her father’s father” or jt jt jt.f “his father’s father’s chief queen, Meritaten, as his own, as well as the father.”70 The former would identify Thutmose IV juxtaposition of his name with Akhenaten’s on the as Tutankhamun’s grandfather, and the latter as his vase from Tutankhamun’s tomb, all seem clearly great-grandfather. The epithet’s unusual character designed to enhance the legitimacy of his claim suggests that it was meant literally: had Tutankha- as Akhenaten’s successor. Tutankhamun followed mun merely intended to honor Thutmose IV as an the same course by taking Ankhesenpaaten as his illustrious ancestor, he would undoubtedly have chief queen. The right of Smenkhkare and Tut- used the more common term jt.f “his father.” Of ankhamun to the succession, however, may not the two readings, the first isruled out by the evi- have been based merely on these marriages. dence that Tutankhamun’s father was probably Although Tutankhamun’s designation of Smenkhkare, who was born at the earliest thirty Amen hotep III as “his father” is not a literal years after the death of Thutmose IV; by the same state ment of his parentage, it does indicate that measure, his mother is not likely to have been a he regarded that king as an ancestor. The model daughter of that king. coffin found in his tomb, containing a lock of hair The inscription therefore honors Thutmose IV from Amenhotep III’s queen, Tiya, looks like a as Tutankhamun’s great-grandfather. This in turn family heirloom and suggests that the term “his identifies his grandfather or grandmother as a father” had more than just religious meaning.68 child of Thutmose IV, who must be either Amen- Tutankhamun’s ties to the family of Amenho- hotep III or one of that king’s siblings. Although tep III are under lined by a surveying instrument Amenhotep III had several sisters (or half-sisters), dedicated to Amenhotep’s father, Thutmose IV.69 and possibly also brothers (or half-brothers),71 any Inscriptions on both sides of the object describe of whom could have been grandparents of Tut- Tutankhamun as ankhamun, the lock of Queen Tiya’s hair buried with Tutankhamun argues that Amenhotep III himself was Tutankhamun’s grandfather, and Tiya his grandmother. His father, Smenkhkare, “he who renews the monument of …, Lord of was therefore a son of Amenhotep III and Queen the Two Lands, Menkheperure.” Only two Tiya, and a younger brother of Akhenaten. interpretations of the signs preceding nb tAwj

68 For the coffin, see A. Rowe, “Inscriptions on the Model Reign of Thutmose IV (Baltimore and London: The Johns Coffin Containing the Lock of Hair of Queen Tyi,”ASAE Hopkins University Press, 1991), pp. 120-23. Three or four 40 (1940), pp. 623-27. brothers of Amenhotep III may be represented as children 69 J.A. Larson, “The Tutankhamen Astronomical Instru- on the lap of the owner of TT 226: N. de G. Davies, The ment,” Amarna Letters 2 (1992), pp. 77-86. Theban Tomb Series V:The Tombs of Menkheperre sonb, 70 jtw.f “his fathers” is impossible in the context, which Amenmosĕ, and Another (Nos. 86, 112, 42, 226) (London: refers only to Thutmose IV. The term might also be read EES, 1933), pl. 30 (E). These are usually seen as sons of as jtwj.f “his dual father,” meaning that Tutankhamun had Amenhotep III, but the fact that tomb dates to his Regnal descended from a son and daughter of Thutmose IV, but Years 1-2 makes it more likely that they were his broth- this too implies an improbable nonsingular reference to ers, and perhaps himself as a child. The only two names Thutmose IV. preserved, in part, were compounded with the throne name 71 For the daughters of Thutmose IV, see B. Bryan,The of Thutmose IV’s father, Amenhotep II. architraves de la grande salle hypostyle du temple d’amon-rê à karnak 21

NOTE ARCHÉOLOGIQUE ET ÉPIGRAPHIQUE SUR LES ARCHITRAVES DE LA GRANDE SALLE HYPOSTYLE DU TEMPLE D’AMONRÊ À KARNAK

Michel Azim Université de Nice Sophia-Antipolis, CEPAM–CNRS et Vincent Rondot Section française de la Direction des Antiquités du Soudan

On sait l’importance capitale que revêt, pour la Les architraves naviformes du quart sud-ouest connaissance des sites antiques, l’étude des docu- de la salle hypostyle1 ments anciens—gravures et photographies notam- ment—ce dont William J. Murnane, bien entendu, Au sud de la salle hypostyle et l’ouest de la cour du avait une conscience parfaitement claire. Lorsqu’il VIIe pylône, au bord de l’ancienne route venant sut, en 2000, grâce à Luc Gabolde, que je travail- de Louqsor, demeure de nos jours un magasin en lais sur les clichés rassemblés ou pris naguère par plein-air que Vincent Rondot a désigné par le sigle Georges Legrain à Karnak, il me contacta, naturel- SB2 (Fig. 1) ; il regroupe des éléments architecto- lement intéressé, renouant ainsi avec l’époque niques retirés de la salle, dont quatre architraves où nous fîmes connaissance à Louqsor dans les naviformes provenant de son quart sud-ouest3. Au années soixante-dix. Je me réjouissais de pouvoir départ de notre recherche, nous espérions pouvoir examiner avec Bill, en France, les clichés réunis ; utiliser les photographies d’archives existantes le dialogue studieux et amical espéré, certes, ne pour déterminer leur position d’origine dans le devait pas avoir lieu, mais j’ai un peu le sentiment, monument, qui pose problème pour deux d’entre néanmoins, de l’ouvrir aujourd’hui au travers de elles, celles qui jadis reliaient les colonnes de la cette note que Vincent et moi-même lui dédions ; nef sud 24 et 33 d’une part, 25 et 34 de l’autre4. relative à des éléments d’un monument dont il Ces photographies, hélas, se sont avérées insuf- contribua tant à développer la connaissance, elle fisantes, et il manque toujours le cliché, s’il existe, exploite des documents photographiques illus- qui fournirait une preuve décisive ; on a jugé inté- trant des épisodes encore mal connus de l’histoire ressant, toutefois, de commenter la question et récente des travaux de la salle hypostyle et ajoute faire le point des connaissances sur les différentes un passage inédit à l’établissement de ses textes. étapes qui ont amené le quart sud-ouest de la salle

1 Cf. V. Rondot, La grande salle hypostyle de Karnak. qu’une « feuille » de pierre composée de deux plaques longi- Les architraves (Paris : ERC, 1997), Fig. 2, p. 5 ; M. Azim, tudinales accolées surmonte, détail qui a trompé S. Clarke, G. Réveillac, Karnak dans l’objectif de Georges Legrain (Paris : R. Engelbach, Ancient Egyptian Masonry (ouvrage réédité CRA Monographies, 2004), vol. I, Fig. 9 p. 135 ; ces deux en 1990 sous le titre Ancient Egyptian Construction and figures font la synthèse des connaissances actuelles sur l’état Architecture) (London : Oxford University Press, 1930), archéologique des architraves et l’histoire récente de leur Fig.203 après p. 171, où elles n’associent à tort que deux ruine. grands blocs seulement sur toute leur épaisseur. Chacune des 2 V. Rondot, Les architraves, pl. 55. architraves naviformes complète pèse plus de 40 tonnes. 3 Les architraves naviformes sont celles qui présentent 4 Blocs SB4 et SB12, V. Rondot, Les architraves, p. 110, en plan le contour d’un petit bateau : l’une de leurs extré- SB4 côté. La numérotation des colonnes utilisée ici est celle mités est taillée en prisme droit à 45° pour pouvoir s’in- de G. Legrain, Les temples de Karnak (Bruxelles : Vromant, tégrer, au-dessus d’une colonne, à une ligne d’architraves 1929, p. 160 ; lorsque nécessaire, on donnera également celle perpendiculaire creusée en « V », l’assemblage étroit de ces de H.H. Nelson, Key Plans showing Locations of Theban éléments assurant ainsi une surface d’appui suffisante à Temples Decorations, OIP 56 (Chicago: University of Chicago chacun d’eux. Les figures citéessupra n. 1 montrent que ces Press, 1941), pl. III. architraves, comme celles qui les reçoivent, sont les seules à 5 Cf. M. Azim, « La structure des pylônes d’Horemheb ne pas être constituées de deux blocs parallèles ; elles sont à Karnak », Karnak 7 (Paris : ERC, 1982), p. 127-134. au contraire faites essentiellement d’un énorme monolithe, 22 michel azim et vincent rondot

Fig. 1. Plan du magasin SB au sud de la salle hypostyle (relevé V. Rondot, mai 1983). hypostyle à son état actuel, et de chercher à éta- sur la nef sud de la salle hypostyle et d’envisager ce blir ce qu’il s’est passé entre l’effondrement du IIe que fut le destin des quatre architraves naviformes pylône et la constitution du magasin d’architraves qui jadis furent hissées dans sa moitié occidentale, SB. SB4, SB5, SB11 et SB12, retrouvées au sol de nos Le IIe pylône, on le sait, est un immense édifice jours dans le magasin SB8. qui, victime de sa propre structure5, s’est effondré L’emplacement initial de SB11 a pu être déter- de longue date, son môle nord s’écroulant vers miné sans erreur possible par l’étude épigra- l’ouest dans la grande cour, son môle sud à la fois phique9 : c’était l’architrave la plus proche du IIe vers l’ouest et vers l’est entraînant, dans la salle pylône. Celui de SB5 ne fait aucun doute non hypostyle, la chute de six colonnes et l’inclinaison plus, puisque ses blocs furent arrachés à leur posi- de deux autres6. Si l’état récent du monument, tion d’origine par Legrain au début de 190910; SB5 vu depuis la grande cour ou le Ier pylône, a été occupait la quatrième position vers l’est à partir illustré par de nombreuses gravures ou photog- du IIe pylône. Ce sont donc les deux architraves raphies depuis la Description de l’Égypte7, il en a intermédiaires, SB4 et SB12, que l’on avait eu été tout autrement de l’éboulis ayant affecté la l’espoir de pouvoir replacer11. salle hypostyle, malaisé à dessiner ou photogra- Les photographies pertinentes sont au nombre phier et surtout singulièrement dénué d’intérêt de sept12 : six dues à Legrain (4-3/19, 4-3/142, aux yeux des visiteurs du passé, éblouis ailleurs 4-3/143, 4-3/144, 4-3/145, 4-3/146) et une plus par la grandeur et la majesté de l’ensemble monu- ancienne, à Beato (4-3/147), mais, sur cette série mental de Karnak. C’est dire si les rares photo- de clichés, une seule architrave naviforme tombée graphies retrouvées dans les archives de Legrain est visible. Le cliché Beato, pris vers 1870-1880, sont précieuses du point de vue de l’archéologie : montre l’allée transversale de la salle hypostyle elles constituent les seules sources permettant de barrée vers le sud par une énorme masse de blocs visualiser l’impact de l’écroulement du IIe pylône tombés provenant de la chute de la colonne 35, qui

6 M. Azim, G. Réveillac, Legrain, vol. I, p. 168-171 et 10 M. Azim, G. Réveillac, Legrain, p. 171-172 ; V. Rondot, Fig.11. Les architraves, textes N°54, 55, 56, p. 72-73, et pl. 31, 32, 7 Description de l’Egypte, Antiquités, vol. III (Paris : 43. Imprimerie Impériale, 1812), pl. 19. 11 V. Rondot, ibid., p. 110 et pl. 52, J (SB4) ; p. 111 et 8 Elles sont vierges de tout martelage, et si elles avaient pl. 52, K (SB12). connu des placages de boue avant leur chute, celle-ci les 12 Nous conservons ici les numéros qui leur ont été aurait à l’évidence fait disparaître ; sur cette question, voir attribués dans M. Azim, G. Réveillac, Legrain, chap. 4-3, V. Rondot, Les architraves, p. 4-5. vol.I, p. 130, 170-171, vol.II, p. 44, 80-81. 9 Ibid., p. 192 ; textes N°63, 64, 65 p. 77-78 et pl. 34, 35, 44. architraves de la grande salle hypostyle du temple d’amon-rê à karnak 23 marque aussi—ou presque—la limite orientale de masse de décombres provenant, pour la plupart, l’éboulis du IIe pylône et des éléments architecto- du déblaiement de la partie centrale du temple. niques emportés dans son naufrage à l’intérieur Au-dessus, quatre grands linteaux de l’Hypostyle de la salle ; il donne déjà une idée de ce formi- avaient été tirés là par M. Legrain. Ils sont tous dable chaos que l’on est bien en peine, en simple en mauvais état et il n’y avait pas à songer à les promeneur de Karnak aujourd’hui, d’imaginer. remettre en place ; ils furent donc rangés plus au Les six autres photographies constituent un état sud, en bordure de la route. »14 Ces « linteaux » sont des lieux avant travaux enregistré par Legrain, en visibles, en compagnie de quelques autres pierres précurseur qu’il fut de ce qui est systématique- descendues par Legrain, sur un cliché pris en févr- ment réalisé aujourd’hui avant toute intervention ier 1912 par Pillet lors de sa toute première visite sur le monument. de Karnak sous la direction de Legrain (Fig. 2), Le cliché 4-3/19 illustre l’aspect du contrefort notamment l’architrave qui reliait initialement les antique érigé entre le IIe pylône et la première des colonnes 17 et 26, toujours recouverte de la feuille grandes colonnes de la rangée axiale sud avant de pierre en deux parties qui la surmonte (soit le son démontage en 1912 ou 1913 ; au-dessus de bloc SB5)15 ; ils apparaissent encore sur une pho- cet élément, aucune des architraves de la salle tographie aérienne prise par la Royal Air Force le hypostyle n’apparaît dans l’éboulis du pylône. 7 mai 1921, avant les travaux de Pillet.16 En revanche, sur la photographie 4-3/146 mon- Legrain, toutefois, fut bien à l’origine de la créa- trant sa seconde travée nord-sud à partir de ce tion du magasin SB où, dans la foulée de ses travaux même pylône, on constate qu’une architrave, à de 1909-1910, il avait déjà transporté plusieurs l’arrière-plan, s‘est écroulée sur l’amas des blocs blocs ; l’embryon du dépôt apparaît clairement sur tombés. Elle est visible également, vue depuis la photo aérienne précitée. Les architraves navi- l’est cette fois et beaucoup plus nettement, sur le formes, quant à elles, furent amenées au magasin cliché 4-3/143, avec sa pointe dressée vers le ciel SB par Pillet, du 4 au 6 janvier 1923. Une série de et les deux queues d’aronde ménagées à sa partie photographies conservées dans ses archives rend supérieure. Il s’agit de la pierre qui reliait les col- compte de l’opération17, et l’une d’entre elles a été onnes 14 et 23 de la nef sud, soit le bloc SB11. publiée 18, qui montre les préparatifs de déplace- On retrouve ce bloc quelque temps plus tard, au ment de deux naviformes. La première est en début de 1909, pendant son déplacement : Legrain train d’être tirée vers le sud, c’est le bloc SB12, en a publié une photographie en 1914 dans son reconnaissable à la cassure caractéristique que ouvrage Louqsor sans les pharaons13, qui montre présente son « nez » 19 ; l’autre, SB11, retournée, des équipes d’ouvriers affairés à le tirer dans un est encore sur cales (ses queues d’aronde appa- premier temps vers l’est sur une plateforme de raissent au bas du bloc, et son texte de soffite à manoeuvre ménagée à environ mi-hauteur des sa face supérieure20). L’architrave descendue par colonnes. Legrain (SB5), surmontée de sa « feuille » en deux Une fois sorties du quart sud-ouest de la salle plaques de grès juxtaposées, est déjà arrivée au hypostyle, les quatre architraves naviformes magasin SB, de même que SB4 rangée immédi- furent laissées par Legrain immédiatement au atement à l’ouest de SB5. sud du monument, devant sa porte méridionale, En conclusion, ni les textes qu’elles portent, ni comme l’a confirmé Maurice Pillet en 1923 :« Tout les documents d’archives n’ont permis, jusqu’à l’espace compris entre la Salle Hypostyle au nord, présent, de trancher l’alternative quant à la posi- le temple de Ramsès III à l’ouest, la route au sud et tion d’origine des architraves SB4 et SB12 ; seul la cour de la Cachette à l’est était encombré d’une l’argument épigraphique avancé par Vincent

13 Fig.77 après p. 194 (la Fig.76, elle, montre le dépla- Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée-Jean Pouilloux cement du bloc SB12). (MOM), CNRS, Université de Lyon 2, France. Les dates de 14 M. Pillet, « Rapport sur les travaux de Karnak (1922- l’opération sont portées sur les plaques photographiques 1923) », ASAE 23 (1923), p. 111. elles-mêmes. 15 Cf. M. Azim, G. Réveillac, Legrain, vol.I, p. 171- 18 Cliché B089-10, Fig.33 p. 42 dans M. Pillet, Thèbes, 172. Karnak et Louqsor : « Karnak. Déplacement des linteaux de 16 M. Pillet, Thèbes, Karnak et Louqsor (Paris : Laurens, la Salle hypostyle ». 1928), Fig.11 p. 16 ; p. Barguet, Le temple d’Amon-Rê à 19 Cassure visible sur la Fig.76 de G. Legrain, Louqsor Karnak (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéo- sans les pharaons : légendes et chansons populaires de la logie Orientale, 1962), pl. I. Haute Égypte (Paris : Vromant, 1914). 17 Boîte B089, clichés n°08 à 14 ; les archives égypto- 20 Bloc illustré par la Fig.77 du même ouvrage. logiques de Maurice Pillet sont désormais conservées à la 24 michel azim et vincent rondot

Fig. 2. La salle hypostyle vue depuis le sud en 1912 avec, devant sa porte latérale, plusieurs des grands blocs descendus par Legrain ; on notera, au premier tiers gauche de la photographie, la présence des deux dernières demi-architraves reposant sur le mur sud (Collection M. Pillet, CNRS-MOM, 1912, inv. . B028-16).

Rondot est, pour l’instant, susceptible de fournir Des architraves récemment disparues un indice21. Au-delà, le seul moyen, peut-être, d’acquérir une certitude relèverait de l’observation Si, au fil des siècles, la majeure partie des archi- archéologique : il consisterait à comparer un relevé traves de la salle hypostyle ont été malheureuse- minutieux des pointes des deux monolithes au ment détruites, particulièrement dans la nef sol—qui prendrait en compte tous leurs détails nord23, quelques documents d’archives montrent significatifs, dimensions exactes, angles de taille, que certaines d’entre elles, jusqu’à une date rela- position des queues d’aronde, cassures, traces de tivement récente, étaient encore visibles. plâtre de liaison …—, et l’observation attentive Outre celle que Vincent Rondot étudie ci-après, des zones d’encastrement des pierres au sommet on signalera : des colonnes comme de leurs anciennes surfaces – Un bloc abandonné jadis au sommet du mon- d’appui22, ce qui demanderait le montage sur place tant nord de la porte du IIe pylône, illustré d’un échafaudage. par une photographie de la fin du XIXe siècle publiée par Mariette24 ; après l’intervention de

21 Cf. V. Rondot, Les architraves, p. 110, SB4 côté plus aujourd’hui que 43% du total initial, et seulement 13,5% (pl.52, J). dans la nef nord. 22 Il en existe des photographies dans les archives de 24 Voyage dans la Haute-Égypte (Le Caire : Mourès, M. Pillet, insuffisantes toutefois pour que le but recherché 1878, réédité chez Paris : Errance, 1999), pl. 41 ; V. Rondot, puisse être atteint. J.-C. Golvin, « Restaurations antiques à l’entrée de la salle 23 Voir l’état des connaissances résumé par les plans hypostyle ramesside du temple d’Amon-Rê à Karnak », donnés dans V. Rondot, Les architraves, Fig.2 p. 5, et M. Azim, MDAIK 45 (1989), p. 249-259, Fig.1 p. 250 et Taf.29 G. Réveillac, Legrain, vol.1, Fig.9 p. 135. V. Rondot, Les archi- (bloc B). traves p. 6, indique que les pierres in situ ne représentent architraves de la grande salle hypostyle du temple d’amon-rê à karnak 25

Legrain sur le monument, en 1907 semble-t-il, matière de cette note offerte à Bill. Tous deux ce bloc n’apparaît plus sur aucun document et furent, lorsque je me proposais de faire les relevés n’a pu depuis être repéré sur le site 25, ce qui des textes des architraves de la Grande salle fait donc craindre qu’il n’ait été détruit26. hypostyle du temple d’Amon-Rê à Karnak, les – Un des deux blocs constituant l’une des collègues irremplaçables que tout étudiant sou- grandes architraves est-ouest de l’allée cen- haiterait pouvoir rencontrer au moment où il fait trale, côté sud, entre les deux premières ses premières armes sur le terrain. L’accueil con- grandes colonnes à compter du IIe pylône27, fiant de Bill et ses conseils avisés ont été décisifs a vu sa chute s’arrêter contre le montant dans le succès de cette entreprise et c’est un plaisir sud de la porte de ce monument ; il est vis- que de pouvoir signer avec Michel cet article à sa ible sur une photographie de Francis Frith mémoire32. prise à la fin des années 185028, et avait Les archives Lacau, conservées au Centre Vladi- auparavant été dessiné par Edward William mir Golénischeff, contiennent une photographie Lane dans les années 182029 ; il fut détruit de G. Legrain datable du début de l’année 1899 selon toute vraisemblance vers l’année 1860, et représentant des ouvriers au milieu du désor- n’apparaissant plus sur aucun cliché après dre des colonnes tombées dans la moitié nord cette période. de la grande salle hypostyle33. La photographie – De toutes les architraves qui joignaient les est publiée34 et, sur mes indications, M. Azim rangées extrêmes de colonnes aux murs avait proposé comme position d’origine la volée latéraux de la salle hypostyle, au nord comme entre les colonnes 53 et 6235, côté ouest. Un réex- au sud, une seulement était encore en place amen plus approfondi des indices me fait penser en 191230, bien que les deux blocs qui la aujourd’hui que sa position d’origine est beau- composaient se soient affaissés vers le sud à coup plus certainement la volée d’architrave la suite de la dégradation de leur mur por- entre les colonnes 54 et 6336. L’intérêt de ce cliché teur, comme on le constate sur la figure 2. est qu’il documente un bloc d’architrave qui a Cette architrave fut descendue peu après par aujourd’hui disparu et qui fournit un fragment Legrain ; son bloc occidental pourrait être de texte inconnu de moi lorsque je travaillais à SB131, alors que son compagnon oriental, lui, l’établissement du corpus. Publier un texte à partir n’a pas été retrouvé. d’une photographie d’archives est toujours une (M.A.) entreprise délicate, et celle-ci n’échappe pas à la règle. Il m’a cependant paru possible de prendre le risque à nouveau, comme j’avais déjà été amené Une architrave perdue de la nef nord et son à le faire pour plusieurs extraits des textes des texte architraves37, dans la mesure où nous pouvons raisonnablement tenir pour acquis que des blocs C’est à Michel Azim que je dois la connaissance aussi gros, lorsqu’ils sont introuvables, ont selon de la photographie d’archives qui me fournit la toute probabilité définitivement disparu.

25 V. Rondot, J.-C. Golvin, MDAIK 45 (1989), n.2 32 Pour une présentation générale des travaux de pub- p. 249. lication de la Grande salle hypostyle de Karnak, W.J. Mur- 26 M. Azim, G. Réveillac, Legrain, vol.1, p. 127-128. nane, p. J. Brand, J. Karkowski, R. Jaeschke, « The Karnak 27 Colonnes n°1 et 2 de Legrain, n°7 et 8 de Nelson ; cf. Hypostyle Hall Project : (1992-2002) », ASAE 78 (2004), V. Rondot, Les architraves, pl. I, deuxième texte de soffite, p. 79-127. en 5, d. 33 Archives Lacau A XX 12. Tous mes remerciements à 28 A. Grimm, Ägypten, Die photographische Entdeckung Christiane Zivie-Coche et à Ivan Guermeur pour les facilités im 19. Jahrhundert (München : Edition Photographica, qui m’ont été faites lors de l’examen du tirage original. Laterna magica, 1980), p. 66 ; J. Vercoutter, L’Égypte à la 34 M. Azim, G. Réveillac, Legrain, photo 4-3/56, vol.II chambre noire. Francis Frith, photographe de l’Égypte retrou- p. 57, et commentaire, vol.I p. 146-147. vée (Paris : Gallimard, 1992), p. 31, 125-126. 35 Ou 120 et 129 (numérotation Nelson). 29 E.W. Lane, Description of Egypt, éd. J. Thompson 36 121 et 130 de Nelson. (Cairo : American University in Cairo Press, 2000), Fig.81 37 Grâce à des clichés inédits ou publiés, V. Rondot, Les av. p. 177. architraves, p. 187 sq. Les textes des architraves concer- 30 M. Azim, G. Réveillac, Legrain, vol.I, Fig.9 p. 135, nés sont : N° 1, sup. et inf. ; N° 2, Sud ; N° 19, Est ; N° 19, architrave 59 sud, p. 169-170, vol.II, cliché 4-3/152. Ouest ; N° 22, Est ; N° 33, inf. ; N° 35, Ouest et Est ; N° 37, 31 V. Rondot, Les architraves, pl. 53, L. sup. et inf. ; N° 38, Ouest et Est ; N° 39, inf. ; N° 43, sup. ; NA28+NA29+NE20 côté, sup. et inf. 26 michel azim et vincent rondot

Fig. 3. Nouvel établissement des textes des architraves N° 31, sup. et 31, inf. (d’après V. Rondot, Les architraves, p. 18*).

Ainsi replacé selon les critères archéologiques La Fig. 3 ci-dessous donne le nouvel établisse- fournis par la photographie, ce bloc permet de ment des deux textes. compléter l’établissement des textes N° 31, sup. et N° 31, inf.38. La traduction de N° 31, sup. est désormais la Je donne en Figures 4 et 5 le détail agrandi du suivante : bloc d’architrave visible sur la photographie et le (Vive) fac-similé schématique des signes encore lisibles, l’Horus : Taureau puissant, celui qui apparaît dans sur lequel ne figurent que les informations qui Thèbes celui qui fait vivre les Deux Terres. me paraissent assurées. Même ainsi incomplet Roi puissant, et imparfait, cet établissement du texte présente Aux grands monuments dans le domaine de (son) plusieurs intérêts pour notre connaissance du père Amon-Rê, corpus des textes des architraves. Le premier tient […] ? […] ? pour lui. dans le fait que ce fragment complète deux des Le roi de Haute et Basse-Égypte : Menmaâtrê- textes décorant les architraves placées sur l’axe l’élu-de-Rê. secondaire nord-sud de la salle c’est-à-dire à une Il a fait comme mémorial personnel pour (son) position remarquable dans le plan général des père Amon-Rê, roi des dieux, l’acte de faire pour architraves. Le second est que le texte de la ligne lui un temple auguste et grand […] […] il irradie et il s’en (du temple) réjouit. En supérieure (N° 31, sup.) contient une formule de récompense à [ce]la, [il donne ?] vie-et-pouvoir dédicace que notre fragment vient compléter par […]. un développement, alors que dans l’établissement antérieur, la lacune interrompait brutalement ce Ps est l’un des mots nouveaux dans le vocabulaire texte. Le troisième enfin tient à ce que ce fragment des architraves, à ajouter à wbn, déjà attesté par ajoute au vocabulaire des architraves deux mots et deux fois (N° 29, inf. et NE 40 côté, sup.), seul autre une expression jusqu’à présent non attestés dans verbe qui décrive dans nos textes le dieu investis- notre corpus. sant de sa lumière le nouveau temple construit39.

38 Ibid., Rondot, p. 18* et pl. 10. 39 Les deux autres verbes, en effet, s  et  n, sont réser- vés au roi qui fait resplendir le temple, Ipet-Sout, Thèbes architraves de la grande salle hypostyle du temple d’amon-rê à karnak 27

Fig. 4. Photographie G. Legrain 1899. Archives Lacau A XX 12. Détail agrandi de l’architrave.

Fig. 5. Fac-similé schématique du texte lisible sur la photographie d’archives Lacau A XX 12.

Il n’est pas exclu, alors, que le fragment NE40 Les martelages rendent la suite du texte dif- (pl. 48, W) ait pu appartenir à notre texte, sur ficile à établir avec certitude. La forme qu’ils pren- l’argument de son contenu, mais également parce nent autant que la présence du r au bas du cadrat qu’il appartient lui aussi à une ligne supérieure invitent à restituer un r dans le cadrat suivant40 dont les hiéroglyphes ont été martelés systéma- dans une phrase tp r.s décrivant la joie du dieu tiquement, selon la même technique que N°31 pour le temple construit ( wt-nr wrt), repris comme du bloc de notre photographie d’archives. par le pronom suffixe .s. Le verbe jusqu’alors Nous aurions dans ce cas un long développement le plus largement attesté dans nos textes pour tout entier consacré à la brillance du dieu dans décrire cette joie divine est ἰ (N° 1, inf., n. b), le temple. ou les Deux-Terres ou dont l’éclat est étincelant à l’instar 40 Pour d’autres exemples de r intégralement martelés des dieux solaires (ibid., Les architraves, Index I, p. 162 et et en ne débordant pas ou que très peu la silhouette du 164), à l’exception toutefois d’une attestation de s  dans signe, pl. 3 (N° 4, sup.), pl. 4 (N° 6, sup.) et pl. 9 (N° 15, un texte qui dit du temple qu’il est « resplendissant comme inf., trois fois). Le contour que j’ai donné aux martelages le disque du soleil » (N° 1, sup.). sur la Fig. 3 n’est pas assuré. 28 michel azim et vincent rondot l’expression tp r étant quant à elle réservée au Roi roi, dans un total de seulement trois attestations [qui fait un mé]morial dans le domaine il est vrai, dont deux épithètes royales41. d’Amon, Ainsi « découpée », cependant, la phrase [détermi]né [à construi]re pour celui qui l’a mis reprend par l’expression r ἰsw, alors que l’on atten- au monde. drait plutôt un nouveau verbe, avec pour sujet le Le roi de Haute et Basse-Égypte : Men-[maât]rê- [l’él]u-de-Rê. dieu ou le pronom suffixe le désignant. Peut-on Prince parfait, proposer, sans être trop conjectural, que le verbe le bien-aimé, prenne place plus loin, dans la lacune après le fils aîné de Horakhty, démonstratif nn dans une phrase qui serait r ἰsw celui qui construit les temples […] n[n rdἰ.f] nh-wAs [… n sA R cartouche] ? Le mot […] ses rayons. ἰsw est déjà employé deux fois dans nos textes C’est le roi lui-même […] (N° 9, sup., n. j) et c’est ici la troisième attestation, Le mot mAwt et l’expression nswt s.f sont tous dans une graphie nouvelle42. Les autres termes deux nouveaux dans nos textes. Le contexte est utilisés sont mtn « récompense » et l’expression beaucoup trop lacunaire pour qu’il soit utile ou nm sw m (N° 9, sup., n. e). possible d’établir plus avant ce passage. On remar- Les textes en place comme les fragments font quera cependant que les « rayons » dont il est apparaître que cette réjouissance divine pour la question sont divins selon toute vraisemblance, fondation royale, suivie des récompenses accor- agissant d’une façon ou d’une autre sur les temples dées au roi, est l’un des thèmes fondamentaux construits par le roi et dont il est fait mention43. du corpus des textes des architraves. Ce sont les L’expression « C’est le roi lui-même » conclut la mots mêmes du dieu, rapportés par les discours série d’épithètes qui précède en décrivant le sou- divins placés symétriquement sur l’axe majeur, verain « à l’œuvre » lorsqu’il s’agit de donner les l’un adressé aux dieux de l’Égypte (N° 9, sup.), instructions pour la construction du temple44. l’autre au roi (N° 10, sup.), qui le manifestent de Voici donc les informations supplémentaires la façon la plus directe et la plus étendue. Il semble fournies par ces deux fragments de textes. Elles bien que, dans les textes de la partie nord de la salle sont à la fois nouvelles, pour le vocabulaire, et (ceux de Séthi Ier), cette réjouissance suivie d’une attendues, pour la phraséologie. Il faut rappeler récompense divines aient été l’une des clausules ici que selon mes calculs, nous ne connaissons les plus utilisées, ce que l’état fragmentaire des qu’une partie très réduite des textes ayant décoré textes ne laisse plus voir aujourd’hui. la partie nord de la salle (sculptés sous le règne de Séthi Ier) puisque j’avais pu estimer à 13,5 % le La traduction de N° 31, inf. est désormais la sui- pourcentage des blocs en place ou rétablis à leur vante : position d’origine45. On retiendra ici surtout la Les Deux Maîtresses : Celui qui répète les nais- sances, celui dont le glaive est puissant, celui qui place particulièrement importante donnée à la repousse les Neuf Arcs ; radiance divine, dans ces deux lignes de textes pla- L’Horus d’Or : Celui qui répète les couronnements, cées sur l’axe secondaire nord-sud de la salle. celui dont les arcs sont puissants dans tous les (V. R.) pays.

41 V. Rondot, Les architraves, Index I, p. 161 et Index III, Caire : Centre de documentation et d’étude sur l’ancienne p. 172. Égypte, 1968), p. 142-145. J’avais remarqué que pour 42 Comparer, pour la salle hypostyle, avec KRI I, p. 210, l’épithète mrwty « le bien-aimé », lorsque le roi est comparé 13 (discours d’Amon au-dessus de la barque procession- à des divinités, ce sont les divinités solaires qui reviennent le nelle). plus souvent, V. Rondot, Les architraves, N° 31, inf., n. e. 43 A. Erman et H. Grapow, Wörterbuch der ägyptischen 44 N° 4, sup., n. d avec le recours deux fois dans nos Sprache, II, Die Belegstellen, 4e édition (Berlin : Akademie- textes à l’expression équivalente ἰn m.f « C’est Sa Majesté Verlag, 1992) cite Urk. IV, p. 424 et Abyd. Mar. I, 19b (= qui… ». Comparer, pour la salle hypostyle, avec KRI I, 207, KRI I, p. 161, 13). Je renvoie à nouveau à Chr. Desroches 5-6 (fête d’Opet). Noblecourt, Ch. Kuentz, Le petit temple d’Abou Simbel I (Le 45 V. Rondot, Les architraves, p. 5 sq. et Fig. 2. usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 29

USURPED CARTOUCHES OF MERENPTAH AT KARNAK AND LUXOR

Peter J. Brand University of Memphis

It is an honor to dedicate this article to my late often find vestiges of the earlier ruler’s name as friend and mentor Bill Murnane. I have the fond- a palimpsest beneath the surcharger’s. Although est memories of hours we spent together at Karnak this is not always the case, especially with inscrip- pouring over epigraphic conundrums on the walls tions carved in hard stone like granite,1 enough of the Great Hypostyle Hall. I count myself highly traces usually remain to credit the original authors fortunate to have been trained in the arcane art of whole series of usurped wall reliefs on lime- of epigraphy from a master of the craft. So too in stone and sandstone monuments. Examples are the disciplines of Egyptian history and historiog- numerous, including reliefs of Hatshepsut at raphy I benefited immeasurably from his tutelage Karnak and Deir el-Bahari, Tutankhamen’s reliefs during countless hours of exposure to his vast surcharged by Horemheb in the Colonnade Hall knowledge and incisive reasoning skills both in at Luxor,2 Ramesses I’s usurpations of Horemheb formal class sessions and stimulating discussions on the Second Pylon at Karnak,3 Ramesses II’s outside the classroom as a student in Memphis replacements of his three immediate predeces- and later during our work at Karnak. His death sors’ cartouches on the Second Pylon4 and in the left a great void in my own life professionally Karnak Great Hypostyle Hall,5 as well as Ramesses and personally, and not a day passes when I do VI’s appropriation of Ramesses IV’s reliefs in the not think about him or speak about him to my Hypostyle Hall6 and elsewhere at Karnak.7 colleagues and my own students.

Usurped Cartouches Naming Seti II at Introduction: Usurped Cartouches in Karnak the New Kingdom Among the cartouches usurped by Seti II at At Karnak and Luxor temples one often finds the Karnak, however, only rarely do any traces of cartouches of Seti II carved secondarily over the the original author remain. In a few instances erased titulary of one of his Ramesside predeces- it is clear that Merenptah’s name had occurred sors in wall reliefs, statuary and bandeau texts. earlier, as with the war scenes on the west exte- The usurpation of royal inscriptions, especially rior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak in the Nineteenth Dynasty, is a common enough and some blocks from its walls, where faint phenomenon in the New Kingdom, but one can traces of Merenptah’s titulary occasionally surive

1 P.J. Brand, “Methods used in Restoring Reliefs “The Karnak Hypostyle Hall Project (1992-2002),” ASAE Vandalized during the Amarna Period,” GM 170 (1999), 78 (2004), pp. 100-101. pp. 37-48. 5 W.J. Murnane, “The Earlier Reign of Ramesses II and 2 E.g., Epigraphic Survey, Reliefs and Inscriptions from his Coregency with Sety I,” JNES 34 (1975), pp. 180-183; Luxor Temple, Volume 1: The Festival Procession of Opet P.J. Brand, The Monuments of Seti I: Epigraphic, Histori- in the Colonnade Hall (Chicago: The Oriental Institute of cal and Art Historical Analysis (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2000), the University of Chicago, 1994), passim; idem, The Facade, pp. 193-196. Portal, Upper Register Scenes, Columns, Marginalia, and 6 Murnane† and Brand, ASAE 78 (2004), pp. 106-107 Statuary in the Colonnade Hall (Chicago: The Oriental Insti- and Figs. 12A-B. tute of the University of Chicago, 1998), passim. 7 E.g., the bandeau texts inside the Cour de la Cachette 3 K.C. Seele, The Coregency of Ramses II with Seti I and (PM II2, p. 132 [490]; KRI IV, pp. 40-42) and on the obe- the Date of the Great Hypostyle Hall at Karnak (Chicago: lisk of (PM II2, p. 75 [D]; KRI IV, pp. 31-32). University of Chicago Press, 1940), pp. 7-8 and Figs. 1-2. See K.A. Kitchen, “The Twentieth Dynasty Revisited,”JEA 4 Ibid, pp. 7-8; W.J. Murnane, “Ramesses I and the Build- 68 (1982), p. 122; A.J. Peden, The Reign of Ramesses IV ing of the Great Hypostyle Hall at Karnak Revisited,” VA (Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1994), p. 38. 10 (1995), pp. 163-168; W.J. Murnane† and P.J. Brand, 30 peter j. brand

Fig. 1. Cartouches of Merenptah surcharged by Seti II from a war scene at the north end of the west exterior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. The surface of the cartouche has not been cut back as have others on this wall. Location. PM II2, p. 132 (491).

(Figs. 1-2, 14-15). The original date of these sur- secondarily for Seti II at Karnak. The telltale charged reliefs on the west wall of the Cachette smooth depression where the primary name was court—especially the war scenes—has been the erased, while clearly betraying that Seti’s name is subject of great controversy and some maintain not original, was typically accomplished so well that they were first authored by Ramesses II and that the identity of the original author is often usurped in turn by Merenptah, Amenmesse and unrecoverable (Figs. 3-4). Reliefs and marginal finally Seti II.8 No sign of Ramesses II’s titulary inscriptions of this type occur all over central and no reliable trace of Amenmesse has ever been Karnak, including on the Fourth Pylon10 and on a found in this court.9 Vestiges of Merenptah’s mon- gateway south of the main axis between the Fifth ikers are occasionally found in some of the car- and Sixth Pylons.11 touches from the Cachette war scenes, but many It has long been suspected that Amenmesse’s betray no sign of their previous owner although hand lay beneath the cartouches surcharged by it is obvious they have been recut. Unfortunately Seti II, either as their original author or as the this is true of most of the cartouches inscribed usurper of Merenptah’s titulary. It is all the more

8 D.B. Redford, “The Ashkelon Relief at Karnak and 10 PM II2, pp. 78-79 (202). the Israel Stela,” IEJ 36 (1986), p. 193; H. Sourouzian, Les 11 PM II2, p. 81 (210a); H.H. Nelson, Key Plans Showing monuments du roi Merenptah, (Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Locations of Theban Temple Decorations(Chicago: Univer- Zabern, 1989), p. 150; S. Iskander, “The Reign of Merenptah,” sity of Chicago Press, 1941), KC 34; C. Loeben, “La porte (PhD dissertation, New York University, 2002), p. 318. sud–est de la salle–wAjt,” Karnak 8 (Paris: ERC, 1987), 9 So K.A. Kitchen, “Some New Light on the Asiatic Wars pp. 207-223. of Ramesses II,” JEA 50 (1964), p. 68, n. 9; idem, RITANC II, pp. 72-73. usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 31

Fig. 2. Drawing of the same cartouche. No trace of Amenmesse’s name as claimed by Yurco was found after repeated collations. puzzling, therefore, that direct evidence of Amen- Amenmesse is often suspected to have been messe’s presence on the monuments at Karnak responsible for deleting Merenptah’s names from and elsewhere has rarely been detected. A group the walls of Karnak and Luxor. It is generally of silicious sandstone statues from Karnak rein- assumed, too, that he simultaneously placed his scribed for Seti II are probably to be assigned name in their stead. Frank Yurco claimed to have to Amenmesse based on historical and stylistic found slight traces of Amenmesse’s names in a criteria, although the original monikers have couple of cartouches from the war scenes on the been thoroughly erased leaving only a few inde- west wall of the Cour de la Cachette,14 but subse- terminate traces of the primary edition.12 KV 10 quent inspections have shown these to be phan- can also be confidently assigned to Amenmesse. toms (Figs. 1-2).15 Elsewhere at Karnak, only a Although his reliefs were largely hacked out, his handful of Amenmesse’s cartouches have ever protocol is still legible in several examples from been detected as palimpsests beneath usurpa- the tomb.13 tions by Seti II or even Ramesses III.16 In those

12 F.J. Yurco, “Amenmesse: Six Statues at Karnak,” MMJ 14 F.J. Yurco, “Merenptah’s Canaanite Campaign,” JARCE 14 (1980), pp. 15-31.The fact that silicious sandstone, often 23 (1986), pp. 189-215. called quartzite, is a hard stone and was left unpainted 15 I have inspected these cartouches on three separate necessitated the thorough erasure of the original text prior occasions in the past few years: in the company of Bill Mur- to usurpation since paint and plaster could not have been nane and Samah Iskander (February 2000), alone (March used to mask the original inscription. See Brand, GM 170 2001) and with my graduate students Robert Griffin, Louise (1999), pp. 37-48. Cooper and Heather Sayre (December 2004). On each occa- 13 E.L. Ertman, “A First Report on the Preliminary Survey sion, we all agreed that only the names of Merenptah and of Unexcavated KV-10 (The Tomb of Amenmesse),” KMT 4.2 Seti II were visible amid chisel marks. No traces suited (1993), pp. 38-46; O.J. Schaden, “The Tomb of Amenmesse Ramesses II or Amenmesse. See Murnane† and Brand, ASAE (KV-10): The First Season,” ASAE 63 (1998), pp. 116-155; 78 (2004), p. 104. idem, “KV-10: Amenmesse 2000,” ASAE 78 (2004), pp. 129- 16 A handful of usurped cartouches at Karnak have been 147; idem, “Some Observations on the Tomb of Amenmesse attributed to Amenmesse. These include: a bandeau text (KV -10),” in Essays in Egyptology in Honor of Hans Goedicke, from the eastern temple of Ramesses II (PM II2, p. 211 eds. B.M. Bryan and D. Lorton (San Antonio, Texas: Van [30-31]; P. Barguet, Le Temple d’Amon-Rê à Karnak, [Cairo: Siclen Books, 1994), pp. 243-254. Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 32 peter j. brand

Fig. 3. Cartouches of Seti II carved over thoroughly erased originals from a gateway in central Karnak. Location. PM II2, p. 95 (272). The original author in this case was Amenmesse based on traces from another cartouche in the same series identified by Roy Hopper.

Fig. 4. Bandeau text from central Karnak usurped by Seti II. No trace of the original name can be detected, although its original author is probably Merenptah. Location. PM II2, p. 88 (237). cases where Amenmesse’s name can be detected it seems less plausible that Seti II would have beneath Seti II’s, it seems likely that Amenmesse usurped cartouches of Merenptah left untouched was the original author of the inscription since in by Amenmesse as Seti was Merenptah’s son and no case have traces of both Merenptah and Amen- legitimate heir. But what if Amenmesse, instead messe been detected in cartouches usurped by of usurping these cartouches, had merely erased Seti II. From a historical point of view, however, them?

1962], p. 229, n. 2); on the gate of the Fourth Pylon (PM south-east gate of the wAyt-hall clearly suit Amenmesse. II2, 79 [202c-d]; ibid., Barguet, p. 90, n. 3); on a gate in the On the facade of the Fourth Pylon, vertical lines in the Akhmenu (ibid., Barguet, p. 204); a gateway with adjoining palimpsest might correspond to elements of Amenmesse’s wall space in central Karnak south and west of the Sixth nomen. I was unable to locate the text from the Akhmenu Pylon (PM II2, p. 95 [269-273]); and the south-east gateway cited by Barguet. However, my doctoral student Mr. Roy of the so-called wAyt-hall of Thutmose I and Hatshep- Hopper, who is preparing a dissertation on Amenmesse and sut (PM II2, p. 81 [212d]; Barguet, p. 104, n. 5; Loeben, Seti II, has now confirmed that there are indeed traces of Karnak 8 [Paris: ERC, 1987], pp. 213 and 217). I was able Amenmesse’s titulary in some of these locations, includ- to inspect most of these cartouches in 2004 and 2006. Of ing the gateway south and west of the Sixth Pylon and on these, the bandeau text from the eastern temple I found no one of the colossi at the entrance to the Akkhmenu (PM discernable traces of an earlier name, only chisel marks from II2, p. 112 [343]). where the surface was cut back. The palimpsest traces on the usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 33

Of pharaonic chronology after Merenptah’s monuments.20 Sometimes, however, a damnatio death, we can only be certain that—in the Theban memoriae was perpetrated by carefully erasing a area at least—Amenmesse held sway before Seti name while leaving the attendant surface of the II, regardless of whether Seti enjoyed some monument otherwise unblemished, especially in brief control over the region immediately after the case of raised relief which could be sliced off. Merenptah’s death. We shall not consider here This process was also employed to usurp raised the geographical range of Amenmesse’s author- relief inscriptions, which were typically replaced ity, his origins, the length of his tenure, nor his by sunk relief in the Ramesside era. Slicing away blood relationship with either Merenptah or Seti raised relief cartouches generally left engraved II, if any, all of which are being investigated in traces behind caused by the method employed in a new study of Seti II’s and Amenmesse’s reigns carving raised relief. These traces have allowed the by my doctoral student Roy Hopper of the Uni- original authors of many usurped 18th Dynasty versity of Memphis.17 Instead, the aims of this and early 19th Dynasty reliefs to be identified.21 study are limited to investigating the alteration The thorough erasure of earlier names that leave of Merenptah’s reliefs at Karnak and Luxor by no trace whatsoever, however, is less common, Amenmesse and Seti II. especially with sunk relief. Even with proscrip- The treatment of the cartouches reinscribed by tions of Tutankhamen and Ay on the dismantled Seti II is telling. Before his name was placed in temple called the “Mansion of Nebkhepurure at them, the original titulary had been thoroughly Thebes,” Horemheb erased raised and sunk relief erased by cutting back and carefully smoothing cartouches of these kings, but not so completely down the surface, a process, we have seen, that that they cannot still be read, sometimes easily often left no sign of the original text (Figs. 3-4). In (Figs. 7-9).22 By contrast, the care applied to era- every case we are dealing with sunk relief, but the sures of cartouches secondarily inscribed for Seti most common practice in the Ramesside era when II is remarkable and this is all the more frus- usurping a sunk relief cartouche was simply to trating for the epigraphist seeking a palimpsest. plaster over the original name and incise the new Fortunately, there are some revealing exceptions. text over it without shaving the original surface A handful of altered inscriptions of Merenptah at down.18 This method was applied, inter alia, to a Karnak and Luxor shed much light on the rest. cartouche of Merenptah usurped by Amenmesse In a few places at Karnak and Luxor, Meren- from an isolated bandeau text at the Ramesseum ptah’s name escaped erasure. Aside from some (Figs. 5-6).19 When the aim was damnatio memo- marginalia,23 the most prominent survivors are in riae, however, it was common practice simply to the Great Historical Inscription on the south half hack the name away as with reliefs vandalized by of the east wall inside the Cour de la Cachette.24 In Akhenaten or many defacements of Hatshepsut’s both the text and some accompanying triumphal

17 For recent scholarship on the reign, see most impor- 19 C. Leblanc et al., Le Ramesseum IX-1, Les piliers tantly: R. Krauss, “Untersuchungen zu Konig Amenmesse “osiriaques” (Cairo: Organisation égyptienne des antiquités, (1. Teil),” SAK 4 (1976), pp. 161-99; idem, “Untersuchungen 1980), pp. 45, 167, j. 20a and pl. 96. zu Konig Amenmesse (2. Teil),” SAK 5 (1977), pp. 131-74; 20 For the various methods of defacement of Hatshepsut’s A. Dodson, “Amenmesse in Kent, Liverpool, and Thebes,” monuments see A.M. Roth, “Erasing a Reign,” in Hatshepsut: JEA 81 (1995), pp. 115-28; C. Vandersleyen, L’Égypte et la From Queen to Pharaoh, ed. Catharine H. Roehrig (New Vallée du Nil, vol. 2, De la fin de l’Ancien Empire à la fin du Haven: Yale University Press, 2005), pp. 277-281. Nouvel Empire (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1995), 21 Bill Murnane was responsible for some of these dis- pp. 575-81; A.J. Spalinger, “Review of Die Elephantine-Stele coveries. See n. 4. des Sethnakht und ihr historischer Hintergrund, by Rosemarie 22 O. Schaden, “Report on the 1978 Season at Karnak,” Drenkhahn,” BiOr 39 (1982), pp. 272-88. NARCE 127 (1984), pp. 44-64; idem, “Tutankhamun-Ay 18 Examples include reliefs of Horemheb on the facade Shrine at Karnak and the Western Valley of the Kings Proj- of the Second Pylon usurped in turn by Ramesses I and II ect: Report on the 1985-1986 Season,” NARCE 138 (1987), (Seele, Coregency, Figs. 1-2; Murnane† and Brand, ASAE pp. 10-15. 78 [2004], Fig. 54). Ramesses II used the same methods 23 So in the negative space between the legs of some on the exterior walls of the Hypostyle Hall at Karnak as of the colossi in the Ramesside court at Luxor (PM II2, did Ramesses VI in usurping Ramesses IV throughout pp. 311-312). Karnak. Traces of plaster masking can still be found in 24 PM II2, pp. 131-132 (486-488); C. Manassa, The some instances. (ibid., Murnane† and Brand, Fig. 12A; Great Karnak Inscription of Merenptah: Grand Strategy P.J. Brand, “Veils, Votives, and Marginalia: The Use of Sacred in the 13th Century BC (New Haven: Yale Egyptological Space at Karnak and Luxor,” in Sacred Space and Sacred Seminar, 2003); F. Le Saout, “Reconstitution des murs de la Function in Ancient Thebes, eds. P.F. Dorman and B.M. Bryan cour de la cachette,” Karnak 8 (Paris: ERC, 1982), pp. 213- [Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 258. 2006], p. 53 and Fig. 5.6). 34 peter j. brand

Fig. 5. Bandeau text of Merenptah usurped by Amenmesse from a pier in the second court of the Ramesseum. Location. PM II2, p. 435, pillar E(b); Leblanc et al., Le Ramesseum IX-1, pl. 9.

Fig. 6. Detail of figure 5. the prenomen cartouche usurped by Amenmesse. Traces of plaster used to cover Merenptah’s titulary remain. scenes, Merenptah’s titulary was never mutilated. 10-11).25 On the west interior wall, the original Elsewhere in the court, we know that the war royal names in a series of ritual scenes have been scenes on the west exterior wall had once been erased and replaced with those of Seti II (Figs. inscribed for him—originally or secondarily—as 12-13).26 Although they have been attributed to well as an isolated scene at the north end of the Ramesses II,27 they are more likely the work of east interior wall of the Cachette court showing Mereptah.28 Even more fierce is the debate con- the king between the paws of a criosphinx (Figs. cerning the initial author of the war scenes on

25 PM II2, p. 131 (482) where it is wrongly attributed prior to Seti II’s has been discovered in this series ritual to Ramesses IX: Yurco, JARCE 23 (1986), p. 198, Fig. 12; scenes. H. Sourouzian, Les monuments du roi Merenptah, pp. 149- 27 Le Saout, Karnak 8 (Paris: ERC, 1987), p. 229 and n. 150 and Fig. 11. 98; Sourouzian, Les monuments du roi Merenptah, pp. 143 26 PM II2, p. 132 (490), which wrongly labels them “Sethos and 150. II usurped by Ramesses II”(!) The original names were so 28 Yurco, JARCE 23 (1986), pp. 189-215. thoroughly erased here that, to date, no trace of any name usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 35

Fig. 7. Architrave fragment from the “Mansion of Nepkhepurure at Thebes” found at Karnak. The prenomen of Ay was care- fully erased by Horemheb while that of Tutankhamen was left intact. O. Schaden, NARCE 127 (1984), p. 57, Fig. 25-2.

Fig. 8. Another erased cartouche of Ay. Distinct traces of his prenomen can still be made out.

Fig. 9. Another architrave fragment from the “Mansion of Nebkhepurure at Thebes.” The distinctive epithets of Ay’s Horus and Two Ladies names have been erased though traces remain. O. Schaden, NARCE 127 (1984), p. 56, Fig. 7-2. 36 peter j. brand

Fig. 10. Scene of Merenptah kneeling between the paws of a criosphinx from the north end of the east interior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. Location. PM II2, p. 131 (482).

Fig. 11. Detail of figure 10. Merenptah’s names have been subject to hacking, but the damnatio memoriae was never completed and no other royal names were carved in their stead.

Fig. 12. Seti II driving the four calves before Amen-Re in a scene from the west interior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. Location. PM II2, p. 132 (490, II.5). usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 37

Fig. 13. Detail of figure 12. cartouches and Horus name of Seti II carved over erased originals on the west interior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. the west exterior wall of the Cour de la Cachette. Measurement of the depressions in which the It has been claimed by Redford, Sourouzian, final version of Seti II was carved shows that Iskander and Lurson that the cartouches in these it is impossible for four or even three separate war scenes were inscribed and reinscribed by as royal names to have been carved successively in many as four kings, viz. Ramesses II–Merenptah– any of them.34 Are we to believe that three or Amenmesse–Seti II,29 while Yurco would elimi- four sets of sunk relief carvings were inserted in nate only Ramesses II from this list.30 Yet in just these confined spaces, yet aside from the final ver- a couple of the war scenes (Figs. 1-2),31 and a sion of Seti II, in only a handful of the dozens of small number of loose blocks stemming from this usurped cartouches do we find even a few traces section of the wall (Figs. 14-15),32 the only traces of any earlier name and these always belong- of an earlier name beneath Seti II’s final edition ing to Merenptah? Moreover, since the usurped belong to Merenptah alone.33 cartouches from the Cour de la Cachette have

29 Redford, IEJ 36 (1986), p. 193; Sourouzian, Les monu- in Fig. 15 is likewise virtually impossible. ments du roi Merenptah, p. 150; S. Iskander, “The Reign of 34 Measurements of cartouches from the battle scenes Merenptah,” p. 318; B. Lurson, “Israël sous Merenptah ou made in 2000 by the late William J. Murnane and the le sort de l’ennemi dans l’Égypte Ancienne,” in Étrangers author, and augmented in 2001 and 2004 in a check of et exclus dans le Monde Biblique. Colloque International other usurped cartouches naming Seti II from the Cour de à l’Université Catholique de l’Ouest, Angers, les 20 et 21 la Cachette and central Karnak, confirmed that the depres- février 2002 (Théolarge 3), (Angers: Université Catholique sions in these cartouches were quite shallow. The depth to de l’Ouest, 2003), 45-62 . which the original surface was cut back varies from 0.7 to 30 Yurco, JARCE 23 (1986), pp. 197-198. 1.5 cm. It is impossible that three successive sunk relief 31 Ibid., pp. 196-201 and Figs. 10-11, 13 and 15. cartouches could have been carved and then erased inside 32 Ibid., pp. 201-204 and Figs. 17-20. these cartouches, leaving no trace behind when a fourth 33 As noted above, traces of Amenmesse’s name in some of one was carved. The reading of palimpsests is taxing, but these cartouches have proved illusory after repeated examina- not impossible and we need not succumb to a council of tion in the field. So contra Yurco, ibid., pp. 196ff. and Figs. ignorance and declare that it is too difficult to decipher such 10, 13 and 15. His evidence for Amenmesse’s name in these inscriptions and that “no one can tell whether the name of cartouches is very slim, consisting of a few scratches against Merenptah is original, or whether it was carved secondarily very distinctive traces of Merenptah’s titulary in his Fig. 10. in a blank cartouche” (Redford, Israel Exploration Journal His figures 13 and 15 are somewhat misleading. Only the 36 [1986], p. 193). Moreover, to posit that Ramesses II’s mἰ-sign in the text over the horses’ backs is said to remain, name once existed here but has been obliterated by mul- but this is in a severely damaged part of the inscription, tiple subsequent usurpations constitutes an argument ex yet the “second version” is rendered without indicating that silento. So contra: Redford, ibid., p. 193; Sourouzian, Les even he saw almost none of this phantom cartouche. So monuments du roi Merenptah, p. 150; Iskander, “The Reign too the “possible second version” of Amenmesse’s nomen of Merenptah,” p. 318. 38 peter j. brand

Fig. 14. Erased cartouche of Merenptah surcharged by Seti Fig. 15. Drawing of figure 14. My own collation did not find II on a loose block from the war scenes on the west exterior as many traces of Merenptah’s prenomen as Le Saout’s did. wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak. Le Saout, Karnak Cf. Le Saout, Karnak 8 (Paris. ERC, 1987), p. 231. 8 (Paris. ERC, 1987), p. 231. been shaved back to the same degree as other Merenptah’s original relief decoration at Karnak cartouches reinscribed by Seti II in various ban- was subjected to erasure. Amenmesse would deau texts, marginal inscriptions and a gateway seem to be the most likely candidate responsible from the central part of Karnak, we would have to for this proscription, yet we find no trace of his conclude that Merenptah had usurped these, too, name in these erased cartouches. Rather it is Seti from his father while ignoring many other reliefs II, Merenptah’s rightful and eventual heir, who of Ramesses II at Karnak. Finally, if Merenptah placed his names over his father’s deleted ones. had started this orgy of usurpation by appropriat- An examination of some erased inscriptions from ing the war reliefs on the west wall of the Cour de Luxor temple and a second look at some of the la Cachette from Ramesses, why did he not annex Karnak examples resolves this conundrum. the adjoining ones on the south wall of the Great Hypostyle Hall or the decorative titulary on the pilasters of the Hittite Peace Treaty stela? Erased Marginal Decoration of Merenptah at It would seem that Merenptah did not engage Luxor Temple35 in a large program of usurping Ramesses II’s decoration on the west exterior wall of the Cour At Luxor temple, bandeau texts and other de la Cachette or elsewhere at Karnak where his marginal inscriptions from the later Nine- own name itself was subsequently erased. Instead, teenth Dynasty can be found in the Ramesside

35 In the later stages of preparing this essay I chanced Louqsor,” in Égypte: Louqsor temple du Ka royal, Dossiers across a brief article where Bill Murnane had already reached histoire et archéologie 101 (1986), pp. 48-49. the same conclusions about Amenmesse and the inscrip- 36 Located at PM II2, pp. 307-309 (27-31) but omitted tions of Merenptah at Luxor Temple which I discuss here. there. See Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pls. 143, 200 and W.J. Murnane, “Les cartouches trompeurs du temple de 204. usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 39

Fig. 16. Erased marginal inscription of Merenptah along the base of the west interior wall of the Ramesside forecourt at Luxor Temple beneath a procession of Ramesses II’s daughters. Location. PM II2, p. 308 (28). forecourt,36 the Colonnade Hall37 and the solar deleted.41 Extensive traces of the suppressed text court of Amenhotep III.38 Despite the poor condi- can still be made out, such as the phrase sA R nb tion of the lower course of the eastern and western w on both sides and nsw-bἰty on the western one. walls of the Ramesside and solar courts, we may More exacting was the treatment applied to the confidently reconstruct this program of marginal cartouches. Even here, though, enough survives texts as having encompassed most of the interior to peg Merenptah as the unfortunate victim of dados of all three structures. In addition, decora- these efforts. On the east wing, his nomenMr-n- tive friezes of cartouches and strings of titulary Pt - tp- r-MAt can be detected (Figs. 19 and 21). have been added to the columns in the Colonnade A prenomen cartouche on the west wing is more Hall.39 All of this marginalia was subsequently damaged, although the mr-hoe, the head of the altered in some fashion to eliminate the name of Re hieroglyph and the distinctive ram-glyph of its original author, but the treatment of specific BA-n-R-Mr-’Imn leave no doubt as to Merenptah’s inscriptions varies throughout the temple. authorship of the original text (Fig. 20 and 21). Inside the Ramesside forecourt, a series of ban- On the west wall proper, a bandeau text below a deau texts cut in sunk relief along the base of the procession of Ramesses II’s daughters has been interior walls has been deliberately, if not thor- shaved down in a similar manner, almost certainly oughly, erased. The texts probably once encom- to the detriment of Merenptah (Fig. 16). It is clear passed the south, west and east interior walls of the that whoever altered these reliefs had no intention court. The lower courses of the masonry are often of usurping them, but rather he preferred instead so poorly preserved that only fragments of the to obliterate them. The only likely candidates are western text remain and no such inscriptions—if Amenmesse and Seti II. Votive inscriptions of the they ever occurred—survive along the base of the High Priest Pinudjem were later imposed over eastern wall (Fig. 16). Along the dado of the better some of the erased texts on the east wing of the preserved south wall, corresponding in part to the south wall.42 facade of the Colonnade Hall, substantial remains In the Colonnade Hall, marginal texts of of these erased texts persist (Figs. 17-18).40 On Merenptah were arrayed along the bottom of both wings of the facade, Merenptah’s texts were the east and west walls but were erased in a carved over the horizontal lines of a dado pattern. manner similar to those in the Ramesside fore- In each case, after the phrase n r kA nt, the rest court. Ramesses IV later carved new bandeau texts of the inscription and the earlier dado lines were in the same location, but he was certainly not

37 Ibid., Epigraphic Survey, pls. 155-159, 172-173, 194- 41 The Epigraphic Survey suggests that Seti II was respon- 195 and 224. sible for the erasures and had originally intended to reuse 38 PM II2, p. 317 (93-98, 101). Some are listed as “texts these for a new series of inscriptions that were never carved. of Sethos II,” the rest are omitted. Ibid., pp. 6-7. This now seems unlikely, see below. 39 Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pls. 178, 194-195. 42 Ibid., pls. 199-200, 204. 40 Ibid., pls. 143, 199-200. 40 peter j. brand

Fig. 17. Erased marginal inscription of Merenptah along the base of the west half of the south wall of the Ramesside forecourt at Luxor Temple beneath a procession of Ramesses II’s sons. A statue may have once stood in front of the unerased segment in the middle of the photo. Location. PM II2, p. 308 (30).

Fig. 18. Part of an erased marginal inscription of Merenptah below an intact one of Ramesses II from the west wing of the facade of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor. The phrase sA R nb w has been incompletely erased. More thorough was the treatment of the king’s nomen cartouche on the right, although the mr-hoe and MAt-figure are discernable. Location. PM II2, p. 309 (31); Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 143A.

Fig. 19. Erased nomen cartouche of Merenptah from the east wing of the facade of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. Cf. Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 143B. usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 41

Fig. 20. Part of a damaged and erased prenomen cartouche of Merenptah from the west wing of the facade of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. Cf. Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 143A.

Fig. 21. Facimile drawings of erased cartouches of Merenptah on the facade of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple, after Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 143. Cf. Fig.s 19-20. 42 peter j. brand

Fig. 22. Erased bandeau text of Merenptah from the dado of the west interior wall of the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. Ramesses IV later carved another bandeau text in its place. The partially erased ram-glyph of Merenptah’s prenomen is visible beneath the -cobra at the left end of the photograph. Location. PM II2, p. 314 (78); Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 173. responsible for deleting Merenptah’s (Fig. 22).43 of the thicket of columns at the south end of the Merenptah also clad the shadow of the door inside solar court, an entirely new set of bandeau texts the main entrance of the hall with masonry to was carved by Seti II. Prima facie, the treatment of which he added ritual scenes, replacing decora- Merenptah’s marginal decoration at Luxor temple tion of Ramesses II that his new masonry covered, appears to be a “typical” case of Ramesside usur- and here, too, his cartouches were subsequently pation on the part of Seti II.46 If so, Seti went to a erased and replaced by Seti II’s protocol.44 Look- great deal of trouble to remove his father’s inscrip- ing to the columns, the culprit might seem to be tions, often without replacing them. In fact, the Seti II whose name has been inserted over erased erasures at Luxor Temple have all the hallmarks cartouches of Merenptah (Figs. 23-24).45 of a damnatio memoriae. Evidence from Karnak In the solar court, Merenptah’s dado texts once and elsewhere indicates that Seti II himself was encompassed the entire east wall, the east wing of not responsible for Merenptah’s proscription. the north wall and southern portions of the west wall (Fig. 25). The rest of the west wall and the west half of the north wall is missing today, but The Proscription of Crown Prince Seti at it is likely that his marginalia also included these Karnak areas. In every case, the bandeau inscriptions were wholly erased. Along the base of the eastern por- Among a dozen or more blocks stemming from tico behind the double row of columns, the texts the war scenes on the west exterior wall of the were never replaced. Elsewhere, on the east half of Cour de la Cachette which now lie in the yard the north wall, and on both the east and west walls nearby is a unique representation of a prince

43 Ibid., pp. 25-26 and pls. 172-173, 224B. 44 recesses was not antagonism towards his father. Ibid., p. 16 and pls. 155-159. According to the Survey, 45 Ibid., pls. 178 and 194. These traces were recorded the recesses in the thickness of the doorway were clad to by the Epigraphic Survey but not shown in their published erect a smaller doorway here. The cartouches of Merenptah drawings except for an erased marginal text on the base of on the cladding have been usurped, but marginal texts of column 2 (ibid., pl. 195). Ramesses II on either side were left intact, indicating that 46 So Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pp. 6-7. Merenptah’s purpose in covering his father’s reliefs in the usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 43

Fig. 23. Large cartouches of Seti II surcharged over erased ones of Merenptah on a column in the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. A tp-sign is discernable beneath the group Pt of Seti’s nomen on the left. None of these traces are shown in the Epigraphic Survey’s drawings of the columns. Cf. Epigraphic Survey, RILT 2, pl. 194.

riding in a chariot while enjoying the protection of a sunshade (Fig. 26).47 The figure of the prince is intact, but his name has been erased.48 His titu- lary is ἰry-pt Swty sA-nsw n t.f (Fig. 27). Less affected is his titleἰry-pt while the phrase sA nsw n t.f was left untouched.49 Clearly, the intention

47 Le Saout, Karnak 8 (Paris: ERC, 1987), p. 232, 4c and pl. 9, 4c; Yurco, JARCE 23 (1986), pp. 204-205. 48 This erasure is certainly not the result of a Late Period proscription of heiroglyphs of the god Seth. In all such cases in the Theban region, when the Seth-ideogram was removed from the protocols of kings and princes named Seti, it was hacked out, not erased. Further, only the offending ideogram was attacked, not the rest of the name. This is even true in cartouches of Seti II which themselves were inscribed in earlier cartouches usurped by that king. Cf. Figs. 3, 13, 23, and 24. So contra Lurson in Étrangers et exclus dans le Monde Biblique, 57 who maintains that the prince’s name was erased by iconoclasts in the Late Period offended by the Seth element. 49 Yurco, Sourouzian and Lurson have argued that the phrase sA nsw n t.f was the beginning of the titulary of another prince, the one pictured under the sun shade, and that the figure of the ἰry-pt Seti was before him on an adjoining block with his name spilling over onto the pres- ent one. Ibid., Yurco, p. 205; Souruzian, Les Monuments Fig. 24. A nomen cartouche of Seti II surcharged over an du roi Merenptah, 14, n. 84; Lurson, in Étrangers et exclus erased cartouche of Merenptah from marginal decoration on dans le Monde Biblique, 57. Lurson even maintains that the a column in the Colonnade Hall at Luxor Temple. A diagonal arragement of the prince’s titulary requires three princes line between the two reed leaves may stem from a squatting to have once been represented in these war scenes, viz. deity figure in Merenptah’s nomen. Khaemwaset, Seti and “Prince X.” 44 peter j. brand

Fig. 25. An erased bandeau text of Merenptah from the base of the east interior wall of the solar court at Luxor Temple. Location. PM II2, p. 317 (96).

Fig. 26. Block from the war scenes on the west exterior wall of the Cour de la Cachette showing Crown Prince Seti riding in a chariot. The first part of the Prince’s titulary has been erased. Le Saout,Karnak 8 (Paris. ERC, 1987), p. 232. was damnatio memoriae, not usurapation, despite the war scenes from the Cour de la Cachette and the seemingly imperfect execution. Of course, their relationship to those of Ramesses II on the incomplete erasures could have been disguised south wall of the Hypostyle Hall, Yurco’s iden- further with plaster and whitewash. The identity tification is certainly right.51 At present, I would of the prince has been subject to debate.50 He is note that while the title ἰry-pt need not always most probably the Crown Prince and future king refer to the Crown Prince in the Ramesside age, it Seti II. As I have argued elsewhere in a study of usually does.52 Moreover, the other named prince

I have challenged these observations elsewhere: “The Date with other inscriptions naming Crown Prince Seti (the future of Battle Reliefs on the South Wall of the Great Hypostyle Seti II), in sources from the reign of Merenptah. Hall and the West Wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak 50 Ibid., Yurco, p. 205; Kitchen, RITANC II, p. 74; and the History of the Later Nineteenth Dynasty,” in Rames- Iskander, “The Reign of Merenptah,” pp. 57-58. side Studies in Honour of K.A. Kitchen, eds. M. Collier and 51 Brand in Ramesside Studies. S. Snape, (Bolton: Rutherford Press, forthcoming). Here 52 M.M. Fisher, The Sons of Ramesses II (Wiesbaden: I would only note that the title ἰry-pt + personal name often Harrassowitz, 2001), pp. 85 and 125. precedes the phrase sA nsw n t.f and this usage is common usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 45

on the wall, the “king’s son Khaemwaset,” does not hold this title.53 If Crown Prince Seti is not the future Seti II, then he would presumably be the ninth son of Ramesses II.54 But it seems highly unlikely that this synonymous son of Ramesses, who died years before his father, would have ever been singled out as the target of persecution in the later Nineteenth Dynasty.55 If, however, the Cour de la Cachette war scenes are the work of Merenptah and featured his eldest son Seti, then the latter’s suppression alongside his father at the hands of the Gegenkönig Amenmesse accounts for the epigraphic data.56 That Amenmesse suppressed the names and titles of Merenptah and his intended successor Seti II on monuments in Thebes seems hard to escape. Rather than hack them out or carve his own protocol in their stead, Amenmesse preferred to erase Merenptah’s titulary. These deletions occasionally included whole bandeau texts. Nor did an isolated ocurrance of Crown Prince Seti’s name in his father’s war scenes on the west wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak escape pro- scription. It is not clear why Amenmesse never carved his name over Merenptah’s, but to date no reliable evidence for the former usurping the latter has been found at Karnak or Luxor. In fact, Fig. 27. Detail of fig 26. The erased protocol of Crown Prince it may be the case that Amenmesse never com- Seti, ἰry-pt Swty. pleted his program of erasures.

53 Debate on the identity of this prince Khaemwaset in Merenptah? Fisher’s photograph shows the cartouches at a the war scenes has been more contentious than that over the partially oblique angle, due to the curvature of the column, Crown Prince Seti from the loose block. Yurco and Kitchen and it is impossible to tell from it anything other than the fact maintain that the name is a common enough Ramesside that they were clearly defaced. The king in this instance—but moniker that it could belong to an otherwise unattested son not his son Seti—was the target of a damnatio memoriae by of Merenptah, especially as it belonged to his own illustrious a later king who did not seek to usurp the monument for elder brother (Yurco, JARCE 23 [1986], p. 206; Kitchen, himself. Why would this be Ramesses II? Are there any other RITANC II, pp. 73-74). Others would identify the prince examples of such deliberate violence to Ramesses’ cartouches, from the Karnak war reliefs as Ramesses II’s celebrated son as opposed to usurpation of them? A more likely scenario Khaemwaset (Redford, IEJ 36 [1986], p. 196; Sourouzian, is that they belonged to Merenptah and were hacked out Les monuments du roi Merenptah, p. 150; Iskander, “The at the behest of Amenmesse whose agents were looking Reign of Merenptah,” pp. 59-60). for Merenptah’s titulary but overlooked the name of his 54 Fisher, The Sons of Ramesses II, vol. 1, pp. 109-110; Crown Prince, and their own lord’s rival for the throne, the vol. 2, pp. 151-154; KRI II, p. 900; RITANC II, pp. 603- future Seti II. We do know that Merenptah was proscribed 604. A prince Seti with the title ἰry-pt is attested once on elsewhere. Until the column is carefully examined again, it a column drum from Cairo (JE 36652; TN 16/2/25/8; SR need not be taken difinitively as a monument of Ramesses 13959*) as ἰry-pt. Both Kitchen and Fisher identify him II’s like-named son and could just as likely belong to the as the son of Ramesses II and Fisher believes he may have future Seti II as Crown Prince of Merenptah. Under this served briefly as Crown Prince between the tenures of scenario, the prince’s name could have been overlooked Khaemwaset and Merenptah (ibid., Fisher, vol. 1, p. 110; by the chisel men who were mainly seeking Merenptah’s vol. 2, p. 153, no. 9.14). The prince on this drum is shown cartouches which occurred much more frequently than the standing before his father, a king whose cartouches have prince’s titulary. been hacked out. Kitchen’s hand copy records traces of 55 Kitchen, RITANC II, p. 74. The hacking out of the Seth- a sun disk at the top of the prenomen cartouche and of glyph in the name of Ramesses II’s ninth son in inscriptions an Amun-glyph and a Re-glyph at the top of the nomen, at Luxor Temple and the Ramesseum occurred in the Late the rest of both monikers he placed in brackets. Without Period, and is not germane to the question. Its defacement further direct observation of the piece in Cairo, it is not in instances of Prince Seti’s name is consistent with removal clear whether any of these traces are reliable, but Kitchen of the Seth-glyph from the royal nomen cartouches of Seti clearly expected to find Ramesses II in them. I and II on Theban monuments. See n. 48. But could these defaced cartouches have named 56 Cf. Kitchen’s similar conclusions in RITANC II, 74. 46 peter j. brand

The Incomplete Damnatio Memoriae of while Amenmesse’s monikers, (carved in stucco), Mernptah inside the Cour de la Cachette at did not. Yurco’s understanding of the epigraphic Karnak sequence of these usurpations was based largely on the one aforementioned set of cartouches from Among the handful of usurped cartouches bearing the north end of the Cachette court. As we have Seti II’s name in the war scenes on the west exte- seen, however, these are not like the rest. They rior wall of the Cour de la Cachette at Karnak— lack the smooth depressions of the others and including loose blocks stemming from them—by contain far more substantial traces of Merenptah far the best preserved instance of Merenptah’s than their fellows precisely because they have not titulary beneath that of Seti is from the northern- been cut back! most scene (Figs. 1-2). It was here, too, that Yurco It may be that Amenmesse’s program of dam- thought he detected a phantom trace of Amen- natio memoriae was never completed in the area messe.57 Substantial vestiges of both Merenptah of the Cour de la Cachette. Confirmation of this and Seti II are evident. Still, this cartouche is unlike hypothesis can be found inside the court. As was the rest in other respects. There are some chisel noted earlier, Merenptah’s ritual scenes on the marks inside the ring, but the background surface west interior of the court were usurped in toto has not been cut back or smoothed down and is but his name often survives intact on the east still largely intact despite light scoring with a chis- side. While his monikers were untouched in el.58 Seti II’s names were cut over Merenptah’s in the Great Historical Inscription and adjoining a manner similar to many Ramesside usurpations scenes at the south end of the wall,59 the same but without the erasure of Merenptah’s cartouches cannot be said of an isolated tableau at the north as in other cases on the west wall of the Cachette end (Fig. 10). Here Merenptah is depicted as a court and throughout Karnak. The conclusion to young king wearing the youthful side-lock and which these observations are leading is that these kneeling between the paws of a great ram-headed particular cartouches may have only been partly sphinx.60 The relief is entirely intact and the wall erased or perhaps not at all by Amenmesse and surface smooth and even, except for the interior that they are unlike the others reinscribed for Seti of the cartouches which show hacking. Despite II in the war reliefs because his father’s names this, the royal names are clearly legible and there were still largely intact in this one instance. Since is no indication that they were ever usurped or Merenptah’s name had been systematically erased that they are not the original work of Merenptah from the other scenes on this wall, Seti may not (Fig. 11). This strange case has long puzzled me, have felt remorse about appropriating what might but I believe that a solution may now be offered. have been the only instance where his father’s We have here a damnatio memoriae left unfin- name still survived there. ished. Examination of a loose block now in the Yurco seems to have mistaken this pair of car- south yard at Karnak steming from the Cour de la touches as being typical of the method used to Cachette also shows the deletion of Merenptah’s surcharge Merenptah’s cartouches elsewhere in cartouches in media res with some hacking prior the Cachette court. His reconstruction of the pro- to their final erasure (Fig. 28). cess was as follows. Merentpah’s name was only Elsewhere Merenptah’s cartouches were fully partially removed with a chisel and the cartou- erased by smoothing down the surface. As they che was plastered over. Amenmesse’s titulary was were all sunk relief, it was first necessary to chisel inscribed over them, but much of it was cut into away the projecting background matrix around the plaster, not the stone. Next, Seti II removed the sunk relief glyphs after which the scooped-out this plaster, all but obliterating Amenmesse’s pro- cartouches were polished smooth with a sand- tocol, and replaced it with his own. Supposedly, stone buffer. This process would leave few and vestiges of Merenptah, (although partly erased), very often no traces of the original name once remained beneath the plaster and survived all this, completed. The few chisel marks persisting on

57 Location: PM II2, p. 132 (491). Yurco, JARCE 23 that this hacking stems from the incomplete deletion of (1986), p. 197. Merenptah’s cartouches by Amenmesse, see below. 58 Yurco interprets light chisel marks inside the cartouche 59 Sourouzian, Les monuments du roi Merenptah, pl. as keying for plaster used to usurp the cartouche. If this be 26b. the case, then this was done only once by Seti II and not 60 Ibid., pl. 27a. also by Amenmesse as he suggests. Ibid., p. 197. I suspect usurped cartouches of merenptah at karnak and luxor 47

Fig. 28. partly hacked cartouches of Merenptah from a Cour de la Cachette block. The relief was later plastered over by Seti II who cut a new inscription over it. The pattern of hacking to Merenptah’s cartouches is consistent with an uncom- pleted damnatio memoriae by Amenmesse rather than keying for plaster by Seti II prior to carving a new relief in its place. Cf. Figs. 10-11. the smooth surfaces of other erasures, like those Conclusions: Programs of Marginal Decoration at Luxor and inside the cartouches usurped by and Damnatio Memoriae in the Late Seti II, show this to be the case. The criosphinx Nineteenth Dynasty scene at the north end of the east interior wall of the Cour de la Cachette preserves the first stage The picture that emerges from all this is that of this process. The mason was in the midst of neither the addition of marginal decoration chipping away at the background surface of the and bandeau texts on Theban monuments by cartouche and the incised hieroglyphs remained Merenptah nor their erasure and usurpation, mostly untouched when the work was abandoned. respectively, at the hands of Amenmesse and Elsewhere, Amenmesse’s erasures of Merenptah Seti II were carried out in a piecemeal or epi- were largely complete and so thorough that Seti sodic fashion. Instead, as with wall reliefs depict- II was free to carve his own name in their place. ing rituals or battles, Ramesside pharaohs often Presumably, Amenmesse’s agents completed their took a systematic approach to their decoration work on the west wall before moving on to the of standing monuments, even when they were east. They had started with the criosphinx scene merely filling in the limited blank spaces such at the north end of the wall when the project as the dados of walls or the gaps between earlier came to an end, leaving Merenptah’s cartouches reliefs on columns.61 in the Great Historical Inscription and attendant Amenmesse’s damnatio memoriae against triumph and ritual scenes at the south end of the Merenptah at Karnak and Luxor was comprehen- east interior wall still intact. sive if not exhaustive. At Luxor, some marginalia

61 See Brand in Sacred Space and Sacred Function in the available space had already been used by his predeces- Ancient Thebes, pp. 52-58; By the end of the Ramesside era, sors. See A.M. Roth, “Some New Texts of Herhihor and Herihor was forced to employ the bases of the columns and Ramesses IV in the Great Hypostyle Hall at Karnak,” JNES the wall dados in the Karnak Hypostyle Hall as virtually all 42 (1983), pp. 43-53. 48 peter j. brand were overlooked.62 Merenptah’s image was not from the Theban temples than with adding his targeted and his cartouches were rarely usurped own name to them. Amenmesse’s own original by Amenmesse. Inside the Cour de la Cachette inscriptions at Karnak and elsewhere would like- at Karnak, erasures of Merenptah’s cartouches wise be erased and usurped by Seti II, and deter- were underway when they finally ceased, perhaps mining the original author of many cartouches abruptly, at the end of Amenmesse’s brief reign. reascribed by Seti has been a complex and dif- The complete obliteration of Merenptah’s ban- ficult problem.63 Yet in no case have traces of deau texts inside the Ramesside court at Luxor both Merenptah and Amenmesse been detected indicates that usurpation was not the motive for in any cartouches reinscribed by Seti II. When targeting his monuments. The deletion of the Seti became the sole master of Egypt, he chose to name of a Crown Prince Seti alongside that of his bolster his own position by replacing his father’s father confirms that Amenmesse was the author erased cartouches and inscriptions with his own of this systematic damnatio memoriae. while respecting Merenptah’s texts where they Amenmesse himself may have been more con- had survived Amenmesse’s purge. cerned with removing his predecessor’s titulary

62 E.g., inscriptions added by Merenptah to the negative 63 See the special note by Kitchen in KRI IV, p. 194. Here space bewteen the legs of some of the colossi of Ramesses he states that many inscriptions of Seti II may have been II in the Luxor temple forecourt. These were overlooked by originally carved for Amenmesse or earlier kings. Kitchen and remain unpublished (PM II2, pp. 311-312). variations and significance of egyptian royal costume 49

QUANTIFYING REGALIA: A CONTEXTUAL STUDY INTO THE VARIATIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE OF EGYPTIAN ROYAL COSTUME USING RELATIONAL DATABASES AND ADVANCED STATISTICAL ANALYSES

Amy Calvert Institute of Fine Arts—New York University

During my time at the University of Memphis, York University, I hope to be in a position to I had the great privilege to study with Dr. Mur- help answer such questions and much more. With nane. Those seminars, one on Amarna history and their assistance, I was able to spend January to the other focused on Egyptian imperialism, were May 2006 in Egypt gathering essential data for some of the most stimulating I have experienced. my Ph.D. dissertation, The Regalia of Ramses III: Dr. Murnane’s sharp mind, depth of knowledge, A Contextual Study into the Variations and Sig- and probing questions made each meeting a beau- nificance of Royal Costume. This dissertation is tiful challenge. His unfettered generosity with his under the astute direction of Dr. David O’Connor time, always happy to provide guidance, refer- and aims to provide a comprehensive understand- ences, and suggestions made a huge impression. ing of the contextual importance of select royal So too did his absolute passion for Egypt and regalia in the New Kingdom through detailed his drive to record her endangered monuments examination of depictions of the pharaoh in a as thoroughly as possible. It is with this in mind variety of settings.1 The mortuary temple of the that I dedicate this article, an initial presentation king at Medinet Habu, with its abundance of well- of my dissertation project, to the memory of Dr. preserved relief, is the focus of this project. Murnane. The primary goals of this dissertation project are: 1) to create a total digital color photographic record of Medinet Habu, of which approximately Introduction 90% is completed; 2) to develop a relational data- base to track all Medinet Habu scene attributes The hundreds of scenes at the temple of Medi- (and those of comparative data sets); 3) through net Habu usually feature the king in a variety advanced statistical analyses, to discover pairs of contexts (ritual, ceremonial, battle, etc.) and and/or triads of correlated attributes of royal allocate to him regalia involving an array of attri- regalia; and 4) to provide a methodology which butes. For example, in many scenes he wears a would be valuable for similar studies by others prš-crown. In others, he wears a t-crown, a in the future. šnjt-kilt and a royal beard (the šnjt and the beard Using the visual data assembled during my field seemingly never appear with the prš). Do these season, individual elements of royal dress, as well and other attributes form significant clusters of as attributes and signifiers appearing in associa- spatial distribution and association that would tion with the king (such as chariot equipment enhance our understanding of the various levels or insignia), are being examined in conjunction of meaning potentially embedded in the scenes? with accompanying texts and epithets. This will But how would we study such patterns of clus- facilitate an exploration into the ways in which tering and association given the massive number those elements interact with each other and with of attributes and the variability of the contexts/ the body of the king, as well as how they function scenes involved? together as a whole to provide him with a visual Thanks to generous awards from the American projection of royal power, divine strength, and Research Centre in Egypt, the Samuel H. Kress apotropaic protection. The communicative aspect Foundation and the Institute of Fine Arts of New of royal regalia and the ways in which items of

1 For his sage advice and focused direction, I am also has benefited greatly from discussions with Dr. Ann Roth most grateful to Dr. Ogden Goelet. In addition, this project and I would like to thank her for her guidance. 50 amy calvert pharaonic costume impacted audiences will also cycle (e.g. Sokar festival, First Libyan war, etc.), be explored. I will be searching for regalia patterns of geo- For this particular project, rather than attempt- graphical, temporal and seasonal elements. Pat- ing to examine all of the depictions of Ramses III terns may emerge of certain elements being used and the contexts in which he appears at Med- in scenes with specific enemies at particular times inet Habu (a daunting task to say the least), a of the year, or discernible shifts in selected ele- reduction of focus depth to a more manageable ments may be visible over a span of time (e.g. First amount of material was clearly necessary. While vs. Second Libyan wars). Differences in costume an entire dissertation could certainly be written on related to the type of audience, how they would an examination of the variations in royal regalia have seen the king, and how they were intended that are seen within a single genre of scenes, a to view the king could be most telling. more productive and interesting angle is a com- These data should be most revealing in terms parative study of the regalia that appears in the of the selection of particular attributes, or combi- battle cycles and the festival reliefs.2 nations thereof, for specific contexts and duties. There are several reasons to approach the Individual components will be carefully examined topic in this way. Both types of scenes display in an attempt to determine their distinct natures the king engaged in terrestrial interactions—quite and the powers they suggest. Ensembles will be unlike the cultic and mortuary scenes where he is investigated to ascertain how individual accoutre- focused solely on the divine realm. Both groups ments symbolically integrate to provide support portray the pharaoh as ‘facing off’ against chaotic and divine strength to the king while outwardly forces, albeit forces of differing types. Both are projecting different aspects of those powers. The also venues where pharaoh had a human audi- role of regalia as an apotropaic unit functioning to ence, although those audiences were disparate in shield him from any potential danger, terrestrial nature. Additionally, the reliefs themselves would or otherwise, will be explored. Now that field- have had a living, if limited, audience. This audi- based research is completed, detailed analyses of ence points to the importance of the commu- the symbolic, historical, and ideological associa- nicative aspect of royal regalia and the ways in tions of select elements of royal regalia is cur- which items of pharaonic costume interacted with rently under way. and conveyed information to those who saw his ‘Regalia’ applies to more than headgear, and image, whether in the flesh or etched in stone. The this project will also examine the contextual inter- physical locations of the festival and war reliefs actions of dress, jewelry, apron, sandals, scepters, also speak of an implied connection, especially and many other elements. Previous research into in the courtyards of Medinet Habu where they pharaonic costume has tended to focus on indi- are directly juxtaposed. vidual aspects or has approached the topic from By comparing the two ‘public’ venues of warfare a more technical standpoint.3 Useful information and festival, selected patterns of regalia related to has emerged as a peripheral result of research on the particular powers to be emphasized and/or specific rulers in specialized contexts, but is by different levels and different types (i.e. physical its very nature limited in scope.4 While a number vs. cultic) of vulnerability the pharaoh experi- of studies have been written about crowns and enced may become discernible. Within each broad other items of pharaonic dress, they are generally group of war and festival and in each individual examined in isolation.5

2 By ‘battle cycle’ I refer to the entire sequence that elaboration of costume that accompanies the deification begins with the commission from the gods to carry out a of the living king. military action and finishes with the presentation of spoils 5 For a few instances, E.L. Ertman, “More Comments on to the gods, following (most recently) Susanna Heinz, Die New Kingdom Crown Streamers and the Gold Temple-band Feldzugsdarstellungen des Neuen Reiches (Vienna: Verlag They Held in Place,” JSSEA 23 (1993), pp. 51-55; S. Col- der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, lier, The Crowns of the Pharaohs: their Development and 2001). Significance in Ancient Egyptian Kingship (Ph.D. Disserta- 3 Such as G. Vogelsang-Eastwood, Pharaonic Egyptian tion: University of California Los Angeles, 1996). K. Goebs, Clothing (Leiden–New York–Köln: E.J. Brill, 1993), Studies “Some Cosmic Aspects of the Royal Crowns,” Proceedings of in Ancient History, p. 2. the 7th International Congress of Egyptologists, ed. C. Eyre, 4 For one example, see W.R. Johnson, “Monuments OLA 82 (Leuven: Peeters, 1998), pp. 447-60. One very useful and Monumental Art under Amenhotep III: Evolution study that examines the related attributes of a specific royal and Meaning,” Amenhotep III: Perspectives on his Reign, costume is D.C. Patch, “A ‘Lower Egyptian’ Costume: Its eds. D. O’Connor and E. Cline (Ann Arbor: University Origin, Development, and Meaning,” JARCE 32 (1995), of Michigan Press, 1998), p. 84, where he discusses the pp. 93-116. variations and significance of egyptian royal costume 51

Fig. 1. Detail of Medinet Habu Epigraphic Survey plate 121.

To date, no analysis has attempted to investi- gate comprehensively all elements of royal cos- tume to determine how they function together as a whole. There is good reason for this. Put simply, tracking thousands of variables across hundreds of scenes, and more importantly being able to actually utilize that data, would be quite impos- Fig. 2. Photograph of same showing preserved paint. sible without current technology. Even the core task of acquiring these images in the field would have been time and cost-prohibitive before the color other locations of great comparative value. recent advent of affordable, high-resolution digi- Many elements of royal costume were rendered tal photography. The questions ofwhy particular exclusively in paint and, thus, are not generally attributes were selected for certain contexts and discernible in epigraphic drawings, which do not what their specific functions have understandably always record painted details and rarely indicate not been quantifiably addressed. color (Figs. 1 and 2). The color of specific elements During the research season, my primary goal of regalia is clearly significant for this project and, was to collect high-quality color digital photo- therefore, even full black and white documenta- graphic documentation of several royal monu- tion was insufficient for my research. ments from the New Kingdom that have either not Due to the well-preserved state of his monu- been entirely published or have been published ments and their rich variety of scenes, this project only in grayscale.6 My photographic documenta- focuses on depictions of Ramses III (c. 1184-1153 tion supplements the irreplaceable work of the bce). Often called the last great pharaoh of the University of Chicago’s Oriental Institute Epi- New Kingdom, the costumes of Ramses III can be graphic Survey at many of these sites.7 For my viewed as representative amalgams of the period. project, it was not only necessary to fully pho- It is well known that he had strong affinities for tograph the painted scenes of my core monu- his eminent namesake, Ramses II, but he was also ment, Medinet Habu, but also to document in heavily influenced by Amenhotep III, as evidenced

6 For his generosity and support in Luxor, I would like Mohamed. He was a great asset to my project and I am to sincerely thank Dr. W. Raymond Johnson, director of extremely grateful to the Council for their choice. Chicago House. In Abydos, I was warmly welcomed and 7 Especially at Medinet Habu. Epigraphic Survey, Medi- greatly aided by Dr. Matthew D. Adams. In addition, I must net Habu, 8 vols. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, mention the extraordinary support given by my Supreme 1930-1970). Council of Antiquities inspector, Salah el Masekh Ahmed 52 amy calvert

Fig. 4. Detail of Ramses III wearing falcon shirt in battle.

Fig. 3. Detail of Ramses III wearing feathered back apron. by the many statues of that king found re-used at Medinet Habu.8 Much of the regalia utilized by Ramses III was also worn by his powerful predecessors of Dynasty Nineteen, while other attributes were more commonly seen in the later Eighteenth Fig. 5. Ramses III wearing a falcon shirt. Dynasty. Falcon clothing, which usually identi- fies the king with Horus or Montu, depending on the context, became particularly prominent Ramses III also wears such an attribute, in the during the Eighteenth Dynasty.9 Amenhotep III, Sokar festival at Medinet Habu (Fig. 3).12 for instance, made extensive use of falcon-garb Falcon shirts appear on many images of the at Luxor temple;10 one example being the feath- king (Figs. 4 and 5). Often seen on Dynasty Eigh- ered back apron well known from the quartzite teen kings, especially at Deir el-Bahri where there image of the king found in the Luxor Cachette.11 are a number of well-preserved relief examples,

8 As Johnson (Amenhotep III: Perspectives on his Reign, 10 Podgórski, “The Horus dress as represented in the p. 73) points out, none of the statuary found at Medinet temple of Amenhotep III in Luxor,” Studies in Ancient Art Habu appears to belong to the time of Ramses III, but and Civilization 4 (Kraków, 1992), pp. 27-31. rather seems to have originally come from monuments of 11 J838—now on display at Luxor Museum. This type Amenhotep III. of apron also appears on Thutmosis IV, in the relief scenes 9 For some discussion of falcon costume, see T. Podgór- on his chariot (Cairo CG 46097). ski, “Royal Plume Dress of XVIII Dynasty,” MDAIK 40 (1984), 12 Epigraphic Survey, Medinet Habu, pl. 223. pp. 103-121. Note that he discusses a specific ceremonial garment, not the falcon-jacket. variations and significance of egyptian royal costume 53

shirts are executed entirely in paint; with any image stripped of paint where pharaoh appears to be bare-chested, the potential exists that he was originally depicted wearing one of these attri- butes. In the tombs of his sons, Ramses III is also frequently depicted in elaborate falcon-garb (Fig. 6),15 often combined with another intrigu- ing garment—a shirt apparently made of a mate- rial known primarily from the late Eighteenth Dynasty, and most famously from Akhetaten.16 This textile, known as ‘royal red fabric,’ was par- ticularly prominent during the Amarna period and has been suggested to have strong solar con- nections.17 It appears used as an element of rega- lia, specifically as an under-kilt, in a royal tomb from the end of Dynasty Eighteen before seeming to vanish from the pictorial record.18 However, besides the numerous occurrences in QV 44 and 55, I have cataloged several additional instances where the fabric ‘reappears’ through the photo- graphic survey of Medinet Habu performed this season (Fig. 7).19 For such reasons, Ramses III was an ideal subject for this topic, since he is often portrayed wearing complex costumes displaying a combina- Fig. 6. Detail of Ramses III in QV 55 wearing red textile tion of elements which in many cases had their shirt topped by a falcon shirt. origins and/or symbolic significance grounded in the heights of New Kingdom power. this ‘falcon-jacket’ appears on blocks belong- More so than his predecessors, Ramses III faced ing to Amenhotep III that were reused at Medi- civil unrest and enemy attacks on Egypt itself. net Habu.13 These shirts certainly continued to This tangible threat may have exerted a discern- be worn by rulers of the Nineteenth Dynasty. able influence on the appearance patterns of cer- Although they may not seem to be as common tain regalia elements, particularly those that are on Seti I or Ramses II in their mortuary temples strongly apotropaic or embody the ‘rage’ of the in Thebes, this is likely due to the level of preser- divine king. Hypothetically speaking, if an attri- vation.14 With very few exceptions, these falcon bute appeared rarely under Seti I (falcon shirts

13 C. Van Siclen, “Three blocks of Amenhotep III from Nubian archers on the Dynasty Eleven wooden model of Medinet Habu,” VA 2 (1986), pp. 189-206. The scenes on Mesehti from Asyut (Cairo JE 30969) wear red loincloths the blocks show Amenhotep kneeling and receiving a series embellished with blue diamonds. of crowns from the gods. 18 Brock, JSSEA 25 (1995), p. 7. 14 There is at least one certain example of a falcon shirt 19 This fabric also appears (among numerous other at the Ramesseum, in the ished-tree scene of the hypostyle instances) as a shirt on Ramses II, layered underneath a hall. Several other images from the same temple preserve falcon shirt, on the facade of the temple of Seti I at Abydos. hints that a falcon shirt was originally depicted. Seti I wears the red fabric shirt and falcon shirts, albeit inde- 15 Such as Amun-her-hepershef (QV 55) and Kaemwa- pendently, inside the temple. There is but a single occurrence set (QV 44) where he interacts with (among others) Isis, of the pairing preserved at the temple of Ramses II at Abydos Hathor and Geb. (Figure 8). Additionally, I. Rosellini depicts the pairing in 16 Prominently appearing in the painting of the princesses his record of the reliefs from the temple of Ramses II at Abu from the King’s House now in the Ashmolean Museum, Simbel and Baltzar Cronstrand likewise shows traces of the Oxford (1983.I-41). two shirts together at Karnak, in the Great Hypostyle Hall; 17 See L.P. Brock, “The Amarna ‘Royal Red Fabric’, my thanks to Dr. Peter Brand for bringing these instances JSSEA 25 (1995), pp. 7-14. She also links the material to my attention. See I. Rosellini, I Monumenti dell’Egitto e (possibly leather) with the military, foreigners (specifi- Della Nubia, pl. 79; B. George and B. Peterson, Die Karnak- cally Syrians), and strongly suggests a connection with Zeichnungen von Baltzar Cronstrand, Medelhavsmuseet the diamond-patterned heb-sed robe. Personally, I find the Memoir 3 (Stockholm: Medelhavsmuseet, 1979), p. 21. military aspect more viable—note, for example, that the 54 amy calvert

a

Fig. 8. Ramses II wearing red textile shirt topped by a falcon shirt at his temple at Abydos. b

Fig. 7. Details of Ramses III at Medinet Habu showing preserved sections of red textile shirts. Methodology

The technical goal of this relational database will worn in battle scenes, for example) but was very be to identify attributes with the strongest cor- common on Ramses III, this might indicate that relations. Correlation (values range between –1.0 the more vulnerable the office of pharaoh became, for a perfect negative correlation to 1.0 for a per- the more the symbols of power were emphasized.20 fect positive correlation) is defined as a mutual A parallel could be made to the extreme elabo- relationship or connection between two or more ration of the regalia of Amenhotep III after his variables. Imagine finding correlations between jubilee—all designed to visually solidify the iden- weather-related variables. Although the appear- tity of the king with the solar deity.21 A concen- ance of rain and the appearance of umbrellas are tration of regalia elements connected with the connected, rain does not cause umbrellas. Neither physical and military prowess of the king under is the reverse true, which is why correlation stud- Ramses III might have served a similar purpose ies are not about cause and effect, but rather are in exemplifying the ideal pharaoh for a danger- intended to discover significant patterns and ous and chaotic time. tendencies. Negative correlation means when you

20 However, it is highly likely that there were many more 21 Johnson in Amenhotep III: Perspectives on his Reign, instances of these attributes and it is problematic to make p. 88. any historiographical arguments based on the whims of preservation. variations and significance of egyptian royal costume 55

Fig. 9. Example of high positive correlation: horns, feathers, and multiple uraei with nms.

Fig 10. Example of high negative correlation: fans and divine interaction. see one variable, you usually do not see the other portions of Ramses III’s temple to Amun at Karnak —such as how rain and sunglasses rarely appear were photographed since it has little preserved together. Such a relationship can be just as telling paint and is fully published in epigraphic form as a positive correlation. Basic correlation results and grayscale photographs.23 I photographed the from the current data set (Figs. 9 and 10) shows, mortuary temple of the king at Medinet Habu for example, that the headgear elements horns, in its entirety, except for a few inaccessible areas feathers, and multiple uraei have a high positive including the interior of the Eastern High Gate. correlation with one type of crown, the nms, while In addition to the monuments of Ramses III, it fans are shown to rarely appear inscenes where was very important for me to photograph other the king interacts with divine beings. royal monuments where color is preserved. This Instead of randomly picking scenes or blindly comparative data will be absolutely essential in choosing an element of regalia on which to focus, my study of how elements of regalia change (or by utilizing a combination of FileMaker Pro, remain the same) in function and form over a span Microsoft Excel, and SPSS, this suite of techno- of time. Of particular importance in this regard logical facilitators allows for an open, unfiltered are the Dynasty Nineteen temples of Seti I and approach. Through its powerful analytical capa- Ramses II at Abydos, both of which retain a great bilities, this custom tool will instantly identify deal of paint and preserve scene types comparable statistically significant attributes in need of fur- to those at Medinet Habu. The interior of the ther study from the pool of thousands of images temple of Seti I was photographed in its entirety and attributes. (excepting the column reliefs in the hypostyle During the season I was able to amass more halls), as was the facade and the exterior pillars. than 15,000 high-quality color digital images.22 Portions of the interior walls surrounding the two This documentation includes a full photographic courtyards were also documented, although their survey of several monuments from the reign of ruinous state, dearth of paint and existence in Ramses III, including his tomb (KV 11) and those epigraphic publication made them less essential.24 of his sons (QV 42, 43, 44, 52, and 55). Only The more destroyed but still vibrantly painted

22 Photographs were captured with a Canon EOS Digital 23 Epigraphic Survey, Reliefs and Inscriptions at Karnak Rebel XT (8-megapixel), a telephoto lens where appropriate, I: Ramses III’s Temple Within the Great Enclosure of Amon, and a polarized filter for exterior images. Where possible, a part 1 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1936), and tripod was utilized (my sincere thanks to Sandro Vannini part 2 (Chicago: University of Chicago Pres, 1936). for allowing me to borrow one of his tripods after mine was 24 A.M. Calverley and M.F. Broome, The Temple of King damaged by a tourist). Much of the painted relief at Medinet Sethos I at Abydos, 4 vols (London and Chicago: Egypt Habu was shot from atop a ladder generously loaned by Exploration Society, 1933-1958). Dr. W. Raymond Johnson of Chicago House. 56 amy calvert temple of Ramses II was completely documented, layout is the static data that stays visible regard- including the exterior walls. less of which tab is displayed. This includes the Through special permission,25 I was also able record number, the plate number and the scene to photograph relevant comparative sections of title. The top tab, ‘Pharaoh’ (Fig. 11),26 contains several other royal tombs in the Valley of the fields to track all items in direct association with Kings. These were the tombs of Merenptah (KV the king, such as all his costume attributes, his 8), Seti II (KV 15), (KV 47) and Tausret body position, the king’s actions and items held and Sethnakht (KV 14). Also greatly appreciated in his hands. I have also included a key plan with was the permission I received directly from Dr. the appropriate plate highlighted for ease of visual Zahi Hawass during his March 10 visit to the location identification. Valley. He generously allowed me to photograph For the next tab, ‘Text,’ (Fig. 12), I have sepa- in the tomb of Ramses VI (KV 9), since it contains rated some of the text into sections using struc- several well-preserved images of unusual royal tural divisions, such as marginal texts and the costumes that will be important comparanda. name block.27 However, spoken text directed at Now that the research season is completed, the king is tracked based on who is doing the the images are being used in conjunction with speaking; bound enemies calling out praise clearly the invaluable work of the Epigraphic Survey to should be recorded separately from deities who form an extensive relational database. I am build- address the king. The Text tab is for general text, ing the database with the skilled help of D. Craig names and epithets, and the speech of the king, Calvert, using a combination of FileMaker Pro, while actual interaction between the king and dei- Microsoft Excel, and SPSS. This suite of tools is ties or humans is tracked in the ‘Context’ tab. designed to track an unlimited range of points in ‘Context,’ as always, is very important each relief image, including not only all costume (Fig. 13). It contains fields related to practicali- elements but also body position, interactions, wall ties such as location, scene orientation, and relief placement, epithets, and key textual markers, to type, but more of the layout deals with the king’s name but a few. appearance and actions. The position, type, and The custom database is an absolutely essential number of fans and sunshades held in association tool for this project, and its high level of complex- with pharaoh are tracked here. Also cataloged are ity has required more than a year of development. elements that hover above the king, such as the The first stage of designing and populating the sun discs, vultures, and falcons, taken along with database for this project was an exhaustive study their textual identifiers. In addition, I am track- of the approximately 6,000 high-resolution digi- ing the many variations in the specific wording tal images of Medinet Habu acquired during my of the lines of protective text that appear behind season. During this stage, I compiled a compre- the king. hensive list of scene attributes, more than 1,600 in One of the most potentially productive lines of number. Once the list was completed, each scene questioning in terms of regalia selection is “with was marked with all of the attributes it contained. whom is the king interacting and what are they Now that the current group of data entry is com- saying to each other?” This is tracked here on pleted, analysis has begun, looking for any and the ‘Context’ tab (Fig. 14 shows a record with all correlated connections within and/or between both divine and human actors). They have been any of the scenes across the complete range of separated into Divine and Human actor groups, attributes (‘variables’). for obvious reasons. There are two main layouts now in use. One of Each actor listed in the ‘Context’ tab has a these is designed to hold all the variables in the separate dedicated layout (Figs. 15 and 16). The scene, and I have termed it my ‘Main Layout.’ actor layouts are accessed through the ‘Context’ In order to handle such an expanse of data, this tab (see Fig. 14) by clicking on the small grey is designed as a tabbed layout with each tab button at the end of the ‘actor’ field, which brings representing a different focus. Along the top of the up the layout for that individual actor. On these

25 My sincerest thanks go to Ali Ibrahim Alasfar, the 27 This phrase is used here to refer to the discrete grouping General Director of Qurna, and Dr. Mohamed Adb el Aziz, of text which includes the cartouches of the king, associated Chief Inspector of North Qurna, for allowing this access. epithets, titles, and sometimes, as in the case of the plate 26 The record for Epigraphic Survey,Medinet Habu I, in Figure 11, additional elements. pl. 19, is used in the following series of figures. variations and significance of egyptian royal costume 57

Fig. 11. Main Layout. Pharaoh tab.

Fig. 12. Main Layout. Text tab.

Fig. 13. Main Layout. Context tab. 58 amy calvert

Fig. 14. Main Layout. Context tab with both types of actors. related layouts, I can keep track of the actor’s As one can discern, this layout is extremely titles, actions, accoutrements, and their words detailed in the number and variations of the attri- to the king. In addition to the fields tracking the butes tracked. When I first showed this database individual’s (or group’s) speech, all of the actor to Adam Soran, an experienced research analyst layouts contain a text field with the entire text of who initially assisted me with the statistical side of the scene in which they appear. This is simply to this project,28 he was rather overwhelmed by the provide ease of data entry, and though duplica- sheer complexity of the data. In order to perform tive, this also allows their comments to be viewed the first level of analysis, he suggested that I pull in context. from this layout approximately 30 pointed ‘yes/ A separate layout was also necessary to deal no’ questions and analyses would begin there. with the royal chariot (Fig. 17). The ‘Chariot’ tab Clearly, use of this new layout does not ignore allows the collection of data such as the type of all the data in the full layout just discussed. This horse headdress and chariot body, the names of dichotomous approach simply allows larger pat- the royal span, and whether they are rampant or terns to be perceived in a more efficient manner not. The number and types of bow cases, quivers, while the ‘Main’ layout will be used in the second and staff-cases shown attached to the chariot of research phase to permit focused analysis of pharaoh are also tracked. greater detail. The ‘Visual’ tab (Fig. 18) allows for a number The current version of the ‘Dichotomous’ of details to be easily accessed; clicking the small layout (Fig. 19) contains 132 questions, divided button in the corner of each image brings up a up into the same general groups as the ‘Main’ full-sized version of that image. The ‘Preserva- layout: things worn by the king, objects in the tion’ tab, which is still under development, deals hand, his immediate context, textual markers, with the surviving amount of paint, percentage interactions, and scene location and type. Note and types of damage to the relief surface, such as that there are currently two basic ‘types’ of scene intentional destruction of relief during the Coptic in this layout—all relief is considered either one period and the countless grooves worn into the or the other. ‘Battle’ refers to the full sequence of walls by centuries of local inhabitants rubbing battle narrative scenes, not simply to depictions sand from the stone for ritual use. In addition, of actual battle. Scenes of hunting at Medinet this tab will record any special treatment, such Habu are also considered ‘Battle,’ due primarily as inlay or sections of relief that were originally to parallels in their placement, the king’s posture, veiled. and immediate context. ‘Ritual’ is obviously much

28 Since Mr. Soran’s return to his homeland of Turkey absolutely invaluable. My sincerest gratitude also to Justin last year, this project has been taken up by another talented Musterman and Andy Gage for their efforts. professional research analyst, Li Li Gerrard, who has been variations and significance of egyptian royal costume 59

Fig. 15. Main Layout. Divine actor screen (related to Fig. 14).

Fig. 16. Main Layout. Human actor screen (related to Fig. 14).

Fig. 17. Main Layout. Chariot tab. 60 amy calvert

Fig. 18. Main Layout. Visual tab.

Fig. 19. Dichotomous Layout. broader. This heading covers festival, offering and considerable time. Currently, I have 125 scenes ‘smiting’ scenes as well, although they are also from Medinet Habu entered in this exhaustive tracked separately. This is the layout currently manner, and the remaining pertinent reliefs will being used to calculate attribute correlations. soon join them. One of the great boons of this Organizing the thousands of photographs from second, ‘Dichotomous,’ layout is the speed with the research season and database construction which the ‘big’ questions about a scene can be took more than a year after my return from Egypt. entered. Since designing this layout in March As the reader can discern simply from glancing 2007, I have entered the ‘yes/no’ data for the same at it, entering a record in the ‘Main’ layout takes 279 scenes currently recorded in the ‘Main’ layout, variations and significance of egyptian royal costume 61 and have also answered these questions for an in ‘yes’ answers. Then we realized there was an additional 232 scenes, for a current total of 511. overlap in ‘no’ answers—location has three fun- Most of the 511 scenes (357 of the current set) damental possibilities in data entry: all scenes are are from Medinet Habu. These appear on the exte- exterior, interior, OR portal. The instances where rior walls and in the first and second courtyards the scenes were located within a portal, and thus and, thus, could conceivably have been viewed ‘No’ was the answer in both interior and exterior, by humans other than the pharaoh and temple created false connections. staff during times of festival. Of these 357 scenes, Therefore, of course, one must always look at 41 are considered ‘Battle’ scenes and 316 ‘Ritual’ the data with a trained eye. Just because a com- scenes. Since one of the foci of this dissertation is puter insists that there is a correlation does not the communicative facet of regalia, it is because mean that there is a true connection through cau- of their ‘public’ aspect that these scenes represent sality. As an example, the results of one search the main study set. showed scenes where horns and feathers appear Currently, the remaining 154 scenes are together atop the nms. There are 21 other exam- from Karnak. Specifically, these include the war ples of this combination, from a variety of con- sequences of Seti I and the reliefs from the - texts, in the complete data set, which suggests ples of Ramses III, all recorded by the Epigraphic that the connection is worth investigating. The Survey.29 These data sets are being used as com- search results for scenes with aggressive enemies paranda; one set because of subject matter and and horses appearing together, unlike the above the other due to similarity of scenes and date. combination, show that this has no likely causal I plan to continue to add further comparative relationship—it is no surprise to find horses in data of different types. For instance, including battle. Thus, for any perceived relationship, the relief from Ramses III’s tomb or those of his sons custom suite of tools allows rapid retrieval of all would provide well-preserved examples of some possible images to study and immediately inves- of the costumes appearing in Medinet Habu. tigate the viability of their connection. Karnak and Habu are fundamentally different In short, if I want to know which scenes from types of temples and it is problematic, though the entire data set have Pharaoh wearing a nms potentially interesting, to directly compare sec- and a beard while facing right, it takes no more tions of them. However, by adding relief from time using this suite than it would take to use the other royal mortuary temples such as the Seti an internet search engine like Google (Figs. 20 I temple at Gurna, the Ramesseum, and Hatshep- and 21). sut’s temple at Deir el-Bahri, comparisons of their While waiting for advanced statistical analy- iconographic programs may elucidate details that ses to be carried out by the professional analyst, shift in usage or meaning over time. I have been working with the data set directly in After months of data entry, a basic paired corre- FileMaker and have noticed a number of inter- lation analysis was performed on all records from esting attribute patterns (Table 1). For instance, Medinet Habu, as well as an additional analysis of the 85 occurrences of the nms in the Medinet on the entire data set, comprised of all recorded Habu set, only two appear on the exterior of the scenes from Medinet Habu and Karnak. temple, and both of these are on the main portal. We serendipitously discovered that the suite of A sole nms appears in one of the battle narra- tools also provided solid error checking abilities. tive scenes; that of the king’s presentation of Sea For example, a slip of the wrist at the end of a long Peoples to Amun and Mut located on the east day of entry, which dropped a ‘Yes’ instead of a face of the second pylon. It is likewise the only ‘No’ in one field, was immediately caught when nms appearing at any point in a battle sequence a correlation analysis was run. Another odd rela- in the entire current data set.30 tionship that confounded us for a few days was a Another suggestive pattern is related to the .76 correlation between variables that should have apron, or sporran, of the king. Of the 375 Habu been total opposites—interior and exterior. We records, in 290 of them he wears one of two basic searched the data set, but there was no overlap types of apron; these I have grouped into ‘multi’

29 Epigraphic Survey, Reliefs and Inscriptions at Karnak and is balanced on the north tower by an inscription of year IV: The Battle Reliefs of King Sety ,I (Chicago: University 8 (Epigraphic Survey, Medinet Habu I, pl. 46), where the of Chicago Press, 1986). event is recorded. The presentation of spoil to 30 This scene appears on the south tower of the pylon the gods provides a visual completion of the sequence. 62 amy calvert

Fig. 20. Search for images of the king wearing selected attributes.

Fig. 21. Results of search. and ‘flanking,’ referring to the number and place- It is important to point out that, to date, only ment of the uraei (Figs. 22 and 23). Of the 290 the most basic of analyses have been applied to found, 54 were ‘multi,’ with 20 of those being the data set. The suggestive patterns noted above ‘Battle’ and 34 ‘Ritual.’ In contrast, the remaining are likely but a hint of what lies hidden in the 236 ‘flanking’ were primarily ‘Ritual’, with only visual record. Currently, this dissertation project 9 examples appearing in ‘Battle’ scenes. Another is focused on continued analyses of the current search of the entire data set brought out that the Medinet Habu data set. In early fall, advanced ‘multi’ apron never occurs with any of the crowns analyses began for selected potentially signifi- related to , , or the uni- cant attribute correlations. To date, several factor fied lands (the t, dšrt, or smty), but appears in analyses have been performed which demon- 26 of its 54 occurrences at Habu with the prš. strate succinct groupings of related attributes. variations and significance of egyptian royal costume 63

Fig. 22. Example of a ‘multi’ apron. Fig. 23. Example of a ‘flanking’ apron.

Table 1. Initial results from database searches of Medinet These analyses are in turn leading to other, more Habu set. intensive search methods which will include: covariance, cluster analysis, and multiple logis- tical regression. As analyses progress, additional questions inevitably emerge. When this occurs, changes can be made to the database layouts to track the new attribute—compare, for example, the first and most recent versions of the ‘Dichoto- mous’ layout (Figs. 24 and 19). With each addition or change, of course, new analyses must be run. The final product of this dissertation will likely be a thorough study of one set of correlated attributes with high statistical significance. However, this research will continue long after the dissertation is completed. I plan to constantly expand the database, focusing first on temples from the late New Kingdom, but I expect to eventually include royal images in funerary art and also those captured in sculpture and other media. It is my (decidedly) long-term goal to use this database to capture and analyze royal depictions from all periods of ancient Egypt. Many elements of royal regalia appeared at the very inception of Egyptian civilization.31 By means

31 Clearly evidenced by the palette (Cairo JE 32169), to name just one example. 64 amy calvert

Fig. 24. Early version of the Dichotomous Layout. of such a thorough study, larger patterns of attri- picture of the public image of pharaoh may be bute usage related to Egypt’s relative strength at achieved. Unlike the mortuary cult reliefs or those the time, her interconnections or interactions of the temple proper, where the king interacts with foreign powers, or even the individual desires only with the divine, the scenes in the main data of pharaoh may become evident. set portray pharaoh also surrounded by a human It is my intention to make this project fully audience. The enemies of Egypt who flee in terror digital, web-based, and permitting user interac- at his appearance and the people of Egypt who tion with the database—allowing others to inves- rejoice at it both do so in response to the dazz ling tigate for deeper levels of correlation in line with and intentionally created image of divine king- their own research interests. In addition, I hope ship in their midst. that this project will provide a framework for By delving into this topic through the use of future interdisciplinary studies. Far from being this newly assembled corpus of images and by purely Egyptological, the model developed here analyzing these data with such powerful analytical can easily be adapted for any study of any image tools, a greater comprehension of the various roles or group of images from any time period. of the ruler, and of kingship itself, in ancient Egypt Different ensembles of regalia were necessary may be achieved. Through this study we should to support the king in different roles, to provide a gain further insight into not only the selections physical embodiment of his myriad royal powers, made to design such an image of pharaoh, but and clearly communicate that information to the also the reasons behind the choices. By adding deities and people who interact with him, while to our understanding of the purpose of the indi- simultaneously protecting him from malevolent vidual elements of royal regalia, we will develop forces. Through this examination of the variations an enhanced perception with which to view depic- of the king’s regalia in what could be considered tions of pharaoh. publicly accessible wall reliefs, a more complete architectural and iconographic conundra in the tomb of kheruef 65

THE LONG COREGENCY REVISITED: ARCHITECTURAL AND ICONOGRAPHIC CONUNDRA IN THE TOMB OF KHERUEF*

Peter F. Dorman Oriental Institute, University of Chicago

A generation of young scholars has been intro- of Kheruef (TT 192) has never been considered duced to the complex issue of Egyptian coregen- to be the primary crux in the coregency contro- cies through Bill Murnane’s seminal dissertation versy, but just one of a myriad pieces of evidence, on the topic, published by the Oriental Institute thus far more or less inconclusive, brought forth in 1977. Of all the coregencies discussed by Mur- to support or refute the possibility of joint rule.1 nane, none has been debated with more passion Each of these fragments of the coregency puzzle than the one alleged between Amenhotep III tends to turn on a single question of interpreta- and his son. The long coregency of ten or eleven tion, whether it be a reading of a regnal year, the years is far more than a chronological quibble: juxtaposition of cartouches, or the significance of it has serious implications for the structure of the presence, attire, or pose of various royal fig- royal administration, the determination of foreign ures. Those readers familiar with the situation of relations, the management of economic resources, Kheruef’s tomb in the coregency debate, however, the promulgation of art styles, the coexistence will recall the unusually rich variety of criteria of apparently conflicting religious cults, and the offered by TT 192: to wit, the portrayals of both reconstruction of the genealogy of the royal family kings as well as Queen in various parts of the at the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty. This pres- unfinished wall reliefs, the intact preservation of ent revisitation of a subject that Bill Murnane the early name of Amenhotep IV, and the depic- himself addressed several times is affectionately tion of certain dated events in two of the historic dedicated to his memory, in admiration of his jubilees celebrated by the elder king. This fortu- scholarship and out of gratitude for his unfailing itous combination of personalities and criteria personal generosity—and with the hope that he should, at first glance, serve to delimit certain dat- would have found the argument of interest. able parameters pertaining to the reigns of Amen- hotep III and Akhenaton, according to which the phenomenon of joint rule might be persua- The Tomb of Kheruef in the Coregency Debate sively demonstrated or definitively denied. Such has not proved to be the case: scholars on both Long one of the bones of contention around sides of the argument have happily embraced the which the coregency debate has swirled, the tomb tomb of Kheruef to promote their own opinions

* This article is partly based on presentations given, in of Egypt: Seven Studies (Toronto: University of Toronto, different versions, in Tucson, Arizona (annual meeting of 1967), pp. 88-169; W. Murnane, Ancient Egyptian Coregen- the American Research Center in Egypt), and Grenoble (9th cies, SAOC 40 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), International Congress of Egyptology) in 2004. The author pp. 123-69, 231-33; Giles, Amarna Age: Egypt, pp. 25-137; is grateful to Professor Edward Wente, one of the members and M. Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, Collection of the epigraphic team to have documented TT 192, who de l’Institut d’Archéologie et d’Histoire de l’Antiquité, vol. read a draft of the article and made a number of thoughtful 3 (Paris: Université Lumière-Lyon 2, 1998), pp. 62-98. The observations that have been incorporated here. debate on these points cannot be addressed in full here. 1 Certain pieces of evidence have been deemed more Two more criteria, brought into play recently, include a diagnostic or pertinent than others, but most have ultimately graffito found at Dahshur (see J. Allen, “Further Evidence been judged inconclusive, like the tomb of Kheruef. Even for the Coregency of Amenhotep III and IV?” GM 140 the general amalgam of ambiguous data has been proposed [1994], pp. 7-8; and J. Allen, W. Murnane, and J. van Dijk, as persuasive in itself; see F. Giles, The Amarna Age: Egypt, “Further Evidence for the Coregency of Amenhotep III and Australian Center for Egyptology Studies 6 (Warminster: IV? Three Views on a Graffito Found at Dahshur,”Amarna Aris and Phillips, 2001), pp. 55, 81, 252. The essential points Letters 3 [1994], pp. 26-31, and especially p. 152), and a boat of evidence have long been known and have been treated by scene from the tomb of Maya at Amarna (Giles, Amarna D. Redford, History and Chronology of the Eighteenth Dynasty Age: Egypt, pp. 78-79). 66 peter f. dorman

Fig. 1. Plan and section of the tomb of Kheruef. From Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pl. 3. while rarely convincing those whose views differ. the burial apartments, which were carved at much The purpose of this article is not to revisit the deeper levels. Few of these areas ever received entire question of the coregency, but only to exam- their decoration before the tomb was abandoned: ine the problem in light of the limited evidence only the entrance doorway and its passageway; the incorporated in the tomb of Kheruef, through a walls of the western portico and its doorway and chronological assessment that employs the dei- reveals; and two of the pillars of the columned fication iconography of Amenhotep III2—which hall, carved with vertical offering texts. adds a useful new dimension to the material from The most convenient starting point for Kheruef’s TT 192—the development of the didactic proto- tomb as it impinges on the coregency question is col of Ra-Horakhty-Aton, and the architecture the masterful chapter by Donald Redford, who of the tomb itself. critiqued previous commentary on the tomb and Even for the reign of Amenhotep III, the tomb presented a host of insightful observations, even is both impressive and unusual in its layout at a time when the full publication of the monu- (Fig. 1). Carved into the floor of the Asasif valley, ment was not yet available.3 At the time Redford Kheruef’s monument is approached by a ramp was writing, two arguments using the tomb of descending into the earth and terminating in a Kheruef had been brought forth to support a long doorway that gives access, by means of a short coregency. The first argument centered on a badly passageway, to a large open court measuring damaged relief carved into the south wall of the approximately 24 meters square and carved 5.5 short passageway just inside the entrance door of meters below ground level. The court was to have the tomb, showing Amenhotep IV pouring a liba- been provided with columns on all sides, but these tion onto an offering stand before the figures of were only finished to varying degrees before the Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye, and on the ques- tomb was abandoned. At the center of the western tion of whether all three persons were living at the portico, a second doorway leads into a pillared time the wall was decorated (Fig. 2). While sev- hall, then into an axial chamber and finally into eral earlier scholars had considered this grouping

2 For these iconographic traits, see below, with note publication of the tomb appeared twelve years later: the 19. Epigraphic Survey, The Tomb of Kheruef: Theban Tomb 192, 3 Redford, History and Chronology, pp. 113-17; the OIP 102 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980). architectural and iconographic conundra in the tomb of kheruef 67

Fig. 2. Amenhotep IV offers a libation to his parents. From Epigraphic Survey,Kheruef , pl. 13. to be purely a posthumous hommage, Fairman observed that the entire passageway of the tomb— believed that Amenhotep III was depicted as both including the adjacent depiction of Amenhotep alive and deified, and that the scene in Kheruef IV reciting a hymn to the rising sun—is devoted might be compared to reliefs at the Temple of to a context that is “timeless,” without reference Soleb in which Amenhotep IV makes offering to to historical reality. But even more, “the essence his still-living father, Nebmaatre, Lord of Nubia.4 of the offering ritual precludes that the recipient On the other hand, Redford maintained that the should be a living person.”5 costume, royal insignia, and the lack of a ped- The second argument hinged on the progress estal in the Kheruef scene are typical of similar of tomb decoration, carefully set forth by Cyril representations of the deified Amenhotep I, and Aldred.6 It has long been recognized that the

4 H.W. Fairman, “The Inscriptions,” in The City of Akhen- we shall proceed on the basis of other criteria. aten, vol. 3, EEM 44, ed. J.S. Pendlebury (London: Egypt 6 C. Aldred, Akhenaton, Pharaoh of Egypt: A New Study Exploration Society, 1951), pp. 155-56. The damage to the (London: Thames and Hudson, 1968), pp. 107-09. Simi- scene was sufficient at the time to lead Fairman to describe lar reasoning was put forward by F. Giles in his Ikhnaton: the figure of Amenhotep III as “seated,” when in fact all Legend and History (London: Hutchinson, 1970), pp. 80-81, three figures are standing. See also the remarks, supportive apparently following an independent train of thought, since of Fairman’s view, of C. Aldred, Akhenaten, King of Egypt he does not cite Aldred’s slightly earlier work. In his later (London: Thames and Hudson, 1988), pp. 174-75. study, Akhenaten, King of Egypt, Aldred does not discuss 5 Redford, History and Chronology, p. 116. The debate the reliefs of Kheruef in depth (see p. 92), stating simply over whether Amenhotep III was alive or dead when the that “their sequence and completeness are problematical” scene was carved is only peripheral to the concerns of the (p. 163). present article: regardless of the validity of this observation, 68 peter f. dorman decoration of Theban tombs was normally initi- painted, but that inside the passageway only the ated before the excavation had been completed, acrostic hymn had received its pigment, perhaps with the draftsmen and painters set to work in the “because of the extremely delicately incised relief outer portions of the tomb before the stonemasons of the inner wall containing the scene of Amen- within had fully achieved their task of quarrying hotep IV offering to his parents.”11 Nor did he out the deepest extremities. If the same sequence entirely discount the east-to-west progression of holds true for TT 192, one would expect that the construction. Wente further noted that one of entrance of the tomb was the first section exca- Kheruef’s titles, “Steward of the Estate of Amun,” vated and decorated, with the western side of the appears only in the pillared hall beyond the west- court following only later. Aldred remarked that ern portico, implying that it may have been an when the entrance was adorned Amenhotep IV office conferred on him later in life, and that its had already been crowned, but the historical first occurrence only relatively deep within the tomb and third jubilees of Amenhotep III are depicted might reflect a chronological datum for tomb 12 only further inside, in the western portico of the construction. open court.7 He was thus led to conclude that the William Murnane’s later analysis of the work in distribution of these scenes demonstrate that the Kheruef, in his monograph on Egyptian coregen- son was already on the throne of Egypt, as a junior cies, conceded that it is possible that the progress coregent, even before his father’s jubilee of year of the decoration flowed from east to west, but if 30 and thus before the death of Amenhotep III, so, there must have been a significant chronologi- cal gap between the entrance doorway—which necessitating a long coregency. In responding to represents some of the earliest relief work exe- these arguments, Redford noted that Kheruef’s cuted under Amenhotep IV—and the western tomb exhibits a number of anomalies in terms of side of the open court, “since the portico is all its construction: not only does the carved deco- of a piece and the events of the third jubilee are ration appear limited to the entrance areas and portrayed there.”13 Murnane estimated this lapse the western portico, but work seems to have been of time at “about ten years,” but did not otherwise abandoned in all parts of the tomb at once. And believe the evidence to compel a decision either since these areas had received their final painted for or against a coregency. coats—at least in part—he asserted that the drafts- In The Amarna Age: Egypt, Frederick J. Giles men and stonecutters had not conformed to the has recently returned to the substance of Aldred’s expected progression of work exhibited in other (and his own) earlier position, reasserting that Theban tombs (that is, east-to-west), but had “the scenes of the first and third jubilees, dated been engaged in both inner and outer areas at to Amenhotep’s Year 30 and 37 respectively, are the same time.8 within the tomb on the western wall of the fore- In a review of Redford’s book,9 Edward Wente court, and therefore probably to be dated later professed himself “not quite prepared to endorse than the scenes of Ikhnaton on the façade.”14 He Redford’s statement regarding the sequence of quotes extensively from Wente’s careful remarks its decoration,”10 and provided a more nuanced on the carving and painting of the Kheruef reliefs, description of the state of the tomb decoration. which, although useful as clarification, in point Specifically, he noted that the southern wing of the of fact skirt the fundamental question of whether western portico (where the first jubilee is depicted) work in the tomb flowed strictly from east to is architecturally less advanced than the entrance west. Giles does accede to Murnane’s deductions doorway and that the carving of the southern- concerning a time lag before the jubilee scenes most reliefs was never completely finished; by were carved, with one caveat: “the intervening comparison, the northern wing (third jubilee) period was long or short depending on whether had been brought to completion and the upper the scenes in the first court were executed in portions painted as well. Wente also pointed out one group, in or after Regnal Year 37, or in two that the entrance doorway had been carved and groups, the first after Year 30, and the second

7 Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pls. 24 and 47. 12 For a cautionary remark, see C. Nims, in Epigraphic 8 Redford, History and Chronology, pp. 116-17. Survey, Kheruef, p. 15, n. 52. 9 E. Wente, “review of History and Chronology of the 13 Murnane, Coregencies, p. 149, with n. 192, which Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt: Seven Studies, by Donald Red- indicates the concurrence of Charles Nims, field director ford,” JNES 28 (1969), pp. 273-80. of the Epigraphic Survey during the years Kheruef was being 10 Ibid., p. 275. recorded; see further below. 11 Ibid. 14 Giles, Amarna Age: Egypt, p. 111. architectural and iconographic conundra in the tomb of kheruef 69 group in Amenhotep III’s last year.”15 Thus, he judge from the relatively voluminous documenta- leaves open the question of whether each of the tion from each of these celebrations: from 4 pr.t jubilee scenes was cut at the time the celebra- 26 of one regnal year to 3 šmw 2 in the succeeding tions were respectively observed. If this question year, or sixty-seven days for each jubilee.16 Within is answered in the affirmative, however, it greatly this span of time fell the anniversary of the king’s complicates the interpretation of the quarrying accession, probably on 2 šmw 1.17 The highest of the court and preparation of the portico: are attested date of Amenhotep III is a jar docket we to understand that the southern wing of the from Malkata: sb.t 38 sw.w 5 ry.w-rnp.t msw.t portico was decorated with the portrayal of the Wsἰr, one of the two epagomenal days mentioned first jubilee seven years before the northern wing in the palace corpus, which occurred only three was carved with scenes of the third jubilee? Why months into the king’s 38th year.18 then was it left (as Wente noted) “architectur- Another vital chronological characteristic has ally at a less advanced stage” than the northern been developed in a series of seminal articles by wing, and its reliefs never painted? Are we then W. Raymond Johnson on the progression of to assign the decoration of the central doorway royal art styles and the deification iconography of the portico to a time part way between years of Amenhotep III.19 Johnson has characterized 30 and 37, or closer to the former date? the style of the third decade of the king’s reign as “mature naturalism,” basing his observations on certain relief blocks extant from the king’s mortu- A Timeline for the Supposed Long Coregency ary temple at Kom el-Heitan on the west bank at Luxor—in particular the Ptah-Sokar-Osiris com- Let us accept for a moment the premise of a long plex—and from the sun court at Luxor Temple.20 coregency. To illustrate how the decoration of the This phase, indicated on the timeline as “natural- tomb of Kheruef might be fit into the chronologi- istic,” is distinguished by a more relaxed, softer cal limits of such a scheme, a diagram may be formality, of which the hallmark is light-raised created with four correlative timelines that com- and light-sunk relief, with emphasis on a more pare the reigns of the assumed coregents against detailed rendering of the ear. the tomb of Kheruef itself (Fig. 3). The uppermost According to Johnson’s studies, “mature line represents the recurring cycle of the civil year naturalism” ends with the first jubilee, when against which all other dates are entered, with 1 the final, “baroque,” phase asserts itself for the A.t 1 marked by a star and the seasons following remainder of the reign. The new royal style is in a purely schematic fashion. characterized by very high, rounded relief.21 In The second timeline shows the reign of Amen- both three-dimensional sculpture and relief, the hotep III from years 26 onward, with his three hallmark is “exaggerated youthfulness,” with the jubilees prominently noted, as well as his highest king’s face almost orb-like, the eyes overlarge, attested year date. As Charles Van Siclen III has the nose made smaller and the lips enlarged. shown, each of the three jubilees of the elder king At the same time, the royal insignia are infused took place over the identical range of dates, to with solar symbolism implying the deification of

15 Ibid., p. 115. and Intentions,” in The Art of Amenhotep III: Art Historical 16 C. Van Siclen III, “The Accession Date of Amenhotep Analysis, ed. L.M. Berman (Cleveland: Cleveland Museum III and the Jubilee,” JNES 32 (1973), pp. 290-300. of Art, 1990), pp. 26-46. An expanded scheme, with four 17 Ibid., pp. 294-96. J. von Beckerath, Chronologie des phases that largely correspond to each of the decades of the pharaonischen Ägypten. MÄS 46 (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, king’s reign, is presented in idem, “The Deified Amenhotep 1997), p. 201, chooses the option of early 3 šmw (“Anfang III as the Living Re-Horakhty: Stylistic and Iconographic XI”), just a month later, which does not materially affect Considerations,” in Atti del Sesto Congresso Internazionale the arguments here. di Egittologia, vol. 2, ed. Silvio Curto et al. (Turin: So cietà 18 W. Hayes, “Inscriptions from the Palace of Amenhotep Italiana per il Gas p.A., 1993), pp. 231-36; and idem, “Monu- III,” JNES 10 (1951), pp. 35-40, Fig. 11, no. 143. Jar label ments and Monumental Art under Amenhotep III: Evolution 143A, presumptively year 38 but missing its year date, men- and Meaning,” in Amenhotep III: Perspectives on his Reign, tions msw.t r. Von Beckerath, Chronologie, pp. 110 and eds. D. O’Connor and E. Cline (Ann Arbor: University of 201, assigns the month 2 pr.t as the highest approximate Michigan, 1998), pp. 80-85. date within year 38, to account for the fact that jar label 62 20 For other relief monuments to be placed in this (Hayes, JNES 10, Fig. 7) refers to new wine of “year 38,” category, see Johnson, “Deified Amenhotep III,” n. 7 on which must have been harvested in mid-summer. pp. 233-34. 19 The initial study, which outlines three major phases, is 21 For a range of examples, see ibid., n. 9 on p. 234. W.R. Johnson, “Images of Amenhotep III in Thebes: Styles 70 peter f. dorman

Fig. 3. Schematic timeline for a hypothetical long coregency between Amenhotep III and Akhenaton.

Amenhotep III: the king’s sporran is often adorned gency does not offer an indefinite sliding scale of with multiple serpents and, on occasion, a possibilities, but only one in which the accession leopard skin; the sashes of the kilt are tied with anniversaries of Akhenaton fall halfway through an elaborate double loop, and pendant stream- the regnal years of his father; accordingly, they can ers are tipped with papyrus or sedge umbels; and only be adjusted (to the right or left) by whole- a shebyu collar often adorns the royal neck. On year increments. One relatively early datum is a the timeline, the “baroque” phase extends from series of graffiti in the Wadi Hammamat referring the first jubilee until the end of Amenhotep III’s to a quarrying expedition undertaken under the reign.22 auspices of the High Priest of Amun May, dated The major chronological points of Akhenaton’s to year 4, 3 A.t 11, implying at least an outward reign are shown in the lowermost timeline. His tolerance of the chief god of Karnak.24 The date accession fell within the very narrow range of 1 at which the younger king changed his name to pr.t 1-8,23 situating this event almost exactly six Akhenaton is of special note: the alteration took months distant from the accession day of his father place in his 5th regnal year, between the 19th in terms of the calendar year. In other words, the day of 3 pr.t, the date of a letter in which the correlation of the two reigns in any proposed core- steward Apy addresses the king according to his

22 In a more recent commentary, Johnson (in “The Setting: of the University of Chicago, 1976), pp. 163-67; and History, Religion, and Art,” in Pharaohs of the Sun: Akhen- W. Murnane and C. Van Siclen III, The Boundary Stelae aten, Nefertiti, Tutankhamun, eds. R. Freed, Y. Markowitz, of Akhenaten (London and New York: Kegan Paul Interna- and S. D’Auria [Boston, New York and London: Bulfinch/ tional, 1993), pp. 149-55. See also von Beckerath, Chronologie, Little, Brown and Co., 1999], pp. 46-47) observes that the pp. 111, 201; and Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, final decade is further distinguished by a variety of other pp. 14-16, who asserts a preference for 1 pr.t 2. styles as well: “the youthful ‘deification style’ of Amenho- 24 For the two primary graffiti, see G. Goyon, Nou- tep III’s last decade existed side by side with statuary and velles inscriptions rupestres du Wadi Hammamat (Paris: relief work carved in a totally different style, that of the Libraire d’Amérique et d’Orient Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1957), Old Kingdom private sculpture,” noting also the influence pp. 106-07, pls. 25 and 31; and W. Murnane, Texts from of statuary of the late Middle Kingdom (Sesostris III and the Amarna Period in Egypt, Society of Biblical Literature. Amenemhat III) on sculpture of Amenhotep III and opining Writings from the Ancient World 5 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, that many of the known examples originated at Amarna 1995), pp. 68 and 248. rather than the Theban area. 25 For the letter (pGurob 1.1 and 1.2), which also invokes 23 W. Murnane, “On the Accession Date of Akhenaton,” the protection of Ptah on pharaoh, see ibid., pp. 50-51 and in Studies in Honor of George R. Hughes, eds. J.H. Johnson 247. and E.F. Wente, SAOC 39 (Chicago: The Oriental Institute architectural and iconographic conundra in the tomb of kheruef 71 birth name,25 and the 13th day of 4 pr.t, the date gency that begins in the elder king’s year 28 (year of the “ earlier proclamation” on the boundary 1 of Amenhotep IV) and ends in year 39 (year 11 stelae at Amarna, where “Akhenaton” appears of Akhenaton [sic]).29 Although Aldred’s theory for the first time26—a span of only 24 days. The that the Aton itself celebrated three historic jubi- boundary stelae also furnish three other dates (in lees synchronized with those of the elder king has years 6 and 8), and the reception of foreign trib- not been widely embraced, other grounds have ute, shown in the Amarna tombs of Huya and been found to reinvigorate this suggested syn- Meryra II, bears the notation “regnal year 12, 2 chronism. Johnson has noted close and convinc- pr.t 8,” in juxtaposition with the later didactic ing similarities between the “mature realism” of name of the Aton.27 Amenhotep III’s third decade and the restrained Other events may be more loosely positioned relief carving of the Ra-Horakhty sanctuary at within the early years of Amenhotep IV. One is Karnak.30 Not only would the first appearance the construction of the sandstone Ra-Horakhty of the Aton (year 2 of Amenhotep IV in such a structure at Karnak, where the Aton is still por- scheme) coincide nicely with the elder king’s first trayed as a falcon-headed anthropomorphic deity jubilee, but the death of Amenhotep III, probably and his early didactic name is written without in year 39, would correspond neatly to a restored cartouches; though not precisely dated, this shrine docket of year [1]2 on Amarna letter EA 27, which must have been under construction in the younger (it has been claimed) contains a reference to a king’s first years.28 royal funeral.31 The death of Amenhotep III has The lengthy overlap between the two king’s also been linked to the onset of the proscription reigns shown in Fig. 3 is essentially predicated on of Amun in year 12.32 the observations of Aldred, who suggested that the It is unlikely, however, that the earliest appear- three jubilees of Amenhotep III might be closely ance of the Aton as a rayed solar disk can be matched with the changes in the didactic name set as early as year 2. As Jean-Luc Chappaz has and epithets of the Aton, resulting in a long core- shown, the Aton’s new iconic form is inextricably

26 Murnane and Van Siclen, Boundary Stelae, pp. 11- the Aton itself, and that this syncretism lies at the very heart 68. of a proper understanding of the Aton religion. For these 27 For Meryra II: N. de Garis Davies, The Rock Tombs of views, see Johnson, “Images of Amenhotep III,” pp. 43-45; El Amarna, Part II, ASE 14 (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, idem, “Monuments and Monumental Art,” pp. 91-93; and Trübner and Co., 1905), pl. 38; for Huya: idem, The Rock idem, “The Deified Amenhotep III,” pp. 232-33. Tombs of El Amarna, Part III, ASE 15 (London: Kegan Paul, 31 Proponents of the long coregency uniformly support Trench, Trübner and Co., 1905), pl. 13. The hieratic docket this double synchronism with the reign of Amenhotep III on Amarna letter EA 27 is not shown on this timeline; none- in years 2 and 12; see, for example, Aldred, Akhenaten, theless, it is one of the essential chronological anchors that King of Egypt, pp. 169-82; W.R. Johnson, “Amenhotep III have been used to justify a long coregency of at least eleven and Amarna: Some New Considerations,” JEA 82 (1996), years. For a recent examination of the tablet and its docket, pp. 81-82; idem, “Images of Amenhotep III,” p. 43; Giles, advocating a reading of “year 2,” see W. Fritz, “Bemerkungen Amarna Age: Egypt, p. 136; and C. Vandersleyen, L’Égypte zur Datierungsvermerk auf der Amarnatafel Kn. 27,” SAK et la vallée du Nil, tome 2, De la fin de l’Ancien Empire à 18 (1991), pp. 207-14; for a rebuttal (unpersuasive, in the la fin du Nouvel Empire, Nouvelle Clio (Paris: Presses uni- opinion of this writer) and reading of year 12, see Giles, versitaires de France, 1995), pp. 402-07. For EA 27, see n. Amarna Age: Egypt, pp. 30-34. The docket was added in 1 27, above. The internal reference in EA 27 to a “festival of pr.t, but unfortunately the day is lost; it could have been mourning,” however, was already cast into doubt by Mur- written either during the very first days of regnal year [1]2 nane, Coregencies, pp. 124-25; and see now W. Moran, The or during the very last. See also n. 31, below. Amarna Letters (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 28 For the Ra-Horakhty temple, see J.-L. Chappaz, “Le 1992), pp. 89-90, with n. 19, who disavows any connection premier édifice d’Aménophis IV à Karnak,” BSEG 8 (1983), of the “kimru-feast” with the funeral of Amenhotep III. pp. 13-45. 32 For this historical reconstruction, see Johnson, “Images 29 C. Aldred, “The Beginning of the El-Amarna Period,” of Amenhotep III,” pp. 45-46; idem, “Monuments and Monu- JEA 45 (1959), pp. 19-33. The numbers cited are Aldred’s; in mental Art,” p. 93 with n. 171; and idem, “The Setting: fact, Akhenaton’s year 11 would have begun in his father’s History, Religion, and Art,” pp. 47-48. For the persecution year 38. The long coregency is often referred to as eleven or of Amun, see below. twelve years long, but there is no reason for such imprecision: 33 There is no example of the name of the solar disk one can be quite definite about the chronological options employed without cartouches. On the other hand, Chappaz, available. Note that the schematic timeline in Fig. 3 shows BSEG 8 (1983), pp. 18, 33-34, cites five examples in the Ra- the reign of Amenhotep IV beginning in year 27 of his Horakhty temple at Karnak in which the cartouches of the father, not year 28, for reasons expounded below. anthropomorphic god were added later; in these cases, the 30 Johnson has proposed that the appearance of the Aton (original) raised relief was shaved down and the didactic as a sun disk—just prior to, or exactly coincident with, the name merely incised, this time within cartouches. Gabolde, first jubilee of Amenhotep III—contains crucial theological D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, n. 202 on p. 26, also notes, overtones, equating the elder (and newly deified) king with “l’apparition des cartouches autour du protocole d’Aton 72 peter f. dorman linked to its didactic name framed in cartouches.33 With the completion of these elements of the The time span for the setting of Aton’s protocol entrance, work on the decoration of Kheruef’s within cartouches seems to be provided by two tomb must have been brought to a halt for over six pieces of linen that were entwined around divine years. Those advocating a long coregency would statues found in the tomb of Tutankhamun. One hold that the great courtyard was in the process linen wrapping displays the didactic name with- of excavation during this period, as well as the out cartouches in conjunction with the notation rooms beyond; the construction of the tomb is “year 3,” and the second shows the name inside further addressed below. cartouches along with the date “year 4, 2 šmw.”34 The second phase of decoration in Kheruef’s In order for the first appearance of the rayed disk tomb would have been initiated after the third to correlate with the first jubilee of Amenhotep jubilee of Amenhotep III (and in the 11th year of III, the junior king would have had to ascend the his son), according to the long coregency scheme, throne no later than the middle of his father’s and it is of uncertain duration. The carving of 27th regnal year, as shown in the present time- the scenes could scarcely have begun prior to the line, not his 28th.35 completion of the third jubilee (unless the reliefs Placed between these concurrent reigns, the are to be considered anticipatory). Realistically, decoration of Kheruef’s tomb occupies two the creation of the third jubilee reliefs can scarcely restricted spans of time, as Murnane pointed out. be made to fit into the reign of Amenhotep III at The lintel of the entrance doorway to the tomb all. Since his highest known day date falls barely bears the figure of Amenhotep IV accompanied three months after the completion of the third by his mother, Tiye, in paired offering scenes jubilee, it is entirely possible that these reliefs were in which the king offers wine to Ra-Horakhty carved only following the king’s death. and Maat, “daughter of Ra,” on the left side, and Work on the tomb was apparently terminated incense to Atum and the “chieftainess of Thebes” after a catastrophic collapse that forestalled fur- on the right (Fig. 4). The passage just within the ther carving or repair, a least in the innermost doorway bears the well known scenes of Amen- rooms.36 Two of the pillars in the columned hall hotep IV offering a libation to his parents (Fig. 2) closest to the central door, however, received and reciting an acrostic hymn addressed to Ra- their dedication texts before the roof fell in, and Horakhty and Amun. The iconography evident a fragment from the top of one of the pillars still on the figure of Amenhotep III—who wears a contains the intact name of Amun, here actually leopard skin and broad streamers on his sporran, compounded with the name of Ra-Horakhty.37 and is referred to only by his prenomen, Neb- As it was not defaced during the Atonist pro- maatre—is typical of the solar insignia added to scription, the name provides a clue that, even in his costume only after his deification during the the scheme of the long coregency, the collapse first jubilee. The entrance doorway and passage, of the columned hall must have preceded the therefore, must have been carved at some point desecration of the figure and name of Amun by after the first jubilee but before Amenhotep IV Akhenaton. On our theoretical time line, the per- changed his name: at most a period of less than secution of Amun is generously indicated at year two years. 13, allowing for approximately two years for the decoration of the western portico and its adjacent spaces.38 a, en fait, précédé de très peu la nouvelle iconographie du of the coregency is correlated to Amenhotep IV’s year 2 dieu d’Amenhotep IV,” and cites two other monuments rather than year 3, each construction phase of the tomb on which the hieracocephalic Ra-Horakhty displays his would be expanded by a year, and the hiatus between them didactic name inside cartouches. lessened by a year. 34 These pieces of linen (JE 62705 and JE 62703, respec- 36 Nims, in Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, p. 15. tively) were first noted by D. Redford (“The Sun-Disc in 37 Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pl. 80F. Numerous men- Akhenaten’s Program: Its Worship and Antecedents, I,” tions of Kheruef’s title as ἰmy-r pr m pr-ἰmn, with “Amun” JARCE 13 [1976], p. 55) as pertinent to this question. See left intact, occur on the column fragments as well. now Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 27 with 38 It seems clear that the name and figure of Kheruef n. 211, citing H. Beinlich and M. Saleh, Corpus der hiero- were attacked sometime during the reign of Akhenaton, but glyphischen Inschriften aus dem Grab des Tutanchamun only after the accumulation of debris that helped to preserve (Oxford: Griffith Institute, 1989), pp. 131 (Carter 281a) a least one of his depictions in the lowermost register of the and 133 (Carter 291a). portico; see Nims in Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pp. 14-15. 35 The difference of a year does not greatly affect the The fall of the portico roof may not have occurred simul- arguments offered here in regard to TT 192. If the beginning taneously with the collapse of the columned hall. architectural and iconographic conundra in the tomb of kheruef 73

Fig. 4. Lintel and upper jambs of the entrance doorway of the tomb of Kheruef. From Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pl. 8.

Iconographic and Chronological Conundra the river at Karnak,40 she appears nowhere in the tomb of Kheruef, either in name or in figure. Given the severe constraints of the long coregency Religious anachronisms abound. At a time scheme on the decoration of TT 192, the entrance when Amenhotep IV was building temples to his area of Kheruef’s tomb offers a proliferation of new deity at Karnak, replete with its fully devel- discordant data, foremost of which is the presence oped representation of the Aton as a disk with or absence of certain royal figures. Amenhotep animate rays, the king apparently had himself III, newly deified in his first jubilee, a ceremony in depicted on Kheruef’s tomb entrance in front of which Kheruef himself participated, seems to have an anthropomorphic Ra-Horakhty and Atum (see been banished from the entrance lintel in favor Fig. 4). In the case of the former deity, Ra-- of his son and the queen mother. 39 The primary akhty is provided with the epithet nr A nb p.t, a female presence throughout is Queen Tiye, whom protocol abandoned by Amenhotep IV in his own Kheruef served as steward; but while Nefertiti third year or earlier, by which time the didactic was already deemed of sufficient importance to name of the Aton was already fully elaborated.41 be the sole officiant in her ownw.t-bnbn across In the offering text to Ra-Horakhty on the door

39 The reason for this absence given by Aldred in Akhen- Akhenaten Temple Project, Vol. 1, Initial Discoveries (War- aten, Pharaoh of Egypt, pp. 108-09, is hardly compelling: minster: Aris and Phillips, 1976), pp. 79-82, pls. 20-23. that Amenhotep III donated the tomb to Kheruef about the 41 See n. 34, above; and I. Munro, “Zusammenstellung von time of his first jubilee, but that Kheruef simply “associated Datierungskritierien für Inschriften der Amarna-Zeit nach the son of his patroness with her husband, particularly as J.J. Perepelkin ‘Die Revolution Amenophis’ IV.’, Teil 1 (russ.), he had recently been made co-regent.” 1967,” GM 94 (1986), pp. 81-82; and Gabolde, D’Akhenaton 40 See D. Redford, in R. Smith and D. Redford, The à Toutânkhamon, pp. 24-25, with references. 74 peter f. dorman jamb of the entrance (who is not provided with ing the following gods: Amun, Ra-Horakhty,46 any epithet in this instance), it seems clear that the Khepri, Atum, Osiris Ptah, Anubis, Wepwawet, deity is viewed as an entity quite separate from the Min, Djehuty, and Hathor. By analogy with the Aton: Ra-Horakhty is invoked in order “that he entrance, the damaged lintel—presumably carved (the god) may grant observation of the solar disk along with the adjacent jubilee reliefs of year 3747 (ἰtn). . . (to Kheruef).”42 Such references cannot be and thus concurrent with the junior coregent’s easily reconciled with purportedly contemporary year 11—should contain figures of Akhenaton icons at Karnak that depict Ra-Horakhty-Aton and Tiye, offering to seated male deities with as the physical disk of the sun. The plethora of goddesses standing behind their thrones.48 The other deities invoked in such proximity to Amen- reverent mention of a multitude of such deities, hotep IV is also problematic for the coregency four represented in human form, in juxtaposition scheme, to wit, Osiris, Isis, Thoth, and Anubis, to with Akhenaton in his 11th or 12th regnal year, as say nothing of Amun pAwty tA.wy and Amun-Ra the long coregency requires, cannot be explained nb nsw.t tA.wy.43 Moreover, the prominent occur- away.49 Perhaps, then, it was Amenhotep III who rence of the name of Amun in the acrostic hymn was portrayed on the lintel with Tiye, and whose of the passageway, adjacent to Amenhotep III’s sensibilities required the inclusion of traditional portrayal in jubilee garb, ensures that this area gods that were, by that time, anathema to his son? must have been decorated together with the lintel But this again raises the question: why should the and jambs of the entrance.44 The resultant con- elder coregent have been portrayed on the lintel of tradictions within the long coregency scheme are the second doorway with his wife, while the son irreconcilable with the textual evidence.45 was depicted on the tomb entrance with the queen The long coregency poses two more puzzles mother? Even the supposition that Amenhotep III on the lintel of the second doorway, which leads is indeed the king portrayed on the lintel of the into the unfinished columned hall (Fig. 5). The second doorway begs the question of what was not lintel is laid out in a manner identical to that of happening at the entrance of the tomb: in a monu- the entrance doorway, but the damage is such that ment still being actively decorated in the younger only the lower portions of the scenes remain, so king’s 11th and 12th year, why was no attempt that the identity of the royal and divine figures made—at the very least—to alter the nomen of cannot be determined. The door jambs contain Amenhotep IV to “Akhenaton,” as had been done ten vertical offering texts, rather than eight, invok- consistently at Karnak and elsewhere?50

42 Following the translation of E. Wente, in Epigraphic 47 For the suggestion—and rejection—that the dates Survey, Kheruef, p. 33. referring to regnal year 37 in the Kheruef reliefs were later 43 Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 25-26, additions, see B. Bryan, in Egypt’s Dazzling Sun: Amenhotep assigns Amenhotep IV’s prohibition against using the name III and His World, eds. A. Kozloff and B. Bryan (Cleveland: of Amun—rather than active persecution itself—to a time Cleveland Museum of Art, 1992), n. 6 on pp. 205-06; and prior to the enclosure of the Aton’s name in cartouches, Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 69. that is, by year 3, even before the time at which work on 48 It is generally agreed that Akhenaton was probably Kheruef’s entrance could have commenced: “Le dieu de the king portrayed on the lintel of the second doorway; see Thèbes n’est pas encore proscrit, mais il (Amenhotep IV) Aldred, Akhenaten, King of Egypt, p. 92; Nims, in Epigraphic n’est plus fait allusion à lui que très discrètement dans les Survey, Kheruef, p. 13; and A. Radwan, Die Darstellungen inscriptions officielles, notamment dans le nom du roi.” des regierenden Königs und seiner Familienangehörigen in 44 E. Wente, in Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pp. 35-37, den Privatgräbern des 18. Dynastie, MÄS 21 (Berlin: Bruno with pls. 14-15. Hessling, 1969), p. 94. 45 A number of the discrepancies thus far noted could 49 Again, Amun and Ra-Horakhty are especially prob- be resolved by assigning the inception of the coregency to lematic. Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 25 with the middle of regnal year 29 of Amenhotep III. This rear- n. 200, asserts that, on the basis of monuments dated to rangement would break the neat synchronicity between the the early years of Amenhotep IV, Amun (though not yet first jubilee of the elder king and the first appearance of the actively persecuted) was no longer mentioned in royal texts Aton (delaying the latter by two years), and the year 12 of of that king from his regnal year 4 onward. To be sure, Akhenaton would then start midway into the 40th year of even after the first several years of Akhenaton’s reign, a his father; but see further below. number of deities other than the Aton were tolerated and 46 The god is again mentioned here without the didactic even honored, at least in specific contexts; see S. Bickel, protocol and without the cartouches that, by year 11 of Untersuchungen im Totentempel des Merenptah in Theben Akhenaton, had become numbingly de rigeur for the Aton III: Tore und andere wiederverwendete Bauteile Amenophis’ at Amarna; nor is the accompanying text compatible with III, BÄBA 16 (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1997), pp. 92-94. Atonist theology: “that he (Ra-Horakhty) may grant entry Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 32-34, delineates into his mountain of the righteous and voyaging in front the extent of the sporadic and inconsistent attacks against of the stars that are wont to go up to the sky,” after Wente, Amun and other deities outside of the Theban area. in Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, p. 68. 50 For the Aton temples, see D. Redford in Smith and architectural and iconographic conundra in the tomb of kheruef 75

Fig. 5. Lintel and upper jambs of the second doorway of the tomb of Kheruef. From Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pl. 67.

Second, there is the artistic convention of the Textual and iconographic anomalies such as “near foot,” a criterion that can be applied to the these can only be accounted for, in the context one of the few pertinent iconographic elements of a long coregency, by the dubious presumption preserved on the lintel in question. Edna Russ- of conflicting but separate artistic and religious mann has demonstrated that the representation sensibilities, practiced according to geographic of the near foot in Egyptian art, with all of its location or at the whimsical discretion of the five toes indicated, originated in painted form in coregents while Amenhotep III was still alive.53 certain Theban tombs of pre-Amarna date, but Such a presumption would, a priori, vitiate any during the reign of Akhenaton became virtually attempt to trace in reasonable fashion the consis- a “royal prerogative” extended to the king and tent development of artistic and religious trends immediate members of the family.51 It is notewor- during the presumed coregency period, or to for- thy, then, that the convention of the near foot, mulate a viable chronological framework on the a motif that Akhenaton deliberately adopted as basis of them. a feature of his personal royal presentation and Finally, the erasure of the name of Amun extended to immediate family members,52 is throughout the tomb is only possible, in the core- avoided everywhere in TT 192, although it was gency scenario outlined here, if its inception is otherwise consistently applied on private and dated roughly no earlier than Akhenaton’s year royal monuments of the younger king for much 13, after the decoration of the several offering of his reign. texts in Kheruef’s columned hall. Susanne Bickel’s

Redford, Akhenaten Temple Project, vol. 1, p. 76; for the 53 The suggestion that Akhenaton was motivated, in the Ra-Horakhty shrine, see Chappaz, BSEG 8 (1983), p. 33, who decoration of the second doorway, to embrace traditional notes eleven examples, all executed in incised carving. religious and artistic conventions out of consideration for his 51 E. Russmann, “The Anatomy of an Artistic Conven- father is a priori unsatisfactory. In any case, it has already tion: Representation of the Near Foot in Two Dimensions been pointed out that dated records suggest that Amenhotep Through the New Kingdom,”BES 2 (1980), pp. 57-81. III was, in all likelihood, deceased at the time this part of 52 Ibid., pp. 70-71. Kheruef’s tomb was decorated. 76 peter f. dorman study of the northern monumental gateway of didactic name of the Aton, seemingly confirming Amenhotep III’s mortuary complex, however, these rough parameters.60 raises certain arguments for assigning the begin- ning of the persecution of Amun to the period directly following Akhenaton’s own name change The Quarrying and Decoration of the Tomb of and his removal to Amarna: year 5 or shortly Kheruef thereafter.54 Bickel has noted that Amun was not merely eradicated from the scenes of the gateway, The presumption that Kheruef’s tomb was exca- but shortly thereafter his figure was recarved as vated and decorated in the usual Theban manner, a deified form of Nebmaatre, probably as part of proceeding from east to west, not only offers firm a prearranged process of cultic transformation.55 support for a long coregency, but is essential to The figures of the deified Nebmaatre are provided it, demonstrating the rise of Amenhotep IV to with various epithets, one of which (nr nfr) seems the throne before the death of his father. In fact, only to be employed by Akhenaton in the years far from representing a typical example of the preceding the change in the didactic name of Theban tomb genre, TT 192 is an innovation in the Aton, after which it is replaced by hqA nfr.56 private mortuary architecture, notably by reason The alterations of the monumental gateway must of its large open court, sunk into the floor of the therefore be assigned to a time preceding the revi- Asasif valley. Moreover, the condition of its walls sion of the Aton’s cartouches.57 Bickel observes at the time of its abandonment directly contra- that scholarly consensus assigns the final manifes- dicts the assertion that work began at its entrance tation of the Aton’s didactic protocol to years 8 or and proceeded inexorably toward its innermost 9, providing a fairly narrow range (between years rooms (see Fig. 1). The main descending ramp 5 and 9) for the alterations to have been effected was completed and its walls smoothed, and of at the mortuary temple gateway.58 Such a dating course the doorway and entrance leading into would also make it impossible for the name of the court were carved with their reliefs and even Amun to be used in the tomb of Kheruef in year partially painted. In the next area directly adja- 11 or later: it could hardly have been employed cent to the entrance, within the court itself, the in the innermost reaches of the tomb while it was columns of the eastern portico had only reached being excised at the entrance.59 In addition, on the stage of roughing out; two sections of the the occasion of the presentation of foreign trib- wall behind the columns had been smoothed, ute, shown in the tombs of Huya and Meryra II at but this work had not progressed far. As for the Amarna and bearing the date of year 12, 2 pr.t 8, courtyard, the northern and southern porticos the royal couple are enthroned beneath the later were largely unquarried; only two columns in the

54 Bickel, Untersuchungen, pp. 91-94. If these changes see Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 105-06. were indeed effected in year 5 or 6, the portrayal of Neb- 58 Bickel, Untersuchungen, pp. 92-93. The year 8 or 9 maatra in the entrance passage of Kheruef’s tomb preceded datum derives largely from the early study of B. Gunn, “Notes them by just one or two years. Her position on the early on the Aten and His Names,” JEA 9 (1929), pp. 168-76. persecution of Amun is supported by Gabolde, D’Akhenaton 59 Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 29, also à Toutânkhamon, pp. 29-30, who also examines, and dis- views the persecution of Amun to have begun more or misses, the arguments that Aldred has proposed for assign- less concurrently with Akhenaton’s name change in year 5: ing a later date of year 12 to the proscription. That Amun “C’est vraisemblablment de cette époque que date le début was still tolerated in year 4 of Amenhotep IV is indicated des remplacements du nomen «Amenhotep» par le praeno- by the series of graffiti in the Wadi Hammamat that refer men «Nebmaâtre» dans les cartouches d’Amenhotep III et to an expedition sent there on 3 A.t 11, a date that falls les martelages du nom d’Amon sur les parois des temples toward the end of the king’s fourth regnal year (see Fig. thébains: il serait paradoxal que le roi censurât les références 3); see ibid., Gabolde, p. 26. à Amon jusque dans son proper nom de naissance si c’était 55 Not to be confused with Nebmaatra lord of Nubia, pour laisser intactes partout ailleurs.” or the deified Amenhotep III in Luxor Temple; see Bickel, 60 Gabolde, ibid., pp. 110-18, has recently urged a recon- Untersuchungen, pp. 89-90. Bickel (p. 89) is further of the sideration of the first appearance of the later didactic name opinion that the recut figures of Nebmaatra on the gateway to year 14. His conclusions rest on a statistical parsing of cannot be concurrent with the last decade of Amenhotep III, the variants of the Aton’s names at Amarna; on the differing as they are inconsistent with the proportional canon of that number of princesses in the two scenes of foreign tribute; period and lack the expected solar iconography associated and on the caution that the carving of the tribute scenes with Amenhotep III in his final years. may both be retrospective by a year or two. Nonetheless, it 56 Ibid., p. 93, citing Munro, GM 94 (1985), p. 85. is not the appearance of the Aton’s later didactic name that 57 That is, the final manifestation of the Aton’s protocol, is of concern here: it is the date of the active proscription which was subject to numerous minor alterations, for which of Amun; these phenomena are not necessarily linked. architectural and iconographic conundra in the tomb of kheruef 77 northwestern corner were in the process of being The problem of access and movement in the roughed out. The western portico, by contrast, is unfinished tomb led to an obvious deduction: in a state of advanced completion. It had received Indeed, it may be that more than one ramp was its jubilee scenes (the third jubilee had been used so that quarrying could be done more rap- partially painted as well), with the pillars of the idly. Besides the present ramp at the entrance, northern wing fully carved, while the pillars of one or more could have been started in the area the southern wing had been left only in rough where the court eventually was quarried. A pos- condition. The walls of the large columned hall, sible point for the start of another ramp is a yet farther in, had been completely smoothed, depression that ran north and south through the with its pillars architecturally finished, but just a area of the court, evidences of which are shown few of the texts on the columns had been drafted on plates 3A and 6A.62 and carved. The final rectangular chamber, with The most likely scenario, then, is that the cutting its double row of columns, had been roughed out, of TT 192 was initiated in the area of the open but only the eastern half of the walls of the room court by means of at least two construction ramps had been smoothed. There is no demonstrable (one of which was the entranceway itself) leading east-to-west progression here, but rather a more from ground level into the ever-deepening court, complicated distribution of labor. with the access ramps left in place until the court Nor does it make practical sense to claim that had been fully roughed out to its present dimen- TT 192 was quarried from its entrance doorway sions. Such organization would enable work to alone, with draftsmen and painters following on proceed on a much broader and faster scale, and the heels of the stonemasons. The proposition that without damage to the completed decoration. this vast tomb was excavated from its entrance The quarrying of Kheruef’s tomb using the alone would imply that the open court, carved open court as the starting point vitiates the need into the bedrock of the Asasif, was created essen- to view the excavation (and thus decoration) of its tially by tunneling from below, a procedure that various parts in the usual east-to-west sequence. is simply not credible from a logistical point of However, the tomb does otherwise conform to view. Such a scenario mandates laborers engaged the usual exigencies of mortuary construction, in removing over 5000 cubic meters of quarried in that decoration was begun on wall surfaces chip, taken from all parts of the subterranean as soon as they could be made available to the tomb, solely through an entrance doorway mea- draftsmen. Presumably, once the entranceway, suring 1.4 m wide. For a time the doorway would court, and the two inner halls were roughed out have been inaccessible due to sculptors engaged in their basic dimensions (aside from the columns in carving the delicate reliefs of Amenhotep IV of the northern and southern portico), drafts- performing a libation to his parents, and for years men were set to work at the front of the tomb thereafter these scenes would have been exposed (the entrance doorway) and the western portico to gangs of men hauling debris. simultaneously, and both teams began working The Epigraphic Survey realized the essential from the east gradually westward. Such a pre- problem and came to different conclusions, based sumption accords with the sequence of finished on the fact that the open court itself contains areas of the tomb itself, and there is therefore no so many unfinished features, including porticos need, on architectural grounds at least, to pos- whose columns had never been fully cut: tulate a chronological gap between the entrance With quarrying going on simultaneously in the and western portico of the tomb.63 front of the tomb and more than thirty meters Moreover, it is remarkable how similar in style away in the rear, the disposal of the debris from and technique the carved decoration of the west- the rear without interference with the work in ern portico is to that of the entrance of the tomb. the front makes probable the use of a ramp or By itself, the passage of five or six years would ramps in the area of the court, which would have hardly make a great difference in terms of a pro- 61 delayed the quarrying there. mulgated and monolithic royal style, but the years

61 Nims, in Kheruef, p. 6. on the coregency (History and Chronology, pp. 113-17), 62 Ibid., p. 4. where his percipient observations, recorded years before 63 Very few of these observations are new. The reader will many of the details were confirmed in the publication of note what a large debt is owed to Redford’s early chapter Kheruef, have stood the test of time. 78 peter f. dorman in question are those that span the full flower- Simultaneous work on the tomb decoration is ing of Amenhotep III’s deification iconography, reflected also by the evidence of its abandonment, the founding of Akhetaton, and probably also in every area of the tomb, prior to its comple- the moderation of the earliest and most extreme tion. Although the tomb entrance has often been stylistic experiments of the Amarna period. Aside characterized as finished, a smoothed area to from the outward trappings of Amenhotep III’s the south of the entry jambs was left only with solar insignia (such as the leopard-skin sporran a painted red grid, as if in expectation of some and shebyu collar) the tomb of Kheruef seems to scene to balance the existing relief on the north, have been utterly untouched by any of the ram- but it was left without a draft cartoon. 67 The north pant artistic innovations or revisions promulgated, wing of the western portico (third jubilee) was in very different ways, by Akhenaton and by his fully carved as far as it had been drafted, but a father: its decoration is surprisingly immune to smoothed area at the northernmost extremity of the turbulent and fecund artistic milieu of a long the wall had been left blank. The upper registers coregency.64 As Murnane observed, advocates of had been painted, while the lower register had a long coregency must embrace a gap in the dec- not, perhaps because it had been carved later; the oration of Kheruef’s tomb, though his estimate ceiling inscriptions had never been completed.68 of ten years should be shortened to six.65 If the The reliefs of the south wing (first jubilee) had architecture of the tomb fails to support such an been largely carved, except for the southernmost interpretation, other features of the tomb decora- extremity of the drafted scenes, where the stern of tion similarly fail to demonstrate a total suspen- the bark and the steersman are incomplete. There sion and subsequent resumption of work. remains sufficient stone to have added a lower reg- In its documentation of Kheruef’s tomb, the ister to match that of the north wing, but further Epigraphic Survey was keenly aware of the impor- work was not undertaken; no pigment was added tance of the reliefs in illuminating aspects of the here, but a portion of the wall was whitewashed coregency question, and its epigraphers closely as if in anticipation of the event.69 examined the style of carving at different points in the tomb. Regarding the entrance doorway, the inner door to the first columned court, and Conclusions the passages attached to those doors, Nims states that The architecture of the tomb of Kheruef argues the work in these areas seems to have been carried for an atypical progression of work by stonecut- out concurrently; a study of the style of the reliefs ters and draftsmen, and various epigraphic and shows similarities and, in some cases, identity stylistic criteria also point toward the simultane- in treatment. A striking example of the latter is ous decoration of the reliefs of the entrance and the consistency in the details of the hieroglyph those of the western porticos. If we take these of the owl … Note the design on the upper wing indicators at face value and suspend the dogmatic coverts; the crosslines on the primary and sec- insistence on an east-to-west sequence of labor ondary feathers of the wing; the chevron pattern in TT 192, the decorated surfaces of Kheruef’s of the feathers of the breast, abdomen, legs, and undertail; and the lines on the rectrices…. The tomb must be seen as having been completed at consistency of treatment of the details in the roughly the same time. If this conclusion is cor- reliefs suggests that those reliefs were carved by rect, none of the carved reliefs can significantly the same sculptor or by sculptors of the same predate the latest chronological indicator con- school at approximately the same time.66 tained within them, namely regnal year 37 of

64 Compare, for example, the tombs of Ramose (N. p. 13, n. 75, and pp. 70-73. de Garis Davies, The Tomb of the Ramose, Mond 65 Murnane, Coregencies, p. 149. Excavations at Thebes vol. 1 [London: Egypt Exploration 66 Nims, in Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, pp. 5-6. Society, 1941], pls. 32-38) and Parennefer (idem, “Akhenaten 67 Pointed out initially by Redford, History and Chro- at Thebes,” JEA 9 [1923], pls. 24,1 and 25), in which the nology, p. 117; confirmed by Nims, in Epigraphic Survey, innovations wrought by the Atonist revolution were freely Kheruef, p. 11. employed; an argument may be made that both traditional 68 Nims, ibid., p. 10, observes that no paint drips are and new styles were used simultaneously, at least in private evident on the bare stone of the lower register. tombs. See also Gabolde, D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, 69 Ibid. architectural and iconographic conundra in the tomb of kheruef 79

Amenhotep III. The argument for a long core- unusable well before the adoption of his later gency is therefore impossible to sustain. name.71 Similarly, the iconographic and textual contra- In the damaged entrance passageway, the dictions noted in the paragraphs above can only space in front of the elder king’s figure is suf- be resolved by the conclusion that Amenhotep IV ficient to accommodate only his prenomen, succeeded Amenhotep III on the throne following written in a single column of text (just below his death, probably in his 38th regnal year, with the name and epithet of Wadjet), which the little or no overlapping coregency period. The Epigraphic Survey was at a loss to reconstruct relief decoration in Kheruef’s tomb, the excava- (Fig. 2).72 The text is probably to be understood tion of which may have begun in the last years of as [nr nfr] Nb-mA.t[-R], an abbreviated protocol Amenhotep III, belongs to the very early period that appears frequently at Soleb in connection with of Amenhotep IV, doubtless to his first two years, representations of Amenhotep III garbed in the before Ra-Horakhty became associated with the sed-festival robe, and with the deified Nebmaatre protocol that was to develop into the Aton’s early of the northern gateway of the king’s mortuary didactic name, 70 and thus while Nefertiti’s rise complex. In the tomb of Kheruef, this titular for- to unusual ritual stature had not yet taken place mation may adumbrate the changes Akhenaton (nor, perhaps, had the union of the royal couple). effected at that latter monument in conjunction Thus it is Amenhotep IV, the new sole reign- with the effacement of the god Amun.73 ing king, who was commemorated on both of The monument may have been abandoned the doorways of the tomb along with the queen when the roof of the columned hall collapsed mother, whose steward Kheruef was. On the other around year 2 and, doubtless because of its ruined hand, the elder king was celebrated as a deceased condition, no effort was made to alter the car- ancestor (Nebmaatre) in the entrance passageway, touches of Amenhotep IV when the king changed as well as in the retrospective wall reliefs of the his name to Akhenaton.74 This did not save the western portico, where his jubilees are commemo- tomb from the later attentions of the Atonists, rated. Unlike the former commemorative scene, who attacked the name of Amun wherever they the latter reliefs depicted historical ceremonies, in could find it, nor from the persecutions aimed which Amenhotep III is appropriately referred to against Akhenaton (inconsistently achieved) and by both his nomen and prenomen, celebrations in Kheruef himself. which Kheruef figured prominently and arranged Admittedly, the architectural and decorative to have recorded on the walls of his tomb. The features of Kheruef’s tomb are but one part of plethora of standard deities that appears on the the complicated coregency debate, but it is not jambs of the two doorways of the tomb was still within the scope of this paper to pursue other palatable to the new king in the first year of his points of the controversy. The debate over the reign, while the adoption of the “near foot” as existence of a long coregency is, in the opinion a distinctive iconographic feature for the royal of this writer, one that is of markedly diminished family, along with many other Amarna innova- scholarly value, and one that can be answered tions, still lay in the future. The unaltered state of in the negative.75 But having argued here for the Amenhotep IV’s nomen in the entrance of tomb accession of Amenhotep IV only following the is understandable if the tomb was abandoned as death of his father, the present writer might note

70 Perepelkin’s observation regarding Amenhotep IV’s the textual variants given on p. 86. One difference in the titulary—summarized by Munro, GM 94 (1985), p. 84—that tomb of Kheruef is that Nebmaatra is adorned with the the king’s epithet A-m- =f is included within cartouche trappings of solar symbolism accorded the king during his only from the last third of regnal year 3 is apparently incor- jubilees, while the deified Amenhotep III in the mortuary rect. On the lintel of Kheruef’s entrance, the king’s nomen temple is not portrayed in such a manner. reads ἰmn- tp nr A WAs.t A-m- =f, and yet Ra-Horakhty 74 Nor was any effort made to alter the nomen of Amen- is not referred to by his early didactic name, which was hotep III, which during the reign of Akhenaton was fre- already in use in year 3, as the linen from the tomb of quently recut as a paired “Nebmaatra” to the prenomen, Tutankhamun attests. or erased with care and simply left blank; for the latter 71 This reconstruction of events is largely consistent phenomenon, see ibid., p. 83. with Gabolde’s view, in D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, 75 Within the context of the tomb of Kheruef, at any pp. 12-13, 70. rate, an argument might be made for a short coregency, if 72 Epigraphic Survey, Kheruef, p. 35, with pl. 13. there be any who perceive a necessity for it. 73 See Bickel, Untersuchungen, pp. 86-90, in particular 80 peter f. dorman that other interesting avenues offer themselves as the core for a double sanctuary dedicated to for exploration. Not the least of these stems from Amun and a new local god, the deified Nebmaatra Johnson’s keen observations regarding the sty- of Nubia, to which was then added a hypostyle listic conventions adopted by Amenhotep IV at hall, two courts built sequentially, an outer pylon, the inception of his reign, which are clearly not and finally an entry porch. The excavators were a continuation of the final phase of Amenho- able to follow these multiple stages of construc- tep III’s reign, but can be viewed as a deliberate tion by means of distinct strata of beaten earth reversion to the “naturalism” of that king’s third painted with whitewash, clearly associated with decade. That is, Amenhotep IV chose to spurn the each of the phases of temple development.77 These “baroque” characteristics of his father’s deification sequential layers, of which thirty-two were ulti- phase—developed for idiosyncratic reasons by mately identified, are referred to in the publica- Amenhotep III—and embraced instead an older tion as “sols blanchis” and provide a sound basis idiom associated with the deceased king that may for relative site chronology.78 The temple publica- have been regarded by him and his contempo- tion assumes that each “sol blanchi” represents raries as “pre-jubilee,” and which provided the a new sedimentary deposit of a Nile inundation, baseline for experimentation in royal and divine so that the temple must have been built over the iconography along very different lines. course of thirty-two years.79 Since the excava- tors associated the twenty-eighth “sol” with the arrangements for the first jubilee of year 30,80 they Addendum therefore concluded that Soleb Temple must have been founded in the king’s third regnal year.81 The preceding article has conscientiously focused Problems abound with this reconstruction of solely on the monument of Kheruef to reconstruct events. To mention just one difficulty: among a time line that illustrates the unlikely possibility the reliefs of the first jubilee, carved in the first of a long coregency. With the appearance of all court at Soleb, one large panel depicts Amenho- three volumes on the architecture and decora- tep III and his officials making the rounds of the tion of the temple of Soleb,76 authored by Michela great sixteen-gated precinct, performing rituals Schiff Giorgini and edited by Natalie Beaux, an of “striking” each doorway as part of the jubilee irresistible opportunity arises, however, to make festivities.82 Yet the enclosure itself is associated one further observation on the essential utility of archaeologically only with “sols” 1 through 16, the timeline in Figure 3 in establishing firm chron- ostensibly years 3 through 18, after which it was ological parameters to the coregency debate. demolished. The excavators’ interpretation of the The magnificently detailed publication of the stratigraphy implies that the “striking” ceremonies Soleb Temple outlines the gradual construction had to have been conducted eleven years before of the temple complex, beginning with the very the first jubilee was actually observed, surely a earliest structures: a large open enclosure with six- dubious interpretation of the evidence.83 teen gates (actually, nonfunctioning doorways, or More importantly, several decorated blocks “portes-chapelles”) and an early peripteros shrine from the earliest peripteros shrine of Soleb located inside, not centered within the enclosure temple, which were recovered in the course of but positioned on the axis of the future temple. excavation, belong to the final, or “baroque,” Although the peripteros shrine was soon disman- phase of Amenhotep III’s reign, as outlined by tled (and later, the enclosure as well), it served W. Raymond Johnson:84 the scenes are rendered

76 Michela Schiff Giorgini, in collaboration with Clément 80 The date is given in a text from the first court, showing Robichon and Jean Leclant, prepared and edited by Nath- the king carried on a palanquin as the jubilee ceremonies alie Beaux, Soleb III: Le temple: description (Cairo: IFAO, unfold; Schiff Giorgini,et al., Soleb IV, pl. 97. 1998); idem, Soleb IV: Le temple: plans et photographies 81 Schiff Giorgini,et al., Soleb III, pp. 29-30. (Cairo: IFAO, 2003); idem, Soleb V: Le temple: bas-reliefs 82 Schiff Giorgini,et al., Soleb IV, pls. 34-60. et inscriptions (Cairo: IFAO, 2002). 83 Clearly, the assumption that each “sol blanchi” can be 77 Schiff Giorgini,et al., Soleb III, pp. 24-29; Soleb IV, equated with a separate Nile innundation must be rethought: Figs. 8-20. doubtless these levels were laid down in much more fre- 78 Schiff Giorgini,et al., Soleb III, pp. 31-33. quent sequence. 79 The concomitant assumption seems to be that the 84 See note 19. temple was built in a location that was sure to be flooded by annual waters, and indeed was flooded each year during its construction. architectural and iconographic conundra in the tomb of kheruef 81

Fig. 6. Usurped cartouches on the cornice of the doorway of the first pylon of Soleb Temple. From Schiff Giorgini,et al., Soleb V: Le temple: bas-reliefs et inscriptions, pl. 23. overall in markedly high relief, and the king is construction must be ascribed to the last eight or depicted with a rounded, youthful-seeming face, ten years of Amenhotep III’s reign. with a large eye set at a noticeable angle in his Implications for the postulated long coregency face. Hence, art-stylistic analysis also supports a are to be found in the entry porch attatched to much later date for the founding of the temple the first pylon, where several scenes and lintel than that suggested by the excavators of Soleb, a cartouches originally ascribed to Amenhotep date probably tied to the creation of the cult of the III have been usurped for Amenhotep IV. As deified king in conjunction with the first jubilee. William Murnane has pointed out,85 in at least The “striking” rites shown taking place within one instance traces in the prenomen cartouche the sixteen-gated enclosure may be assumed to are to be reconstructed as “Nebmaatra,” while have transpired when that monument was still in the nomen they are to be read as ’Imn- tp standing and were later commemorated, after the nr- A-WAst, which is not the name of Amen- enclosure was dismantled, in the scenes adorning hotep III but of his son, prior to his adoption the first court of the temple. The entire course of of the name “Akhenaton” (Fig. 6).86 The current

85 W.J. Murnane, “Soleb Renaissance: Reconstructing address certain issues pertaining to Soleb Temple; these the Nebmaatre Temple in Nubia,” Amarna Letters 4 (2000), papers are presently being edited and should appear shortly pp. 18-19. The article presents a summary of papers delivered as Soleb VI. at a symposium held in Cairo in April 1999, organized to 86 Schiff Giorgini,et al., Soleb V, pl. 23. 82 peter f. dorman

version of the nomen, A-n-ἰtn, therefore repre- have to be telescoped into about eighteen months, sents a double usurpation, the first occurring in and certainly less than two years—hardly a fea- the first five years of the younger king’s reign and sible task, no matter how large and talented the the second after his move to Amarna, when the workforce. name “Akhenaton” is first attested. Even more to the point, the archaeological and If one were to plot these salient chronologi- architectural evidence from Soleb, compressed cal indicators on the double time line in Figure thus onto the coregency timeline, requires Amen- 3, certain impossibilities immediately spring hotep IV to be actively engaged in usurping his to light. The temple of Soleb would have to be own father’s reliefs no later than his own regnal founded around years 28-29 of Amenhotep III year 5, while the elder king was still alive, as much (corresponding to the first years of the purported as seven years before his death. Indeed, any core- long coregency) in preparation for the first jubi- gency theory advocating a duration of more than lee; the sixteen-gated enclosure would have been five years would have to deal with this unwelcome utilized for those rites in year 30 (the middle of datum from Soleb Temple. Amenhotep IV’s regnal year 3); and the usurpa- The strongest evidence for a coregency of any tions within the entry porch attached to the first length is the art-historical argument that links the pylon must have been accomplished before the refined relief style of the first years of Amenhotep change in Amenhotep IV’s name, at the begin- IV’s reign with that of his father’s pre-jubilee years ning of his own regnal year 5 (his father’s year (and thus the concurrence of the first jubilee of 31). Most of the work on Soleb Temple, then—the Amenhotep III with that of the Aton at Karnak); demolition of the great jubilee enclosure and the yet this equation leads to irreconcilable contra- building of the double sanctuary, the hypostyle dictions with the architecture and chronology at hall, the second court, the first court and the entry Soleb. In the opinion of this author, a coregency porch, in addition to all the decoration—would of any length can no longer be supported. the death of meketaten 83

THE DEATH OF MEKETATEN

Jacobus van Dijk Rijksuniversiteit Groningen

Back in 1979, Bill Murnane was one of the first the left a chamber is depicted; inside, Meketaten, Egyptologists I met in the field, if the bar of the identified by an inscription, is lying on a bed. Her old Luxor Hotel can be counted as such. We kept parents are standing at the head end of the bed in regular contact over the years and his prema- and although the scene is very damaged here it ture death came as a great shock. Bill’s epigraphic is clear from the parallel in Room α (Fig. 2) that acumen and the lucid style of his brilliant writ- they are mourning the death of their daughter. ings on the history of New Kingdom Egypt have Two other unidentified, but nonroyal, persons always been an inspiration to me, and I gratefully are mourning at the foot end of the bed. Outside dedicate the following article to his memory. the chamber are two registers with further fig- Among the many controversial problems of ures, both male and female, all displaying various the Amarna Period is the interpretation of the gestures of mourning; among them is the vizier. so-called birth scene in Room γ in the Royal All of these figures face the entrance to the cham- Tomb at Amarna. In fact, there is a second, very ber, except three females in the lower register. similar scene in Room α, but for the time being The first of these is a woman holding a newborn we shall concentrate here on Room γ. The scene baby in her arms and breast-feeding it. She is fol- (Fig. 1) occupies the East wall (A) of a room in the lowed by two other females, each of whom holds Amarna royal tomb which appears to have been a bht fan or sunshade. The whole context of this specially designed for the burial of Akhenaten scene strongly suggests that there is a connec- and Nefertiti’s second daughter Meke taten.1 On tion between the events inside the bedchamber

Fig. 1. The so-called birth scene in Room γ of the Royal Tomb at Amarna.

1 Granite fragments belonging to her sarcophagus or additional fragments (Martin nos. 251, 303, 592, and 699) perhaps her canopic chest have been found within the royal mentioning an unidentified princess which Martin tentatively tomb, see G. Daressy, “Tombeaux et stèles-limites de Hagi- assigned to Meketaten, only nos. 303 (joined to the named Qandil,” RecTrav 15 (1893), p. 62; G.T. Martin, The Royal fragments by Raven) and 592 probably belonged to her. Tomb at El-‘Amarna I: The Objects (London: EES, 1974), No. 592 writes the mr-sign with N36, like the Meketaten p. 29 (no. 103), p. 104; M.J. Raven, “A sarcophagus for fragments, whereas nos. 251 and 699 use the Amarna form Queen Tiy and other fragments from the Royal Tomb at N37, as does the fragment no. 218 which is inscribed for el-Amarna,” Oudheidkundige Mededelingen uit het Rijks- Merytaten. museum van het Oudheden 74 (1994), p. 8. Of the four 84 jacobus van dijk

Fig. 2. A parallel scene in Room α of the Royal Tomb at Amarna. of Meketaten and this group of three women with the baby; the logical conclusion seems to be that Meketaten has just given birth to a child, but has died in the process, and this is indeed the almost universally accepted interpretation. Although the inscription above the body of Meketaten on her deathbed is clear enough, the text inscribed in two columns in front of the woman holding the child has only partly survived, that is, it did until 1934, when what was left of the text and indeed of much of the decoration was almost entirely destroyed by vandals. This means that we have to rely on old photographs and handcopies, foremost of which is the photo- graph taken in 1893/94 by Gustave Jéquier and Fig. 3. A reconstruction by Legrain of the two columns published by Bouriant, Legrain and Jéquier in of text inscribed in front of the woman holding the child in Room γ. their Monuments pour servir à l’étude du culte d’Atonou en Égypte.2 The traces visible on this photograph include a seated person determinative of the scenes and the commentary on the inscrip- followed by what looks like a ms-sign at the end tions,4 provides it in printed hieroglyphs together of the first column and the cartouche of Queen with his reconstruction of the missing parts (Fig. Nefertiti followed by the usual ‘may she live for 3, reversed). ever and ever’ in the second column. This leaves Legrain rightly remarks that the orientation of us Egyptologists literally with room for specula- the text conforms to the orientation of the woman tion. What was in the missing portion of the text? holding the child and not to that of the child And to whom does it refer? itself, and he therefore bases his restoration on the In the drawing of the scene3 the inscription assumption that the text identifies the nurse, not is omitted, but in the letterpress of the volume the child. Because of the fact that Nefertiti is men- Legrain, who was responsible for the description tioned in col. 2 Legrain concludes that this nurse

2 U. Bouriant, G. Legrain and G. Jéquier, Monuments 3 Ibid., pl. VII (Fig. 1 above). pour servir à l’étude du culte d’Atonou en Égypte, MIFAO 4 Ibid., pp. iii and 23 n. 1. 8 (Cairo: IFAO, 1903), Pl. IX. the death of meketaten 85

Fig. 4 G.T. Martin’s reconstruction of the same columns Fig. 5 Martin’s drawing of the scene, including the two of text. columns of text. has to be a princess. The group preceding thems - column are very widely spaced, and there is clearly sign at the end of col. 1 he identifies as a t plus a room in the area available to accommodate the seated woman determinative; the presence of the customary titulary of Meketaten as well as the t, about which he expresses no doubt whatsoever, name of the child.” leads him to suggest that the name is either that He gives his own reconstruction in a handcopy, of Merytaten, the eldest daughter, or Baketaten. which, however, is marred by an unfortunate Since Baketaten had clearly not yet been born at reversal of both the hieroglyphic signs and the this stage, Merytaten is left as the only possibility order of the columns. In corrected form, Mar- (and of course we now know that Baketaten was tin’s reconstruction appears as shown in Fig. 4 5 not a daughter of Nefertiti ). However, looking at above. Legrain’s reconstruction of the text, one cannot However, when one actually tries to insert the help feeling that the damaged area is simply too signs of Martin’s proposed reconstruction in the large for just the signs he wants to read in it. Even available space on his drawing7 (Fig. 5), one soon if we insert mrt=f between sAt nsw n t=f and the discovers that his reconstruction is far too long. name, as one would expect, the text is still not Here even shortening the phrases by taking out long enough to fill the available space. Legrain’s mrt=f does not help. I have tried several possi- restoration is therefore problematic. bilities, but the text simply will not fit the avail- This was also the opinion of Geoffrey Martin, able space. Martin does not suggest a name for whose seminal publication of the Royal Tomb the child, although he briefly considers the idea, contains an alternative reconstruction of the also suggested by Rolf Krauss,8 that the child is inscription.6 Unlike Legrain, he thinks that the male and that it is Tutankhaten whose birth is text refers to the child, although he does so on shown here. Whatever the merits of Martin’s the erroneous assumption that the signs in the reconstruction, however, it is important to note text face left, like the child, which is clearly not that he does not question the t plus seated female the case. He then rightly says that which Legrain saw at the end of col. 1; in fact, “in Bouriant’s [i.e. Legrain’s, JvD] reconstruc- those are the only signs beside the group ms (or tion the signs in the second [actually the first] ms.n) which appear in col. 1 on his drawing.

5 M. Gabolde, “Baketaten fille de Kiya?,” BSEG 16 (1992), 9 First published in popular form in “La postérité pp. 27-40. d’Aménophis III,” Égyptes Histoires et Cultures 1 (1993), 6 G.T. Martin, The Royal Tomb at El-‘Amarna II: The pp. 29-34 (reprinted in Akhénaton et l’époque amarnienne, Reliefs, Inscriptions, and Architecture (London: EES, 1989), eds. T.-L. Bergerot and B. Mathieu [Paris: Éditions Khéops / p. 44, Fig. 10. Centre d’Égyptologie, 2005], pp. 13-33), then in more detailed 7 Ibid., pl. 63. form in his D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon (Lyon: Univer- 8 Ibid., p. 45. Cf. R. Krauss, in Tutanchamun, eds., sité Lumière—Lyon II, Institut d’Archéologie et d’Histoire R. Krauss and R. Wagner (Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von de l’Antiquité; Paris: Boccard, 1998), pp. 118-24. See also Zabern, 1980), pp. 51-2. his “Das Ende der Amarnazeit,” in Das Geheimnis des 86 jacobus van dijk

More recently, Marc Gabolde has come up with an entirely new and startling solution.9 After iden- tifying the elements in the text which he considers to be beyond doubt, i.e. the group ‘born of’ at the end of col. 1 and the cartouche of Nefertiti in col. 2, he rightly remarks that the text therefore must have contained the customary phrase ‘king’s son/ daughter of his body, his beloved’ and that the usual titles ‘great king’s wife, his beloved’ must have preceded the cartouche of Nefertiti in col. 2. He also correctly states that in col. 1 there is room for one name only, not for the two sug- gested by Martin. Here, however, Gabolde unfor- tunately leaves the field of epigraphy and turns to hypothetical historical arguments. The child, he says, because it is depicted in a scene show- Fig. 6. M. Gabolde’s reconstruction of the same columns of text. ing the death of Meketaten, must have been born before Meketaten’s death. Three of her sisters, Meryaten, Ankhesenpaaten and Neferneferu- death chamber of Meketaten, as if they have just aten-ta-sheryt, are depicted elsewhere in Room left that room? That this is indeed what they have γ and can therefore be ruled out. The youngest just done is evident from the parallel in Room α, two daughters of Nefertiti, although not shown where the nurse and child are shown just outside in Room γ, must also be ruled out because they the door of the death chamber, while the atten- were already old enough to participate in ritual dant holding the open fan over the child is still events in Akhenaten’s Year 12, when Meketaten inside the chamber.11 Surely these facts must have was still alive. This, according to Gabolde, leaves some significance. Nefertiti herself is present in only one other possibility: the infant is a seventh the scene in both Rooms α and γ, and in both child of Akhenaten and Nefertiti, and since we do scenes her purported child is shown as a newborn not know of a seventh daughter but we do know baby. In Gabolde’s reconstruction of the events of a king’s son called Tutankhaten, the child in this would mean that two or even three12 of Nefer- Room γ must be Tutankhaten, son of Akhenaten titi’s daughters died within very short succession and Nefertiti. of each other shortly after Nefertiti herself had Before we return to the epigraphy, it is as well given birth to a male heir to the throne. This is to ask ourselves what the reason might be for not in itself impossible, but the presence of the showing a newborn baby in the arms of its nurse child in the actual death chamber of his purported in a scene depicting the death of a princess. If sisters is inexplicable. this child is Tutankhaten, why are not the other In my opinion, a close scrutiny of the remains surviving children of Akhenaten and Nefertiti, of the inscription in Room γ makes Gabolde’s Meketaten’s sisters, depicted in this scene?10 After reconstruction of the text (Fig. 6) highly question- all, the daughters are virtually omnipresent in able, and serious doubts have also been expressed Amarna tomb and temple scenes, whereas Tut- by C. Vandersleyen, although the latter did not ankhaten is almost never depicted. And why is the suggest an alternative reading.13 Gabolde gives the group of the nurse with child and the two women sign preceding the group ms in col. 1 as a seated holding the fans orientated facing all the other man holding a flail; the traces in front of the face figures shown in the two registers outside the of this sign he interprets as the feet of a quail w. goldenen Sarges: Echnaton und das Ende der Amarnazeit, eds. is depicted in both Rooms α and γ, and that the scene in A. Grimm and S. Schoske (München: Staatliches Museum Room α depicts the demise of Neferneferure and Setepenre, Ägyptischer Kunst, 2001), pp. 9-41 (especially pp. 24-7). D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 107-10. Vandersleyen also 10 C. Vandersleyen, “Les scènes de lamentation des assigns Room α to Akhenaten and Nefertiti’s two youngest chambres alpha et gamma dans la tombe d’Akhénaton,” daughters. RdE 44 (1993), pp. 192-4. 13 Vandersleyen, RdE 44 (1993), p. 193; cf. also M. Eaton- 11 Bouriant et al., Monuments, pl. VI (Fig. 2 above); Krauss and R. Krauss, Review of D’Akhenaton à Toutânkha- Martin, Royal Tomb II, pls. 58-59. mon, by Marc Gabolde, BiOr 58, no. 1-2 (2001), p. 93, who 12 Gabolde believes that the newly born Tutankhaten call Gabolde’s reconstruction ‘methodically unsound.’ the death of meketaten 87

On the photograph published by Bouriant c.s., however, this latter sign is clearly a t, as expressly stated by Legrain and confirmed by Martin. The seated man with flail as given by Gabolde has a form that is unattested before the Ramesside period, i.e. with knees pulled up instead of squat- ting on the ground (A52) or seated on a chair (A51). Seated king signs (A42) have their knees pulled up like Gabolde’s hieroglyph, but they wear a royal headdress with uraeus; moreover, the child was not a king, and princes, even crown princes, were not depicted with royal regalia. The pub- lished photograph would appear to confirm the seated female sign (B1) read by Legrain and by Martin and Vandersleyen. These two crucial signs Fig. 7. New reconstruction of the same columns of text. are in my opinion beyond reasonable doubt and are a clear indication that the child held by the nurse is female, not male. Further confirmation of as the one we have just rejected, but, unlike all this comes from the fact that male children who the other options we have discussed, the name are depicted nude are almost without exception Meketaten fits both the traces and the available shown with a clear indication of their male geni- space exactly (Fig. 7). In fact, although I do not talia, and these are absent in this relief, also in want to stress this point too much, enlarging a Gabolde’s drawing of it. Perhaps it is also worth high-resolution scan of the inscription in the pub- pointing out that in the only instance we have of lished photograph on the computer reveals not the name of Tutankhaten as a prince, the famous only the indisputable presence of the t, but also block from Hermopolis, his name is spelled Twt- appears to suggest the contours of a k above the nw-ἰtn, with an additional w not found in later t and the seated female sign (Fig. 8). spellings of his name as king, and, incidentally, Further arguments in favor of the hypothesis with the elements twt, nw, and ἰtn in a different that the child is the reborn Meketaten may be order than in the form used in Gabolde’s draw- found in the nature of the scene itself. In a burial ing. Because we do not have any other occur- chamber the death and resurrection of the occu- rences of Tutankhaten’s name from Amarna we pant is the main subject to be expected in the do not know whether the form Twt-nw-ἰtn was decoration, which is much more likely to be of a an exception rather than the rule, but if it was the symbolic nature rather than depicting an histori- normal form of the name at Amarna, it would no cal event. An indication of the symbolic nature longer fit in Gabolde’s reconstruction. of the scenes in the burial chamber is provided So, if the child is a daughter of Nefertiti, as by the scene on the adjacent wall in Room γ, seems clear from the remains of the inscription, which shows a statue of the deceased Meketaten who can she be? Here we can return to Legrain’s in a shrine entwined with plants usually found original discussion of the text. The only names in connection with birth and rebirth. In a foot- of princesses which fit, he stated, were those of note in his Royal Tomb at El-‘Amarna, Geoffrey Merytaten and Baketaten, but neither of these Martin recorded a suggestion made by Lanny Bell two can be meant here for reasons which have in connection with the death chamber scene in already been discussed. This leaves us with only Room α, that “the presence of a child in connec- one option: the missing name is that of Meketaten tion with the fan might symbolize the rebirth of herself. Inevitably this means that the newborn the deceased ruler,” adding that “this does not baby which is shown leaving the death chamber seem to be the correct interpretation here.”14 I am in the arms of a nurse is the reborn Meketaten sure Lanny Bell’s suggestion is correct, however, herself. This conclusion may seem just as startling although it is not the rebirth of the deceased king

14 Martin, Royal Tomb II, p. 39 n. 6. For the significance Mélanges Gamal Eddin Mokhtar I, ed. P. Posener-Kriéger of the fan and its association with the royal ka see now (Cairo: IFAO, 1985), pp. 31-59. L. Bell, “Aspects of the Cult of the Deified Tutankhamun,” in 88 jacobus van dijk

scenes is not in itself surprising. On the other hand, we know that the traditional Osirian beliefs about the underworld were no longer adhered to at Amarna and that the deceased were thought to live again on earth under the beneficial rays of the Aten in whose temple they received their daily food offerings. An instant rebirth at the moment of death, as appears to be depicted in the scenes in Rooms α and γ does not seem at all inconceiv- able within the new Atenist religion. In fact, one wonders whether the child may not actually be a representation of the deceased princess’s ka. It is the ka, often depicted as a person’s double, which lives on and which receives food offerings Fig. 8. Detail of G. Jéquier’s photograph of the scene recon- in the deceased’s renewed co-existence with the structed in Fig. 7. Aten on earth.16 Whatever the exact nature of the newborn child, however, I would propose that here, but the rebirth of a princess. In an essay in the scene in Room α is a symbolic representa- the book accompanying the exhibition on The tion of the death and rebirth of Meketaten and Royal Women of Amarna in the Metropolitan that neither this scene nor its parallel in Room Museum of Art in 1996, Dorothea Arnold com- γ have anything to do with the actual birth of a mented on the scene in Room γ as follows: royal child, let alone that of Tutankhaten. “It has been suggested that she [i.e. Meketaten] died in childbirth, but she seems too young—ten years old at most—to have borne a child, even at Postscript a time when women matured early. Considering her youth and the well-known unwillingness of The above article is a slightly expanded version of Egyptians to depict anything like the cause of the paper I read during the Ninth International death, this scene probably expresses, in symbolic Congress of Egyptologists in Grenoble, 6-12 Sep- terms, a wish for her rebirth rather than the fact tember 2004. Not long after the congress, Dr. Lise that she died in childbirth.”15 Manniche wrote to me informing me that Prof. Such an interpretation would also explain why John Harris was about to publish an article with this scene is depicted not once, in Room γ, but much the same interpretation as the one I had sug- again in Room α. gested in the Grenoble paper. The article, entitled Of course one might object that there is no par- “En sag om forveksling,” has now been published allel elsewhere in Egyptian tomb representations in the Danish Ægyptologisk TidsskriftPapyrus 24 for this kind of scene, but this applies equally to no. 2 (December 2004), pp. 4-13. Harris too reads any alternative explanation of the scene, including the name of Meketaten in the scene in Room γ an historical one. Amarna iconography is unique and identifies the child as one of the stages of in many other respects and the absence of a par- transformation (prw) in the renewal of life of allel from more traditional Egyptian funerary the deceased princess.

15 Do. Arnold, “Aspects of the Royal Female Image during enfants et la mort en Égypte,” in Naissance et petite enfance the Amarna Period,” in The Royal Women of Amarna: Images dans l’Antiquité, ed. V. Dasen (Fribourg: Academic Press; of Beauty from Ancient Egypt (New York: Metropolitan Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 2004), pp. 13-32, Museum of Art, 1996), pp. 85-119. The quote is on p. 115. esp. pp. 13-6. See for a rare depiction of a deceased mother feeding a 16 In Akhenaten’s religion ‘the living Aten’ and at least baby on a funerary stela D. Wildung and S. Schoske, Nofret, the royal ka were identical, see the texts quoted by L. Bell, die Schöne. Die Frau im Alten Ägypten (Mainz am Rhein: Mélanges Mokhtar I, p. 50 n. 122. Philipp von Zabern, 1984), No. 9, and F. Dunand, “Les images of amenhotep iv and nefertiti 89

IMAGES OF AMENHOTEP IV AND NEFERTITI IN THE STYLE OF THE PREVIOUS REIGN*

Earl L. Ertman University of Akron

There is no doubt about the great scholarship of Representations of Amenhotep IV are known Bill Murnane as his publications speak for them- from early in his reign. These images are in the selves. Few Egyptologists outside of the members style used by the carvers who decorated for his of the Karnak Mission that he led were around father, Amenhotep III. None of the distortions Bill on a daily basis. For several years Bill and his so familiar from what Cyril Aldred has termed staff also stayed at the Windsor Hotel in Luxor, the ‘Early Period’ of the Amarna Style1 are shown during their field seasons. We of the Amenmesse in a few renderings of him like an example from Project also stayed there for some years during Theban Tomb 55 of Ramose, Amenhotep IV/ our early work in the Valley of the Kings. This Akhenaten’s southern vizier.2 A description of put us into contact on several levels with him this tomb indicates that: from breakfast to some evening meals and at times some after working hours discussions of many of “The north-west wall of the great hall of pillars the same issues and topics published in this com- has reliefs dating from the years immediately memorative volume. Bill was a quiet, thoughtful following the death of Amenhophis III on both sides of the doorway… Of these reliefs, those on man immersed in many periods in ancient his- the left of the door clearly belong to the earliest tory, especially those in Egypt. He was willing period of the reign of Amenhophis IV, certainly to share his insights with anyone who asked or no later than the third regnal year. The king is cared to discuss an issue. He is obviously missed shown seated on a throne beneath a canopy with as a beloved individual, but also to many, he is the goddess Maat seated behind him. The whole missed for the loss of insight into problems left of the scene is executed in the style of the reign unstudied and unpublished that will not now be of Amenhophis III.”3 investigated by this brilliant scholar. To him and his memory this brief article is dedicated. (And, A sandstone block (Berlin 2072) with the god thanks again for all the good bakery bread you Re-Harakhty facing left and the king facing right often brought to breakfast.) is another example of Amenhotep IV’s image in When one speaks of Akhenaten and Nefertiti, the style of his father’s reign.4 The king wears a Amarna style representations often come to mind. khepresh crown and his features are not distorted. These images are ‘mannered’ and apparently dis- The images are in raised relief. The scenes from torted since later renderings of these two historic the tomb of Kheruef (TT 192)5 show Amenhotep individuals show them in a less artificial style with IV on both ends of a lintel along with his mother ‘near-normal’ proportions and features. Queen Tiy. They make offerings to Re-Harakhty

* This article is based on my presentation in Tucson, format in the 1958 edition, pl. 115. For a line drawing see Arizona at the annual meeting of the American Research N. de G. Davies, The Tomb of the Vizier Ramose (London: Center in Egypt, April 17, 2004. It has been enlarged since Egypt Exploration Society, 1941), pl. XXIX. then. 3 Lange and Hirmer, Egypt, p. 449. 1 C. Aldred, Akhenaten and Nefertiti (New York: The 4 Aldred, Akhenaten and Nefertiti, Fig. 30, and R. Freed, Brooklyn Museum / Viking Press, 1973), pp. 48-57 and Y. Markowitz and S. D’Auria, Pharaohs of the Sun: Akhen- passim. aten, Nefertiti, Tutankhamen (Boston: Museum of Fine 2 K. Lange and M. Hirmer, Egypt: Architecture, Painting, Arts / Bullfinch Press/Little, Brown and Co., 1999), Sculpture in Three Thousand Years (New York: Phaidon, Fig. 75 and no. 20. 1968), p. 449. This scene of the king and Maat is illustrated 5 The Epigraphic Survey,The Tomb of Kheruef, Theban in W.S. Smith, The Art and Architecture of Ancient Egypt, Tomb 192 (Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University revised with additions by W.K. Simpson (New Haven, Con- of Chicago, 1980), pls. 8-9. necticut: Yale University Press, 1998), Fig. 256 and in a larger 90 earl l. ertman

Fig. 1. Akhenaten kissing the ground: Karnak talatat assemblage A 0081, after R. Vergnieux and M. Gondran, Aménophis IV et les Pierres du soleil. Ahkénaton retrouvé (Paris: Arthaud, 1997), pp. 170-1. and Maat on the left while on the right they offer behind her husband in a window of appearances.8 to Atum and Hathor, all in the style of Amenho- What remains of Nefertiti’s distorted features9 tep III. Another relief ( E 13482) portrays mimic many of those of the king from this scene. the king with the baby-face features found in the This distortion is also true of her image on the reign of his father, but with the additional feature majority of the talatat that we are familiar with of a protruding belly.6 from Thebes where her extended jaw and angular After a discussion of the two scenes in differ- features, while not as prominent as those of her ent styles in the tomb of Ramose of Amenhotep husband, are never-the-less distinctive. IV in a pavilion with the goddess Maat behind On lesser known blocks from Karnak, Amen- him and the king with Nefertiti in the window of hotep IV and Nefertiti both face left with the appearances, Cyril Aldred indicated, “We cannot queen behind her husband as they bow to kiss say whether Nefertiti’s appearance underwent a the ground:10 scene number A 0081 (Figs. 1-2, 6). comparable change, since no representation of A cartouche inscribed with Nefertiti’s name and her is known before the advent of the new style, placed in front of her image between the soles of but it seems likely.”7 Aldred was correct when he the king’s feet and her head makes this identifica- wrote this statement and his belief that represen- tion certain.11 Both the king and queen have long tations of Nefertiti in the style of Amenhotep III spindly fingers which are more mannered than were likely. This can now be confirmed, for at naturalistic. Similar finger shapes are known from least one representation is preserved and one or earlier dynasties, but during the reign of Amen- more are probable based on surviving evidence. hotep III, they are seldom found on royal images. A scene on the north-west wall in the tomb of In scenes of dancers in the tomb of Kheruef (TT Ramose is considered to have been carved early 192) the dancers’ hair hangs down vertically, in the ‘new’ style just coming into vogue with their hands are ‘cupped’ near the ground line the name change of the king from Amenhotep with curved, but jointless thumbs and fingers.12 IV to Akhenaten. Here we see Nefertiti (Fig. 5) The rays of the Aten, in early representations like

6 Freed, Fig. 38 and p. 207, no. 21; R. Vergnieux and one possibly wearing a sun disk. M. Gondran, Aménophis IV et les Pierres du soleil. Ahkénaton 10 Vergnieux and Gondran, Aménophis IV et les Pierres retrouvé (Paris: Arthaud, 1997), p. 93. I thank Joann Fletcher du soleil, p. 43, top. I thank both E.C. Brock for his help for calling this book to my attention. Talatat blocks pictured and Alain Arnaudiès, in charge of the documentation of in this book are not as well known in the United States as Karnak for the French Egyptian Centre in Luxor, for his are those blocks excavated and published by Donald Redford assistance in obtaining the photograph of Nefertiti as well and his team from the Akhenaten Temple Project or those as permission to publish it. illustrated in G. Roeder, Amarna Reliefs aus Hermopolis 11 Ibid., p. 73 where the talatat blocks which make up (Hildesheim: Gebrüder Gerstenberg, 1969). the larger scene are assembled. 7 Aldred, Akhenaten and Nefertiti, p. 54. 12 The Epigraphic Survey, The Tomb of Kheruef, 8 For a drawing of this scene, see Davies, The Tomb of pls. 24, 33-4 and Lange and Hirmer, Egypt, pl. 168. The fingers the Vizier Ramose, pl. XXXIII; Lange and Hirmer, Egypt, of some other individuals in this same tomb also exhibit Fig. 38. this boneless structure of their hands from the knuckles 9 Also visible in Johnson’s close-up photograph are the to the finger tips. dual uraei on Nefertiti’s brow, each wearing horns, with images of amenhotep iv and nefertiti 91

Fig. 2. Nefertiti kissing the ground: Karnak talatat assemblage A 0081, after R. Vergnieux and M. Gondran, Aménophis IV et les Pierres du soleil. Ahkénaton retrouvé (Paris: Arthaud, 1997), pp. 170-1. those in the tomb of Ramose (see Johnson’s pho- the right end of the Kheruef lintel (Fig. 3) men- tograph, Fig. 5) also are without bone structure tioned earlier (see note 5 supra). There are many for all the digits, except the thumb. similarities to the Nefertiti image. Tiy’s modius In the complete talatat scene under study,13 (on both ends of the lintel) is plain and undeco- the king wears a khepresh crown. On the right rated. A heavy circlet is placed over her wig. A dis- hand side of A 0081, block number 34-118, the tinctive and pronounced gold browband extends queen wears a tripartite wig surmounted by an from brow to ear with the ‘tab’ of this browband undecorated modius and two tall plumes—she showing under her wig. Individual sections of is obviously dressed as a goddess (Figs. 2 & 6). the wig (locks or curls) are rendered in a similar Two uraei, each topped by sun disks are held fashion. in place by a band around her deeply cut wig.14 A portrait of Queen Tiy on a relief17 (Brus- A gold browband is present, visible from the front sels E2157) from the tomb of Userhet (TT 47) of her heavy wig to her ear. She may wear a very also compares well, including those features cited small circular earring.15 Her face, often angular for the Kheruef lintel (right side). A drawing by in representations from Theban talatat,16 is more Elaine Taylor of this image (Fig. 4) compares well rounded here with little emphasis on her cheek to the talatat carving under study. The overall bones or extended jaw. This is in stark contrast to shape of the faces of each are closer than any the representation of King Amenhotep IV in front other two images of these queens in their rounded of her whose sharp angular features and promi- softer forms. nent jaw recall many other similar representations Returning to the talatat image of Nefertiti from this early time in the reign prior to the move (Fig. 6), what would account for this difference in by the king and court to Akhetaten. rendering the king’s and queen’s faces in different There are two relief portraits of Queen Tiy styles and why is the queen’s image in the style which are quite similar to the talatat image of of the previous reign?18 One possibility would be Nefertiti under review. One is the queen from that while the king’s image followed a new canon

13 Vergnieux and Gondran, Aménophis IV et les Pierres 17 C. Aldred, New Kingdom Art in Ancient Egypt (London: du soleil, pp. 73-5, 170-1. Alec Tiranti, 1961), pl. 85. 14 See this author’s comments on dual uraei wearing 18 P. Dorman’s comments related to Nefertiti in “The sun disks in “An Amarna Icon Reconsidered: Berlin Relief Long Coregency Revisited: Architecture and Iconography: 15000,” KMT 15.4 (2004-05), pp. 41-2. Conundra in the Tomb of Kheruef,” in this volume. Dorman 15 It is difficult to determine if a small earring is pres- suggests that the status or iconography for Nefertiti may not ent or not. A larger earring is seen in the later statuette of have been established when Kheruef’s lintels were carved Nefertiti (Berlin 21 263). See D. Arnold, The Royal Women and this could support the idea that Nefertiti is shown as a of Amarna (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1996), goddess on the talatat under study (similar to ways Queen Tiy Figs. 68-9, 71. The yellow quartzite head of this queen from was at times depicted) in terms of form at the earliest time the Thutmosis workshop at Amarna (Berlin 21 220), shows of Amenhotep IV’s reign. Dorman’s comments in reference double piercing of the ears in this later work, Figs. 66-7. to Kheruef’s tomb decoration are, “The relief decoration 16 For examples see Aldred, nos. 23-25, 31 and other in Kheruef’s tomb … belongs to the very early period of especially early works. Amenhotep IV, doubtless to his first two years … and thus 92 earl l. ertman

Fig. 3. After the Epigraphic Survey, The Tomb of Kheruef, pl. 9. there may not have been a new canon yet designed for images of the queen so she was sculpted as her mother-in-law Queen Tiy had been. Another possibility is favored by this writer, that obvi- ously two different draftsmen/sculptors, carving in different styles, created this scene. Seemingly against this scenario, Cyril Aldred, referring to the two different styles in the tomb of Ramose, indicated regarding the scene of the king with the goddess Maat: “This scene had not been completed before the companion relief was drawn and partly cut in the new style and with the new subject of Akhenaten and Nefertiti at their Window of Appearances … albeit by the same craftsman responsible for the traditional style of work.”19

It is possible that the work in Ramose’s tomb Fig. 4. Brussels E 2157, relief of Tiy from the tomb of User- followed this formula, but as far as the talatat het. Drawing by Elaine Taylor. while Nefertiti’s rise to unusual ritual status had not yet but used those of the last reigning queen (Tiy) or at least taken place…” Therefore she may not yet have had her own the sculptors did. personal symbols to distinguish her from other queens, 19 Aldred, Akhenaten and Nefertiti, pp. 50-51. images of amenhotep iv and nefertiti 93

that Queen Nefertiti’s face does not resemble any of the later inscribed representations of her on talatat nor those features of her known images from the studio of Tuthmosis at Akhetaten does not mean that this talatat image is the earliest known representation of Nefertiti as queen. At this time it is the only image of her in the style of Amenhotep III’s reign. Since the construction of the Aten temple complex in Thebes commenced around the second year of her husband’s reign, as Donald Redford believes,20 images like that seen in Ramose’s tomb may actually have been carved earlier in the reign, but they are carved in the ‘new’ style. Important, however, is the fact that this talatat image of Nefertiti has to be early in date, surely within the first year or two of the reign, since a craftsman familiar with the previous style (that of the reign of Amenhotep III) had not yet assimilated the newly desired structure of images for Akhenaten’s radical decorative plan. Surpris- ing is the fact that the king appears much more harshly, with angular features and that Nefertiti has a soft serene appearance. The sculptor who had worked for Amenhotep III created an image more like those seen in Amenhotep III’s reign, but he did include two features found in other late Fig. 5. Nefertiti in the Window of Appearances, TT 55, Tomb representations of Nefertiti. I have commented of Ramose. Photograph courtesy of George Johnson. on these in other presentations and papers. These are: virtually an unbroken profile line from the scene under study is concerned this writer’s top of the forehead to the tip of the nose without view is that the carver of the king’s image on the a noticeable depression for the bridge of the nose left worked in the ‘new’ style while the carver and a ball-like chin.21 of the queen’s face, on the right, worked in the Until more images of Nefertiti in the style of style of Amenhotep III with which he was prob- Amenhotep III are recognized, this talatat proves ably more familiar. It would seem that no time that she along with her husband were portrayed interval elapsed between the carving of each of early in Amenhotep IV/Akheanten’s reign with these figures since they are placed side by side more examples of his image surviving that her and it is thought that the carved decoration was own. cut only after the wall blocks were set in place. Susan Redford, who has cleared the tomb of If Aldred’s assumption is correct that the carver Parennefer, has indicated to me in personal com- of Ramose’s tomb (if indeed there was only one munication that, “I agree that there were prob- master involved) was one craftsman working in ably some traditional style representations in both styles, it does not seem to follow that both the tomb…” Charles Nims had inferred this in images, those of the king and queen on the tal- an article in 1973 stating, “From the style of the atat, would be created in different styles. The fact decoration in the tomb [Parennefer] it is almost

20 Confirmed in an e-mail conversation with Don Red- the talatat image here under study of Nefertiti to relief ford whom I thank for his assistance. carving of some representations of Queen Tiy could sug- 21 A point of interest while noting the facial structure gest a similarity in the earliest years of the reign also in of Nefertiti on this talatat, it may be that we should not so three-dimensional representations of Nefertiti, depending hurriedly exclude Nefertiti as a possible candidate for the on the sculptor’s experience. See Arnold, The Royal Women ownership of Metropolitan Museum 26.7.1396 (the famous of Amarna, Figs. 27, 29 and her comments on this head yellow jasper head) if it was in fact not from Amarna, but included in the chapter, “An Artistic revolution: The early from Thebes. See Aldred’s remarks, Akhenaten and Nefertiti, years of King Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten,” pp. 35-39. p. 107. “Probably from Tell el Amarna.” The similarity of 94 earl l. ertman

Fig. 6. Nefertiti talatat ©CNRS/CFEETK—A. Bellod. certain that the king and queen were convention- Thetalatat block under study depicts Nefertiti ally represented.”22 From the present evidence, in the earlier style of her father-in-law, but the Susan believes that: king, Amenhotep IV, was carved in the ‘new’ style, an unusual circumstance at best. In a similar, but “There is only one scene in the hall that I can say once depicted Nefertiti and it is my belief heavily damaged scene, we can see Nefertiti again that she and her husband are depicted in the bowing to kiss the ground apparently in the same Amarna art-style on this wall… On the outside style as the undamaged example we have been façade, Akhenaten and Nefertiti were shown in reviewing.23 So originally there were at least two the usual Amarna art style offering scene to the and possibly more examples like this of Nefer- sun-disk.” titi in the style of her father-in-law, Amenhotep III. Although this tomb may have been started early Once more Thebantalatat blocks with their in the reign of Amenhotep IV, the sculptors of decoration are published and studied we will pos- this tomb may not have relied on any forms sibly see more ‘early’ representations of Queen from the previous reign, at least not for images Nefertiti in the style of the previous reign, but of Nefertiti. perhaps not juxtaposed with those of her husband in the ‘new’ style.

22 C. Nims, “The Transition from the Traditional to 23 Vergnieux and Gondran, Aménophis IV et les Pierres the New Style of Wall Relief under Amenhotep IV,” JNES du soleil, p. 172. 32 (1973), p. 184. two semi-erased kushite cartouches in the precinct of mut 95

TWO SEMIERASED KUSHITE CARTOUCHES IN THE PRECINCT OF MUT AT SOUTH KARNAK

Richard A. Fazzini Brooklyn Museum

William Murnane is perhaps best known for his of his theory: Claude Traunecker and Françoise work in New Kingdom Egypt, but his interests Le Saout of the Centre Franco-Égyptien d’Étude were more far ranging than that. For example, des Temples de Karnak arranged for a latex cast in the 1990s he became involved with the ques- to be made of the cartouche on the stela, and both tion of the name of Taharqa in the entrance way they and Bill agreed that the traces must belong of the Second Pylon of the Temple of Amun at to Nefertumkhure, the prenomen of Taharqa.5 Karnak.1 The same prenomen exists in a crypt in the Mut Much earlier, soon after I began work in the Temple (Fig. 2). Precinct of Mut at South Karnak in 1976, I ben- Margaret Benson and Janet Gourlay reported efited from conversations with Bill concerning that they uncovered crypts in “Room f,” which is Ptolemaic inscriptions at the site. At the time, Bill the Mut Temple’s central bark shrine (Fig. 3) and was also engaged in attempting to establish the another chamber which they did not specify. They date of a much damaged stela in the first court described these as “small stone-lined vaults, too of the Amun Temple before the south wing of low to stand upright in, and had probably been the Second Pylon (Fig. 1).2 This stela had been used for safe-guarding treasure.”6 attributed first to Dynasty XXV and Taharqa3 The bark shrine does not seem to have such and then to a much later time.4 Bill had come to a chamber, but one of these “crypts” could pos- believe that it could be dated to Dynasty XXV on sibly be the room just northwest of Benson and the basis of its style and asked me, as an art histo- Gourlay’s “Room e” (Fig. 3), whose south wall rian, what I thought of his attribution. I told him seems to have had a sliding panel and where the that I thought that he was correct, and advised space between the edge of the Tuthmoside plat- him not to worry that he was not trained in art form of the temple and the foundations of a later history: paleography, after all, is a variant of art expansion of the temple could have been seen as history. Not long thereafter Bill got confirmation a crypt. 7

1 W.J. Murnane, “Egyptian Monuments & Historical unnumbered pages 66-67, where it is also attributed to Memory: New Light on the Ancients’ ‘Uses of the Past’ Dynasty XXV. from the Great Hypostyle Hall at Karnak,” KMT 5.3 (Fall 4 J. Lecant, Recherches sur les monuments thébains de 1994), pp. 14-24 and 88. See also the later comments of la XXVe dynastie dite éthiopienne, BdE 36 (Cairo: Impri- E. Russmann and Bill Murnane as cited by her in “Two merie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1965), Bracelets with Anachronistic Cartouches, with Remarks p. 15, E, where he says “Si le martelage des cartouches on Kushite Royal Jewelry and on the Commemoration of pouvait faire envisager de la considerer comme éthiopienne, Kushite Kings in Egypt,” BES 13 (1997), pp. 47-58. le style de sa gravure, exagérément maniérée, exigé, nous 2 This is described in PM II2, p. 24 as “Stela, unfinished, semble-t-il, qu’on la rejette à l’époque ptolémaïque ou peu two figures of Amun, back to back, and text with erased auparavant.” cartouche, granite, in front of south wing of the Second 5 Letter in the files of the Brooklyn Museum from Wil- Pylon.” liam Murnane to Bernard V. Bothmer, who had agreed 3 H. Chevrier, “Rapport sur les travaux de Karnak (1930- with Leclant’s dating. 1931),”ASAE 31 (1931), p. 85, where he said that “Dans tout 6 M. Benson, J. Gourlay and P. Newberry, The Temple le déblai, nous n’avons trouvé qu’une stèle en granit noir… of Mut in Asher. An account of the excavation of the temple La stèle, où ne subsistent plus que les figures d’Amon et and of the religious representations and objects found therein, du roi [sic: the figures of Amun and the king are actually as illustrating the history of Egypt and the main religious back to back figures of Amun], est entièrement martelé. ideas of the Egyptians (London: Murray, 1899), p. 75, with Elle date, je pense, de l’époque éthiopienne: le cartouche, plan of Mut Temple opposite p. 36. dont l’intérieur seul est martelé, est très petit, permet de 7 R. Fazzini, “Some Aspects of the Precinct of the l’attribuer à Taharqa.” For good images of the stela’s figures, Goddess Mut in the New Kingdom,” in Leaving No Stones see B. de Gryse, Karnak, 3000 Jahr ägyptischer Glanz, trans. Unturned. Essays on the Ancient Near East and Egypt in N. Hiltl and H. Weber (Liège: Éditions du Perron, 1985), Honor of Donald P. Hansen, ed. E. Ehrenberg (Winona Lake, 96 richard a. fazzini

Fig. 1. Detail of a Dynasty XXV stela found in front of the south wing of the Second Pylon of the Amun Temple at Karnak. Photograph by B.V. Bothmer.

chamber to hold ritual images or equipment but could be a sort of serdab8 or wt-kA.9 However, it does contain an image of Taharqa labeled with both his prenomen and nomen. The cartouche with Taharqa’s prenomen in Fig. 2 is in what is both the one definite crypt that Benson and Gourlay identified and a structure that has normally been ignored in discussions of crypts.10 It is located under the central shrine Fig. 2. The prenomen of Taharqa in the crypt under the of the Mut Temple (Fig. 3). Benson and Gourlay main sanctuary of the Temple of Mut. Drawing by J. van 11 Dijk and R. Fazzini. described it and its discovery as follows: …the man who was clearing out the earth in front of it perceived that under its pavement was Another structure in the Mut Temple identi- a hole large enough for a little boy to crawl into. fied as a crypt is that called the Crypt of Taha- We began to work out the hole, and found that it rqa or Montuemhat (Fig. 3). As the author has extended inwards from the top of a narrow door, stated elsewhere, this is not necessarily a crypt or through which, when the earth was removed we

Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2002), pp. 72-73, and p. 64, Fig. 1, Dynasty XX-early Dynasty XXVI (with Special Emphasis 11. on the Temple Precinct of the Goddess Mut at Karnak), 8 R. Fazzini, Egypt, Dynasty XXII-XXV, Iconography forthcoming. of Religions, Section XVI, Egypt 10 (Leiden: Institute of 10 For some recent publications of crypts, their decora- Religious Iconography, State University of Groningen / tion and contents, see S. Cauville, “Les statues cultuelles de E.J. Brill, 1988), pp. 16-17 and 33, and pl. XXX. Dendera d’après les inscriptions parietals,”BIFAO 87 (1987), For this “crypt” see also PM II2, p. 258; R. Fazzini and pp. 73-117; C. Traunecker, “Cryptes décorées, cryptes ané- W. Peck, “The Precinct of Mut During Dynasty XXV and pigraphes,” in Hommages à François Daumas (Montpellier: early Dynasty XXVI: A Growing Picture,” JSSEA 11 (1981), Université de Montpellier, 1986), pp. 571-577; C. Traunecker, pp.115-116; R. Fazzini, “Report on the 1983 Season of Excava- “Cryptes connues et inconnues des temples tardifs,” BSFE tion at the Precinct of the Goddess Mut,” ASAE 70 (1985), 129 (1994), pp. 21-46; W. Waitkus, “Zum funktionalen p. 294, and pl. IV, a. Zusammenhang von Krypta, Wabet und Goldhaus,” in 9 For a wt-kA of Nesptah, son of Montuemhat, that 3. Ägyptologische Tempeltagung, Hamburg, 1-5 Juni 1994. was built into one of the Mut Temple’s XXVth Dynasty Systeme und Programme der ägyptischen Tempeldekoration, porches, see R. Fazzini, “The Precinct of the Goddess Mut at ÄAT 33, ed. D. Kurth (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1995), South Karnak 1996-2001,” ASAE 79 (2006), pp. 85-94. This pp. 283-303. monument will be dealt with in greater depth in R. Fazzini, 11 M. Benson, J. Gourlay and P. Newberry, The Temple Aspects of the Art, Iconography and Architecture of Late of Mut in Asher, pp. 50-52. two semi-erased kushite cartouches in the precinct of mut 97

Fig. 3. Schematic plan by C. Van Siclen of the rear half of the Temple of Mut. The dotted line indicates the Tuthmoside platform.

descended into a tiny underground chamber, to have been deliberately made, for it was filled measuring 4 feet 4 inches in breadth by 5 feet 6 not with earth but with rubbish… We worked inches in length, and too low to allow one to stand at the hole in the floor through rubbish, find- upright…The door or hole at which one got in ing nothing but some scraps of pottery, half a was broad enough to admit the shoulders of the Hathor head in earthenware, a broken bit of blue average person but not more than two feet high, glaze, until we came to the sand. Even then we and its top being on the same level as the top of did not despair of finding a deposit in the sand, the chamber there was thus a drop of about three and worked through it until we came to layers feet inside. From the top of the doorway outwards of earth that were wet with infiltration from the masonry extended for a short way, the blocks of lake… stone being ingeniously placed in such wise that The Brooklyn Museum’s investigation of the crypt two more stones dropped between them would have filled up the space and completely hidden (Fig. 4) indicated that it was a rectangle 157 cm. the little door… when on having cleared out the deep and 135 cm. wide (slightly different from earth and rubbish with which the chamber was Benson and Gourlay’s measurements) and 155 choked we found that in the paved floor there cm. tall. The short shaft leading to it was almost was a hole extending from the north-east corner centrally located, being 39.5 cm. from the crypt’s to halfway below the door. There is probably but east wall and 42.5 cm. from the west wall. The one paving-stone missing, and the hole seemed preserved portion of the shaft is 94 cm. tall, 52 98 richard a. fazzini

Fig. 4. The crypt under the main sanctuary of the Temple of Mut and the shaft before it. Photograph by M. McKercher. cm. wide, 50 cm. deep, its floor sitting 61 cm. In an interesting article, C. Traunecker dis- above the crypt’s floor. A line of text that ran cussed a number of types of cult images. Among around the interior of the crypt except for the his tentative classifications of these images were: space left by the opening has been almost com- (1) images used in the “culte manifesté,” i.e. images pletely erased. However in one area, Jacobus van of the god(s) of the temple and of temple equip- Dijk and the present writer were able to make ment with specialized functions, such as sacred out remains of an inscription that could be read barks; and (2) “images de culte latent,” defined as nr nfr nb tAwy nb w, followed by the traces as: “les effigies divines conservées en des lieux of the cartouche with the name Nefertumkhure discrets tel les cryptes, les cénotaphes ou les salles illustrated in Fig. 2.12 cachées d’un temple où par leur seule présence A fragmentary and not easily datable offering elles remplissent leurs fonctions.”14 If images were table13 (Fig. 5) was found at the bottom of the contained in the crypt under the main shrine of shaft. However, as Benson and Gourlay did not the Temple of Mut, they would certainly only be mention it, one cannot be sure that it was there accessible with considerable effort and of Trau- when they conducted their excavation of this necker’s “latent cult” type. entrance. Moreover, the length and width of the Temple A in the northeast sector of what preserved portion of the table suggest that it was became the Precinct of Mut also contains some too large to fit in the bottom of the shaft. If the badly damaged cartouches, probably or definitely offering table was originally associated with this of Dynasty XXV. part of the temple it could have been placed inside The most important and only readable one of the crypt or have fallen down from the paving these is on a stray block found in the north side of the sanctuary. Be this as it may, the crypt’s of the Inner Hall by the door to the North Sanc- entrance seems only to have been accessible by tuary.15 Badly damaged, this front part of a hori- pulling up paving stones of the floor above. zontal cartouche was read first by Jacobus van

12 The few readable elements of decoration of this crypt égyptiens,” in L’Image et la production du sacré. Actes du will be published in R. Fazzini, Aspects of the Art, Iconog- colloque de Strasbourg (20-21 Janvier 1988) organisé par le raphy and Architecture of Late Dynasty XX-early Dynasty Centre d’Histoire des Religions de l’Université de Strasbourg XXVI. Suffice it to say here that one group of signs could be II. Groupe «Théorie et pratique de l’image cultuelle», eds. restored to read “Beloved of the Mistress of the Gods.” F. Dunand, J.M. Speiser and J. Wirth (Paris: Méridiens 13 Expedition Number 6M.14. Length 41.5 cm.; width Klincksieck, 1991), pp. 85-86. 15 2 45.5 cm.; height 13 cm. PM II , pl. XXVI. 14 C. Traunecker, “Observations sur le décor des temples two semi-erased kushite cartouches in the precinct of mut 99

Fig. 5. Fragmentary offering table found at the bottom of the shaft before the crypt under the main sanctuary of the Temple of Mut. Photograph by M. McKercher.

Dijk and then confirmed by this writer as ŠbA … more closely known faces in relief of Shabaqo18 (Fig. 6).16 From the Third Pylon (called Second than of .19 Nevertheless, these faces are Pylon in the plan cited in n. 15) to the rear of examples of a main style of the art of the Third the building, Temple A was built as a whole. The Intermediate Period, one with roots in Dynasty style of those of its reliefs that were not recarved XXI and which continued into early Dynasty in later times is that of Dynasty XXV17 and much XXVI.20 more likely of the reign of Shabaqo than She- Unfortunately, the birth and circumcision bitku. The reasons for this attribution are simple. scenes on the north wall of Temple A’s First We do not have any large-scale construction of Court (called simply “Court” in PM II2) cannot be Shebitku and the few well-preserved faces in dated by inscription because their cartouches are relief in this part of the temple (Fig. 7) resemble entirely erased.21 Nevertheless, the faces in these

16 The Mut Expedition’s reading of this cartouche was 19 K. Myśliwiec, Royal Portraiture of the Dynasties XXI- already reported by K. Cooney, “The Edifice of Taharqa: XXX, pls. XXXIV and XXXV, b. Ritual Function and the Role of the King,” JARCE 37 (2000), 20 R. Fazzini, “Sculpture, Third Intermediate Period,” in p. 39 with n. 163. The Dictionary of Art 9, ed. J. Turner (London and New York: 17 P. Barguet, Le temple d’Amon-Rê à Karnak. Essai Grove, 1996), pp. 886-888; and R. Fazzini, “The Chapel of d’exégèse. Recherches d’Archéologie, de Philosophie et Osiris Ruler-of-Eternity and the Art of the Third Intermedi- d’Histoire 21 (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français ate Period,” in The Twenty-Third Dynasty Chapel of Osiris d’Archéologie Orientale, 1962), pp. 9-10; R. Fazzini and Ruler of Eternity at Karnak, eds. G. Kadish and D. Redford W. Peck, “The Precinct of Mut During Dynasty XXV and (Mississauga, Ontario: Society for the Study of Egyptian early Dynasty XXVI,” pp.115-126; R. Fazzini, “A Monument Antiquities Publications, forthcoming), with references to in the Precinct of Mut with the Name of the God’s Wife E. Russmann, The Representation of the King in the XXVth I,” in Artibus Aegypti. Studia in Honorem Bernardi Dynasty, Monographies Reine Élisabeth 3 (Brussels: Fon- V. Bothmer a Collegis, Amicis, Discipulis Conscripta, eds. dation Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth; Brooklyn: Brooklyn H. De Meulenaere and L. Limme (Brussels: Musées Royaux Museum, l974); S. Wenig, Africa in Antiquity. The Arts of d’Art et d’Histoire, 1983), pp. 51-62. Ancient Nubia and the Sudan II: The Catalogue(Brook- 18 E.g., K. Myśliwiec, Royal Portraiture of the Dynasties lyn: Brooklyn Museum, 1978); C. Aldred et al., L’Égypte XXI-XXX (Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern, 1988), du crepuscule. De Tanis à Meroé, 1070 av. J.-C. - IVe siècle pls. XXVII, a-d; XXXI, b-d; XXXIII, b and d; J. Leclant, in apr. J.-C., Le monde égyptien. Les pharaons 3 (Paris: Gal- R. Parker, J. Leclant and J.-C. Goyon, The Edifice of Taha- limard, 1980). rqa by the Sacred Lake of Karnak, Brown Egyptological 21 A decent published photograph of the best preserved Studies 8 (Providence: Brown University Press, 1979), pls. cartouche is W. J. de Jong, “De tempel van Chonsoe-het-kind 2, E and 3, A-B. (vervolg),” de Ibis 8, no. 4 (1983), Afb. 37 on p. 115. 100 richard a. fazzini

a b

Fig. 6a-b. Photograph and drawing of the front part of a cartouche of ŠbA… found in the rear of Temple A. Drawing by R. Fazzini. Photograph by M. McKercher.

Fig. 7. Two well-preserved faces in relief in the rear of Temple A. Photograph by M. McKercher. scenes22 have significant similarities to reliefs of As we and others have also argued elsewhere, the reign of Taharqa, who was responsible for during the Third Intermediate Period and later other significant work in south Karnak,23 and this Temple A functioned as a mammisi,24 and the attri- writer believes the attribution of these reliefs to bution of this building to Shabaqo and Taharqa Taharqa is relatively safe. leads to another point worth mentioning.

22 See, e.g., W. J. de Jong, “De tempel van Chonsoe-het- pp. 122-126; R. Morkot, The Black Pharaohs: Egypt’s Nubian kind (vervolg),” p. 105, afb. 30; p. 107, afb. 32. Rulers (London: Rubicon Press, 2002), p. 244. For publica- 23 See, e.g., K. Myśliwiec, Royal Portraiture of the Dynas- tions of the decoration of Temple A see PM II2, pp. 270- ties XXI-XXX, pl. XL; R. Fazzini and W. Peck, “The Precinct 272, especially the references to M. Pillet, “Les scènes de of Mut During Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI,” naissance et de circoncision dans le temple nord-est de Mout pp. 115-126; R. Fazzini and W. Peck, “Excavating the Temple à Karnak,” ASAE 52 (1952), pp. 77-104; and G. Nagel, “Déco- of Mut,” Archaeology 36 (1983), pp. 16-23. ration d’un temple de Mout à Karnak,” Archiv Orientální 24 H. De Meulenaere, “Isis et Mout du mammisi,” OLA 20 (1952), pp. 90-99. See also W. J. de Jong, “De tempels 13 (1982), pp. 25-29; R. Fazzini and W. Peck, “The Precinct van Karnak, 4: De tempel van Chonsoe-het-kind,” de Ibis 8, of Mut During Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI,” no. 3 (1983), pp. 66-96 and W. J. de Jong, “De tempel van two semi-erased kushite cartouches in the precinct of mut 101

The Lake Edifice of Taharqa by the sacred lake at the beginning of Dynasty XXV,27 as a structure of the Amun Precinct at Karnak had strong links devoted to mammisiac royal renewal/justification to solar-Osirian ideas of divine and royal renew- that served as a counterpoint to the Lake Edifice, al.25 Equally important, it may also be a structure site of solar-Osirian royal renewal/justification.28 originally built by Shabaqo but then rebuilt by Be this as it may, it is important to keep in mind Taharqa.26 If so, and admitting that ideas of divine that the rise of both the mammisiac and the solar- and royal rebirth/justification are also known in Osirian ritual of Djeme began no later than late the Lake Edifice and other Theban structures in Dynasty XX,29which is the time by which Temple Dynasty XXV, it seems reasonable to see Temple A appears to have changed from a “Temple of Mil- A, apparently just brought into the Mut Precinct lions of Years” of Ramesses II to a mammisi.30

Chonsoe-het-kind (vervolg),” pp. 98-119. Without referring a parallel piece at the Ramesseum to which Jacobus van Dijk to the articles by De Meulenaere or Fazzini and Peck just kindly referred me, it appears to me that Queen Tiye is a cited, de Jong argued (p. 118) that Temple A “…can be potential candidate for original ownership of the statue. For tentatively identified as a ‘missing link’ between the temple another possible fragmentary statue of Tiye in the Precinct, halls of Deir el Bahri and Luxor…” He also suggested (p. see R. Fazzini, “Some New Kingdom Images,” in Studies in 119) that the Khonsu Temple shows “the merging of the Honor of James F. Romano (=BES 17 [2007]), ed. J. Allen, ancient royal birth reliefs with the, already existing, separate pp. 83-96. child-god temple,” which led to the later mammisis. As we 25 J.-C. Goyon, in R. Parker, J. Leclant and J.-C. Goyon, have already indicated, the identification of Temple A as The Edifice of Taharqa by the Sacred Lake of Karnak, a temple of Khonsu is not necessarily correct and there is pp. 11-86; K. Cooney, “The Edifice of Taharqa,” pp. 27, reason to believe that it was a mammisi by Dynasty XXV 34, 39, 41. (R. Fazzini and W. Peck, “The Precinct of Mut During 26 J. Leclant, in R. Parker, J. Leclant and J.-C. Goyon, The Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI”). This has been Edifice of Taharqa by the Sacred Lake of Karnak, pp. 5-10; accepted by other scholars (e.g., D. Arnold, The Encyclo- K. Cooney, “The Edifice of Taharqa,” p. 17. pedia of Ancient Egyptian Architecture, trans. S. Gardiner 27 R. Fazzini and W. Peck, “The Precinct of Mut During and H. Strudwick [Princeton: Princeton University Press, Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI,” p. 119. 2003], p. 33). 28 R. Parker, J. Leclant, J.-C. Goyon, The Edifice of In “A Monument in the Precinct of Mut with the Name Taharqa by the Sacred Lake of Karnak, pp. 30, 33-35, 82; of the God’s Wife Nitocris I,” p. 58, I stated my belief that K. Cooney, “The Edifice of Taharqa,” pp. 21, 27, 34, and the presence of certain female images in Temple A was 39. For the importance of the solar-Osirian cycle in the related to the presence in the temple of scenes of the birth earlier Third Intermediate Period, see A. Niwiński, “The of a king. Here I will add that it probably also reflects the Solar-Osirian Unity as principle of the Theology of the ‘State relationships among Mut, queens and God’s Wives of Amun. of Amen’ in Thebes in the 21st Dynasty,”Jaarbericht van If this is accepted, I wish to briefly note here two errors in het Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch Genootschap Ex Oriente Lux 30 that article on topics with which I will deal in more detail (1987-1988) (1989), pp. 89-107. elsewhere. First, at the time of writing the article I was 29 On the mammisiac see, e.g., R. Fazzini, “Four Unpub- not certain that the Nitocris I lintel belonged to the small lished Ancient Egyptian Objects in Faience in the Brooklyn structure near which it was found; after further study, there Museum of Art,” JSSEA 28 (2001) = Papers Presented in seems no reason to doubt that it does. Secondly, I stated Memory of Alan R. Schulman, pp. 55-66. On the ritual of that the base of a statue of a queen, inscribed for a queen Djeme see R. Fazzini, Egypt, Dynasty XXII-XXV, pp. 22-24, of Taharqa (p. 57 and Fig. 7a-b), was original to Dynasty with its numerous references, and K. Cooney, “The Edifice XXV. This statue was also attributed to a queen of Taharqa by of Taharqa,” pp. 26-37. R. Morkot, The Black Pharaohs, p. 244, possibly on the basis 30 R. Fazzini and W. Peck, “The Precinct of Mut During of my article. However, and as first noticed by Jacobus van Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI,” pp. 122-124. This Dijk, the sculpture appears to be an earlier work usurped by subject will be discussed in more detail in R. Fazzini, Aspects her, such a usurpation being unusual in Dynasty XXV royal of the Art, Iconography and Architecture of Late Dynasty statuary. After studying the object further and examining XX-Early Dynasty XXVI. 102 richard a. fazzini un assemblage au nom d’amenemhat ier dans les magasins du temple de louxor 103

UN ASSEMBLAGE AU NOM D’AMENEMHAT Ier DANS LES MAGASINS DU TEMPLE DE LOUXOR

Luc Gabolde Centre Franco-Égyptien pour l’étude des Temples de Karnak

En 1999, Bill Murnane, en réponse à une ques- comme si une pièce d’encastrement y avait été tion que je lui posais sur l’ancienneté du temple primitivement insérée. Quoi qu’il en soit, le bloc de Louxor, m’avait révélé l’existence des docu- d’origine était assez peu épais et devait former une ments jusqu’alors inédits que j’ai le privilège de sorte de placage de pierre plutôt qu’une maçon- présenter ici en hommage à sa science et à son nerie pleine. Il faudrait donc imaginer un édifice humanité. originel constitué d’un noyau de maçonnerie en Il s’agit d’un lot de blocs en calcaire décorés grès ou en briques crues et recouvert d’un placage en bas-reliefs et portant des éléments de la titu- de calcaire portant la décoration.3 lature d’Amenemhat Ier (Fig. 1). Conservés dans le magasin sud du temple de Louxor, ils ont été minutieusement documentés en 1996 par le Dr. Le matériau R. Johnson et l’équipe de l’Oriental Institute 1 et portent aujourd’hui les n° d’inventaire ES 393 Les blocs sont taillés dans une pierre calcaire. La (situé à l’est de 123 E) et n° 875 (situé en 122 W, nature exacte du matériau utilisé n’est pas facile à extrémité sud). L’assemblage est composé de deux déterminer sur les seules indications données par très longs blocs—chacun brisé en deux parties— un examen de la photo et il ne m’a pas été possible qui se raccordent quasi directement pour former de procéder à un examen de visu de la roche. Sa les restes d’une scène. Ce format est étrange et cassure paraît grumeleuse et l’apparente en cela résulte apparemment du débitage du ou des blocs au calcaire de Tourah extensivement employé plus primitifs en longs moellons, débitage qui doit tard par Sésostris Ier.4 Les constructions d’Ame- avoir été effectué à la scie après le démantèlement nemhat Ier à Ermant avaient toutefois été réalisées de l’édifice auquel ils avaient appartenu.2 Le bloc dans un calcaire local5 tout comme celles qui lui supérieur comporte en outre la trace d’une sorte sont attribuables à Karnak.6 d’échancrure, réalisée à coups de ciseaux et de scie,

1 Avec une libéralité dont je lui suis profondément recon- parois en grès, voir W. Kaiser et alii, « Stadt und Tempel von naissant, le Dr. Raymond Johnson, directeur du Chicago Elephantine, 19./20. Grabungsbericht », MDAIK 49, 1993, House de Louxor, a accepté de m’en confier les photos p. 148-152 ; idem. « Stadt und Tempel von Elephantine, assorties de l’autorisation (de ses encouragements, devrais-je 25./26. Grabungsbericht », MDAIK 55 (1999), p. 90-94. dire) de les publier ici. Son recensement des blocs du Moyen 4 Sur le calcaire employé par de Sésostris Ier, à Karnak, Empire conservés dans les magasins de Louxor comporte voir Ch. Karlshausen et Th. De Putter, « Provenance et carac- 22 autres blocs, parmi lesquels on relève un élément avec tères distinctifs des calcaires utilisés dans l’architecture du un cartouche de Sésostris III et deux autres avec le simple Moyen et du Nouvel Empire à Karnak », Karnak 11 (Paris : nom de Sésostris. ERC, 2003), p. 373-386. 2 Le débitage en long blocs, sans doute pour obtenir 5 Pour les blocs d’Amenemhat Ier trouvés à Ermant voir des éléments de linteau, de jambages ou de seuil, est encore R. Mond, O.H. Myers, Temples of Armant I-II, EEM 43 attesté pour des blocs du Moyen Empire conservés dans le (Londres : Egypt Exploration Society, 1940), pl. LXXXVIII magasin du Cheikh Labib à Karnak : 87 CL 57 ; 87 CL 59 ; et les dessins pl. XCVIII. C’est mon propre examen visuel 87 CL 61 ; 87 CL 300. Un élément similaire—sur lequel on des pierres d’Ermant qui m’a conduit à la conclusion qu’il reviendra plus bas—a été retrouvé à Tôd : L. Postel, « Frag- s’agissait d’une roche locale. Des analyses plus poussées ments inédits du Moyen Empire à Tôd (mission épigraphique seraient les bienvenues pour confirmer ou infirmer cette de l’IFAO) », dans J.-Cl. Goyon, Chr. Cardin (éd.), Actes estimation. du IXe Congrès international des égyptologues, Grenoble, 6 Un bloc en calcaire avec une représentation d’Atoum, 6-13 septembre 2004, OLA 150, (Louvain : Peeters, 2006), remployé dans la plate-forme en grès de la « cour du Moyen p. 1539-1550. Empire », doit appartenir au décor du temple d’Ame- 3 À Éléphantine, plusieurs monuments de la XIe dynastie nemhat Ier . Il s’agit apparemment d’un calcaire local (voir avaient ainsi été constitués de briques crues plaquées de L. Gabolde, J.-Fr. Carlotti, E. Czerny, « Aux origines de 104 luc gabolde

Fig. 1. Assemblage de blocs d’Amenemhat Ier dans les magasins du temple de Louxor.

Le style Le style et l’épigraphie sont sobres et dépour- vus des abondants détails que l’on rencontre sur Le bloc est traité en bas-relief très peu saillant, les décors d’Amenemhat Ier à Ermant, sur ceux difficilement comparable, de ce point de vue, aux de Mentouhotep III à Tôd ou, plus tard, sur ceux décors en relief dans le creux du même Ame- de Sésostris Ier à Karnak. nemhat Ier à Ermant7 et notablement distinct des décors en méplat assez saillant de Sésostris Ier à Karnak. Ce style en relief très peu marqué se La scène rattache à la tradition de l’Ancien Empire, mais aussi aux styles en cours à la fin de la XIe dynastie Les éléments fragmentaires dont on dispose per- comme celui des reliefs raffinés de Mentouhotep mettent de restituer une scène où le roi, coiffé de III-Seânkhkarê à Tôd, Ermant et Éléphantine.8 On la couronne rouge, se dirigeait vers la gauche, relève que ce sera encore la tradition de l’atelier précédé d’une enseigne d’Oupouaout10, comme d’artisans qui a réalisé les bas-reliefs de Sésos- c’est souvent le cas lors des sorties solennelles, tris Ier à Éléphantine.9 lors des « montées royales »11 ou encore pendant

Karnak : les recherches récentes du Centre Franco-Égyptien 9 L. Habachi, « Building Activity of Sesostris I in the Area d’Étude des Temples de Karnak dans la “ cour du Moyen South of Thebes », MDAIK 31 (1975), pl. 12 a-b. Voir encore Empire ” », BSEG 23 (1999), p. 40, Fig. 8-9-11). Les pierres W. Kaiser et alii, « Stadt und Tempel von Elephantine, 13/14. utilisées à Karnak au Moyen Empire ont été, on l’a mentionné, Grabungsbericht », MDAIK 43 (1986), p. 84-88 et pl. 8. étudiées par Ch. Karlshausen et Th. De Putter (« Provenance 10 Sur cette enseigne, qui représente le nom d’Horus et caractères distinctifs des calcaires utilisés dans l’architecture du roi, voir P. Barguet, « Un groupe d’enseignes en rapport du Moyen et du Nouvel Empire à Karnak », Karnak 11 (Paris : avec les noms du roi », RdE 8 (1951), p. 9-19. ERC, 2003), pp. 373-385). L’échantillonnage examiné ne 11 Voir, sous Sésostris Ier, l’introduction du roi dans la comportait pas d’élément d’Amenemhat Ier mais du règne chapelle d’Anubis, ou un des rituels préludant à l’érection suivant, celui de Sésostris Ier, lequel emploie exclusivement du mât de Min, P. Lacau, H. Chevrier, Une chapelle de Sésos- le calcaire de Tourah. tris Ier à Karnak (Le Caire : Imprimerie de l’Institut Français 7 Supra n. 5. d’Archéologie Orientale, 1956-1969), pl. 13, scène 3 ; pl. 8 F. Bisson de la Roque, Tôd 1934 à 1936, FIFAO XVII 31, scène 8’, ou bien, pour des occurrences plus commu- (Le Caire : Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie nes et plus récentes, H.H. Nelson, W. Murnane, The Great Orientale, 1937), pls. XXI,2-XXVII et R. Mond, O.H. Myers, Hypostyle Hall at Karnak, vol. I, part 1, The Wall Reliefs, Temples of Armant, pl. LXXXVIII (Éléphantine) et XCIV- OIP 106 (Chicago : Oriental Institute of the University of XCVII (Ermant). Chicago, 1981), pl. 50 ; 51. un assemblage au nom d’amenemhat ier dans les magasins du temple de louxor 105 les cérémonies jubilaires.12 Il serait hautement La provenance des blocs et la question de spéculatif d’essayer ici de la reconstituer plus l’ancienneté de Louxor complètement. La présence de ces vestiges au nom d’Amenemhat Ier conduit naturellement à s’interroger sur leur Les textes provenance exacte et, subséquemment, sur l’an- cienneté des sanctuaires de Louxor. Ces blocs mis Devant le roi, sa légende : à part, les plus anciens témoins historiques exhu- més du site du temple sont constitués d’une table r W m L’Horus « qui d’offrandes de Sésostris III, usurpée par Apopi,15 mswt renouvelle les d’une seconde table d’offrandes, au quadruple [1] créations »a, nom d’un Sésostris indéfini, trouvée dans le vil- [2] zA-R le fils de Rê lage16, enfin d’éléments de porte de Sobekho- ’Imn-m- Amenemhat, tep II.17 Comme le soulignait déjà G. Daressy, la [ At] dἰ n t gratifié de vie table d’offrandes de Sésostris III pourrait bien éternellement. avoir été apportée d’Hérakléopolis en raison des [3] divinités qui y sont mentionnées (et ce, bien après le Moyen Empire). Les éléments trouvés dans le village peuvent, quant à eux, provenir aussi bien des ruines de Karnak que de celles de Louxor, Au-dessus de la déesse vautour (dont on aperçoit l’extrémité sans compter qu’on a pu encore les transférer des plumes) : de la rive gauche. Les deux fragments architecturaux en granit Nbt Nekhbetb. [4] rose de (Sekhemrê-khoutaouy)-Sobekhotep II qui furent exhumés dans la cour d’Amenho- tep III sont peut-être plus significatifs, mais ils a—Il s’agit du second nom d’Horus du roi, sont bien incapables de garantir une ancienneté adopté apparemment après quelques années de du site allant au-delà de leur époque. règne.13 Il faut peut-être comprendre que ce nom- S’il est vraisemblable, malgré tout, que la fon- programme signale la mise en œuvre d’un vaste dation des sanctuaires de Louxor remonte au projet de construction du roi, le mot mswt (« ce qui moins au Moyen Empire, compte tenu du conser- a été créé = création ») pouvant, en effet, signifier vatisme théologique des anciens égyptiens, force sporadiquement « création(s) architecturale(s) ».14 est, cependant, de constater qu’aucun vestige n’en La titulature viendrait ainsi faire écho à la trace a jamais été trouvé in situ, et donc que l’hypo- architecturale laissée par les blocs, lesquels consti- thèse demeure une pure, quoique séduisante, tuent par eux mêmes des indices de cette refon- conjecture. dation proclamée. b—On remarquera que le nom et l’image de la déesse n’ont pas été attaqués par les agents d’Akhe- Un matériau de récupération amené d’ailleurs ? naton, contrairement à ce que l’on constate glo- balement sur le territoire thébain, ce qui montre Compte tenu du débitage qu’ont subi les blocs, que ces blocs étaient hors d’atteinte au Nouvel on est tenté d’y reconnaître un matériau de récu- Empire (parce que sans doute remployés). pération, amené sur le site après l’abandon des

12 F.W. F. von Bissing, Das Re-Heiligtum des Königs dans les récits de refondation de temples de Thoutmosis III : Ne-woser-re (Rathures) II (Leipzig : Hinrichs, 1923), pl. 1, Urk. IV, p. 817, 10 et 17 ; 820, 17 ; 830, 8. 10, 11 et particulièrement 13. 15 PM II2, p. 339 = CG 23009, A.B. Kamal, CGC, Tables 13 J. von Beckerath, « Zur Begründung der 12. Dynastie d’offrandes (Le Caire, 1906-09), pl. V, p. 8-9 et E. Grébaut, durch Ammenemes I. », ZÄS 92 (1966), p. 7 ; idem., Han- « Fouilles de Louqsor », BIE X (1889), p. 335-6. dbuch der ägyptischen Königsnamen, MÄS 49 (Mayence : 16 PM II2, p. 339 = K. Lepsius, Denkmäler aus Ägypten Philip von Zabern, 1999), p. 83 et p. 82, n. 1. und Äthiopien, Text III (Genève : Editions des Belles-Let- 14 Chr. Wallet-Lebrun, « Contribution à l’histoire de la tres, 1975), p. 89. construction à Karnak », dans L’égyptologie, histoire, résul- 17 PM II2, p. 338 = G. Daressy, « Le voyage d’inspection tats et perspectives (Grenoble : Presses Universitaires de de M. Grébaut en 1889 », ASAE 26 (1926), p. 8. Grenoble, 1994), p. 227-229 ; voir les mentions éloquentes 106 luc gabolde cultes.18 Ce genre de transfert est bien attesté Aujourd’hui remployé au temple de Ptah, il ne pour la plupart des sites de la région thébaine : fait guère de doute qu’il avait à l’origine été ins- des talatates de Karnak se sont ainsi retrouvées tallé dans le sanctuaire qui s’était dressé dans la au temple de Tôd,19 d’autres ont rejoint Ermant.20 « cour du Moyen Empire ». À ce très ancien temple À Louxor, c’est encore de Karnak que provient d’Amon appartient sans doute le fragment de bloc l’essentiel des blocs arrachés d’un autre site. On décoré en relief dans le creux qui avait été rem- recense ainsi dans les magasins de Louxor la série ployé dans la plate-forme en grès. Représentant d’éléments suivants originaires du grand temple une scène d’allaitement du roi en présence du dieu d’Amon-Rê : Atoum, il pourrait, en effet, remonter au règne er 23 1°) un fragment d’obélisque en granit rose de Thout- d’ . Le second élément d’impor- mosis Ier provenant de l’obélisque nord du IVe tance est un groupe statuaire fragmentaire, une pylône de ce roi (inédit) ; dyade, en granit gris ayant originellement figuré 2°) plusieurs fragments des obélisques orientaux Amon et le roi.24 On peut encore suspecter que d’Hatchepsout (avec notamment les figures des le groupe statuaire à six personnages trouvé près Amon ithyphalliques), généralement remployés de l’autel solaire au nord de la « cour du Moyen en meules (inédits) ; 25 3°) des talatates d’Akhenaton dont les thèmes per- Empire » lui soit redevable. Ces documents font er mettent de les raccorder aux talatates remployées d’Amenemhat I un des souverains les plus actifs dans les murs des cours des IXe-Xe pylônes (et sur le site de Karnak avant le règne de Sésos- d’une manière générale toutes les talatates retrou- tris Ier ; il n’y aurait rien d’extraordinaire à ce que vées à Louxor) ; des parois de placage en calcaire décorées en bas 4°) une table d’offrandes de Thoutmosis III provenant relief aient orné les murs du temple primitif où manifestement de l’Akhmenou.21 il avait installé son naos.26 Démontés par Sésos- tris Ier, ces éléments auraient ensuite pu servir L’éventualité d’une origine à Karnak à garnir les fondations de son nouveau temple. Réapparus après la désaffection des cultes et le Or, à Karnak, les vestiges au nom d’Amenemhat Ier démantèlement du temple par les chaufourniers sont, justement, bien attestés, montrant que l’ac- médiévaux, les placages de calcaire auraient tivité architecturale de ce roi y avait été loin d’être ensuite été apportés, entre autres, à Louxor et négligeable. Il y a tout d’abord le très important débités en éléments longs, constituant ces élé- socle de naos en granit rose destiné à recevoir ments mêmes qui ont été retrouvés et documentés le tabernacle de la vénérable statue d’Amon.22 par l’équipe de l’Oriental Institute.

18 Dans le magasin dit du « Cheikh Labib » à Karnak sont p. 10, 41-42, pl. 8 e ; E. Hirsch « Die Kultpolitik Amenemhets conservés des blocs du Moyen Empire en calcaire dont le I. im Thebanischen Gau », dans Ägyptische Tempel-Struktur, format actuel, très allongé, peu haut et peu épais, semblable Funktion und Programm, HÄB 37 (Hildesheim : Gerstenberg à celui des blocs d’Amenemhat Ier traités ici, semble indiquer Verlag, 1994), p. 137-142, notamment p. 139. qu’ils avaient été débités pareillement, dans la perspective 23 Supra, n. 6. d’une réutilisation. Voir leur liste, supra n. 2. 24 PM II2, p. 107 ; G. Evers, Staat aus dem Stein (Munich : 19 M. Etienne dans G. Pierrat et alii, « Fouilles du Musée Bruckmann, 1929), p. 95, § 634, p. 22, ill. 4 et pl. II, ill. 35 ; du Louvre à Tôd, 1988-1991 », Karnak X (Paris : ERC, 1995), A. Mariette, Karnak, p. 41, n° 4, pl. 8 d ; G. Legrain, « Notes p. 490-492. Les blocs proviennent assurément de Karnak prises à Karnak », RecTrav 23 (1901), p. 63 ; M. Seidel, Die et ont probablement été amenées à Tôd à l’époque ptolé- Königlische Statuengruppen I, HÄB 42 (Hildesheim : Gers- maïque ou romaine. tenberg Verlag, 1996), p. 65-66 (doc. 31). 20 Comme l’a rappelé A. Eggebrecht (« Armant », LÄ I, 25 PM II2, p. 103, (307) ; M. Seidel, Die Königlische col. 437), l’éventualité que les quelques fragments du règne Statuengruppen I, doc. n° 32, p. 67-68 et pl. 23 a-c et L. d’Amenhotep IV trouvés à Ermant (R. Mond, O.H. Myers, Gabolde, Études sur la genèse des temples de Karnak et du The Temple of Ermant ; Idem, Bucheum II, EEM 41 (Londres : culte d’Amon-Rê, à paraître. Il pourrait se raccorder à un Egypt Exploration Society, 1934), p. 46) puissent effective- élément similaire acheté par Mond et Myers à Tôd. ment attester l’existence d’un temple primitif d’Aton dans 26 Les fouilles récentes du CFEETK dans le secteur des cette ville et que celle-ci ait eu un rôle particulier dans cours nord et sud du VIe pylône ont confirmé l’existence de l’essor de la nouvelle théologie a été mise en doute avec structures de briques crues contemporaines ou de très peu des arguments de fond par H. Kees (« Ein Sonnenheilig- antérieures aux aménagements de Sésostris Ier et ont montré tum im Amonstempel von Karnak », Orientalia 18 (1949), aussi que la stratigraphie du lieu ne pouvait guère remonter p. 433 et 439). au-delà de la fin de la PPI ou du début de la XIe dynastie 21 PM II2, p. 339 = L. Habachi, « Clearance of the Area to (G. Charloux, J.-Fr. Jet, E. Lanoë, « Nouveaux vestiges des the East of Luxor Temple and Discovery of Some Objects », sanctuaires du Moyen Empire à Karnak. Les fouilles récentes ASAE 51 (1951), pl. V, Fig. 12 et p. 464-68 [IX]. des cours du VIe pylône », BSFE 160 (2004), p. 26-46). 22 PM II2, p. 200 (23) = A. Mariette, Karnak : étude topographique et archéologique (Leipzig : Heinrichs, 1875), un assemblage au nom d’amenemhat ier dans les magasins du temple de louxor 107

Des blocs isolés ? Résumé en Anglais

Une ultime interrogation demeure : l’assem- Two broken limestone slabs, stored in the Luxor blage de blocs d’Amenemhat Ier conservé dans temple magazine and carefully documented by the les magasins de Louxor est-il seul de son espèce ? team of the Chicago Oriental Institute, bear frag- En fait, un bloc des magasins du temple de Tôd, ments of the titulatury of king Amenemhet I. As dépourvu de nom royal, mais pareillement décoré the blocks have apparently been sawn and recut, en bas-relief, présente des dimensions, un style de they can be considered as reused material, and décor et pour finir un type de retaille en forme de may have been brought from other sites in the longue poutre, extrêmement similaires à ce que Theban area. It is a matter of fact that several l’on observe sur l’assemblage qui nous occupe27 ; pieces found in the vicinity of Luxor Temple peut-être a-t-il été lui aussi arraché à Karnak, precisely originate from Karnak. It is also well comme l’ont été bien d’autres éléments retrou- known that Amenemhet I worked at Karnak and, vés sur ce site.28 significantly, dedicated a granite naos there for the sacred sanctuary of the god Amun-Râ. On the other hand, no archeological element can guar- Conclusion provisoire antee that the temple of Luxor could be older than the reign of Sobekhotep II, and nothing Les blocs isolés au nom d’Amenemhat Ier trou- there can, of course, be related to Amenemhat I. vés sur le site de Louxor et enregistrés dans les I would consider it plausible that the two blocks magasin du CSA, de par leur format et du fait published here in memory of Bill Murnane—who qu’ils montrent des traces de débitage, ont sans had mentioned their existence to me—constitute doute été apportés comme matériau de construc- the remains of one of the oldest temples dedicated tion depuis un autre site de la région, comme ont, to Amun at Karnak. They would have reappeared par exemple, été apportés à Louxor les talatates after the dismantling of the sanctuary and the sub- qui y ont été découvertes. Compte tenu des traces sequent recovery of the building material, which conséquentes de l’activité architecturale d’Ame- was then brought to the site of Luxor. nemhat Ier à Karnak, ce dernier site constitue probablement le meilleur candidat pour leur pro- venance et ils en constitueraient quelques uns des plus anciens vestiges.

27 N° d’inventaire : Tôd 310. Ma gratitude va à L. Postel 6-13 septembre 2004, OLA 150 (Louvain : Peters, 2006), qui publie ce bloc avec les autres trouvailles du site (« Frag- p. 1539-1550) et qui m’a permis de faire état ici, en primeur, ments inédits du Moyen Empire à Tôd (mission épigraphique de son existence. de l’IFAO) », dans J.-Cl. Goyon, Chr. Cardin (éd.), Actes 28 Supra n. 19. du IXe Congrès international des égyptologues, Grenoble, 108 luc gabolde under a deep blue starry sky 109

UNDER A DEEP BLUE STARRY SKY

Marc Gabolde Université Paul Valéry—Montpellier III

As one of the last authors reviewed by W.J. Mur- Option B: An unknown or destroyed object, is nane who kindly sent me his final comments a few hardly plausible despite the fact that some inlays days before his death, I am delighted to present recovered from the tomb apparently belonged to this tribute to his memory, a roving walk in the items other than those already known. Since, as company of one of his favorite pharaohs, under the authors of the catalog suggest, the deep blue a deep blue starry sky.1 signs formerly in Munich were part of the nomen Among the finds from KV 55 recently exhib- Amenhotep,5 I believe the fragment of the ited in Munich and then returned to the Egyptian hieroglyph6 comes from the end of the right hori- Museum in Cairo there was an inlay fragment of zontal inscription on the outside under part of the ‘sky’-sign, slightly convex, in deep blue glass, the coffin (inscription ‘C’). There, in the lacuna, adorned with yellow stars (Fig. 1).2 This object was previously published by Reeves, and I have commented on its possible original was perhaps the formula to which the location in tomb KV 55.3 The possibilities are: 7 hieroglyph probably once belonged. The A) the coffin, symmetrical formula gives however “Son of Re, B) an unknown or destroyed object from KV living by Maat, lord of the crowns.”8 In the same 55, way, the fragment of a clypeus from a ‘scarab’-sign C) the canopic jars. is from part of a royal praenomen, despite the fact The coffin may be ruled out. Only one ‘sky’-sign that its scale is slightly larger than expected for 9 was inserted at the end of the inscription and the the known inscriptions from the coffin. How- inlay is still visible. It is made of deep blue glass ever, all of these inlays and fragmentary inlays without stars.4 Another possibility may have been are easy to insert in the already known inscrip- the top of the same column where such a sign tions from KV 55, opposite the starry ‘sky’-sign. might be expected, but there is no room for it now This means that option C: the canopic jars must and the fact that the starry fragment is slightly be considered seriously. curved strongly suggests that it was not placed The problem, however, is that on each jar, in there. Moreover, it would have been surprising the location where this inlay should have been, to find two identically-shaped inlays with such there is a fragment of calcite that fills the channel different details. of the right end part of the ‘sky’-sign. As Krauss

1 I wish to express my thanks to Amanda Dunsmore for part of the coffin is not to be completely discounted if this her precious advice and improvements to the translation. last change occurred during Tutankhamen’s reign. However, 2 A Grimm and S. Schoske, Das Geheimnis des goldenen the inlaid signs newly executed in the altered parts of the Sarges (Munich: Staatliches Museum Ägyptischer Kunst, coffin present a wide range of materials and colors, opposite 2001) [Munich 2001 hereafter], p. 75, Kat. 63, Abb. 39, the signs belonging to the nomen Amenhotep apparently cf. p. 78. only worked in a deep blue, glazed material. 3 C.N. Reeves, Valley of the Kings: The Decline of a Royal 6 Munich 2001, p. 75, Abb. 37. Necropolis, Studies in Egyptology (London and New York: 7 D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pl. XXXII, b, missing Kegan Paul International, 1990), pl. III; M. Gabolde, D’Akhe- in δ. In the restored underside of the coffin, fragments of naton à Toutânkhamon, Collection de l’Institut d’Archéo- gold foils suggest the title “lord of the crowns” at the end logie et d’Histoire de l’Antiquité, vol. 3 (Lyon: Université of the formula, just before the cartouche, cf. Munich 2001, Lumière—Lyon II, 1998) [D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon p. 104, Abb. 59. hereafter], pp. 239-240, ns. 1713-1715, pl. XXX (f). 8 Ibid., pl. XXXII, a. 4 Munich 2001, front cover. 9 Ibid., pl. XXX (g). Another possibility is that it belonged 5 Munich 2001, p. 75, Kat. 63. The possibility that the to a ‘heart-scarab’ composed of various elements. nomen of Akhenaten was written Amenhotep in the emended 110 marc gabolde has convincingly demonstrated, this fragment of ‘left’ in the tomb by the workers. Such a scenario calcite comprises part of a more ancient ‘sky’- seems hardly possible. Tomb KV 55 was not the hieroglyph.10 There is no evidence that the original best place for such work, even if hastily done. ‘sky’-sign was inlaid, yet the channel looks too Moreover, logically speaking, the other changes deeply cut for a hieroglyph to have been simply to the funerary equipment of Kiya must also have engraved. If this was the case, it would have been been undertaken in KV 55. It is hard to imagine easier to sand back completely the inscription of the insertion of a new uraeus on the jar stop- Kiya, including the ‘sky’-sign, rather than replace pers and coffin, the cutting of a new false beard, it with a sliver of calcite. If it had been filled in new scepters, new inlays (items not immediately such a way, it was probably because the original available in the Valley of the Kings) and the new sign was also inlaid. If one compares the dimen- engraving on gold foil inside the coffin, in such sions of the items, the results are as follows: an inappropriate place. All these factors suggest starry fragment:11 that the changes to the canopic jars and coffin of Length: 5.55 cm, Kiya, in order to adapt them for a king, were done Width: 1.1 cm (0.68 cm for the ‘sky’ without in a workshop and not in the tomb. the ‘corner’), We must then consider another scenario. The Thickness: 0.25 cm starting point is the shape of the right end of the calcite fragment:12 starry fragment. Here, the ‘corner’ of the ‘sky’-sign Length: 3.6 cm (but, Martin adds: “The channel is visible. If the ‘sky’-sign had only been cut out was not continued for the entire length of the and replaced with a calcite inlay, this essential part ‘heaven’ sign, but only for a distance of approxi- of the hieroglyph would have been missing over mately 5.4 cm from its right end.”13), Width: 0.6 cm the remaining inscription. It would have been necessary to add this ‘corner’ with another mate- The difference between the dimensions are at odds rial (paint for example). It is then very possible if one supposes that the space for the calcite inlay that the workers preferred to re-insert this part was the original location of the fragment. Never- of the hieroglyph with its starry decoration and theless, it seems that all the calcite inlays vary in to cut another fragment corresponding in length, width from one jar to another and moreover, it in the middle part of the ‘sky’-sign rather than seems that the plaster join is also of some thick- to bungle the work. The care they took in filling ness. If one allows a thickness of 0.04 cm for this the empty space at the right end of the sign with join on both the upper and the lower sides, then a fragment of calcite, instead of simply filling it the channel is about 0.68 cm high which may fit with some plaster, indicates that their intention with the starry inlay. As for the length, it is note- was to perform a high quality change and not worthy that the channel in which the calcite frag- simply the erasure of Kiya’s hieroglyphs. Making ment was originally laid was about 5.4 cm, hence a new ‘sky’-sign with parts of the former one, i.e., not so far from the 5.55 cm of the starry fragment. its ‘corner’ elements, was presumably the obvi- The remaining calcite inlays have apparently all ous solution. been broken a few centimeters along the left side, In this case, the presence of the starry inlay probably when the colored inlays on the left were fragment among the items from KV 55 can only removed, leaving the channel empty there. be explained by considering that the defacement If we accept the possibility that the starry inlay of the remaining inscription (i.e., that which comes from one of these jars, a scenario then involved Akhenaten’s and the Aten’s names) and arises: the removal of the right side of the ‘sky’- the sanding back of the ‘sky’-sign above it took sign and its replacement with a calcite inlay, con- place in KV 55. This possibility has, however, been temporaneous with the erasure of the titles and challenged by Dodson, following a suggestion of name of Kiya underneath, was carried out in the Eaton-Krauss: “This erasure is normally linked tomb and one fragment of the original inlay was with the removal of cartouches from the coffin

10 R. Krauss, “Kija—ursprüngliche Besitzerin der Kano- P. Posener-Kriéger, Bibliothèque d’Étude 97/2 (Cairo: Institut pen aus KV 55,” Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1985), p. 113. Instituts, Abteilung Kairo 42 (1986), p. 75. 13 Ibid., p. 113. In fact, the channel had been cut all 11 Munich 2001, p. 78. along its length, but was later sanded back, except for 5.4 12 G.T. Martin, “Notes on a canopic jar from King’s cm on the right end. Valley 55,” in Mélanges Gamal Eddin Mokhtar II, ed. under a deep blue starry sky 111 and shrine found in KV 55, but I would prefer suggest. If only the names of Akhenaten had been to see it as simply the final elimination of texts erased and the Aten names preserved, then, from that were irrelevant to the jars’ final owner.”14 He the Egyptian point of view, this canopic set would also states that: “Regarding the erasures from the have been attributed to the Aten himself and the coffin and shrine, I am persuaded by Marianne viscera inside would have necessarily belonged to Eaton Krauss that they did not take place within him. One presumes that the ancient Egyptians KV 55, but before they came to rest within that were sadly less imaginative than Dodson and tomb.”15 preferred simply to avoid any inconsistency by It is clear that if the deep blue sky from KV 55 removing the whole text. The complete erasure actually belongs to one of the canopic jars, then of the panel appears in this way to be a successful Dodson’s theory falls short. It also becomes obvi- attempt at depriving the jar’s owner of his names ous that the defaced panel on the jars represents and status. I am more persuaded to think that the the last phase of the changes to this canopic equip- Egyptians succeeded in making the last owner ment and that no other name was ever intended anonymous rather than to believe that they failed to be engraved. Moreover, in such a case, it would to attribute the set to an alleged new owner. have been useless to remove the ‘sky’-sign and the As a diagram is often more illuminating than Aten’s names. Once again, Dodson has a brilliant any statement, Figures 2-7 show the different explanation for another succession of events: steps of work on the inscribed panel, as sug- gested above. “It is clear that their (i.e. canopic jars) inscriptions had been excised of portions relating to their We can be quite sure that the original owner 17 former ownership by Kiya at an early stage; less of the canopic jars with stoppers was Kiya. It is certain is the date of the removal of the remainder also almost certain that the coffin was originally of the panel of text, which bore the names and made for Kiya.18 It is now also highly probable that titles of Akhenaten and the Aten. It is not impos- the last owner of these items was Akhenaten and sible that this could have been associated with no other. For the canopic jars, if the starry frag- the erasures seen on other items from KV 55, but ment of ‘sky’-sign actually belonged to one of the the fact that the whole panel was removed, and panels, it is now strong evidence. Concerning the not just the cartouches of Akhenaten, suggests coffin, it is also possible to argue that it belonged that it was part of the preparation of the vases to Akhenaten, on the basis of two points: 1) the for their new owner. Perhaps new decoration was intended, but never carried out, or else inscribed epithet “great in his lifetime” after the defaced in paint which has long since disappeared.”16 cartouche of the king in bands (B) and (C) and 2) the reading “Waenre” instead of “beloved of It would seem, however, slightly paradoxical to Waenre” on band (D). erase the panel so carefully yet fail to engrave it, even roughly with a new name or to re-inscribe 1) The formula “great in his lifetime,”inscribed it so carelessly that the name has completely dis- on re-cut areas of inscriptions (B) and (C) on the appeared. It is furthermore stretching the eye of coffin19 concerns only Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten faith to deduce the existence of such a name from and is never found in original inscriptions after its complete absence. the name of another pharaoh.20 It must be remem- Nevertheless, the fact that the whole panel has bered that Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten included been defaced is not as surprising as Dodson would this epithet in his own cartouche in the tomb

14 A. Dodson, The Canopic Equipment of the Kings of stoppers to the jars. Given the very constant iconography Egypt (London and New York: Kegan Paul International, of Kiya and making allowances for the fact that the faces 1994), p. 59. are thin, these masterpieces may actually belong to the early 15 Ibid., p. 59, n. 67. stages of Amarna art and depict very probably Kiya in her 16 A. Dodson, “On the Origin, Contents and Fate of youth, despite A. Dodson, The Canopic Equipment of the Biban el-Moluk Tomb 55,” GM 132 (1993), p. 22. Kings of Egypt (1994), p. 58, based on presupposed views 17 R. Krauss, MDAIK 42 (1986), pp. 67-80. The comments of the Amarna style. of A. Dodson (GM 132 [1993], pp. 22-23 and n. 17) following 18 D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 237-255. an observation by G.T. Martin (BdE 97/2 [1985], p. 112) 19 G. Daressy, “Le cercueil de Khu-n-Aten,” BIFAO about the poor fit of the stoppers on the jars is unconvinc- 12 (1916), pp. 145-149; D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, ing. This is often the case and as he acknowledges, there p. 245. is often ancient and modern confusion in attributing the 20 There are only three cases where Amenhotep III is 112 marc gabolde of Kheruef21 and that this king is sporadically described simply as “the one who is great in his lifetime.”22 The fact that this formula has been inserted in an emended part of the inscription on the coffin from KV 55 demonstrates indisputably that it refers to the last addressee of the coffin.

2) After checking with May Trad, and thanks to the authorization of Dr. Mamdouh Al-Damaty and the kind collaboration of Mr. Sabri from the Cairo Museum, the fragment of inscription ‘D 6’ from the inside part of the coffin lid from KV 55 appears to bear the following signs, (Fig. 8), Fig. 8. Schematic drawing of traces from the gold sheet which corresponds to the formula: fragment ‘D 6’ from the coffin from KV 55.

between and the body of the -sign is about twice as high as that between the and the . This indicates that something existed Despite the poor state of preservation, it is over the rectangular part of the . A -sign clear that the last two signs are , with the and a -sign may be ruled out as no trace of simply written as a streak, as in all other them can be seen there. The more plausible solu- parts of this text. Unfortunately, the gold sheet tion for filling the space is the now illegible seal is scrunched up over the , but the space and tie of the papyrus-sign that G. Daressy saw

supposed to be A(w) m  w=f “great in his lifetime”: from the published photographs that the first names were 1) the legend of a statue depicted in the tomb of Huya Neferkheperure-Waenre Amenhotep netjer-heqa-Waset, at Amarna (C.E. Loeben, “No Evidence of Coregency—Two emended to Neferkheperure-Waenre Akhenaten during Erased Inscriptions from Tutankhamen’s Tomb,” Amarna Akhenaten’s reign and changed to Nebmaatre Amenhotep Letters 3 (1994), p. 108, n. 30), heqa Waset after the restoration, cf. M. Schiff-Giorgini, 2) the door of the gilded shrine from KV 55, “Soleb,” Kush 6 (1958), pp. 82-97; J. Janssen, in M. Schiff- 3) some reliefs at Soleb. Giorgini, “Soleb, Campagna, 1958-59,” Kush 7 (1959), p. The case for 1) is, in fact, a misinterpretation by C.E. 168; M. Schiff-Giorgini, C. Robichon and J. Leclant,Soleb Loeben and the statue concerned, whose cartouches are I, 1813-1963 (Firenze: Sansoni, 1965), p. 131, n. 3 (see too defaced, actually depicts Akhenaten, despite the fact that it pp. 78-79, doc. 11, G; pp. 103-104, doc. 20, I; pp. 105-106, looks isolated among other statues of Amenhotep III. The doc. 20, L and n. 18; p. 113, doc. 20, M); J. Leclant, men- king is n(w) m MA.t and queen Tiyi, depicted to the side, tioned in W.J. Murnane (Ancient Egyptian Coregencies, is called “king’s mother,” which is not the case when she SAOC 40 [1977], pp. 154-155); J. Leclant, “Soleb,” LÄ V is depicted along with Amenhotep III who is never n(w) (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1984), col. 1076. In one of m MA.t, cf. N. de G. Davies, The Rock tombs of El Amarna, his last e-mails, W.J. Murnane told me that he had reached Part III, The Tombs of Huya and Ahmes, with an appendix the same conclusion. on the Greek Graffiti by S. de Ricci, Archaeological Survey 21 Epigraphic Survey [The] (in cooperation with the of Egypt Memoir 15 (London: Egypt Exploration Society, Department of Antiquities of Egypt), The Tomb of Kheruef— 1905), pl. X. Theban Tomb 192, OIP 102 (Chicago: The Oriental Institute 2) On the door of the gilded shrine from KV 55 the of the University of Chicago, 1980), pls. 8-9. name of Amenhotep III, written with the goddess Maat in 22 M. Sandman, Texts from the time of Akhenaten, Biblio- the praenomen and with the nomen Amenhotep, is clearly theca Aegyptiaca 8 (Brussels: Fondation Égyptologique a secondary emendation in red ink (cf. T.M. Davis [G. Mas- Reine Élisabeth, 1938), p. 31, line 14; p. 40, line 4; p. 66, pero, G.E. Smith, E.R. Ayrton, G. Daressy and E.H. Jones line 14; p. 171, line 9 and, probably, p. 79, line 9. For the (coll.)], The Tomb of Queen Tîyi [London: Constable and three texts where this epithet seems to concern Amenhotep Co., Ltd., 1910], pp. 13-14). Despite the fact that Daressy III, see D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 232, n. 1675. forgot to mention the emendation (p. 14), it is clear from his A.H. Gardiner, in “The so-called Tomb of Queen Tiye,” reading of it on p. 13 where he claims that the praenomen JEA 43 (1957), p. 21, n. 3, suspected that the epithet A(w) of Amenhotep III, written with the goddess Maat, occurs m  w=f was inscribed once after the cartouches of the only on reworked parts. Aten. Unfortunately, his reference: “Amarna I, pl. 7,” does 3) At Soleb too, it appears that the names of Amenhotep not show any evidence of that. The only other king whose III have been recut over that of Amenhotep IV after the “duration of life” was referred to in the literature is the death of the last pharaoh. M. Schiff-Giorgini, J. Janssen and pharaoh Sisebek of Papyrus Vandier, see G. Posener, Le J. Leclant have been misdirected by the fact that the nomen Papyrus Vandier, Bibliothèque Générale 7 (Cairo: Institut has been corrected twice and the praenomen once. It is clear Francais d’Archéologie Orientale, 1985), passim. under a deep blue starry sky 113 in 1910.23 It is noteworthy that all the signs are Ankh(et)kheperure … Neferneferuaten … The very spaced out, excluding the possibility of any epithets of this ruler are always written without short writings of words, and giving the feeling ~n: Mr(y)(.t) W(w)~n-R or Mr(y)(.t) Nfr-pr.w-R that the engraver tried to enlarge the length of (and never Mr(y)~n A(w)~n ’Itn). 25 The fact that the inscription to fill the whole space. Looking at one (~n)–sign is missing and another is unneces- the phrase from a grammatical point of view, the sary strongly suggests another solution. only possible solution is the last reading: D) W(w)(~n) R mA-rw is clearly to be ruled out

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Idem after checking the original, despite the fact that the Daressy Daressy Engelbach Gabolde & M. Trad formula mA-rw is encountered twice in the foot 1910 1916 1931 1998 2003 end inscription after the name of the king.26

E) W(w)~n R makes sense, is grammatically cor- rect and presents no mistakes. The only pecu- liarity is the unusual writing of W(w) with a rare ‘arm’-sign as phonetic complement27 and a ‘papyrus-roll’-sign unattested until now for the nickname of Akhenaten, but found sometimes in My suggestion of 1998 to read the end of the Middle Kingdom literature.28 Such a developed formula mA-rw is clearly wrong and I must writing can be explained here by the noticeably apologize for having misled the authors of wide spacing between glyphs due to the need to Munich’s exhibition catalog who accepted my fill extra space. proposal. Engelbach’s reading can be explained by the fact that the two horizontal lines The end of the inscription (D) reads then: of the pass slightly over the vertical edge of the sign on the left hand side, but actually less “(O) Lord of heaven, I am one whose heart is than one millimeter. The various translations give living in its (right) place. May thou contemplate Waenre every day without ceasing!” the following results: Such a text unequivocally makes Akhenaten the A) W(w)(~n) R A: “Wa(en)re the Great” makes last owner of the coffin. The fact that Akhenaten no real sense and supposes the absence of (~n). is referred to once in the first person singular, (Such an absence occurs only in one of the papyri and another time in the third person singular from Ghurob, but the close similarity of is simply due to the fact that the relationship of and in hieratic explains it fully.24 Akhenaten/Kiya in the original inscription has been adapted, with some difficulty, to the rela- B) W(w) R š/mr(y) tA makes no sense either and, tionship of the Lord of Heaven/Akhenaten in the here too, the absence of (~n) should be noted. emended text. To sum up, the changes in the inscriptions on C) Mr(w)~n W(w)(~n)-R appears to make sense both the coffin and canopic jars strongly suggest and is generally accepted, but it presents one that the last owner of these items was Akhenaten incorrect writing: W(w) R instead of W(w)~n R, and no other. Some indirect evidence is also to and an unattested relative form Mr(w)~n which be found in the text of the Restoration Stela of is never encountered with the epithet of “king” Tutankhamen (CGC 34183). In line 26 it is writ-

23 G. Daressy, in T.M. Davis (G. Maspero, G.E. Smith, des goldenen Sarges (Munich, 2001), p. 39, p. 108, and “La E.R. Ayrton, G. Daressy and E.H. Jones [coll.]), The Tomb parenté de Toutânkhamon,” BSFE 155 (2002), p. 47. of Queen Tîyi (London: Constable and Co., Ltd., 1910), 27 For this writing in hieroglyphic inscriptions, see p. 19. N. de G. Davies, The Rock Tombs of El Amarna, Part IV, 24 A.H. Gardiner, “Four papyri of the 18th dynasty from The Tombs of Penthu, Mahu and others, Archaeological Kahun,” ZÄS 43 (1906), p. 29, l. 14 and l. 20. Survey of Egypt Memoir 16 (1906), pl. XXI. 25 For the misreading Mr(y)~n A(w)~n Jtn instead of 28 R. van der Molen, A Hieroglyphic Dictionary of Egyp- A(y).t~n-h(j)=s, see n. 68 below. tian Coffin Texts,Probleme der Ägyptologie 15 (Leiden, 26 D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 248. This recon- Boston and Köln: E.J. Brill, 2000), p. 87, where the writing structed epithet on band (D) is to be emended on pp. 252- is specifically associated with the qualitative verbwj “(to) 253 of the same publication as well as in Das Geheimnis be alone/unique.” 114 marc gabolde ten concerning Tutankhamen and after claiming This is not an isolated case as another king of that this king is the real, eldest son of Amun, that the XVIIIth Dynasty was buried in a sarcophagus “taking care of the father who bore him, his king- previously cut for a woman and later altered for ship is the kingship of (his) father Osiris.”29 This him, namely Thutmosis I. The strange story of allusion to the god Osiris is completely isolated the mummy of Thutmosis I is in many points in the text. The formula translated here as “taking directly parallel to that of the king from KV 55.34 care of,” n r in Egyptian, is obviously related Thutmosis I was first buried by Thutmosis II in an to the pious behaviour of a son, considered to be unidentified tomb.35 Later, during Hatshepsut’s Horus, toward the body of his dead father Osiris. reign, his body was re-buried in tomb KV 20 of It is exactly the role of Harendotes whose name Hatshepsut.36 It is noteworthy that for this second includes the same wording.30 Reading the text lit- burial Hatshepsut altered her own sarcophagus erally, this indicates that Tutankhamen buried his for her father and ordered a new one to be cut for actual father who became Osiris and consequently herself.37 A few years later, Thutmosis III decided inherited the kingship of his father. As some seals to remove Thutmosis I from KV 20 and to bury from tomb KV 55 were stamped with the name of him in a new tomb, KV 38,38 with a new sar- Tutankhamen31 and given that Tutankhamen is cophagus,39 a new coffin,40 a new canopic chest41 most probably the son of Akhenaten,32 it is logi- and, apparently, non-royal canopic jars adapted cal to deduce that the king buried in KV 55, and by adding uraei to the stoppers,42 as in KV 55. significantly entitled “Osiris Neferkheperure” on The motivation to remove this mummy is obvi- at least two of the magical bricks, is Akhenaten, ous: It was to strengthen the legitimacy of the the father of Tutankhamen. ruling king by acting as Horus acted for Osiris.43 Such a scenario provides a possible answer to For Hatshepsut, it was a good way to legitimate her the pertinent question of Dodson: “Why was a claim to the throne and for Thutmosis III it was an king of the Amarna Period placed in an elab- opportunity to annul the legitimacy of Hatshepsut orately altered woman’s coffin rather than his and to assert his own rights. It is interesting to own?”33 note that, in each case, part of the funerary equip-

29 Cf. H.W. Helck, Urkunden des ägyptischen Altertums 36 C. Vandersleyen, L’Égypte et la Vallée du Nil, tome 2, De IV. Urkunden der 18. Dynastie (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, la fin de l’Ancien Empire à la fin du Nouvel Empire, Nouvelle 1984), 2031, 6-7, with complements of R. Hari, Horemheb Clio—l’Histoire et ses problèmes (Paris: Presses universitaires et la reine Moutnedjemet ou la fin d’une dynastie, Éditions de France, 1995), pp. 263-264. de Belles-Lettres (Genève: Imprimerie la Sirène, 1964), pls. 37 C.E. Loeben and P. Der Manuelian, JEA 79, pp.121- XXIb, XXII and XXIIIg from the fragment found at Karnak 155, pls. V-XIV. north (A. Varille, Karnak I, FIFAO 19 [Cairo: Institut Francais 38 C.N. Reeves, Valley of the Kings, pp. 17-18. d’Archéologie Orientale, 1943], p. 19 and pl. 48 [line x+11]) : 39 Cairo Museum JE 52344. 40 D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 269; C.E. Loeben . and P. Der Manuelian, ibid., p. 128, Fig. 3. The dedication 30 D. Meeks, in LÄ II (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, text, with masculine pronoun, reads: “[…] for his father, the 1977), pp. 964-965. good god, king of Upper and Lower Egypt, [Aakheperka]re.” 31 D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 262-263 and Fig. As the text on the lid clearly mentions Thutmosis I as the 8(b) p. 262. owner and, as this coffin, 2.32 m long, was too large for the 32 M. Gabolde, BSFE 155 (2002), pp. 32-48. sarcophagus from KV 20 but suitable for the sarcophagus 33 Sesto Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia—Atti, vol. from KV 38 (2.33 m inside), its attribution to Thutmosis I 1, International Association of Egyptologists (IÆ) (Torino: by Thutmosis III appears inescapable. Società Italiana per il Gas p.A.), p. 135. 41 A. Dodson, The Canopic Equipment of the Kings of 34 D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 267-270. Egypt (London and New York: Kegan Paul International, 35 Probably the tomb cut by , cf. Urk. IV, 57, 3-5. For 1994), p. 119, n° 28. the discussions about the tomb of Thutmosis I, cf. J. Romer, 42 C. Lilyquist, “Some Dynasty 18 Canopic Jars from “Tuthmosis I and the Bibân El-Molûk: Some Problems of Royal Burials in the Cairo Museum,” JARCE 30 (1993), Attribution,” JEA 60 (1974), pp. 119-133; L. Gabolde, “La p. 112 and p. 114, Fig. 9. chronologie du règne de Thoutmosis II, ses consequences 43 M. Gabolde and L. Gabolde, “Les temples “mémori- sur la datation des momies royales et leurs répercutions aux” de Thoutmosis II et Toutânkamon,” BIFAO 89 (1989), sur l’histoire du developpement de la Vallée des Rois,” pp. 177-178; D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 59-62, p. SAK 14 (1987), pp. 78-80; C.N. Reeves, Valley of the Kings: 270 and n. 1911. The inheritance is clearly attributed to the The Decline of a Royal Necropolis, Studies in Egyptology heir who performed the burial with special reference to the (London and New York: Kegan Paul International, 1990), “law of pharaoh,” in Papyrus Boulaq X, even this use was pp. 13-19; C.E. Loeben and P. Der Manuelian, “New Light mainly a way to cover the cost of the burial, cf. J.J. Janssen on the Recarved Sarcophagus of Hatshepsut and Thutmose and P.M. Pestman, “Burial and Inheritance in the Commu- I in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston,” JEA 79 (1993), nity of the Necropolis Workmen at Thebes,”Journal of the pp. 122-128. For the material associated with this burial, cf. Economic and Social History of the Orient 11, no. 2 (1968), D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 267, ns. 1893-1894. pp. 137-170; A. Théodoridès, “Les ouvriers-‘magistrats’ en under a deep blue starry sky 115 ment had to be renewed, presumably because the tograph published by Harrison50 seems to confirm original equipment was considered as ‘corrupted’ Filer’s results, but still there is some reluctance to by the rites performed previously.44 In any case, accept that Elliot Smith was completely wrong in a new sarcophagus or coffin and a new canopic stating that the bones were fully fused as he paid equipment appeared necessary. great attention to these details. The post-mortem adventures of Thutmosis I Regarding the second point, it must be remem- provide an ideological backdrop to the burial in bered that the standards used for comparison are KV 55. Here again, the most persuasive expla- mostly modern and European. There are no reli- nation is that Tutankhamen buried his father able standards for the ancient Egyptians as there to annul the legitimacy of Akhenaten’s female is not, for the 15-30 year old population, one successor, probably Merytaten,45 who originally mummy whose age at death is indisputably known buried her father in the Royal Tomb at Amarna46 through epigraphic data or strong deduction. We and to strengthen his own claim to the throne. have no idea about the impact of diet, climate, The only obstacle to such a reconstruction genetic inheritance, diseases or social status on of events is the alleged age at death of the body the growth curves of ancient bones. These aspects found in the coffin. More recent studies propose are generally dismissed—probably to avoid a dif- an age between 18-25 years at death, 47 neces- ficult interpretation—by scientists as indicated sarily ruling out Akhenaten. The discrepancy in the following text: between epigraphic data and forensic ones had 48 49 “There is no reason to believe that today’s stan- already been discussed by Germer and Robin. dards are not generally applicable to any sample Strangely, egyptologists are generally more likely of Homo sapiens, making due allowance for envi- to consider the coroner more reliable than the ronmental influences such as nutrition, health and epigraphist. Nevertheless, a careful examination disease, endocrinic balance, and so on; in effect of the methods used for assessing age at death for it may be concluded that the ancient Egyptian ancient Egyptian bones clearly shows the great aged in bone and tissue much as today; it may be uncertainty of the forensic data. The results are assumed that they experienced the same matu- hampered by three major problems: rational changes in essentially the same order as present-day populations.”51 1) the subjective nature of data collection. However the problem of assessing secular changes 2) the appropriateness of standards used for com- parison. in the rate of maturation was apparent to Smith 3) the statistical value of the method. in 1912 when he reflected upon his earlier assign- ment of 25 years as the age at death for Thutmosis Concerning the first point, a remarkable example IV. Smith states: is provided by Filer in her description of the body “But during the eight years that have elapsed since from KV 55: “Elliot Smith states that the limb I examined this mummy, and, on the assumption bones are fully fused and consolidated, but as that the data given in all text-books of Anatomy noted above, this is definitely not the case.” As this in reference to this matter were reliable, estimated is a question of direct observation, it is impossible his age as 25 years, I have examined the epiphysis for the non-specialist to obtain the facts. The pho- of the iliac crest in several thousands of Egyptian

Égypte: à l’époque Ramesside,” Revue International des Droits by J. Leclant and A. Minault-Gout, “Fouilles et travaux en de l’Antiquité, 3rd ser., 16 (1969), pp. 139-165, especially Égypte et au Soudan, 1997-1998,” Orientalia 68 (1999), pp. 147-148. p. 387: 18-22 years old; J. Filer, “The KV 55 Body: The 44 The destruction of the sarcophagi of Akhenaten, Tiyi Facts,” Egyptian Archaeology 17 (2000), pp. 13-17: 20-25 and Maketaten in the Royal Tomb at Amarna has been years old at most. generally misinterpreted as a case of damnatio memoriae 48 R. Germer, “Die angebliche Mumie der Teje,” SAK which makes no sense in the case of Tiyi. It seems more 11 (1984), pp. 85-91. plausible that smashing this monument into such tiny pieces 49 G. Robins, “The Value of the Estimated Ages of the was a way of preventing any re-use, and hence it should be Royal at Death as Historical Evidence,” GM 45 considered a pious act rather than an offending one. (1981), pp. 63-68. 45 D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 147-185. 50 “An Anatomical Examination of the Pharaonic Remains 46 G.T. Martin, The Rock tombs of El Amarna, Part VII/i, Purported to be Akhenaten,” JEA 52 (1966), pl. XXI, 3. The Royal Tomb at El-‘Amarna I: The Objects, Archaeological 51 W.M. Krogman and M.J. Bear, in An X-Ray Atlas Survey of Egypt Memoir 35 (London: Egypt Exploration of the Royal Mummies, eds. J.E. Harris and E.F. Wente Society, 1974), pp. 105-106. (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 47 Study of Nasri Iskander and Eugen Strouhal reported 1980), p. 189. 116 marc gabolde

skeletons. In the course of this investigation I 37 years old at the death of Amenhotep I, who have discovered that in the Ancient Egyptians reigned for 21 years.57 Her mummy is credited it was not an uncommon event for the union of with 30-35 years at death. 58 the posterior end of the epiphysis cristae to be –Ramses III, whose mummy is positively iden- delayed; and that the corresponding part of the tified by the inscription on the shroud, was at least sulcus often persisted well on into the middle age. Hence at the present moment I feel much less 15 years old in year 5 of his own reign, while going certain of the youth of Thutmosis IV than I did to war against the Libyans. Most egyptologists in 1903 before I had learned to distrust the data believe that he was in fact more than 30 at his given so positively in treatises on Anatomy.”52 accession to the throne. He reigned for 30 years and his mummy is estimated to be 30-35 years This conclusion is notably in conflict with the old at death. (Ibid., no. 64) opinion of Harrison: “(…) the epiphyseal union –For other mummies, like that of Amenhotep has been found generally to occur earlier in Egypt II, estimated to be between 35-45 years at death, than modern European and American standards the textual evidence gives a date at the very end dictate.”53 of his estimated age (18 years at his accession and In many cases, when the forensic data is in year 26 on a docket from his funerary temple, total disagreement with the epigraphic data, the hence he must have been at least 44 years old). estimated age at death is younger than what can These examples show that the age at death be deduced from historical sources, giving some is very often under-estimated when compared support to the opinion of Smith. The following to historical evidence. Currently, egyptologists cases are of peculiar interest: –Thutmosis III, whose mummy is clearly prefer to consider that the ancient Egyptians con- fused the mummies during the re-wrapping and identified by the original funeral shroud made 59 by Amenhotep II, and who reigned for 54 years re-burial. But those who re-buried these royal is credited with 35-40 years at death. 54 mummies had at their disposal more information –Amenhotep III, whose mummy is identi- than the modern scientists and it is methodologi- fied by a label on the shroud, and who certainly cally unwise to question first their reliability. reigned for 38 years, is credited with 30-35 years As there are now good reasons for suggesting at death. 55 that Amenhotep IV was about 9-10 years old at –Ahmes-Nefertary, whose mummy is not his accession to the throne and looked like a very clearly identified (in her huge coffin, another fat young boy,60 unmarried and chaperoned by his mummy, that of Ramses III, was also found, but mother,61 he was probably 26-27 years old when the mummy attributed to her clearly dates from he died. Given the unreliability of statistics for the beginning of the XVIIIth Dynasty), gave birth bone growth, we can be certain that, although the to a child before year 18-22 of Ahmosis and she estimated age of 18-25 years is the most probable also outlived Amehotep I.56 If we assume that she case, the same statistics also suggest that estimates was 14 years old in year 20 of Ahmosis’ reign as low as 16 years or as high as 27 years cannot be (more recently a year 22 has been attested, but discarded. They are simply less probable. An error this is not necessarily his last), she was at least of five years in the estimation of age at death of

52 G.E. Smith, The Royal Mummies, CGAE, n° 61051- in the Royal Necropolis of Thebes, ed. C.N. Reeves, Studies 61100 (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie in Egyptology (London and New York: Kegan Paul Inter- Orientale, 1912), pp. 44-45. national, 1992), pp. 2-20. 53 JEA 52 (1966), p. 111. 60 Forthcoming article “Ce bon gros Amenhotep IV.” The 54 W.M. Krogman and M.J. Bear, in An X-Ray Atlas, main arguments are: the most ancient reliefs of Amenhotep table 6.4, no. 47. IV depict him as a fat young boy with a short, wide neck 55 Ibid., no. 22. and double chin (blocks from the X pylon at Karnak and 56 Stela of Thutmosis I, Urk. IV, 80, 3-4. Tomb TT 55 of Ramose). These characteristics are very 57 C. Vandersleyen, L’Égypte et la Vallée du Nil, tome recognizable on plaster portrait Berlin inv. no. 21299 from 2, De la fin de l’Ancien Empire à la fin du Nouvel Empire, Amarna which, due to the shape of the mouth, cannot repre- Nouvelle Clio—l’Histoire et ses problèmes (Paris: Presses sent Amenhotep III “rejuvenated” as currently claimed, but universitaires de France, 1995), p. 240. depicts Amenhotep IV at the very beginning of his reign. 58 W.M. Krogman and M.J. Bear, in An X-Ray Atlas, The change in Amenhotep IV’s iconography in years III-IV table 6.4, no. 60. reveals three phenomena: 1) characteristics of Barraquer 59 A case of complete distrust of epigraphic evidence can and Simon’s syndrome, 2) elongation of the body and new be seen in E.F. Wente and J.E. Harris, “Royal Mummies sensual marks by the time of puberty, and 3) exaggeration of the Eighteenth Dynasty: A Biological and Egyptological of these characteristics due to the baroque style. Approach,” in After Tutankhamūn, Research and excavations 61 Tomb of Kheruef; Amarna Letters EA 26-EA 29. under a deep blue starry sky 117 these very old and poorly preserved bones seems always avoided at Amarna for the king.64 more probable than that the ancient Egyptians – The magical bricks, which are a set with the who buried the body in KV 55 were neglectful, coffin and canopic jars, mention the “Osiris king Neferkheperure true of voice” on two of the careless or inconsistent in their work. inscriptions.65 As these items were prepared at Looking at the alternative proposal for the body the time of burial (and not prepared in advance from KV 55, namely that it belongs to Semenkh- and stored),66 it is clear that Osirian beliefs had kare, it becomes clear that this identification is not already been restored when the burial in KV supported by any epigraphic evidence. This name 55 occurred, and consequently that Akhenaten has never been found in the tomb, and the for- was dead. Confirmation of this is to be found in the presence of seals mentioning Tutankhamen mula “beloved of Waenre” which was thought to which indisputably attribute the burial to his concern him clearly reads in fact only “Waenre.” reign. Dodson’s theory, that Akhenaten buried his core- – As Dodson acknowledges, the cartouches of the gent Semenkhkare with ideologically atonist Aten, as well as those of Akhenaten were defaced burial equipment in KV 55 because the traditional on the panel of the canopic jars. Such deface- burial equipment of that king, later usurped by ment makes no sense if the panel had to be altered in an atonist way. It is totally paradoxical Tutankhamun, appeared too traditional, is based that the only visible traces of the alleged change on prejudiced views. In fact, after alterations, the on the canopic jars ordered by Akhenaten to coffin in KV 55 was not atonist at all: make this equipment “atonist” is precisely the defacement of Akhenaten’s names and the Aten’s – The name of the Aten is carefully avoided on names. the re-cut parts, and when a god is alluded to, he is called nb p.t “Lord of Heaven” (inscription Finally, there is one more point that makes Dod- D) or R-r-Aty, without cartouche (inscrip- son’s reconstruction implausible. This is the fact tion F). This last mention is very significant as R-r-Aty was excluded from the name of the that the royal funerary equipment altered for god after year 1462 and, after a temporary pho- Tutankhamen never mentions Semenkhkare netic writing, was replaced by R-qA-Aty to but only refers to the female pharaoh Ankh(et) avoid the possible reading r “Horus,” of the kheperure … Neferneferuaten … This is clear by falcon.63 It is clear then that it was impossible looking carefully at the pectoral Carter 261 p 1. for this writing to be used between year 14 and The iconography of this object, with the goddess year 17 of Akhenaten (lapses of time foreseen by Dodson for the burial in KV 55) and so it Nut deploying her arms and wings, is typically necessarily post-dates Akhenaten’s death. Osirian and the text, adapted from Pyramid Texts – MA-rw legible on the foot end inscription of 777b and 1654, ensures that it was exclusively the coffin and on the magical bricks, is almost part of the funerary equipment. This object is

62 D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 110-118. This 64 The exceptions are four shabtis of Akhenaten for which suggestion was acknowledged by W.J. Murnane, “The End I gave an explanation in D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, of the Amarna Period Once Again,” OLZ 96, no. 1 (2001), pp. 254-255. p. 14: “Since these changes in the Aten’s titulary can be 65 Despite H.W. Fairman’s comment (“Once Again the more-or-less fixed in time by association with the persons So-called Coffin of Akhenaten,”JEA 47 [1961], p. 37), the buried in these sections (pp. 110-118), there emerges a date name of Akhenaten is legible on the two bricks he published. for the change to the Aten’s final name that is later than The signs for nfr-pr(.w)-R are indisputable and those for what has been assumed previously—i.e., between years 12 W(w)~n-R are not so hard to deduce from the traces as and 14, instead of years 9 and 11. Gabolde makes a plausible Fairman claimed they were. Only the three plural strokes case for this new dating, which in turn can shed valued are hard to find on one brick. (and sometimes startling) light on other members of the 66 It is clear that the magical bricks and the cutting of the royal circle and their monuments.” It is also considered niches were not part of the funerary equipment, but were with interest by M. Eaton-Krauss and R. Krauss in their part of the funerary ritual. For the niches, this is obvious by review of D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, by Marc Gabolde, the fact that the decoration on the walls was often damaged BiOr 58 (2001), p. 92: “Er (Gabolde) macht wahrscheinlich, by their cutting. For the bricks this is evident through their dass die jüngste Namensform erst nach Jahr 12 eingeführt poor material and the rough character of the inscriptions. wurde, und erschüttert damit eine scheinbare ägyptolo- That they were molded, inscribed and consecrated as part gische Sicherheit.” 63 of the ritual performed during the burial, is obvious by It is clear that the last change in the name of the Aten reading Chapter 137 of the Book of the Dead which is was undertaken to avoid the mention of r, which may devoted to theses bricks, cf. now A.M. Roth and C.H. Roehrig, allude to the god Horus and Šw which may allude to the god “Magical Bricks and the Bricks of Birth,” JEA 88 (2002), Shu. But the words chosen in replacement were phonetically pp. 121-139. A. Dodson acknowledged that the presence of closer to the former ones: qA with the same initial and Akhenaten’s bricks was “less easy to explain in terms of (his) the same metric value, and šwty jj(=y) (semi-cryptographic reconstruction,” and his complicated reconstruction failed writtng ) for šwty) sounds nearly like šw nty. to be convincing, GM 132 (1993), p. 27, n. 56. 118 marc gabolde consequently part of the burial equipment of a of Selkis (Carter 266g, Selkis = JE 60691, line 7) king who turned back to the traditional religion, (Fig. 10). as the scarab (Carter 256a), the golden mummy The recent interpretation of this cartouche by bindings (Carter 256b), the coffinettes (Carter Dodson,72 entirely inspired by the publication 266g1-4), and the quartzite sarcophagus attest. of Saleh and Beinlich73 is clearly wrong. Dodson The pecularly legible enlargement of Carter 261 failed to recognize the top of the second and p 1 published recently67 allows a reading of the fourth nfr-signs which can be clearly seen on both praenomen as n(.t)-pr.w-R mr(y.t)-w(w)~n-R. parts of the top of the n-sign, and so he wrongly The feminine ending is confirmed by the femi- placed the only nfr -sign that he identified. His nine epithet MA.t-rw following the cartouche. alleged n-sign on the left part of his misplaced The nomen itself reads Nfr-nfr.w- Jtn A.t-n-h(j)=s nfr-sign is then actually another misinterpreta- “Neferneferuaten—Beneficial for her husband tion, as only traces of a nfr-sign are clearly read- (Fig. 9).”68 able there. The same inaccuracies can be seen in These praenomen and nomen show indisput- Dodson’s interpretation of the cartouche in line ably that this king was a female pharaoh other 9 of the same coffinette where the allegedn -sign than the husband of Merytaten, Semenkhkare, (in the horizontal stroke of the n-sign, so unrec- who is doubtlessly male.69 As it is now certain ognisable itself) and ‘solar-disk’-sign underneath that this queen-pharaoh returned to the poly- are actually invisible. It follows that the alleged theistic beliefs, it seems reasonable to identify Jtn-hieroglyphs in the middle of the cartouche her with the king mentioned in the graffito from appear to be non-existent in both nomina of the tomb of Pare (TT 139) dated from year III lines 7 and 9. The reconstruction of the epithet of Ankh(et)kheprure–Mer(yt)aten Nefernefer- Mr(y)-A(w)~ n- Jtn becomes consequently very uaten-Mer(ytaten), with a significant prayer to uncertain. Moreover, this epithet never existed in Amun.70 That this female pharaoh is also the origi- the cartouche of any king and the formula used nal owner of the coffinettes 266g1-4 is proven by as a reference by A. Dodson from stela UC 410 the (rare) occurrence of the feminine ending71 is actually ill-timed.74 Besides the different order and, moreover, by the presence of the nomen Nfr- of the signs at the end of the cartouche,75 it is nfr.w-Jtn A.t-n-h(j)=s in at least the coffinette noticeable that the assumed hieroglyphs for Jtn are lacking in this text as well as in the other texts

67 T.G. H. James and A. De Luca, Toutankhamon (Paris: (Cairo: Supreme Council of Antiquities, 2002), pp. 275-284 Gründ, 2000), p. 227, Carter 261 p 1 = JE 61944. and particularly p. 277 and p. 285, c. 68 M. Eaton-Krauss, OLZ 98 (2003), p. 47: “Enlargements 73 H. Beinlich and M. Saleh, Corpus der hieroglyphischen of details that exceed the actual size of an object can some- Inschriften aus dem Grab des Tutanchamun (Oxford: Griffith times be illuminating for specialists; a case in point is the Institute, 1989), p. 116. The traces “seen” by A. Dodson are detail of the pectoral Obj. no. 261p1 (p. 226) where traces none other than those published by H. Beinlich and M. Saleh of the original hieroglyphs in the cartouche now reading whose accuracy has already been questioned, particularly Tutankhamun confirm for sceptics Marc Gabolde’s read- concerning the re-engraved inscriptions, cf. M. Eaton-Krauss, ing of the epithet A.t n hj.s (‘beneficial for her husband’) “A Falsely Attributed Monument,” JEA 78 (1992), p. 335, for Neferneferuaten, the original owner of this piece of comment on Carter 48h. It is noticeable that A. Dodson jewellery.” suggests no improvement to readings from this publication. 69 D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 213 and ns. 1531- The reconstruction of A. Dodson is hampered overall by his 1535. method of identification: the dotted line overlying the poor 70 Ibid., p. 161 with references. It is noteworthy that the quality enlargements of the photograph actually hinders the name “Semenkhkare” is always associated with the “Aten” reading rather than illuminating it. 74 cult and is never encountered with the material that post- A. Dodson, ibid., p. 276, n. 5. For the reading, see dates the restoration of the traditional cults. D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, p. 155. 75 71 Carter 266g Neith, line 13, cf. H. Beinlich and M. Saleh, On UC 410 the alleged -sign precedes the alleged Corpus der hieroglyphischen Inschriften aus dem Grab des -sign which would suggest a reading Mr(y)~n-A(w)~n- Tutanchamun (Oxford: Griffith Institute, 1989), p. 110. Jtn. But both signs are more likely to read and . There In the text from chapter 130 of the Book of the Dead, the is only one case where the -sign (written ) is placed at the bottom of the cartouche, a stamped handle from king is in the formula “Turmoil is the abomination Palestine, cf. O. Goldwasser, “A Cartouche of Semenkhkare of the Osiris king Tutankhamen, Ruler of Southern Heliopolis, from Canaan,” GM 115 (1990), pp. 29-32. It would have may she (sic) live for ever.” The context makes clear that been very strange to find the -sign preceding Akhen- n=t(j) is a 3rd fem. sing. ending and not a 2nd masc. aten’s nickname in the praenomen of “king” Ankhkheperure sing. ending. and, as on the same text, the same -sign is following 72 A. Dodson, “The Canopic Coffinettes of Tutankhamun Akhenaten’s alleged nomen in the nomen beginning by and the identity of Ankhkheperure,” in Egyptian Museum Neferneferuaten. This is another good reason to discard the Collections around the World, eds. M. Eldamaty and M. Trad readings Mr(y)~n-A(w)~ n-Jtn and Mr(y)-A(w)~ n-Jtn. under a deep blue starry sky 119 where this supposed name was suspected to have engraved, the nomen occurs on one object and taken place (Carter 620 (41) and 620 (42)).76 More the praenomen appears in the same place on the seriously, the apparent failure of Dodson to rec- other.84 This clearly demonstrates that there were ognise the nomen Nfr-nfr.w-Jtn A(y).t~n-h(j)=s no strict rules for the positioning of nomina and instead of the erroneous Mr(y)-A(w)~n- Jtn 77 preanomina in the fragments from this funerary is surprising as this new name is fully discussed book and that n.t-pr.w-R + epithets could have in D’Akhenaton à Toutânkhamon, pp. 153-15778 been placed where Twt-n-Jmn qA Jwnw šm and this reading has been acknowledged by Mur- is now engraved. Lastly, the possibility that the 79 80 nane, Krauss and Eaton-Krauss —three refer- nomen of Neferneferuaten was written with the ences that are conveniently ignored by Dodson. rare writing of the object Kansas City 67-21, 5-6: On the other hand, the reading of Semenkhkare’s nomen in the coffinette of Nephthys, line 26, is only based upon the fact that an indisputable 85 cannot be totally ‘solar disk’-sign is observable at the beginning ruled out. This means that the presence of the of this cartouche and on the assumption that ‘solar disk’-sign at the beginning of the cartouche “Since elsewhere nomina overlie nomina, one does not necessarily indicate that “Semenkhkare” must assume this to be true in this case as well.”81 was once written there. The fact that no traces This last statement of Dodson’s, which apparently of the s-sign, the mn-sign, or the kA-sign, have works for coffinettes is clearly untrue for other ever been recognized by Dodson, encourages the usurped objects: Carter 48h (JE 61517), where the author to remain very dubious of Dodson’s imagi- native reconstructions of nomina since he fails to cartouche (sic) replaces proba- give traces of A-sign, n-sign and mr(y)-sign and bly the nomen Neferneferuaten,82 and on pectoral is able to concoct a non-existent Jtn group in the Carter 261 p 1 (3) where one can find on the right: alleged epithet Mr(y)~n- A(w)~ n- Jtn, of his false reconstruction of the end of the cartouche.86 From the epigraphic evidence it now appears (sic) and that the king buried in KV 55 is none other than Akhenaten whose age at death was approxima- on the left: (sic).83 tively 26-28 years. He was buried there by his son Interestingly, on two other objects from Tutankhamen to strengthen the rights of the last the tomb of Tutankhamen where this extract king to the throne. Semenkhkare has nothing to from Chapter 134 of the Book of the Dead is do with this burial nor with the usurped funerary

76 R. Krauss, Das Ende der Amarnazeit, HÄB 7 (Hil- Institute, 1970), p. 11 and pls. IV, XVII and XX, despite desheim: Gerstenberg, 1978), p. 88, (h). the opinion of J.R. Harris, “Akhenaten and Neferneferuaten 77 A. Dodson, “The Canopic Coffinettes”; J. Von Beck- in the tomb of Tutankhamūn,” in After Tutankhamūn, erath, Handbuch der ägyptologischen Königsnamen, MÄS Research and excavations in the Royal Necro polis of Thebes, 49 (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 1999), pp. 144-145, 11.E.2. ed. C.N. Reeves, Studies in Egyptology (London and New These texts are now attributed to “king” Nfr-nfr.w-Jtn A.t York: Kegan Paul International, 1992), p. 61 and n. 82. n h(j)=s. 83 J.R. Harris, ibid., p. 61 and n. 97. 78 That this publication was known to A. Dodson is 84 Cf. A. Piankoff,Les Chapelles de Toutankhamon, attested by his comment: “Marc Gabolde has, in D’Akhenaton MIFAO 72 (Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orien- à Toutankhamon (Lyon, 1998), 214-5, attempted to dismiss tale, 1952), p. 15, column 13 Nb-pr.w-R and p. 59, column these conclusions, but in doing so fails to address the totality 30 Twt-n-Jmn qA Jwnw šm. of the traces. This paper is not the place to further address 85 R. Krauss, “Einige Kleinfunde mit Namen von Amarna- Dr Gabolde’s novel conclusions regarding Ankhkheperure.” herrschern,” CdÉ 65, fasc. 130 (1990), p. 210, Fig. 3, [1]. I prefer to let the reader make up his own mind regarding 86 During a friendly discussion in Grenoble (2004), the facts and “novel conclusions” in our respective publica- A. Dodson told me that the very careful analysis of J.P. Allen tions, but the case for the royal name in the Selkis coffinette of the cartouches first engraved in the coffinettes has con- (Carter 266g = JE 60691) line 7 published here (Fig. 10) vinced him that the traces of the name of “Semenkhkare” shows clearly which author actually failed to address the are now less probable than he formerly claimed and are totality of traces. possibly non-existent. For a retractatio see now A. Dodson 79 OLZ 96 (2001), p. 16. and D. Hilton, The Complete Royal Families of Ancient Egypt 80 BiOr 58 (2001), p. 94 and OLZ 98 (2003), p. 47 (London: Thames & Hudson, 2004), p. 285, n. 11. Strangely, [M. Eaton-Krauss]. the discovery of the epithet A(y).t~ n-h(j)=s is credited to 81 A. Dodson, ibid., p. 276. J.P. Allen while in fact Allen’s examination of the coffi- 82 W. McLeod, Composite Bows from the Tomb of Tutan- nettes simply confirmed all my correct readings previously khamūn, Tutankhamūn’s Tomb Series 3 (Oxford: Griffith denounced fiercely by Dodson. 120 marc gabolde equipment from KV 62 which concerns, as far as A.t~n-h(j)=s who is probably none other than the inscriptions are legible, only the female king Merytaten herself. n(.t)-pr.w-R mr(y.t)-W(w)~n-R Nfr-nfr.w-Jtn the festival on which amun went out to the treasury 121

THE FESTIVAL ON WHICH AMUN WENT OUT TO THE TREASURY

Helen Jacquet-Gordon Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale

Karnak temple and its environs were among Bill’s Ptah to be (re)built to serve as a way-station for his special interests. I am happy to make a small con- father Amun “during the festival on which he went tribution towards the understanding of its history out to the Treasury of the Head of the South.”5 in this volume devoted to his memory. A list of offerings to be presented to Ptah on the Festivals during which the bark of Amun was occasion of this festival, among them “white bread carried out of his temple of Karnak in order to from the bakeries of the Treasury,” is followed visit neighboring sanctuaries played a consider- towards the end of the text by a statement of the able role in the annual religious calendar at Thebes precise date on which this particular festival of from the beginning of the New Kingdom onward. Amun was celebrated, namely: the 26th day of the The best known of these outings are those which first month of the inundation season.6 No men- conducted the god southwards from Karnak tion of this festival date has been noted elsewhere, towards the temple of Luxor on the festival of but a certain number of circumstances connected Opet, and that which took him to the west, across with the building and functioning of the small the river to Deir el-Bahari, during the Beautiful temple and bark shrine included in the temenos Feast of the Valley. If the latter of these festivals of the Treasury of Tuthmosis I at Karnak North may already have been celebrated as far back as suggest that a close association existed between the Eleventh Dynasty,1 the former appears not this temple and the above mentioned festi- to have existed before the beginning of the Eigh- val. teenth Dynasty.2 It is about a third festival of this The temple built by Tuthmosis I at Karnak nature during which the bark of Amun traveled North was dedicated to Amun, as is indicated northwards from Karnak in the direction of the from what remains of the decoration of its walls.7 temple of Ptah, at that period situated outside It was originally a free-standing building preceded the enclosure wall of the Amun precinct, that we by a bark shrine and surrounded by a peripteral are here concerned. This festival, like the festival colonnade,8 an architectural ensemble of which of Opet, appears to have been instituted at the this appears to be the earliest example known to beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty. us.9 That the temple was endowed with a regular In 1902, when Legrain cleared the Temple of clergy is indicated by the discovery in the fill over Ptah at Karnak, a stela of Tuthmosis III was dis- the bakeries attached to the Treasury of a small covered in situ in the forecourt of the temple,3 the stela dedicated to the sacred geese of Amun by text of which had been partly erased during the a priest whose name has been erased but whose Amarna period and summarily restored by Seti I.4 title remains intact. He was “hem-netjer of Amun It relates how his majesty ordered the Temple of in the Treasury.”10

1 H. Altermüller, “Feste,” LÄ II, col. 181. 7 H. Jacquet-Gordon, Karnak-Nord VI. Le Trésor de 2 D. Arnold, Der Tempel des Königs Montuhotep von Thoutmosis erI . La Décoration, FIFAO 32 (Cairo: IFAO, Deir el-Bahari, Band I, Architektur und Deutung, Archäol- 1988). ogische Veröffentlichungen (Deutsches Archäologisches 8 J. Jacquet, Karnak-Nord V. Le Trésor de Thoutmosis Ier. Institut, Abteilung Kairo) 8 (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, Etude Architecturale (Cairo: IFAO, 1983), pp. 29-45. 1974), pp. 78-80. 9 The same plan was later adopted by Hatshepsut and 3 G. Legrain, “Le temple de Ptah Rîs-anbou-f dans Tuthmosis III for their sanctuary at Medinet Habu as well Thèbes,” ASAE 3 (1902), pp. 107-111. CG 34013: P. Lacau, as for their bark shrine situated in front of the Mut Temple Stèles du Nouvel Empire I (Cairo: IFAO, 1909), pp. 27-30, at Karnak (in its original form), and survived in variously pl. IX. modified versions at least until the time of Amenhotep III 4 The renewal formula of Seti I is placed in the center in his temple at Kuban. of the vignette at the top of the stela. 10 H. Jacquet-Gordon, Karnak-Nord VIII, Le Trésor de 5 Urk. IV, p. 765: 7-11. Thoutmosis Ier. Statues, Stèles et Blocs Réutilisés. FIFAO 39 6 Urk. IV, p. 770: 3. (Cairo: IFAO, 1999), No. 170, p. 269. 122 helen jacquet-gordon

Pursuing his program of construction, Tuth- The shrine of Amenhotep II appears to have been mosis I included the already existing temple erected approximately where the Amenhotep III together with its bark shrine within the perim- temple now stands.14 It would have constituted eter of the stone enclosure wall built to protect a second way-station for the bark on its way to his newly completed per hedj.11 This complex of the treasury. buildings, whose remains are still visible directly During the Amarna period, all the festivals of north-east of the Temple of Ptah, can with cer- Amun were, presumably, in abeyance, and it is tainty be identified with the Treasury named by apparent from what remains of the decoration Thutmosis III on his stela “The Treasury of the of Tuthmosis I’s temple and bark shrine that the Head of the South.” It was the destination towards latter underwent rough handling on the part of which the bark of Amun was carried on the feast Akhenaten’s agents of destruction. The festival that brought him north from Karnak to stop on when Amun went out to the Treasury, there- the first lap of his journey before the Temple fore, like Amun’s other festivals, was probably of Ptah and to come to rest finally in the bark suspended. But there is reason to suppose that it shrine prepared for him in front of the sanctu- was reinstated, at least for a short time, during ary of Tuthmosis I within the Treasury complex the reign of Seti I or possibly earlier. itself. The bakeries situated along the southern Spallinger, who briefly mentions this feast side of the treasury enclosure12 were those where in his study of the Amun festivals,15 points out the bread for the offerings to Ptah was baked. that the date mentioned on Tuthmosis III’s Ptah The reference on the stela of Tuthmosis III to Temple stela is situated in that part of the inscrip- the occasion when the bark of Amun, after halting tion which was restored by Seti I and does not at the Ptah Temple, proceeded out to the Treasury necessarily reproduce the exact text as it origi- of the Head of the South, indicates clearly that nally stood and whose reading is very uncertain. such a festival was regularly celebrated during This may very well be so, but for our purposes the reign of that King. But it is evident that the is not of primary importance. What interests us bark shrine situated in front of the sanctuary of most here is the fact that the festival was still (or Tuthmosis I was destined from its inception to again) celebrated at the beginning of the Nine- receive the sacred bark of the god to whom it teenth Dynasty, whether it was on the traditional was dedicated on the occasion of such a festival. date or on a new date fixed by Seti I. That it was It may therefore very well have been Tuthmosis so celebrated is guaranteed not only by the fact I himself who inaugurated this festival although that the festival is mentioned in Seti’s restora- we cannot exclude the possibility that it existed tion of the text of the Tuthmosis III stela, but even earlier. Fragments of wall decoration bearing also by archaeological evidence observed in the the name of , found during the excava- bark shrine of Tuthmosis I itself. Nothing much tion of the Treasury of Tuthmosis I in a context remains in situ of this building apart from its which suggests that they had been intentionally foundations and the sill of its southern doorway. preserved there, may have belonged to an older However, the pavement of the narrow passageway bark sanctuary located in the same general area.13 which led from the bark shrine via this doorway Evidence that this festival continued to be cel- to the chapels of the small temple behind it still ebrated at least until the time of Amenhotep II remains in place. It was very much worn and had is provided by the inscription on a block from been repaired with a number of talatat and with the latter’s bark shrine for Amun reused in the two paving slabs cut from a pillar on the face foundations of the temple of Amenhotep III at of which the cartouches of Tutankhamun could Karnak North. It clearly mentions the festival be deciphered.16 The necessity for making such “when (Amun) proceeds (from) his temple to the repairs can only be attributed to the renewed cel- Treasury of the Head of the South,” using the ebration of the festival on these premises, which same expressions as on the Tuthmosis III stela. required that the buildings be renovated and put

11 J. Jacquet, Karnak-Nord V, pp. 45-73. at North Karnak,” BIFAO 86 (1986), p. 356, pl. LV. 12 Ibid., pp. 82-84. 15 A. Spalinger, Three Studies on Egyptian Feasts and 13 H. Jacquet-Gordon, Karnak-Nord VI, §6.2.5, their Chronological Implications (Baltimore: Halgo, Inc., pp. 90-92. 1992), p. 14, n. 50 and p. 20. 14 Ch. van Siclen, “Amenhotep II’s Bark Chapel for Amun 16 J. Jacquet, Karnak-Nord V, p. 32, pl. XXVIII/B. the festival on which amun went out to the treasury 123 into condition worthy of receiving the sacred bark of this cult corresponding to the statues, each of of the god. which had a particular name, housed in the vari- Such renovations could, of course, have been ous sanctuaries established there.20 Now the brick made by any one of the successors of Tutankha- sanctuaries built by Ramses II and his successors mun, but since no trace of activity on the part of down to the time of Pinedjem I on the emplace- Ay, Horemheb or Ramses I have been detected ment of the Treasury of Tuthmosis I appear like- in the Treasury whereas a cartouche of Seti I was wise to have been dedicated to the cult of King found recut over an erased royal name on one of Amenhotep I and Queen Ahmes-Nefertari.21 A the fragments of wall relief,17 it seems probable small statue found in the fill above the Treasury that it is indeed Seti I to whom can be attributed may even have mentioned the name of the par- the work of restoration. ticular form of Amenhotep’s statue which was The dismantling of the entire Treasury complex worshipped there.22 Unfortunately the inscription of Tuthmosis I by Ramses II18 necessarily put an on the dorsal pillar is badly broken and all that end to the celebration of this particular feast leav- one can recognize of the title inscribed there is: ing a lamentable lacuna in the festival calendar. “First Prophet of Amenhotep of the ….” Traces But it should be remarked that the days following which follow do not correspond to the writing of those on which this festival had been celebrated, any of the known names of the king’s cult statues. namely the 28th and 29th of Thoth, the first month It is not unreasonable, therefore, to attribute it to of the inundation season, are known to have been the form of Amenhotep worshipped in the suc- the dates of one of the festivals dedicated to the cessive sanctuaries erected on this spot at the end cult of Amenhotep I and Ahmes-Nefertari.19 This of the New Kingdom. The fact that these sanctu- cult, very widely celebrated in the Theban area aries were located at Karnak North may possibly during the Ramesside period, was particularly be attributed to the association of this area with important on the west bank. As Černý has pointed memories of the Sanctuary first established there out, there existed at Deir el-Medina several forms by the early Eighteenth Dynasty kings.

17 H. Jacquet-Gordon, Karnak-Nord VI, pp. 166, 171; 19 J. Černý, “Le culte d’Amenophis Ier chez les ouvriers pl. XLIII/C, XLV(C26/1). de la nécropole thébaine,” BIFAO 27 (1927), p. 182. 18 J. Jacquet, Karnak-Nord VII. Le Trésor de Thoutmosis 20 Ibid., pp. 162-163. Ier. Installations antérieures ou postérieures au monument. 21 J. Jacquet, Karnak-Nord VII, p. 64, §5.9. FIFAO 36, fasc. 1 (Cairo: IFAO, 1994), p. 150. 22 H. Jacquet-Gordon, Karnak-Nord VIII, Statue No. 80 (KN Inv. No. A378), p. 132. 124 helen jacquet-gordon a sandstone relief of tutankhamun in the liverpool museum 125

A SANDSTONE RELIEF OF TUTANKHAMUN IN THE LIVERPOOL MUSEUM FROM THE LUXOR TEMPLE COLONNADE HALL

W. Raymond Johnson Epigraphic Survey

It was my good fortune to join the Epigraphic been the largest free-standing stone structure in Survey based at Chicago House in Luxor during the ancient world. But by the first century AD the spring of 1978 when Bill Murnane was work- seismic activity had caused the great stone roof ing as senior epigrapher there. I started as appren- blocks to fall, and systematic quarrying of the tice epigraphic artist, graduated to full-time in side walls throughout the medieval period has 1979, and began what was to become my life-long left us only the 14 papyrus columns and archi- career with the Survey. I owe a tremendous debt traves standing to their original height (still one to Bill and former director Lanny Bell for initiat- of the most impressive sights in the modern ing me into the rigors and discipline of epigraphic world). Part of the first register of decoration—the documentation and life “in the field.” Bill was famous Opet water procession reliefs—survives particularly patient with this enthusiastic green- today, out of the four registers of decoration that horn, and I will always remember his encourage- originally reached all the way up to the roof line ment, his humor, his dignity, and his delight in (although I was to discover later that fragments talking with everyone about the work (his and of all four registers do survive). One of my first theirs). His encyclopedic memory was astonish- tasks for the Survey, suggested by Bill (for which ing; I long even now for just a fraction of it. His I will be forever grateful), was to trace the sev- enthusiasm infected us all, and does to this day. eral dozen inscribed, fragmentary sandstone wall Bill taught me that expedition life did not have fragments that the Epigraphic Survey had identi- to be deprived of culture; I learned more about fied as having been quarried from the Colonnade opera in Luxor listening with him to his incredible Hall in later antiquity. These beautiful wall frag- library of cassette tapes than anywhere else in the ments, identifiable by the distinctive low raised world. No one could write the way Bill wrote, or relief carving style of Tutankhamun, had been analyze other people’s work more cogently, or in culled by the Survey from the blockyard stor- a more gentlemanly fashion. Just before his death age areas around the temple where tens of thou- he was producing some of the most thoughtful sands of inscribed fragments found in medieval and insightful writing of his career, particularly foundations around the temple precinct had been concerning the Amarna period, which makes his stored. Little did anyone know at that time that untimely passing doubly tragic. There is not a I would end up specializing in the analysis and day that goes by in Luxor that I do not think reassembly of this fragmentary material, a proj- of him, and wonder what he might have to say ect that is ongoing to this day, 30 years later! At about this or that. current count, 50,000 inscribed fragments from At the time I started work in Luxor, the Epi- all periods of Luxor Temple (over 1500 from graphic Survey was documenting the great Colon- the Colonnade Hall alone) and even parts of nade Hall of Amenhotep III and Tutankhamun Karnak are being documented and analyzed by at Luxor Temple.1 This astonishing edifice—80 the Epigraphic Survey. The blockyards recently feet tall, almost 200 feet long, and supported by have become the focus of our growing conser- 14 open papyrus columns—in its day may have vation and restoration programs designed to

1 Epigraphic Survey, Reliefs and Inscriptions at Luxor and Inscriptions at Luxor Temple Volume 2: The Façade, Temple Volume 1: The Festival Procession of Opet in the Portals, Upper Register Scenes, Columns, Marginalia, and Colonnade Hall, OIP 112 (Chicago: The Oriental Institute of Statuary in the Colonnade Hall, OIP 116 (Chicago: The the University of Chicago, 1994); Epigraphic Survey, Reliefs Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1998). 126 w. raymond johnson

protect the material and make it accessible to the a pre-existing program for the relief decoration public.2 of the Hall which had been drawn up during I cannot pass through the Colonnade Hall Amenhotep III’s reign. The presence of the bark without thinking of Bill, with whom the Chicago of the king for the first time among the barks of House team and I worked for many seasons docu- the Theban triad, and figures of Amenhotep III menting the beautifully inscribed wall surfaces. which Tutankhamun includes behind the cabin While it is clear that Amenhotep III began the sanctuaries of the divine barges and in all of the construction of the Hall at the end of his reign processions might not be simply hommages to to commemorate his deification while alive, he the king who started the Hall, but might actually sadly did not reign long enough to complete it. reflect Amenhotep III’s original program which This was largely accomplished only at the end of commemorated the deified Amenhotep III taking Tutankhamun’s reign; the evidence of unfinished his place among the Theban pantheon.4 A scene reliefs at the southern end of the Hall, later carved which may shed some light on this question can by Sety I, indicates that Tutankhamun died before be found in Amenhotep III’s solar court at Luxor he could finish inscribing the walls. This suggests Temple. Here Amenhotep III is shown presenting that the young king was obliged to finish the Hall’s an enormous offering pile to Amun’s bark set up construction first, at a time when the Egyptian in the center of the court. Standing behind the work force was spread rather thin during the res- bark is another figure of Amenhotep III accom- toration of Amun’s cult throughout Egypt. Except panied by his ka, which implies that Amenhotep for one doorjamb scene on the exterior facade of III and Amun are one and the same, with both the Colonnade Hall that was started by Amenho- benefiting from the offerings.5 In the Colonnade tep III in paint, the entire facade appears to have Hall, the placement of figures of Amenhotep been carved solely by Ay after Tutankhamun’s III at the rear of each divine barge behind the death. Both Tutankhamun’s and Ay’s reliefs were cabin sanctuaries; behind the barks of Amun in ultimately usurped by Horemheb who erased and the bark processions; and behind the Amun-Re- reinscribed their cartouches with his own name, Kamutef procession in the second register west often not very carefully. The plaster and paint wall all indicate identification of Amenhotep III which concealed traces of the earlier kings’ names with Amun, and would have been an appropriate is now gone, and the palimpsest of the sets of part of his program for the Hall. Since Amenho- names is quite clear, especially in raking light.3 tep III was deceased at the time Tutankhamun Analysis of the standing wall remains and executed the reliefs, there was no need to change the fragmentary material from the missing wall the program.6 sections indicates that all four registers of Tut- Amenhotep III’s great water procession scene ankhamun’s decoration in the Hall documented (also Opet-related) on the eastern face of his 3rd rites associated with the annual , the pylon at Karnak shows the king offering incense processions which were part of that festival, and and a bouquet to the cabin (within which was the coronation of the king (or reenactment of enshrined the bark of Amun), but a figure of same) at the culmination of the rites. There are a Amenhotep is also depicted on the stern of the number of iconographic and stylistic anomalies in barge helping to steer with a long-handled oar.7 the decoration that suggest Tutankhamun utilized In Tutankhamun’s divine riverine barge scenes in

2 These programs have been funded by an ARCE/EAP this author’s, “Honorific Figures of Amenhotep III in the grant, BP Egypt, USAID Egypt, and the World Monuments Luxor Temple Colonnade Hall,” in For His Ka: Essays in Fund (Robert Wilson Challenge grants), and numerous Memory of Klaus Baer, SAOC 55, ed. D.P. Silverman (Chi- contributions from private individuals. For reports on the cago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Epigraphic Survey’s conservation activities at Luxor Temple 1994), pp. 133-144. since 1995, see The Oriental Institute Annual Report, from 5 For a preliminary drawing of this scene, the upper 1995-1996 to the present. The results of the first seven sea- section of which has been partly restored from fragmen- sons’ conservation activities will be published in a forthcom- tary material, see this author’s, “Images of Amenhotep III ing ARCE/EAP publication series volume. An epigraphic in Thebes: Styles and Intentions,” The Art of Amenhotep volume dedicated to facsimile drawings and photographs III: Art Historical Analysis, ed. L.M. Berman (Cleveland: of Colonnade Hall upper register fragments and joined Cleveland Museum of Art and Indiana University Press, groups will published in the RILT series. 1990), p. 30, drawing 2. Restoration of this fragmentary 3 For a review of the sequence of carving in the Col- group to the original wall will be finished by the Epigraphic onnade Hall, see the prefaces for each of the two volumes Survey in 2009 cited above, RILT 1 and 2. 6 See note 4 for details of these scenes. 4 For a more detailed examination of this question, see 7 PM II2, p. 61 (183). The sunk relief bark of Amun a sandstone relief of tutankhamun in the liverpool museum 127

Fig. 1. Liverpool Museum 1967.35. Courtesy of National Museums Liverpool (Liverpool Museum). the Colonnade Hall, the placement of a figure of of Tutankhamun wearing the khepresh crown Amenhotep III on the stern of each barge made (Fig. 1).9 The Tutankhamun figure on the left is it awkward to squeeze in the traditional figure intact from head to shoulder with text above and of the king holding the steering oar. Instead, the in front, and the king’s upraised hand grasping two Tutankhamun figures were depicted back- the steering oar pole is preserved at the break. A to-back on the prow, the figure on the left hold- streamer attached to the base of the king’s crown ing a steering oar, and the figure on the right falls over his shoulder and is partly hidden by the offering incense and flowers to the cabin. In the streamer of the right-hand king. Tutankhamun’s preserved wall reliefs and fragmentary material prenomen cartouche Nebkheperure, is carved from the Colonnade Hall this arrangement of ele- slightly above the leftmost king’s face and has ments on the riverine barges of the divine triad of been rather crudely recarved into Horemheb’s Thebes is consistent: back-to-back Tutankhamun prenomen, Djeserkheperure Setepenre, with traces figures (whose cartouches have been usurped by of the original prenomen visible.10 To the left of Horemheb) on the prow, and a figure of Amen- the cartouche read: “the Good God,” and over hotep III at the stern. All preserved royal figures the king’s head read “given life like [R]e.” The on the barges wear khepresh crowns.8 whole group, including cartouche, reads “The A sandstone relief in the Liverpool Museum, Good God, Nebkheperure, given life like [R]e.” Inv. #1967.35 shows this same detail, back-to- There are traces of an inscription above the car- back small-scale figures in shallow raised relief, touche and epithets, too broken to read, from a visible today in the Amun Barge’s main cabin was carved Antiquities, National Museums Liverpool for permission in the later Ramesside period, possibly by Sety II who also to publish 1967.35, and for the photograph of the relief added a renewal inscription below the scene. In the time of published here, courtesy of National Museums Liverpool Amenhotep III, divine riverine barge cabins were depicted (Liverpool Museum). I would also like to thank Margaret closed within a shrine. The divine riverine barge represen- Warhurst, Head of Humanities, National Museums Liverpool tations in the Colonnade Hall represent the first time in for information about the acquisition of the piece. See also Egyptian art that the cabins of such barges are depicted P. Bienkowski and A.M. J. Tooley Gifts of the Nile, National open and their contents—the bark of the god or goddess Museums and Galleries on Merseyside (London: Her Maj- within—visible. esty’s Stationery Office, 1995), p. 27, Fig. 28. This relief can 8 RILT I, pls. 17 (west wall), and 68 (east wall). also be viewed online at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org. 9 The relief is a shallow piece of sandstone 38 cm in uk/wml/humanworld/egyptian/sandstone_relief.aspx. width and approximately 20 cm in height, acquired by 10 The sun disk is original and was utilized for both the Liverpool Museum in 1967 from J. Moger in Holland. names. I would like to thank Gary Brown, Assistant Curator of 128 w. raymond johnson

Fig. 2. The barge of Mut (detail of prow) being towed by the barge of the queen, Luxor Temple Colonnade Hall western wall. photo by Ray Johnson. separate text above the two kings. To the left of the (Amun) and queen (Mut), still preserves the better leftmost king and cartouche is a larger-scaled, ver- parts of the barge of the queen, in full sail, towing tical column of text in reverse orientation, facing the barge of Mut (Fig. 2).11 Mut’s barge is well the king, “... born of Mut.” The rightmost Tut- preserved at the prow and stern, but the central ankhamun figure is mostly broken away except for section is very decayed, and only vestiges of the the back of his khepresh-crowned head, streamer, cabin remain. Today all that remain of the two and upper left section of his shoulder. Between back-to-back figures of Tutankhamun at the prow the heads of the two kings read “protection, life.” are the feet. Photos from 1912 published in RILT 1 Part of a quail chick over the rightmost king’s show more of the legs and lower bodies preserved. head is part of an epithet that follows his (broken Earlier photos taken by Georges Daressy in the away) cartouche. 1890s seem to show both kings intact.12 Liver- Having spent a good deal of time drawing the pool fragment 1967.35 must have fallen off the Tutankhamun barges in the Colonnade Hall, badly fractured Colonnade Hall wall and had been and reconstructing almost an entire divine barge recovered sometime after the 1890s but before from fragments (that of the god Khonsu from the 1912. Comparison of the breaks of the wall and eastern wall), I believe that Liverpool Museum graining on 1967.35 supports the match. 1967.35 is actually a piece of the Colonnade Hall. It is always sweet to run into old friends in In fact, the style, scale, surface treatment, pale- unexpected places, and this is how I feel about ography, and textual reference to Mut makes it Liverpool 1967.35; an old friend, long lost, and certain that 1967.35 comes from the divine barge now found again. It is with deep gratitude, and of Mut scene on the Colonnade Hall western wall. a sense of great loss that I dedicate this study to This section of the water procession, which fea- a dear friend we have lost, but whose name will tured the divine barges of the Theban triad being always live. Thank you, Bill. 13 towed by towboats and the barges of the king

11 RILT 1, pl. 17, far right for the wall context; pls. 27 13 A reconstruction of the wall scene with restored frag- (photo) and 28 (drawing) for details. The published photo ment Liverpool 1967.35 will appear in Epigraphic Survey, dates to 1912 and still shows the feet of the right-hand king RILT 3, Upper Register and Miscellaneous Wall Fragments figure, but the upper part is already gone. from the Colonnade Hall, forthcoming. 12 “La Procession d´Ammon dans la temple de Louxor,” MMAF 8 (Paris: Leroux, 1892). egyptian new-kingdom topographical lists 129

EGYPTIAN NEWKINGDOM TOPOGRAPHICAL LISTS: AN HISTORICAL RESOURCE WITH “LITERARY” HISTORIES

Kenneth A. Kitchen University of Liverpool

Bill Murnane always showed a clear, incisive grasp welcoming deity who (in Ramesside times) might of the various epigraphic and historical matters hold forth the scimitar-sword of victory. He (or that he dealt with; in his published works, he else a lesser deity) also held the ends of cords that left an invaluable deposit of useful studies and ran along and bound the hands and heads of rows observations that will long be of service to us all. of foes behind the deity/ies and below the entire I have happy memories of our rare meetings long scene; each foe was but a head upon a vertical since. I hope that this brief tribute may be found oval containing the appropriate place-name, with fitting. bound arms and hands hanging down behind. A rhetorical superscription runs along over the main full-width rows of names. On the twin Introduction towers of pylon-gateways, it was normal to feature northern foes (Syria-Palestine and beyond) and Lists of foreign place-names (so-called topograph- southern foes (Nubia and southward) and their ical lists) have long been recognized as a potential lists respectively on one tower each (e.g., Tuthmo- resource for historical, geographical and archaeo- sis III, Pylons VI, VII, Karnak), especially if the logical purposes in the study of Syria-Palestine in gateway faced east/west, so that a northerners’ tri- the Late Bronze age, and less usefully (in southern umph-scene could be placed on the north tower, lists) for the Nile Valley and adjoining terrain and a southerners’ scene on the matching south south of Egypt proper (from Aswan). However, tower. It became standard Ramesside practice the varying types (and hence, equally variable also to have two different introductory triumphal nature) of such lists is not well understood by texts, one for each of the two matching scenes. most people attempting to use them, and this One was created by using the triumph-hymn of matter is deserving of clearer definition for the Amenophis III from his memorial temple, plus a general benefit of all who wish to utilize such lists linking text, plus the triumph-hymn of Tuthmosis in their studies. Non-egyptologists in particular III at Karnak. The other was a fresh composition need to know that one cannot pick names indis- on related themes. But in some pairs of scenes criminately out of these lists, to use as instant (e.g., those of Sethos I and Ramesses II flanking history-pegs for the study of any given place in the north and south side-doorways of the great the Near East or NE Africa. hall at Karnak), even though northern wars were the cause of celebration, some southern names were also included in the lists, as a reflex of Pha- Classification raoh’s claim to universal dominion. Special cases of single triumphal reliefs are two by Merenptah A. Types of Record: Physically Defined. These (one, now destroyed) north of Pylon VII, and the lists were included in several different types of unique one by adjoining the Bubas- context. tite Gate, all three at Karnak. Triumphal scenes, 1. In Triumph-Scenes. From the 1st Dynasty to however, were not the sole context for these lists Roman times, the most persistent icon of phar- as the following will show. aonic victory was that of the victorious king, 2. Similar Scenes & Lists in Lunettes of Major striding forward with weapon upraised to bring Stelae. On major stelae, such as those of the it down on the heads of hapless, defeated foes “Blessing of Ptah” of Ramesses II and III, a full half-kneeling confusedly before him. In New- triumph-scene occupies the uppermost part of Kingdom times, opposite the king, there stood a the stela, along with name-ovals (as described 130 kenneth a. kitchen above) behind the deity and at times below the by inspection of the contents, and with the aid full scene, just as on a temple pylon-tower or wall. of such identifications with known places as are On most others (like those of the viceroy Setau beyond doubt. at Abu Simbel), lists are not included. Not all relate to wars, it should be emphasized. 3. Row of Names along the Base-panels of We may distinguish the following types: Temple Walls. So, around all four interior walls 1. Encyclopedic. Such lists can be long, and of the hypostyle hall of Ramesses II at Amarah cover all manner of distant places that Egypt’s West temple in Nubia; above, on three sides, war- rulers knew about, even if contact might be fare and other scenes occupy the main areas; but more tenuous than real (e.g., as remote as matching triumph-scenes flank the rear doorway in southern Babylonia); such lists are not limited into the inner temple. At Abydos, in the Temple to places under Egyptian control, but serve to of Ramesses II, short lists appear on the south illustrate the concept that Egypt’s gods held uni- façade of the IInd Pylon (below prisoners led to versal rule, and the pharaoh was their deputy as the king), and on the north and south end-walls potentially lord of “all lands,” pantocrator. of the forecourt portico (context above them, 2. Regional Lists. (a) Limited to either Nubia now lost). and the south, or to Western Asia and north- 4. Sets of Names inscribed around Lower Parts of ern environs. (b) Mainly one region or the other, Columns & Door-passages. This is most prominent but including names from other regions, out of a in the runs of names around columns in the main sense of universalism, or to fill up the number of hypostyle hall of the vast temple of Amenophis names required by the layout on the wall, base, III at Soleb in Nubia. In Upper-Egyptian Abydos, or whatever. two short lists (engraved as if on royal sphinx- 3. Lesser Lists. (a) Abregés of longer listings; (b) bases) adorn the door-thicknesses of the King’s ‘heraldic’, often limited to traditional names (e.g., chapel of the Temple of Sethos I. Nine Bows) or to major entities beyond Egypt. 5. Lists inscribed around the Base-blocks of Royal Statues & Sphinxes. A far commoner usage than Nos. 2-5, attested (e.g.) for Amenophis II and Exemplification III, Haremhab, Sethos I, Ramesses II, Ramesses III and Taharqa. Such statues and sphinxes can A. African/Southern Lists. We turn first to the lists occur just in isolated pairs, or else in a whole for southern lands, because they show very clearly series, as in a temple court. most phenomena found also in the more heavily 6. Brief “heraldic” lists. These are usually short, used (and abused) lists for northern lands. For the and set as decoration in royal contexts. So, in New Kingdom, our ‘foundation documents’ are scenes in private tomb-chapels on the throne- the three copies of basically 116 names (conven- base below the king; once, on a chariot, that of tionally listed as “1-117,” with [accidentally!] no Tuthmosis IV from his tomb. Plus the two sets No. 6), plus a supplementary list of 152 additional of labeled foreign chiefs high on the façade of names (“118-269”), left to us at Karnak by Tuth- the front ‘high gate’ of Ramesses III at Medinet mosis III (mid-15th-century BC) on Pylons VI Habu. To these may finally be added: and VII in Karnak temple in Thebes. These great 7. Series of place-names in non-list contexts, lists include seven regions over which the Egyp- such as the six registers of captured towns in the tian Empire actually ruled (e.g., Kush, names Nos. reliefs of Year 8 of Ramesses II at the Ramesseum; 1-10, Wawat, 24-47), or sought to control, but and much earlier, the set of personified Syrian incompletely (e.g., Irem, 11-23, Libya, 88-116), or places on jambs of a gateway of Amenophis I at probably notionally (e.g., Medja, 78-85, Kenset, Karnak. 86-87; desert zones), or simply traded with, they 8. Series of place-names in sets of battle-reliefs, being independent throughout (e.g., Punt, 48-77). which are not lists in any sense, but do contain Once Egypt’s rule was firmly established along collocations of place-names in warfare contexts; the Nile from the 1st to the 4th Cataract under so, for Sethos I, Ramesses II, Merenptah and Tuthmosis I and III, incorporating Wawat and Ramesses III. Kush, subsequent wars were limited to the crush- ing of local revolts every two or three decades, B. Types of Record: Textually Defined.The nature or to attempts to cow marginal powers such as of each list (and type of list) has to be defined Irem, or fend off attacks from such quarters. As a egyptian new-kingdom topographical lists 131 result, later pharaohs requiring to celebrate their at the base of the twin scenes, the scribes chose ascendancy in the south had few new places to to omit Wawat (Lower Nubia) entirely (Th. III, boast of subduing—so, it was found convenient Nos. 24-47). Instead, they headed it with the far simply to recopy larger or lesser extracts from more prestigious ‘Punt’ (Th. III, No. 48), and copies of the great Tuthmoside lists, with or with- included practically the entire Punt list (Th. III, out minor more current additions. So, the subse- Nos. 49-77), in proper order in Sethos I’s Eastern quent history of these lists sees them transformed list (Nos. E. [40-41], 42-64, <65?>, then [66-68]), (effectively and functionally) from historical into but in some disorder2 and with further omissions literary sources, for most of the rest of the New in the Western version of the list. Thereafter, Kingdom. Examples will best illustrate this. Medja is listed, with just one other name of its Between the reigns of Tuthmosis III and Sethos group (E. 69-70/W. 56, 65, from Th. III, Nos. 78, I, the lesser lists of Amenophis II and Haremhab 84). Kenset and Tjehenu (Libya) were omitted are mainly little more than brief extracts from such entirely from this sequence. This gives us already sources as the great lists of Tuthmosis III. Only an insight into scribal methods in editing exist- with Amenophis III at Soleb and Kom el-Hettan ing lists for fresh use in a more limited context. do we again find longer lists of original content, They drew extensively upon the more prestigious but for the North rather than for Africa. Some Kush and not Wawat, but only in part, then from African names survive at Soleb, but hardly so far Irem, a smaller extract, then almost the whole of at Kom el-Hettan. exotic and prestigious Punt, with a final glance at The major lists that accompany the triumph- the desert Medja. Faithfully so, in the East Side scenes of Sethos I at Karnak (north wall of the scene, but with curious ‘scrambling’ of ordering Great Hypostyle Hall) are instructive in this of names in the West Side scene, probably partly regard. Originally, these lists were of a series as a result of editorial vacillation over what to of Asiatic names, complemented with a set of include/not include. African names; subsequently, the second set of Under Ramesses II, at Karnak (Great Hypostyle African names at the base of the scene was plas- Hall, South Wall), almost all the emphasis in the tered over, and recut with Asiatic names, as the lists there is on Western Asiatic names, in keep- Chicago Epigraphic Survey was able to establish.1 ing with that theatre of war in the adjoining war- The African names in the upper part o Abydos scenes. Only in the East Side list is there a brief f the scene were kept intact, such that the final concession to wider horizons. After Upper Egypt, lists continued heraldically to proclaim the uni- as with Sethos I, we have the heading ‘Kush’ (at versal dominion of the pharaoh over all lands, No. 2), but followed by only its first three topo- both northern and southern. For the southern/ nyms (Nos. 3-5) rather than by its first eight as African names, as long known, the scribes made Sethos I had done. Then at No. 5 comes Irem on selections from the great lists of Tuthmosis III at its own, then Tjehenu (Libya) as first of 7 out of Karnak. Thus the upper, clear section (after Upper the Nine Bows (Nos. 7-13), before continuing Egypt) began with ‘Kush,’ i.e., Upper Nubia (No. with Levantine toponyms. 2), and Nos. 3-10 (E Side list; 3-9, W Side, omit- But in his Nubian temples, Ramesses II’s ting E.5), copying directly the Nos. 2-10 names scribes had to provide Southern lists. Here the that constituted ‘Kush’ in the original Tuthmosis Aksha temple Nubian list is closely paralleled by III list. Then comes ‘Irem’ (No. E. 11/W. 10), the the 1st Nubian list at Amarah West.3 Both begin next territory, but here the scribes added only with a double heading: Kush and Irem (Nos. 1-2), the first three places in the Irem list (E. 12-14/W. followed by three toponyms from Kush (Nos. 3-5; 11-13, from Tuthmoside Nos. 12-14), cutting Th. III, Nos. 2-4). Then Gurses (No. 6) is from it drastically short for their more limited pur- Irem, Tywrrk may also be from Irem (Th. III, No. poses. In the second (overwritten) Nubian list, 14?), but Srnyk is back to Kush (Th. III, No. 8).

1 See Epigraphic Survey, The Battle Reliefs of King Sety Biographical II (Oxford: Blackwell, 1979), pp. 218-220; idem, I, RIK IV (Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University Ramesside Inscriptions, Translated and Annotated: Transla- of Chicago, 1986), pp. 49-50, 56-57. tions II (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996), pp. 76-77; and remarks, 2 Existing sequence: W. 44-45, 50, 49, 37(!), 40(?), 41, idem, Ramesside Inscriptions, Translated and Annotated: 39, 38, (E. 49 omitted), 46, (E. 51 omitted), 47-48, 51-53; Notes and Comments II (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Black- 55, 54, 58-59, 57, (E. 62-63 omitted), 63, 62, 64, 61, 60. well, 1999), p. 130. 3 K. A. Kitchen, Ramesside Inscriptions, Historical and 132 kenneth a. kitchen

This ties up with the remains of the set of Nubian began as reflections of historical events and/or toponyms on column-bases in the south wing of administrative records of these regions became the hypostyle hall of the great temple of Ameno- (by recopying and editing) a “literary” and sym- phis III at Soleb. 4 bolic phenomenon, at first by copying and adding However, as for the very strange lists not only new data (Amenophis III), and then simply by of Th. III, Nos. 118-269, of Amenophis IIIpassim recopying/editing/rearranging with nothing new with Ramesses II at Aksha (Nubian), Nos. 10-27, added—except scribal errors in copying (often and parallel at Amarah West, Nubian Lists I-II, through misreading of hieratic copies used). Nos. 10-95,—these all remain mutually unparal- leled (Th. III vs. Am. III/R. II) at present. B. Northern/Western Asiatic Lists. Here, we can In turn, the scribes of Ramesses III massively utilize what we have begun to glean for a better- reused older sources in compiling the vast lists at nuanced study of what happened to lists that his Medinet Habu temple. Nubian/African names reflect the northern arc of Egyptian interests. are included in the North Tower list. Already, long Here we have the advantages (i) of a good many since, Edgerton and Wilson pointed out the links well-established identifications of foreign lands, between Ramesses III’s list and the great lists of states and settlements, and (ii) of considerable Tuthmosis III.5 The order of names and in groups knowledge of the local history and geography of is erratic, and includes reduplications. Short runs a variety of such places, from their own (non- of names recur, from the great list, including from Egyptian) records. the long second part (Nos. 118-269). It is need- Here, Tuthmosis III’s superscription to the less to list all these scattered bits here; they can main part of his triply inscribed great list iden- be well observed from Edgerton-Wilson. tifies the 119 places listed as those of the “330” What was happening in the African lists is that chiefs besieged in Megiddo on his 1st campaign we probably possess in the great lists of Tuthmosis (Years 22/23, 1458/57 BC). Significantly, in two III a conspectus of places gleaned from various copies, this prior list begins with Qadesh (No. 1) sources for each region cited. Tax-lists for villages and Megiddo (No. 2). The superscription would along the Nile in Wawat and Kush; places encoun- thus imply that, aided by a large number of lesser tered in invading Irem; the many little villages Central and North Syrian rulers (as well as the and hamlets met with by Punt-expeditionaries local Palestinian ones), the ruler of Qadesh had going inland (as with Hatshepsut’s expedition) headed the coalition and been based in Megiddo from the Red Sea coast deep westward to reach on the occasion—which is also clearly stated in the aromatics terraces within the borderlands of the Annals (Urk. IV, 649:5-6). Sudan, Eritrea/Ethiopia. The second, obscurer list In subsequent years, Tuthmosis III reached (Nos. 118-169) may have drawn upon expeditions north, subdued Qadesh itself (6th campaign, Year that went beyond normal limits in the south. And 30, 1450 BC), and then proceeded in his 33rd year so on. Under Amenophis III, old names were kept, (1447) and 8th campaign to invade as far north as but new ones added; possibly in the wake of that Carchemish (Amenemhab’s text) and across the king’s own expedition deep into southern regions Euphrates into itself. It is with these more by his claim, in Year 5. Haremhab, Sethos I and northern raids that the second major list (Nos. Ramesses II drew upon these lists (Th. III; Am. III) 120-359) is concerned. With the publication of in abbreviated form. Interestingly, with emphasis the archives from Alalakh, it became possible to on the more distant areas: Kush, which they ruled; identify in those texts over 30 place-names from Irem which they periodically fought with; Punt to this later phase of the pharaoh’s campaigning, which their trading expeditions went; and Medja as was long since established by Albright and as representing the great eastern deserts. And Lambdin.6 The layout of these places on the map, then Ramesses III’s scribes simply put extracts however, cannot be systematically established, regarding all these places in existing sources although some segments may be part of land pell-mell into his North pylon-tower list. What routes in North Syria. However, it is improbable

4 New publication, J. Leclant et al., Soleb III (Cairo: 5 In their Historical Records of Ramses III (Chicago: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 2002), pp. 142ff; University of Chicago Press, 1936), pp. 114-115. Soleb V (Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 6 In “New Material for the Egyptian Syllabic Orthogra- 1998), pls. 236-239. Older sources, in Soleb I (Firenze: phy,” Journal of Semitic Studies 2 (1957), pp. 119-122, items Sansoni, 1965), pp. 64-102, passim. (12)-(42e) passim, followed up by others since. egyptian new-kingdom topographical lists 133 that such segments can all be joined-up to map heraldry. At Karnak, in both triumph-scenes east the campaigns of Years 30, 33, as attempted by and west of the north door of the Great Hypostyle Helck; the results are too eccentric and bizarre to Hall, the first set of northern places begins with permit of this. Thus the historical/geographical the traditional Nine Bows series, then moves on realities behind the northern great lists should to the great powers of Hatti, “Naharin” (Mitanni), be accepted, but do not necessarily yield actual and Sangara (Babylonia), before coming to Syria: campaign-routes. Compare the narrative of the “Wunum” is a scribal corruption of uni“p” in real march-route through Canaan to Megiddo in both lists, Qatna had been destroyed half a century the Annals with a variety of places in the main before and no longer existed, while Asy was a mis- great list—some of the same places can be found, understood form of (Al)asiy(a), probably Cyprus, but not necessarily in marching-order. picked up from texts of Tuthmosis III, the sole When we come to the published Kom el-Hettan pharaoh to use Asy as a “live” entity. Mennus is an lists of Amenophis III (north half of the temple obscure traditional name from Middle-Kingdom court only), what is striking is the wide variety of times, while Iqpt is obscure, Barna is corrupt for places touched upon. List A covers major powers Barga, and Artun a similar error for Ardukka. In and places from Assur, Sangara (Babylonia) and short, this pharaoh’s scribes were copying names Naharin (Mitanni) in the east through Syrian already becoming ‘traditional’ from older hieratic Carchemish, Aleppo and Nuhasse to Anatolian copies and in places misreading them. The second Arzawa in the far west. List B is south-Syrian part of the list (at the bottom of the scene) is more (Takhsi) to south-Palestinian areas. Lists C and interesting. Here, traditional African names had F are too damaged to be useful. List D has Bab- been included, from the great list of Tuthmosis ylon (city), Assur again, and then Aram from III, as noticed above. But then, new orders came more westerly zones. Finally, List E is strikingly to superimpose a set of Levantine names instead. a record of Aegean locations: Knossos, Lyktos, And this time, they were contemporary. Pahil, Amnisos, Phaistos in Crete; nearby Cythera, and Hammath, Beth-Shan, Yenoam (close together) mainland Nauplia, Mycenae, Messenia, Cydonia, had been involved in local troubles in Jezreel with plus Wilios (Troad) in NW Asia Minor. What we Galilee in the opening years of Sethos I himself. have in this combined group of lists is an ency- So, their inclusion here marked his recapture clopedic representation of the wide world over and reoccupation of these places. (NOT their which the god Amun and his pharaoh were ideally final destruction!) Even more so, inclusion here considered to be in principle supreme. In no way of Accho, Tyre and Uzu and Ullaza illustrated did Egypt rule politically over Mesopotamia, Asia his renewed contact with Phoenicia, as shown Minor or the Aegean. Links here could only be by the scene of their hewing timber in the pha- through diplomacy and/or trade. Topographical raoh’s relief-scenes. Hazor, too, was simply one lists are NOT exclusively lists of physical con- more strongpoint, not a smoking ruin this early; quests, still less lists of places destroyed outright it was still operative down to the last decades of (though in some cases, some might be). Ramesses II, whose vizier [Prehotep] left a statue Haremhab’s lists are more ‘heraldic’, being there.7 So, here, these names illustrate the sov- anthologies of places in the Syro-Palestinian ereignty of Pharaoh, not his destructive force. realm deemed subject to Pharaoh. But already His lists at Qurnah are similar. Again, there are the move from active history to literary record is “traditionalized” northern names (Ardukka, mis- beginning to show. He includes Qatna in his ideo- written; but Tunip, correctly), and also the “con- logical realm, as later do Sethos I and Ramesses temporary” set; and both Asy and Alasiya, no II. But Qatna no longer existed as a viable entity longer known to be simply the same place. so late as Haremhab. It was a great central-Syrian In the case of Ramesses II, we have twin lists at city-state down to Akhenaten’s time. But then, in Karnak and another pair at Luxor, in paired tri- battle with Mitanni over Syria, the Hittite armies umph-scenes. Here, they accompany battle-scenes of Suppiluliuma I destroyed it totally, and it never of wars in Syria (later than the Qadesh-conflict of recovered its greatness again. Year 5). Names of places in the actual war-scenes The Karnak and Qurnah lists of Sethos I take us recur solidly in the West list at Karnak; it is his- further down the road of the move from history to torical as the scenes are. But in the East list, for

7 For which see Kitchen, “An Egyptian Inscribed Fragment from Late Bronze Hazor,” IEJ 53 (2003), pp. 20-28. 134 kenneth a. kitchen variety (so to speak), the Levantine component is later than Ramesses III. While cast in the fully taken from the ‘new’ part of the lists of his father traditional heroic mold, this piece differs radi- Sethos I. Down at Luxor, the twin triumph-scenes cally from all its predecessors in several respects. (so far as preserved) again copy Sethos I, but add Firstly, in its triumphal text above the scene. In in one or two names from Ramesses II’s own wars, the Ramesside period, it was firmly customary to such as Dalat-Silul (“Door of the Locusts”). On use here either a text made up from the triumph- the bases of colossi at Luxor, the S. lists are tradi- hymns of Amenophis III plus Tuthmosis III (in tional Tuthmosis III, while the N. lists are a mix that order), or else a pendant text; or one of each, of traditional names, Sethos I names, and occa- in a pair of matching scenes. Not Shoshenq I; his sional new entries (such as Moab, from Ramesses text begins in triumphal form, reusing much good II’s own wars). Thus, Ramesses II alternated lists traditional phraseology, but NOT copies of the in his temples, some of original data from his two texts used under the Ramessides; and in his own wars, some using older material, especially case, triumph then passed over into a building- taken from his father’s lists. This is halfway his- text—a wholly original and unparalleled develop- tory, halfway to a “literary” tradition, as had long ment. Secondly in its list of place-names (so far been the case with African names. as preserved), after the obligatory Nine Bows, we Under Ramesses III, things go still further. The find a list (so far as extant) which is90% origi- first 69 Asiatic names (S. tower) do not seem to nal, corresponding to no previous list whatsoever. appear in any other known list, while Nos. 70-78 Thirdly in orthography. His scribes no longer include central Syrian items like Hernam (Hermel, stayed with the old ‘syllabic orthography’, but S. of Qadesh), Qarmiyan from Ramesses II, Shab- largely adopted their own version. Fourthly, his duna (ditto), and the commonly-attested Yenoam set of names certainly contains route-segments in or close to Galilee. Of Nos. 1-69, few have been (of the kind found in P. Anastasi I), and from universally identified except No. 2, certainly Pitru these, reasonable suggestions can be made as to (biblical Pethor), at a crossing of the westernmost the course of his campaign. Thus, this scene is stretch of the Euphrates. Astour attempted to a document of very great interest, and of con- show that most of these names come from Upper siderable historical value. It is no mere pastiche. Mesopotamia, from Pitru eastward to beyond the But it was the last of its kind. Taharqa’s brief Tigris.8 This is tempting, but needs careful test- list is mundane; the Graeco-Roman lists reflect ing. After No. 78, Nos. 79-101 (with omissions), only late priestly learning, and attempts to adapt and 108-110 derive in reversed groups from the old, largely-forgotten names to the conditions of West Karnak-list of Ramesses II (or its tradition). their day. A few more are unplaced. There is no reason to believe that Ramesses III actually reached Pitru, still less that he ever invaded Upper Mesopota- Conclusions mia. However, his scribes most likely ransacked copies of “encyclopaedic” lists from some previ- We must now sum up. Egyptian topographical ous reign, plus the more original list of Ramesses lists occur in various contexts (usually monumen- II as at Karnak. Significantly, none of the data tal), and show some change in nature through in the front Pylon lists has any connection with their history in the New Kingdom. There are the king’s own wars, so far as we can determine short, ‘heraldic’ lists that merely symbolize the currently. For that, one must go to the heraldic might of Pharaoh; these usually offer us nothing scenes of vanquished chiefs on the façades of the else, except names known at the time of inscrip- Eastern High Gate, with chiefs of Sea Peoples, etc. tion, whether derived from previous reigns or Thus, the big lists of Ramesses III have become still current or new. But much more important, a “literary” triumphal record, re-employing the we have very extensive lists, commonly as part of historical detritus of former reigns. triumph-scenes, but by no means always. Under Wholly different is the final great list from Tuthmosis III, the great lists probably reflect the Egyptian pharaonic history—that of Shoshenq knowledge of his time, particularly in Western I, engraved at Karnak c. 925 bc, some 250 years Asia; no other pharaoh had penetrated as far (or

8 M. C. Astour, “Mesopotamian and Transtigridian Place (1968), pp. 733-752 with map. Names in the Medinet Habu List of Ramses III,” JAOS 88 egyptian new-kingdom topographical lists 135 further) than he, except Tuthmosis I—of whose repeatedly reused/recopied, and scribal misco- time, no such records have so far been recovered, pying sometimes deform names (e.g., Tunip > and who reigned very closely before Tuthmosis Wunum!) III in any case. It is important to compare lists The appearance of town names in these lists with war-narrations (annals, stelae, etc.) and sets (even highly original, up-to-date ones) does NOT of war-scenes, as a form of control as to the con- necessarily imply that the places concerned had temporaneity and nature of other records and been wiped off the map by a warring pharaoh. lists. Segments of routes as used by travellers That could happen on occasion; Tuthmosis III (be it merchants, diplomats or armies) may be once mentions reducing settlements to ‘reddened detectable—but this is not necessarily the same mounds.’ But normally, the astute pharaohs pre- as actual campaign-records of routes used in par- ferred to defeat foreign/hostile places, and leave ticular wars. Route-marches would commonly them alive, more profitably to become tribute- have to go by recognized routes; but this has to paying vassals. To vanquish a foe or town does not be worked out separately. automatically mean kill/destroy, unless explicitly With time, as wars ebbed and flowed, it was not stated. So, a place might indeed suffer damage, felt necessary to produce complete new up-to-the or partial destruction, then, be allowed to rebuild minute lists every time some temple needed heral- and get on with becoming Pharaoh’s profitable dic triumph-scenes with lists. So, older material vassal. Thus, all of us, including archaeologists, could simply be used to fill the need; new, cur- need to be careful in interpreting Egyptian writ- rent data could be used also if desired (so, Sethos ten data and site destruction levels alike. I, Ramesses II). Particular sequences might be 136 kenneth a. kitchen senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 137

A RECONSTRUCTION OF SENWOSRET I’S PORTICO AND OF SOME STRUCTURES OF AMENHOTEP I AT KARNAK

François Larché CNRS

Outline The four granite thresholds The slicing of the radier’s west side 1. Senwosret’s Limestone Portico The channel embedded beneath the radier’s 1.1. The Limestone Radier is too Short West- top face ward to Place Senwosret I’s Portico The hypothetical plan of the walls built on The north-west corner block of the radier the radier The slicing of the radier’s west edge The reused blocks inside theradier 1.2. The Original Decoration on the South The blocks found scattered on the radier Outer Face of the Hatshepsut Suite The particular case of the calcite socle with 1.3. The Hypothetical Superimposition of Two steps in Senwosret I’s name Similar Scenes with Different Proportions 3.2. The Brick Structures Predating the Lime- 1.4. The Change in Direction of Senwosret I’s stone Radier Portico Around the radier The new placement of the Osirian pillar Below the radier n°11 Below the 6th Pylon’s courtyards The new placement of the Osirian pillar Conclusions n°15 3.3. The Platform Built into the Limestone Eastward orientation like the contra temple Radier of Tuthmosis III Its elevation Placement of the portico Its pebble foundations 1.5. The Existence of a Double Portico The low mud brick wall encasing the pebble 1.6. The Date and Reason for the Dismantling fill of Senwosret I’s Portico 3.4. The Connection Between the Radier and 1.7. Blocks of Senwosret I’s That Do Not Come the Platform from the Portico’s Facade 3.5. A Hypothetical Drainage System Two limestone chapels 4. Proposed Plan of Amenhotep I’s Monu- Two large limestone gates probably em- ments bedded in a stone wall 4.1. First Stage: The Constructions Built On Small limestone doorways probably built and Around the Limestone Radier (in gold into mud brick walls on the plan) Elements of a wall The sanctuary Elements of a sandstone portico The enclosure wall C+C’ 1.8. The Furniture in Senwosret I’s Name The wall D+D’ Naos in diorite The wall A+A’ Socle with steps in calcite 4.2. Second Stage: The Constructions Built to Altar with a cornice in hard limestone the West of the Limestone Radier (in yellow 1.9. Conclusions on the plan) 2. Senwosret I’s Sandstone Colonnade The bark shrine R+R’ 3. The New Kingdom Foundations in the The enclosure wall around the bark shrine So-Called “Middle Kingdom” Courtyard B+E and B’+E’ 3.1. The Limestone Radier The two lines N+S of 16 niches, the pre- Theradier ’s dimensions decessor of the 6th Pylon Theradier ’s top face The chapels G and P for the royal cult 138 françois larché

The chapel of Ahmes-Nefertari Limestone radier: A stone foundation platform The copy of Senoswret I’s covering the entire surface to be built upon. 4.3. The Stages of Deconstruction The limestone radier refers to the thick founda- The first stage of deconstruction under tion (height: 3 cubits) made of thin courses of Tuthmosis I small limestone blocks, which is buried under The second stage of deconstruction, during the surface of the so-called “Middle Kingdom” the coregency of Hatshepsut and courtyard. The blocks are all reused and were Tuthmosis III produced by cutting off the faces of larger The third stage of deconstruction under blocks. Amenhotep III Platform: A foundation made of flat blocks of sandstone, limestone and granite, which occu- DEFINITIONS: These architectural terms will pies a small surface of less than 100 m2, and be defined as follows: built at the west side of the limestone radier. “+”: altitude above sea level. The blocks are all reused and at least two lime- Header: a stone block occupying the entire thick- stone blocks are decorated. ness of a wall, that is to say with two visible Storerooms surrounding the radier: A group faces. of 10 storerooms was built around the east, Face: The visible surface of a wall. north and south sides of the limestone radier Doorframe: The slight projection of the door- from which they are separated by a U-shaped jambs and the lintel on a gateway which forms corridor. Set on a thick layer of sand, their a frame around the doorway. foundations are made of two green sandstone Reveal: The inner reveals are between the rebate courses surrounding the limestone radier. and the inner face. The outer reveals are Enclosure tied to the 5th Pylon: This enclosure is between the rebate and the outer face. made up of four perpendicular walls delimiting Rebate: A projection of the reveal in order to a wide rectangular space, the west one being receive the edges of the doorleaf. divided by the Pylon. Each half of this west Socle: A raised platform supporting another wall is bonded to the Pylon and to the north structure. or south enclosure walls, while the east wall Colonnade: A line of columns and their roof- is perpendicular to both the north and south ing. ones. The Akh-menu abutts the east face of this Peristyle: A colonnade on the perimeter of a east enclosure wall. building or courtyard which completely or Service corridor: The north side of this corridor almost completely surrounds it. borders the outer wall of the storerooms sur- rounding the limestone radier. Its south side is Portico: An open gallery at ground level, but bordered by a range of rooms with or without which is not necessarily bordered by a colon- columns. The corridor leads to the south door nade. of the Akh-menu. Enclosure tied to the 4th Pylon: This enclosure DESIGNATIONS: These designations for archi- consists of three perpendicular walls delim- tectural structures will be defined as follows: iting the courtyard between the 5th and 4th Senwosret I’s portico: This formed the facade Pylons, with the west one being bisected by of Senwosret I’s temple, “le Grand Château the 4th Pylon. Each half of the wall is bonded d’Amon,” of which there remains no certain to this Pylon and to the north or south enclo- vestiges. sure walls. So-called “Middle Kingdom” courtyard: The Hatshepsut’s podium: Similar to a high platform empty space bounded by Hatshepsut’s suite and accessed by several steps, Hatshepsut’s to the west and the storerooms surrounding podium is the massive structure built three this courtyard to the east, north and south. cubits above the pavement of the temple in No Middle Kingdom remains are visible, order to elevate the superstructures (of the and it would have been better to name it the Chapelle Rouge + her north and south suites). “New Kingdom” courtyard. Since, however, The east side of Hatshepsut’s podium abutts this space has long been known as the “Middle both the limestone radier and the platform. Kingdom,” it will be designated here as the so- Hatshepsut suite: These rooms were built by the called “Middle Kingdom” courtyard. queen to either side of the Chapelle Rouge. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 139

Enclosure tied to the 6th Pylon: This enclosure the first course of the radier that is still buried is made of three perpendicular walls delimiting under the so-called “Middle Kingdom” courtyard. the space bounded by the 6th Pylon and the This block is actually placed 7 cubits (1 cubit = limestone radier, the west one being divided by 52.5 cm) east of the location proposed in a recent the Pylon. Each half of this west wall is bonded hypothesis2 which identified the limestoneradier to the Pylon and to the north or south enclo- with the foundation of Senwosret I’s temple, the sure walls, these last two walls being simple “Grand Château d’Amon.” This temple, of which veneers leaning against older walls. there remains very few dismantled remnants of Annals’ courtyard or axial courtyard of the 6th the facade’s portico, will henceforth be named Pylon: This courtyard is delimited on the west more modestly as “Senwosret I’s portico.” In by the 6th Pylon, on the east by Tuthmosis Gabolde’s hypothetical reconstruction, the por- III’s vestibule with pillars, and by the cross tico is placed 7 cubits west of the joint between walls closing the south and north courtyards Hatshepsut’s podium and the limestone radier, of the 6th Pylon. but the north-west corner of this radier should have been located at the base of the left anta From 2001 to 2007, the Franco-Egyptian center of the facade’s portico and not 3.7 m further has undertaken new archaeological excavations east. in the central area of Karnak, between the Akh- In reality, the block discovered at the north- menu to the east and the 3rd Pylon to the west. west corner of the limestone radier bonds the The numerous mud brick walls we discovered are north side of the first course of the radier’s foun- giving new insights into the vast complex which dations to the west side of this first course of the spread across this area before the New Kingdom. same radier (Fig. 24a-b). In Gabolde’s hypoth- These ancient structures allowed us to establish esis, whereby the limestone radier should be the that in this area of the temple, the New King- foundation of Senwosret I’s temple, shifting the dom monuments could only have been built after radier’s west side to the east would then oblige earlier monuments were demolished. A shrewd the portico on its facade to line up with the north- expert on the temples of Karnak, William Mur- west corner block of the radier. Therefore, this nane would have been fascinated by all these new move challenges some of the arguments on which discoveries which were made possible after the Gabolde’s hypothetical reconstruction of the lowering of the water table successfully imple- “Grand Château d’Amon” are based, and it was mented by the SCA. During his many seasons essential to reexamine the remnants previously in the Ramesside Hypostyle Hall, he constantly discovered in the so-called “Middle Kingdom” shared his knowledge of the temple with me. He courtyard in connection with the architectural taught me never to discard even the tiniest clues, vestiges of Senwosret I’s portico. and the example of his meticulous study of the monuments has inspired me to propose these new 1.1. The Limestone Radier is too Short hypotheses on Senwosret I’s and Amenhotep I’s Westward to Place Senwosret I’s Portico monuments. In Gabolde’s hypothesis for the placement of Sen- wosret I’s temple, the facade’s portico is set at 1. Senwosret’s Limestone Portico the location of the eastern part of Hatshepsut’s suite3. He has also argued that Hatshepsut would The sounding1 made in 2003 at the north-east have dismantled the Osirian pillars4 of the por- corner of the podium on which Hatshepsut’s suite tico’s facade in order to attatch the east face of is set has revealed the limestone corner block of her suite to the portico’s back wall.5 According to

1 G. Charloux, “Karnak au Moyen Empire, l’enceinte the latter having been reused in the foundations of Tuthmosis et les fondations des magasins du Temple d’Amon-Rê,” I’s colonnade. The clearing by O. de Peretti and Emmanuel Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), pp. 191-204. Lanoë of the pit where this pillar was buried seems to show 2 L. Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon” de Sésostris that it was reused at the same time as other elements of Ier à Karnak (Paris: Diffusion de Boccard, 1998). Senwosret I, but not during the construction of the 6th Pylon 3 Ibid., pl. I. and its enclosure. This indicates that the latest possible date 4 The Osirian pillar n° 11 was discovered by G. Legrain that Senwosret I’s portico could have been dismantled was buried below the south courtyard of the 5th Pylon, very under Tuthmosis I. close to the sandstone elements of Senwosret I’s colonnade, 140 françois larché this hypothesis, the construction of Hatshepsut’s the north half of Hatshepsut’s podium (Fig. 25) podium would have required the destruction, to shows that the east edge of the bed face of the a depth of seven cubits, of six courses forming sandstone blocks of the podium’s first course rests the west side of the limestone radier. Therefore, on the west end of the top face (+73.09 m) of the while the observation of the vestiges of this west limestone blocks of the radier’s first course. This side does not confirm this destruction to such overlap of about 50 cm has been confirmed on a depth (3.7 m), it nevertheless shows that ~ 50 the north-west corner block of the first course cm of the edge of the west side was sliced off, of the radier, where this limestone block is par- with this excision stopping exactly at the base of tially covered by a sandstone block that forms the west face of the original structure that rested the north-east corner of the podium’s first course on the radier. (Fig. 24). Hatshepsut’s podium having thus been built The north-west corner block of the radier slightly inside (~1 cubit and not 7 cubits as in (Fig. 24a-b) Gabolde’s reconstruction) the west side of the The actual position of the limestone block forming limestone radier, it is not possible to shift Senwos- the north-west corner of the first course6 of the ret I’s portico westward and therefore outside the radier which occupies the so-called “Middle King- radier which was supposed to be its foundation. In dom” courtyard, is incompatible with Gabolde’s another hypothesis,9 whereby the portico would proposed placement7 of the facade of Senwosret I’s be effectively placed plumb with the radier’s west temple.8 Indeed, in order to set this corner block side, it becomes difficult to imagine how Hat- in place, (and probably the whole first course), the shepsut’s suite could have leaned against a line builder had to level a former mud brick structure. of Osirian pillars of which no traces exist on the This destruction was made only under the surface suite’s back face on either side of the the axis. of the block to be placed, since the vestiges of the brick structure are still visible against the west 1.2. The Original Decoration on the South and north faces of the corner block. Thesein situ Outer Face of the Hatshepsut Suite bricks indicate that, well before the construction of Hatshepsut’s podium, the radier’s first course Several anomalies have appeared in the hypo- did not spread further west of the corner block thetical reconstruction which joins to Senwosret or further to the north. I’s portico a representation of this king, carved in sunk relief at the east end of the outer face of The slicing of the radier’s west edge the south wall of the Hatshepsut suite, in conti- Observation of the cross joint that separates the nuity with Tuthmosis III’s Texte de la Jeunesse east face of the north half of Hatshepsut’s podium (Fig. 1). from the west side of the limestone radier (Figs. Traces of Hatshepsut’s original decoration are 36-37) has shown that Hatshepsut had cut a slice still visible on two of the three outer faces of the (50 cm deep) away from the radier’s west face suite she built. This decoration was in sunk relief while keeping its first course intact. Although the on the north side where its has been erased, except podium is built against the radier, vestiges of the for its west end which was hidden by a doorjamb radier’s west side make it possible to see traces of Tuthmosis III. of this excision. A photograph of the east face of

5 The east side of Hatshepsut’s podium has, at the base that would have adorned the base of the back wall of Sen- of its setting course, a horizontal groove carved at differ- wosret I’s portico. F. Larché, “Nouvelles observations sur les ent levels. On the north half, this groove is lined up with monuments du Moyen et du Nouvel empire dans la zone the granite threshold n°1, while on the south half, it is cut centrale du temple d’Amon à Karnak,” Karnak 12 (Paris: much lower (giving it the appearance of “stairs” at differ- ERC, 2007), pp. 407- 499, pls. 24, 34. ent levels) but not along the entire length of the course. 6 G. Charloux, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), pp. 191- Between the south half of Hatshepsut’s podium and the red 204, pl. 16, Fig. 22. sandstone blocks, the limestone blocks of the 5th course 7 Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” pl. I; ibid., of the radier are still in place. Their layout shows that the Charloux, pp. 191-204, pl. 19, Fig. 27. groove (with “stairs”) was carved intentionally in order 8 Larché, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), pp. 407- 499, to join the podium to the courses of the limestone radier. pl. 20. This irregular groove could not have been used to attach 9 Charloux, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), pp. 191-204, Hatshepsut’s podium to an hypothetically projected dado pl. 20, Fig. 28. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 141

On the west face, the original decoration has to have replaced. The hieroglyphs carved in the been replaced by a new one in sunk relief, and limestone version are more tightly spaced than it is impossible to determine if the original was those carved in the sandstone edition. The king’s raised or sunken relief. South of the bark chapel, feet are not placed at the same level in relation the present decoration is sunk relief in Tuthmosis to the text. The cut of the blocks on the right III’s name,10 while to the north it is also sunken joint of the sandstone face does not fit exactly but seems to date from Sety I.11 This later decora- with the one on the left joint of the limestone tion has clearly replaced an older one, also sunken, anta.15 Together, these four discrepancies make remnants of which are still visible along the north the proposed superimposition of the two scenes face of the north wall of the Annals’ courtyard. representing Senwosret I seated under a canopy No clue permits their attribution to either Hat- impossible in reality (Figs. 2-3). shepsut or Tuthmosis III, who could have also Tuthmosis III carved this representation of erased an older decoration by Hatshepsut. To the Senwosret I followed by an important text of north, the only clue for this erasure is the trace which only two columns remain. The rest of the of its thickness which is delimited by the facade’s text should not have covered the whole face of the building-line, well incised on the podium’s edge. missing limestone wall, whose east end probably The 4 centimeters (5 near the north-west corner) showed Amun accompanied by other divinities. which separates this building-line from the pres- The Berlin leather roll (3056, verso, VIII, 4-5) ent face, indicates a thin excision of the facade evokes a similar scene where Amun and Thoth made after its construction. are shown on the wall named “Kheperkare is pure Unlike the north side, the decoration of the in Amun’s temple.”16 south was in raised relief.12 At its west end, an Amun figure is still visible carved in raised relief, 1.4. The Change in Direction of Senwosret I’s although partially covered with Tuthmosis III’s Portico throne in sunk relief. The representation of this seated king marks the beginning of the Texte de The new placement of the Osirian pillar n°11 la Jeunesse.13 It seems impossible, then, to connect (Fig. 4) this original decoration with the sunk relief deco- The white crown of the Osirian pillar17 n°11 ration of the outer face14 of the anta of the lime- (Cairo Museum JE 48851) allows it to be placed stone portico (as L. Gabolde has reconstructed on the south half of the portico as has already it) in order to form the facade of Senwosret I’s been proposed.18 However, the scenes on the three temple because the original decoration is in raised decorated faces of this pillar do not permit its relief and is laid out on several registers. placement at the east end of the portico, facing the south anta, as Gabolde suggests. Whereas the 1.3. The Hypothetical Superimposition of Two left face of the Osirian pillar and its back face are Similar Scenes with Different Proportions decorated with the king facing Amun, its right face shows a walking figure of a lone king wear- The figure of Senwosret I, carved on Hatshep- ing the atef-crown (Fig. 7). Representations of sut’s sandstone wall surface, is larger than the one this type are always found framing passages for decorating the limestone anta that it is supposed processions, as can be seen all along the east-west

10 Urk. IV, 852; P. Barguet, Le temple d’Amon-Rê à Karnak sud présentait une grande scène d’audience royale. Elle était (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie bordée à droite par un grand texte qui se prolongeait sur le Orientale), p. 127. mur sud de la cour du Moyen Empire, selon une composi- 11 Ibid., Barguet, pp. 121-122. tion reproduite à trois reprises par Tuthmosis III ” and §59: 12 The original decoration being in raised relief on the “Les blocs en calcaire de Sésostris Ier n’en conservent qu’une west end of the wall, it is tempting to reconstruct this style partie de la première colonne, tandis que la copie à l’Est du of decoration on the whole south face. However, one cannot texte de la jeunesse n’a gardé en plus que quelques bribes definitively dismiss the hypothesis that Senwosret I’s figure peu exploitables de la seconde…Toute la suite a disparu was carved in sunk relief by Hatshepsut on the east half avec le reste du temple du Moyen-Empire.” of the south face or that both styles of relief appeared on 15 Ibid., pp. 28, §38-39. the same wall. 16 Barguet, Karnak, p. 156, n. 4. 13 TheTexte de la Jeunesse having replaced Hatshepsut’s 17 PM II2, p. 89; Cairo Museum (JE 48851) and Gabol- earlier decoration, it is likely that this text was carved after de’s numbering: n°11 (Le “Grand château d’Amon,” p. 63, the Chapelle Rouge was dismanted. n. 92). 14 Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” §51: “La paroi 18 Ibid., Gabolde, pl. I. 142 françois larché axis of the temple, from the 2nd Pylon to the Akh- therefore be moved to its true place alongside the menu. The lone king always holds his walking staff only passageway of Senwosret I’s portico, that is to obliquely on the right of the passage, while the say to the left of the axial passage. This new posi- staff is vertical on the left19 as it has been verified tion of the Osirian pillar n°11 orients the colos- in the following passages (Figs. 12-13): sus’ white crown to the left side of the passage, – the reveals of the doorways of the 2nd (Fig. 12.4) and prevents the placement of the left half of the and 5th Pylons (Fig. 12.3),20 portico to the north of the axis. The white crown – the opposite faces of the two axial pillars of the indicates clearly that the position of this Osirian bark chapel’s vestibule, (Fig. 13.6),21 pillar is to the south of the passage, and excludes – the opposite faces of the four axial pillars of the a westward facing orientation for the portico. At 22 Akh-menu, El-Lisht, six Osirian pillars in limestone leaned – the outer doorframe of the north door of Tuth- mosis IV’s calcite chapel,23 against the walls of a large courtyard in front – the west doorframe of the inner door of the of Senwosret I’s pyramid. Their position north Chapelle Rouge,24 and south of the courtyard was indicated by the – the west doorframe of the east door of the south- red or white crown, and it is very likely that at ern WAyt-hall, (Fig. 12.1) Karnak red crowns, of which no vestige remains, – the doorframe, turned towards the axis, of the topped the Osirian colossi abutted against the two doors opened in the walls linking the so- called “granite arch” to the 6th Pylon.25 pillars placed north of the portico’s axis. One can also observe this layout on the third ter- The new placement of the Osirian pillar n°15 race of Deir al-Bahari, on the doorframe of the (Fig. 7) sanctuary’s door as well as on the door of the A fragment of the face of a pillar is decorated Hathor shrine. with the lower part of the oblique staff of a lone With passages located on the north-south axis walking king. His direction allows its hypotheti- as well as on the east-west one, it is not possible cal attribution to the left side of the fragmentary to identify the position of the staff (vertical or Osirian pillar (MBAIL 17, n°15, pls. XXIV-XXXV) oblique) with a geographical direction (north or and its placement to the right of the axial pas- south). In fact, this position (vertical on the left sage,26 facing the Osirian pillar n°11. The lone of the passage and oblique on the right) seems king holds his staff vertically on the Osirian pillar linked to the gesture that the king is making with n°11, while the staff is oblique on fragment n° 15 his right hand while the left one holds the staff facing it. The face-to-face orientation of these two and a mace. pillars on both sides of the axis thus seems well According to Gabolde’s hypothesis, no door confirmed by the position of the staff in the hand opened in the back wall of the portico, next to its of the lone king. angle with the right anta. Such a door would have justified the position of the Osirian pillar n°11 Eastward orientation like the contra temple of facing the south anta if the anta’s inner face was Tuthmosis III also decorated with a lone walking king, facing On the antas of the portico, the king always seems a matching scene on the pillar. As this is clearly to wear the double-crown, to the north as well not the case, because the anta is decorated with as to the south (Gabolde, Le “Grand château a completely different scene, this pillar should d’Amon,” pls. V, VI, XIII, XIV). This crown is

19 Cl. Traunecker, Fr. Le Saout, O. Masson, La chapelle 23 N. Grimal, F. Larché, “Karnak 1994-1997,” Karnak d’Achôris à Karnak II (Paris: Éditions ADPF, 1981), p. 53: 11 (Paris: ERC, 2003), p. 59, pl. VIIb. in his observations concerning the consecration of meat 24 P. Lacau, H. Chevrier, Une chapelle d’Hatshepsout offerings, Cl. Traunecker remarks that the obliquity of the à Karnak (Cairo: IFAO, 1977), p. 395, §708; F. Burgos, staff results from the ritual liturgy which requires the king F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge d’Hatshepsout, vol. 2 (Paris: to speak with one hand extended outwards. ERC, 2008), pp. 272-273. 20 Barguet, Karnak, pp. 54 and 110. 25 E. Arnaudiès-Montelimard, “L’arche en granit de 21 Ibid., p. 131. Thoutmosis II et l’avant porte du VIe pylône,” Karnak 12 22 J. –Fr. Pécoil, L’Akh-menou de Thoutmosis III à Karnak (Paris: ERC, 2008), pp. 148-149. (Paris: ERC, 2000), pls. 45, 47, 49. Near the solar cham- 26 The existence of a double portico, (explained further ber, the fifth pillar is decorated with a lone walking king. below), allows a second placement for fragment n°15 in the B. Letellier showed me that this lone king was recarved median pillar under the portico to the right of the axis. above an earlier scene where Tuthmosis III faced a deity, as on the other faces of this pillar. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 143 still visible on the outer face of the right anta and does not permit a connection between the lime- on the facade of the left anta (Figs. 2, 15). stone portico and the sandstone colonnade. At Karnak, the position of the crowns of kings not facing west allows Senwosret I’s portico to 1.5. The Existence of a Double Portico face either eastwards or northwards but certainly not southwards. Osirian pillars facing east are not The two preserved headers of the upper part of rare at Karnak, especially to the east of the teme- the portico’s right anta are joined and are perpen- nos, where they can be observed in the temple dicular to the facade’s corner architrave.29 These of “Amun who hears prayers” as well as in Tuth- three blocks supported the roof of the portico’s mosis III’s contra temple which abuts the east wall corner. On both inner faces of the joined headers, of the Akh-menu. The contra temple originally the horizontal frame which supports the Kheker- consisted of a portico of six free standing Osirian frieze, turns at a right angle to go down along the pillars without the low walls that linked them later two vertical edges (Figs. 8-9). 27 (Figs. 10-11). The three decorated faces of each To the right, the frame runs vertically along pillar display scenes similar to the ones carved on the inner face of the facade’s architrave before Senwosret I’s Osirian pillars. Unfortunately, the turning at 90° to border horizontally the soffit Roman restorations made to the reveals of the of the same architrave. axial passage, that is to say the face-to-face sides To the left, the frame runs vertically along of the two Osirian pillars framing it, prevent us another face,30 like the same type of border seen from seeing the original decoration which should in the porticos of Hatshepsut’s temple at Deir al- have been a lone walking king. On the other hand, Bahari. In this temple, the double range of archi- the king’s direction on the back face of each of traves of the portico which forms the vestibule of the pillars located south of the axis corresponds the Anubis chapel is directly embedded into the exactly with the king’s direction on the back face side wall without the support of abutted pilasters of pillar n°11 that has been replaced to the left of (Fig. 9). The embedding of the middle architrave the axis. The direction of the walking king pro- into the wall is framed, along its soffit and both ceeds towards the back of the portico, following vertical faces, by the frame which supports the the perimeter of the pillars until it returns to the axis of the portico (Fig. 11).28 Kheker-frieze. A similar layout probably existed The similarity of the decoration of Senwos- in Senwosret I’s portico where the vertical frame ret I’s Osirian pillars to those of Tuthmosis III’s carved to the left of the two joined headers lets contra temple incitates that Senwosret’s pillars us suppose the existence of a second range of also faced east. architraves supported by pillars rather than by a back wall as has been reconstructed at this loca- Placement of the portico tion in Gabolde’s hypothesis. It is still impossible to determine if the original Moreover, the embedding of an intermediary building site of Senwosret I’s portico was close architrave at this location is confirmed at the to the findspot of Osirian pillar n°11, which was top face of the side wall by the layout of the left found below the 5th Pylon’s south courtyard with header.31 The left cross joint of this header is cut sandstone drums and architraves of the same king to the shape of a right angle and its top face is (Figs. 20-23). Their reuse by Tuthmosis I indicates hollowed out with a mortice in order to receive that Senwosret I’s temple no longer existed during a bonding clamp with a perpendicular block his reign. It should be noted that all the other (Fig. 9). If such a deep excision of the cross joint limestone fragments of Senwosret I’s portico were is unusual for the simple need to bond the course discovered further west. At present, the evidence of a perpendicular wall, it can be perfectly justified

27 A. Varille, “Description sommaire du sanctuaire ori- different since it consists of only one row of pillars without ental d’Amon-Rê à Karnak,” ASAE 50 (1950), pp. 137-172, attached Osirian colossi. On the inner face of each pillar, pl. XLI. the king walks towards the axis of the temple. Barguet, p. 221: “Les six piliers osiriaques renouvelés par 29 Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” pl. IX. Séti Ier, ont été usurpés par Ramsès II. La porte d’entrée a 30 L. Gabolde sees this as proof of the portico’s depth été ornée d’un texte par Domitien, où l’on peut reconnaître (3.03 m), and therefore, the position of its back wall. une sorte d’hymne au soleil levant.” 31 Ibid., block n°5, pls. X and XL; CFEETK neg. 28 In Sety I’s temple at Abydos, the portico facade is 43091-5. 144 françois larché to embed an architrave perpendicular to the anta (height: 9 cubits), the height of the facade reached (Figs. 8-9). 12 cubits (Figs. 14-17). Parallel to the facade, this second range of architraves could be supported by simple square 1.6. The Date and the Reason for the pillars that Gabolde’s hypothesis reconstructed Dismantling of Senwosret I’s Portico inside a courtyard placed behind Senwosret I’s portico (Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” Although the Osirian pillar n°11 was most prob- pls. XXXVIII-XXXIII). Each square pillar (height: ably reused by Tuthmosis I to fill in the 5th Pylon’s 8 cubits) would then stand behind each Osirian south courtyard, L. Gabolde attributes to Hat- shepsut the dismantling of the portico’s pillars, pillar (height: 9 cubits) of the facade (Figs. 5-6, at the time of the construction of her podium 14-17).32 Each Osirian pillar is one cubit higher which supported the Chapelle Rouge, between than the square one, but this difference is easily the Queen’s north and south suites. Among his explained because the Osirian colossi abutting arguments, one33 relies on the re-carving of a the pillars of the fadade stand on socles (height: king’s figure on one face of the square pillar n° 20 1.5 cubits). On the other hand, the blank dado (Fig. 6). He recognizes Tuthmosis II’s profile, across the four faces of each square pillar, from its although the shape of the nose, which is straight base to the start of the decoration, is about 90 cm and short, does not seem to be a convincing high while it reaches 140 cm on the Osirian pil- enough criteria to attribute the relief to this king, lars. This 50 cm difference (1 cubit) corresponds whose portrayals are rare.34 to the height of the podium on which the portico It may well be the case that this modification of (and the square pillars) was built. Since the socle pillar n° 20 was made prior to or at the very begin- (height: 1.5 cubits) supporting each Osirian colos- ning of the 18th Dynasty. Since the lack of a royal sus is higher than the podium (height: 1 cubit), beard is very common in reliefs on Amenhotep I’s the feet of the colossi were placed only half a cubit limestone blocks,35 it is tempting to attribute the above the podium. A staircase of four steps equal profile to him, since he could have easily reused to the podium’s height was necessary to reach some of Senwosret I’s pillars in his new sanctuary. the double portico’s floor. It is not impossible In fact, at least ten blocks of Amenhotep I are in that the whole complex stood on another higher hard limestone, of which three show palimpsest podium like Montouhotep II’s funerary temple traces of older relief decoration. Two limestone at Deir el-Bahari. patches were, moreover, inserted into one face of In adding the architrave (height: 2 cubits) and pillar n°20, witness to the incautious handling of the cornice (height: 1 cubit) to the Osirian pillar the monolith.

32 M. Boccon-Gibod, “Le grand temple d’Amon-Rê Comme cette nouvelle intervention remettait plus ou moins à Karnak reconstruit par l’ordinateur,” Les dossiers de cette face en conformité avec les autres et reprenait une l’archéologie 153 (October 1990), p. 12: two ranges of pil- composition du pilier, il faut supposer que cette phase lars are proposed here as a hypothesis. correspondit à la réouverture de l’entrecolonnement. Les 33 Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” p. 78, §115: “Un caractéristiques du nouveau relief, très plat—très différent, des piliers de Sésostris Ier présente, par ailleurs, une double en cela, des canons artistiques d’Amenhotep Ier—et des retouche particulièrement révélatrice: dans un premier temps, particularités des traits du visage, avec, notamment, un l’espace compris entre ce pilier et son voisin fut comblé par nez court et droit—permettent d’attribuer avec beaucoup une maçonnerie, puis une scène, de module plus réduit de vraisemblance la retouche à Tuthmosis II: le monument que l’original et placée beaucoup plus haut, fut regravée était donc encore debout pendant son règne.” tant sur le pilier que sur le mur de comblement qui avait 34 The recent discovery, at the base of Hatshepsut’s north été élevé tout contre. Comme cette maçonnerie, que l’on obelisk, of a niche with two statues of Neferhotep, a king of est bien obligé de restituer pour compléter la scène, était the XIIIth dynasty, has shown a certain flexibility to stylistic fatalement venue masquer la face adjacente, bien décorée, characteristics. Indeed, before Neferhotep’s cartouche was elle, dans le style de Sésostris Ier, on est amené à conclure exposed, the iconography of the kilt and (except for the que le comblement de l’entrecolonnement et la gravure ears) the style of the face, seemed to indicate that the niche de la nouvelle scène sont selon toute vraisemblance pos- dated from the beginning of the 18th dynasty. For Tuth- térieurs à son règne. Quoi qu’il en soit ce décor de petit mosis II’s reliefs, see K. Myśliwiec, Le portrait royal dans module fut à son tour arasé, de manière assez sommaire, le bas–relief du Nouvel Empire (Warsaw, 1976), pp. 42-45 à coups de ciseaux grossiers. Après un lissage au plâtre, and Figs. 39-41, 45-46. une nouvelle représentation de roi, cette fois-ci de grand 35 Amenhotep I never wears a beard on his calcite bark module—ce dernier est identique à celui adopté pour les shrine now restored in the Karnak open air museum. figure humaines sur les autres faces—lui fut substituée. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 145

The state36 of preservation of the portico’s general-in-chief Ah[mès],” and that it had reached blocks indicates a the rising water table was prob- the base of the chapel’s walls.38 ably one of the reasons for dismantling the Middle Kingdom monuments,37 of which the lower part 1.7. Blocks of Senwosret I’s That Do Not Come of the walls were very damaged and weakened. from the Portico’s Facade This idea seems justified, although another cause A number of other blocks naming Senwosret I’s could just as well explain the destruction of the that were found at Karnak have no direct con- lower part of the White Chapel. Indeed, one would nection with the portico’s facade.39 expect a socle, slightly larger than the base of the main structure, under the first preserved course of Two limestone chapels the chapel’s limestone blocks, but this is missing. – The White Chapelwas almost entirely reused It is possible to reconstruct a foundation system in the 3rd Pylon’s foundations, except for the pil- similar to that of Hatshepsut’s Chapelle Rouge, lars which were discovered under the Hypostyle which was standing on her podium. Here too, Hall.40 one could have had two superimposed podiums, – A bark shrine was found reused inside the the upper one being the only one preserved. Two 9th Pylon’s fill.41 large blocks forming the sides of another small chapel of Senwosret I that were retrieved from Two large limestone gates probably embedded the 9th Pylon give confirmation that the Middle in a stone wall Kingdom edifices had been flooded: a graffito – Lintel: 7 fragments of a limestone lintel42 have from the beginning of the 18th Dynasty mentions been reassembled in the Open Air Museum near that “in year 5, 2nd month of Akhet, day 12, the Amenhotep I’s calcite shrine. They form the upper level of the Nile inundation” had been observed half of a doorway lintel, decorated with a scene by “the chancelor of the king of Lower Egypt, the depicting Senwosret I enthroned above the Sema-

36 Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” p. 137-138, the Thirteenth Dynasty, ”SAK 1 [1974], p. 209 et W. Helck, §214: “La base des quatre faces du pilier à colosse osiriaque, KÄT, pp. 47-47, n° 63).” tout comme la partie inférieure du pilier carré du Musée du 37 In an unpublished study, Cl. Traunecker remarks Caire sont profondément rongées. Par ailleurs, dans la ‘Cour that a similar situation happened at Coptos, as the work of de la Cachette,’ le moignon de pilier dressé verticalement Sennucheri shows: see I. Guermeur, “Glanures,” “La statue est encore largement attaqué à la base. Les deux premiers d’Esnou(n),” BIFAO 103 (2003), p. 286, line x+18). The pas- de ces monolithes retrouvés couchés horizontalement sous sage in question relates to problems with the water table. The le sol du temple, n’ont pas pu subir les dommages qu’ils evidence indicates that during the 17th Dynasty and at the présentent pendant la période où ils sont demeurés enfouis, beginning of the 18th, it was essential that action be taken car toute la surface aurait alors été atteinte. Au contraire, le to deal with the problem of damage to the temple caused remblai qui les recouvrait constituait un milieu suffisamment by high annual innundations and the water table. sain pour que leurs couleurs aient résisté jusqu’à leur mise 38 Cl. Traunecker, “Rapport préliminaire sur la chapelle au jour par G. Legrain (BIE 4/3, 1902, p. 162). Il est donc de Sésostris Ier découverte dans le IXe pylône,” Karnak 7 clair que les dégradations sont antérieures à l’enterrement (Paris: ERC, 1982) , pp. 121-123. des blocs et donc antérieures au règne de Tuthmosis III. On 39 Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” pp. 119-120, relève encore qu’à peu près aucun des blocs de la base des § 189. parois n’a subsisté, comme si cette partie des murs avait 40 H. Chevrier, “Rapport sur les travaux de Karnak,” particulièrement souffert. Seul le relief avec la ‘montée royale’ ASAE 28 (1928), p. 123: “Ce fut ensuite un pilier de Sésostris appartient à une première assise. Il présente justement, à sa Ier, en calcaire, découvert [dans la salle hypostyle] à côté du partie inférieure, des zones de desquamation et des taches grand linteau de l’an passé…Sous le mur Est, au droit d’une dues aux migrations salines, qui sont accompagnées d’un niche de mât, on a découvert un autre pilier qui se trouve écaillage de la pierre (n. 120: Cette dégradation apparaît être le voisin de celui découvert dans le IIIe pylône sous sur tous les clichés anciens …On remarquera encore que l’autre mur de parement. ” It is possible that the blocks of les parties basses de la chapelle blanche de Sésostris Ier the White Chapel discovered in the foundation of the 3rd ont presque entièrement disparu. A l’inverse, les parties Pylon were buried here before the construction of the Pylon. supérieures des parois et les architraves sont en relativement It is also possible that these elements were already reused bon état et ne montrent en tout cas aucune des desquama- inside the fill of Tuthmosis II’s vanished Pylon and that tions observées sur les parties basses de l’édifice…§216: they were reused a second time in the 3rd Pylon. In both Que l’eau soit responsable des dégâts est évident à l’examen hypotheses, the White Chapel would have been dismantled des vestiges…Un texte de Sobekhotep VIII rapporte ainsi at the beginning of the New Kingdom as Senwosret I’s other que le flot avait atteint sous son règne la cour même du monuments were. temple d’Amon: ‘Sa Majesté se rendit dans la cour de ce 41 Traunecker, Karnak 7 (Paris: ERC, 1982), pp. 121- temple pour regarder le grand Nil venu pour sa Majesté. 126. La cour de ce temple étant remplie d’eau, sa Majesté se mit 42 Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” p. 120, n. 41; PM à patauger en compagnie de ses courtisans’ (L. Habachi, II2, p.135; H. Chevrier, ASAE 53 (1956), p. 41; G. Björkman, “A High Inundation in the Temple of Amenre at Karnak in Kings at Karnak (Uppsala: BOREAS, 1971), p. 128, 3. 146 françois larché tawy between Horus and Seth. When the lintel the right, the king, wearing the red crown,45 stands was dismantled, it was cut up into blocks which before Amun who gives him life, which permits us were then turned 180° and then reused inside a to orientate its decorated face either eastward or lintel of Amenhotep I built into a battered stone northward. This doorway could be placed on the wall, as the well planed side joints seem to indi- east-west axis, with the counter-lintel facing east, cate. At the level of the lintel, the doorframe’s or on the north-south axis, with the counter-lintel length was 3.10 m (6 cubits) under Senwosret facing south. Could it have been the inner face I, but was 3.46 m under Amenhotep I. This allows of the main gate to Amun’s temple, the ancestor us to reconstruct the width of the vertical door- of the 5th Pylon? frame as 1.5 cubits, and of the doorway as 3 cubits under Senwosret I and Amenhotep I, while the Small limestone doorways probably built into height of the doorway can be estimated as being mud brick walls 7 to 9 cubits. The decoration of both lintels (Sen- – Small lintel:46 This fragment of a limestone wosret I and Amenhotep I) represents the king lintel was discovered in the Cachette courtyard wearing the red crown on the left. In the hypoth- and is exhibited in the Open Air Museum. esis where both doorframes would be exterior – Small lintel:47 This fragment of a limestone ones and not interior ones, this king would be lintel of unknown provenance is lost today. Th. to the north, implying that the door itself faced Zimmer remarks that H. Chevrier48 had entioned south or west. Although one does not know if this a fragment of a Senwosret I lintel which could be lintel was really found inside the 3rd Pylon, two one of those he found not far from the structure reconstructions can be proposed: either this lintel with six columns standing north of the courtyard belonged to the doorway of the structure that the between the 3rd and 4th Pylons. 6th Pylon replaced, or it belonged to a doorway – Small lintel:49 A limestone fragment carved on the southern axis. The blocks from Amenhotep with a nomen cartouche of Senwosret is epigraph- I’s doorjambs and counter-lintel have now been ically identical to Senwosret I’s other doorways. identified (Fig. 40: the 2 lines N+S of 16 niches).43 Because no monument of any other Senwosret is – Counter-lintel (length: 364 cm; height: 136 known at Karnak, it is likely that this lintel belongs cm; passage: 187.6 cm): carved in sunk relief, this to Senwosret I. This fragment is perhaps also one counter-lintel was found in the foundations44 of of those found by H. Chevrier not far from the the south courtyard between the 4th and the 5th structure with six columns standing north of the Pylon, and not in the Cachette courtyard. Rebuilt courtyard between the 3rd and 4th Pylons. in the Open Air Museum, behind the White – Doorjambs:50 Some fragments (87CL 340, Chapel, this counter-lintel was built into a bat- 95CL 331) belong to two doorways built into a tered stone wall, as its perfectly planed side joints mud brick wall. This could be the wall discovered indicate. At the level of the counter-lintel, the below the northern part of the sandstone founda- doorframe’s length (7 cubits) implies a doorway tions surrounding the limestone radier. width from 3 to 4 cubits. The stars decorating the – Doorjamb: A fragment of doorjamb naming soffit of the counter-lintel indicate that this block Senwosret, in hard limestone, was reused in the belongs to the inner face of the door, since this “horned altar,” east of Karnak (CFEETK neg. type of starry decoration is only found above the 42793/9). inner doorway but never above the outer one. To

43 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, pgs. 46 Ma‘arouf, Zimmer, Karnak 9 (Paris, ERC, 1993), 326-7. pp. 223-225, 234, Fig. 1: archives Lacau n° A IX-a4 and 44 PM II2, p. 135; A. Fakhry, “A report on the Inspectorate a4d. of Upper Egypt,” ASAE 46 (1947), p. 30: the lintel of Sen- 47 Ibid., pp. 225-226, 234, Fig. 2a. wosret I found broken into three fragments by Abou el-Naga 48 H. Chevrier, “Rapport sur les travaux de Karnak Abdallah in 1946 beneath the southern courtyard between (1937-1938),” ASAE 38 (1938), p. 598. the 4th and 5th Pylons seems to correspond perfectly to this 49 Ma‘arouf, Zimmer, Karnak 9 (Paris, ERC, 1993), lintel of Senwosret I. See Fr. Le Saout, A. el-H. Ma’arouf, p. 226, Fig. 2b. Th. Zimmer, “Le Moyen-Empire à Karnak: Varia 1,” Karnak 50 Le Saout, Ma‘arouf, Zimmer, Karnak 8 (Paris: ERC, 8 (Paris: ERC, 1987), pp. 302-305, pl. VI. 1987), pp. 297-302; for their dimensions see E. N. Hirsch, 45 On the north-south axis, the red crown is usually “Bemerkungen zu Toren in den Tempeln des Alten und Mitt- placed to the left of the door, that is to say to the west, leren Reiches,” in Wege öffnen. Festschrift für Rolf Gundlach when moving northwards and to the east when moving zum 65. Geburtstag Festschrift, ÄAT 35, ed. Mechthild Schade- southwards. Busch (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1996), pp. 88-97. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 147

Elements of a wall and with Senwosret I’s cartouche being perfectly – Doorjamb in hard limestone: Two opposite legible. Decorated with a row of stars, the skyline faces are decorated, one with three superimposed of this scene is placed under the groundline of the scenes representing Senwosret I making offerings upper register, of which only one foot of a running to Amun and the other with a cartouche which king is preserved. Contrary to all Senwosret I’s is part of a larger text. These faces were cut up other blocks, this one is in soft limestone which during the transformation of the block into a stela could be an argument against its belonging to the by . The depth of the block (1.12 m) is “Grand Château d’Amon.” Moreover, although too great and its decoration is inappropriate for the quality of the details is very close to Senwos- a pillar.51 Instead, it must be from a doorjamb ret I’s style, the carving is flatter and the raptor’s which could come from an edifice modified or feathers are less detailed that on Senwosret I’s dismantled by Kamose or one of his predecessors. monuments. The lack of a uraeus on the crown This doorjamb could have come from the axial is very rare in reliefs of Senwosret I’s, while the doorway of Senwosret I’s portico. Reused in the three figures of Amenhotep I preserved on the foundation of the north colossus attributed to lintel of the monumental south gate have none on Ramesses II, in front of the 2nd Pylon’s gate, the their crowns. One potential hypothesis would be stela is today exhibited in the Luxor Museum52 to link this block with those of Amenhotep I, this (J 43, CFEETK negs. 53139-53143). one having posthumously represented Senwosret – Large block53 with a niche in hard limestone: I whose temple Amenhotep had just destroyed, This block carved in raised relief was discovered even while copying his decorative style. How- in the Cachette courtyard and is exhibited in the ever, architectural elements55 in soft limestone Open Air Museum. It has been reconstructed on have already been attributed to the Middle King- the south axis, either in a wall, by Th. Zimmer, or dom, therefore one cannot exclude block 87CL in a doorway, by Ch. Van Siclen, while L. Gabolde 315 from Senwosret I’s temple so easily. The direc- places it on the east-west axis inside the “Grand tion of the red crown prevents its placement under Château d’Amon.” It seems to me that this block the facade’s portico, so a second hypothesis would could come from the back wall of Senwosret I’s reconstruct this block either in the chapels behind portico or from the rear facade (the one facing the portico, or in the rear facade (facing west) of west) of the monument of which the portico the monument to which the portico served as served as entrance. The carving in raised relief entrance. In this last hypothetical position, this indicates a roofed space, perhaps one behind this block should be located in the north half of this rear facade that one could reconstruct as the sand- rear facade like the previous large block with a stone colonnade whose elements were reused on niche. either side of the 5th Pylon. – Fragment in soft limestone:This fragment (87 – Block in soft limestone:54 Decorated in raised CL 490) shows part of Senwosret I’s cartouche relief, this block (87CL 315) shows the remains carved in sunk relief. As with the previous block, of two large superimposed registers (Fig. 7). On the nature of the limestone throws some doubt on the lower one, there remains only the king’s red a Middle Kingdom attribution, although architec- crown without uraeus and topped with the ves- tural elements in soft limestone have been already tiges of spreading wings of the Behdetite falcon, dated to the Middle Kingdom (cf. note 55).

51 Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” § 13. 53 PM II2, p. 135; P. Lacau, H. Chevrier, Une chapelle 52 PM II2, p. 37; M. Hammad, “Découverte d’une stèle de Sésostris Ier à Karnak (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut du roi Kamosé ,” CdÉ 30 (1955), pp. 198-208; L. Habachi, français d’Archéologie orientale, 1956), p. 209, § 584: this “Preliminary report on Kamose Stela and other Inscribed blocks mentions a chapel which is known from the list Blocks found reused in the Foundations of two Statues at on the White Chapel; Ma‘arouf, Zimmer, Karnak 9 (Paris, Karnak,” ASAE 53 (1956), pp. 195-202, pl. I; idem, The Second ERC, 1993), pp. 227-232, Fig. 3 and 4; Gabolde, Le “Grand Stela of Kamose and the struggle against the Ruler château d’Amon,” § 125-128. and His Capital, ADAIK 8 (Glückstadt: Verlag J. J. Augustin, 54 This block was identified by L. Coulon, on April 4, 1972), pp. 28-29 and 51; Björkman, Kings at Karnak, p. 56 1994, in fiche 87CL 315 of the “Cheikh Labib” database and 128; B. V. Bothmer, Catalogue du Musée d’art égyptien (CFEETK neg. 25 883, 29 026). The red crown has no uraeus. ancien de Louxor (Cairo: IFAO, 1985), p. 21, Fig. 32 and 33; The block is not mentionned in Gabolde, Le “Grand châ- Chr. Wallet-Lebrun, “Contribution à l’étude de l’histoire de teau d’Amon.” la construction à Karnak,” in L’égyptologie et les Champollion, 55 Fr. Le Saout, “Un magasin à onguents de Karnak eds. in M. Dewachter & A. Fouchard (Grenoble: Presses et le problème du nom de Tyr: mise au point,” Karnak 8 Universitaires de Grenoble, 1994), p. 230, n. 20. (Paris: ERC, 1987), p. 328. 148 françois larché

– Fragments of decoration, in the name of one Senwosret I’s portico. It is crowned with a cor- Senwosret, were discovered in the courtyard nice and its facade is framed by a torus mould- between the 7th and 8th Pylons. ing resting on a dado (height: 5 cm). The back face of the naos was neither decorated nor even Elements of a sandstone portico56 polished, so it must have stood against a wall. – At least two sandstone polygonal columns with Each side face is decorated with two superim- 16 faces: Column drums and their fragments were posed registers made up of two scenes represent- unearthed in the so-called “Middle Kingdom” ing Senwosret I making offerings to Amun. The courtyard. One face is inscribed with a column king wears the white crown on the left side and of text in Senwosret I’s name, on which Amun’s the red one on the right. The location of the royal name was defaced. According to Th. Zimmer, the crowns shows that the naos faced to the east or the carving is characteristic of the 18th Dynasty but north. The god’s figures and names were defaced this hypothesis can be challenged by a similar style under Akhenaten and then later recarved. It is of carving on Senwosret I’s sandstone architraves still unknown if the statue that sheltered inside found reused on both side of the 5th Pylon. the naos represented Senwosret I or Amun. The – Sandstone architraves: Two fragments carved naos’ inner volume (height: 129 cm; width: 54 on both faces in sunk relief were found by A. Mar- cm; depth: 68 cm) limits the scale of the statue iette around 1870 in the so-called “Middle King- to 2/3 of human size, similar to the Ka-statue of dom” courtyard. The first fragment mentions a king Hor standing inside a wooden naos in the “20th regnal year” and reports a “renewal,” the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.59 text of one of the faces having being recarved over an older inscription. The second fragment shows Socle with steps in calcite (Fig. 19) a cartouche of Senwosret I, while Amun’s name Early photographs shows that fragments of a cal- has been hacked out and then recarved. These cite socle were found, very deeply buried, east of architraves seem to belong to the aforementioned the granite threshold n°4 in the so-called “Middle polygonal columns, discovered in the same loca- Kingdom” courtyard. This socle has often been tion. According to Th. Zimmer, the dedication of identified as the base of a wooden naos. However a “renewal” (that could have happened during this function does not fit with the design fea- the reign’s 20th year) would be later than Sen- tures of its upper surface, since the rectangular wosret I and could date between the beginning of grooves carved around its perimeter have a slope the 18th Dynasty and Akhenaten. However, this (around 5 cm/m) indicating that they are chan- hypothesis can be challenged after the discovery nels for the flow of liquids rather than slots to of another sandstone colonnade, in Senwosret I’s secure the wooden panels of a naos to the socle. name, on both sides of the 5th Pylon.57 The liquid would have then been directed toward steeply sloping, narrow channels cut on both sides of the steps at the front of the socle. The right 1.8. The Furniture in Senwosret I’s Name channel can be reconstructed through the much damaged side elevation of the stairway. On the Naos in diorite (Fig. 18: height 175 cm; width other hand, no doorhinge sockets are found on 77 cm; depth 93 cm) the socle, making it impossible to have functional This naos58 was discovered in the later fill which doorleaves on any wooden naos placed on the covered the courtyard between the 7th and 8th socle. Nevertheless, such sockets are clearly vis- Pylons, just like the block from the left anta of ible on the large quartzite socle which supported

56 PM II2, p. 108; A. Mariette, Karnak: étude topographique 58 M. Pillet, ASAE 23 (1923), pp. 143-158: “Cette pièce et archéologique (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1875), pp. 32-33 and capitale a été trouvée à Karnak, à quelques pas au sud de 41, pl 8 (a-b-c); LDT, pp. 28-29; H. Chevrier, “Rapport l’obélisque occidental du VIIe pylône, le 29 janvier 1922. sur les travaux de Karnak (1947-1948), ” ASAE 46 (1947), Elle était enterrée au milieu d’une petite pièce faisant partie p. 176; Barguet, Karnak, 1962, p. 154, n. 3; J.-M. Kruchten, des habitations élevées dans cette cour à une basse époque Les annales des prêtres de Karnak (XXI-XXIIIe dynasties) et et devait servir de bassin, le rebord de sa face faisant une autres textes contemporains relatifs à l’initiation des prêtres saillie de quelques centimètres seulement au-dessus du sol d’Amon, OLA 32 (Leuven: Peeters, 1989), p. 8: Th. Zimmer de cette époque.” dates these columns and architraves to the reign of Tuth- 59 Cairo CG 259, JE 30948. The statue is 170 cm high, mosis III. 27 cm wide, 77 cm deep; its naos is 207 cm high, 70 cm 57 Larché, Karnak 12 (2007), pp. 421-422, pls. XVI- wide, 105 cm deep. XIX. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 149 the naos from the Akh-menu, and likewise on the those seen on the “horned altar,” on the represen- small diorite socle discovered north of the granite tations of Tuthmosis III’s “Great Offering,”63 or on threshold n°3. These sockets permitted installa- two blocks of Amenhotep I.64 In the inscription tion of a wooden naos (Fig. 19e). carved in sunk relief on the cornice’s fillet, the This impressive calcite socle looks more like a name of Amun remains intact and pristine, indi- stepped altar60 similar to the one that once stood cating that the altar was not visible under Akhen- in the Akh-menu’s axial sanctuary.61 The socle’s aten. One should be certain that these fragments facade is carved with a text in Senwosret I’s name, really came from the so-called “Middle Kingdom” which was defaced under Akhenaten and then courtyard before advancing the hypothesis that, restored later. Its back face is vertically levelled since Amun’s name was not defaced, the altar was but roughly polished, in order to lean it against perhaps reused inside the limestone radier. a wall. The stairway is not centered on the socle since three columns of text are carved on its left 1.9. Conclusions (Figs. 14-17) front and only one on its right. This asymmetry is also noteworthy on its top face, where the two From the “Grand Château d’Amon,” there remains parallel grooves are not equidistant from the outer only the sparse vestiges of a double portico with sides. It probably lacks a very thin calcite block pillars lining up in front of a wall.65 Like Tuth- that must have abutted the south side in order mosis III’s contra temple, this portico could have to restore its symmetry. faced east, allowing us to think that Tuthmosis III may have copied Senwosret I’s portico but on Altar with a cornice in hard limestone62 a smaller scale.66 The reconstruction of the text Three large fragments and several smaller ones carved on Senwosret I’s missing architraves allows have been pieced together, in front of the “Cheikh a range of at least eight Osirian pillars in antis, Labib” storeroom, to form 3/4 of this altar’s top standing in front of an equal number of square course (3 x 4 cubits). The support for a ramp or a pillars built under the portico. Behind this facade, stairway (width: 2 cubits) is visible in the middle its is still impossible to determine if Senwosret I’s of one face, while on the opposite one, a recess naos, facing eastward, was simply leaning against has been carved to fit a patchstone. A shallow the portico’s back wall or if it was displayed in a rectangular depression (width: 152 cm; depth: room en suite whose door opened through the axis 95 cm; height: 7 cm) is cut into the altar’s upper of the back wall. M. Pillet thought that the calcite surface. It has probably been used to support a socle with steps could have been used to support heavy offering table as seems to be indicated by the diorite naos,67 a hypothesis that is compatible lever cavities dug on one edge of the depression. with the observations made on its top face. If the It is framed with a badly damaged vertical pro- naos sheltered Senwosret I’ s statue, the portico jection (width: 15 cm), placed 13 cm behind the would be the facade of a contra temple, but if it level of the fillet topping the cavetto cornice. This was an Amun statue, the temple’s main entrance projection could be the start of cross-steps, like did not face west, but must have faced east.

60 Ch. Van Siclen suggests that a naos with its own floor (2001), pp.132-140; R. Naumann, “Der Tempel des Mittleren could have been placed on this socle. This arrangement would Reiches in Medīnet Mādi, ” MDAIK 8 (1939), pp. 185-189; not require door hinge sockets to be carved into the socle. D. Arnold, The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egyptian Architecture This, I propose, is also the case with Senwosret I’s naos. (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2003), figure 61 N. Beaux, Le cabinet de curiosités de Tuthmosis p. 156 (short note on the temple p. 145); M. Bietak, “Kleine III. Plantas et animaux du “Jardin Botanique” de Karnak, ägyptische Tempel und Wohnhäuser des späten Mittleren OLA 36 (Louvain: Peeters, 1990), p. 10. Reiches. Zur Genese eines beliebten Raumkonzeptes von 62 2001 report of the franco-egyptien committee, p. 20: the Tempeln des Neuen Reiches,” Hommages à Jean Leclant study of L. Gabolde concerns blocks 87CL 338+344+398+429, vol.1, Bibliotheque d’Étude 106/1 (Cairo, IFAO, 1994), 92CL 344+645, 94CL 1108. He reckons that the inscription pp. 413-435.8.3. is in Senwosret I’s name. According to M. Azim, some 66 Gabolde, Le “Grand château d’Amon,” §21: “À Karnak blocks would have come from beneath the courtyard of the même, le temple adossé de Tuthmosis III, avec ses six piliers 8th Pylon and others from the so-called “Middle Kingdom” à colosse osiriaque adossé en façade, s’est à l’évidence inspiré courtyard. du modèle de Sésostris Ier…” 63 Burgos, Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2 (Paris: ERC, 67 M. Pillet, ASAE 23 (1923), p. 155: “le point où fut 2008), p. 202b. découvert le naos ne fournit aucun renseignement sur son 64 Larché, Karnak 12 (2007), pl. XC. emplacement primitif, mais à l’endroit que je viens d’indiquer 65 The known temples of the Middle Kingdom have small se trouve un bloc d’albâtre gravé au nom de Sésostris Ier et dimensions. See E. Bresciani, “Le temple double de Sobek qui, croyons-nous, put servir de socle au naos. ” sur la colline de Medinet Madi,” Dossier de l’archéologie 265 150 françois larché

2. Senwosret I’s Sandstone Colonnade was found below the 5th Pylon’s south courtyard by G. Legrain.74 The large pit cleaned75 (Fig. 23) Two architraves, one fragment of a polygonal in 2004 outside the west enclosure wall of the 6th column drum and one column base were reused Pylon, corresponds to the negative space where under the pavement alongside the west face of the pillar once lay. This pit is clearly independent the 5th Pylon’s north wing68 when the latter was from the foundation trench of the west enclosure built (Figs. 20-21). They come from a sandstone wall built by Hatshepsut and Tuthmosis III. This colonnade of Senwosret I. More column bases of disconnection of the trench from the pit invali- this colonnade were reused in the foundations of dates the hypothesis that the Osirian pillar n°11 most of the Osirian colossi leaning against the was put here by Tuthmosis III. On the contrary, east face of the 4th Pylon.69 Five other fragments it seems very likely that it was buried as a votive of similar architraves as well as 14 fragments of deposit by Tuthmosis I when he reused the frag- polygonal sandstone column drums with 16 ments of Senwosret I’s sandstone colonnade in faces70 (Ø: 1.5 cubit) were reused in pairs, below the foundations of his own colonnade in the 5th the 5th Pylon’s courtyard, as the foundation of Pylon’s courtyards. Because all of these architec- Tuthmosis I’s colonnade which is still partially tural elements of Senwosret I were reused so close standing (Figs. 20-23).71 to each other, it is tempting to think that they All of these sandstone elements belonged to come from the dismantling of the same archi- a colonnade that existed before the 5th Pylon’s tectural complex. construction. Its partial reconstruction is pos- The addition of these archaelogical facts clearly sible thanks to the symmetry of the text carved demonstrates that Senwosret I’s temple was dis- on the two corner architraves, symmetry which mantled at the latest by Tuthmosis I. Further- allows the placement of the colonnade on an axis more, other evidence will permit us to identify of the temple.72 The sandstone was covered with his predecessor, Amenhotep I, as the individual a plaster coating and the sunk relief decoration most likely responsible for dismantling the Midlle was painted yellow. Traces of scratching on Sen- Kingdom monuments. wosret I’s drums indicate that Amun’s temple had endured a period of negligence before the 18th Dynasty’s reconstruction. 3. The New Kingdom Foundations in the To date, there is no indication that Senwosret So-Called “Middle Kingdom” Courtyard I’s colonnade can be restored as standing near the place of its discovery, where it could, very In the light of archaelogical excavations inside76 hypothetically, have been built at a lower level and archival photographs of the so-called “Middle (+73.45 m) close to the floor linked with the two Kingdom” courtyard, new observations have been calcite column bases buried between the 5th and established concerning this empty space bounded the 4th Pylon.73 by Hatshepsut’s podium to the west and the sand- The limestone Osirian pillar n°11 (Fig. 4), rep- stone foundations of the rows of storerooms to resenting Senwosret I wearing the white crown, the east, north and south. A vast radier made of

68 In november 2005, R. Le Bohec discovered, between nettoyé jusqu’à un niveau mettant au jour les fondations the foundations of the north wing of the 5th Pylon and the des colonnes centrales. Sous deux de celles-ci nous avons foundations of the north obelisk, three sandstone elements vu des tambours de colonnes de seize pans remployés pour reused as pavement that were placed on a sand layer fill- leurs fondations.” ing the space between the two foundations. Two elements 72 O. De Peretti, E. Lanöe in La Chapelle Rouge, vol. belonged to architraves (length: 75 cm) each decorated on 2, pp. 144-150: 7.3, “Les fouilles des cours du 5e pylône.” one face only. The third one is an upside down column These architraves and some fragments of the column drums base. Their dimensions, decoration and the fact that they were removed to be displayed on a mastaba built between are sandstone, link them to elements of Senwosret I’s col- the 3rd Pylon and the Ptah temple. onnade reused in the foundations of Tuthmosis I’s portico 73 See n. 68. in the courtyards of the 5th Pylon. 74 G. Maspero, Guide du visiteur au Musée du Caire 69 They were discovered in april 2007 by R. Le Bohec. (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie 70 Barguet, Karnak, p. 109, n. 3. Fragments of this col- Orientale, 1915), pp. 8-9, n°11; PM II2, p. 89. onnade were partially seen in 1985 by M. Azim during the 75 O. De Peretti, E. Lanöe in La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, clearing of the south courtyard, before being discovered in pp. 144-150: 7.3. Les fouilles des cours du 5e pylône. their entirety during the 2003-2004 excavations by J.- Fr. 76 Excavations by H. Chevrier in 1946 (ASAE 47 [1947], Jet, E. Lanoë and O. de Peretti. pp. 176-177); J. Lauffray in 1976-79; M. Azim in 1982-83; 71 H. Chevrier, ASAE 49 (1949), p. 261: “À l’Ouest (plutôt L. Gabolde and J-Fr. Carlotti in 1998; G. Charloux and à l’Est) [of the side room of the 6th Pylon], nous avons R. Mensan from 2004 to 2007. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 151 limestone courses built of small and thin blocks The radier’s top face is buried under the surface of the courtyard. The sounding80 made along the east face of the A smaller platform composed of sandstone, lime- southern half of Hatshepsut’s podium (Fig. 28) stone and granite blocks, is embedded in the revealed four superimposed courses built of radier’s west side. small limestone blocks, on which rests—parallel to the podium—a line of three long red sand- 3.1. The Limestone Radier (Figs. 26, 33) stone blocks. Two limestone courses are miss- ing to reach the level of the top surface (+74.44 The radier’s dimensions m) of these sandstone blocks. This top surface is A vast radier (hight: ~ 3 cubits) was made up of at leveled with the granite threshold n°1, which is least six superimposed courses (Fig. 28), built by now used as a step to the eastern axial door of means of an irregular assembly of flat limestone Hatshepsut suite, the one named “Door of the blocks which do not seem to come from either food offerings” (Figs. 24-28). 81 Like the three red the Gebelein quarries, or from Tura or Ma’asara sandstone blocks, this threshold n°1 rests on the in northern Egypt.77 This radier is founded at a radier’s third course, which extends the platform’s lower level (+72.82 m to the west, +72.69 m at lower course (see below, 3.3). its center and +72.76 m to the south of the plat- The building-guidelines incised on the top face form)78 than the green sandstone foundation of of the west threshold n°1 (Figs. 24, 26) and also the storerooms around its perimeter (bed face on the red sandstone block contiguous to its south +73.46 m and bottom of the trench +73.04 m). The edge, indicate that the south doorjamb of the pre- vestiges of these small and flat limestone blocks, vious axial gate rested astride both blocks. This well organized in courses, still occupy a square clue is confirmation that these three red sandstone space (72 x 72 cubits) where they have often been blocks belong to the setting course of a vanished discovered in place among other disturbed ones monument. While distinctly marking the radier’s (Fig. 31). west edge, it is possible that this line of long red This radier is the only limestone subfloor sandstone blocks continued around the radier’s known at Karnak, the foundations of this site four sides. In framing the radier’s setting course, being nearly always made of sandstone apart this line of blocks could have thus formed a kind from a few scattered limestone blocks used to of chain giving greater stability to the walls built fill joints. If it was logical to quarry hard lime- on its superstructure. Dovetail mortices carved on stone blocks from northern Egypt in order to the eastern top edge of the red sandstone blocks build temple superstructures, it seems strange show that they were firmly clamped to theradier ’s to transport them all the way to Karnak only to upper course. hide them inside a radier. On the contrary, the many smoothen faces79 of these small limestone The four granite thresholds (Figs. 26, 31, 34) blocks (Figs. 28-29) prove that, in fact, they were The radier’s top surface can be determined by produced by slicing up much larger blocks which the four granite thresholds (n°1 to 4 from west belonged to dismantled monuments. It will be to east) which are aligned on the east-west axis, explained below why the radier was built on the westernmost one (n°1) being one step lower the site of earlier structures that had been torn (15 cm) than the other three82 (n°2, n°3, n°4). down, without digging any foundation pit for These are the only vestiges of the floor of a van- the radier. ished monument. Resting on the radier’s third

77 This cream white limestone shows irregular cracks 79 M. Azim, CFEETK Report n° 1599 on the project but it seems to the naked eye quite different from the lime- made to developp the central part of the temple of Amun in stone from the Tura or Ma‘asara quarries. Unfortunateley, 1983-1984: “Ce mur d’enceinte peut avoir entouré un temple its origin could not be established since the blocks of the de pierre fondé sur un radier général de calcaire, dont les radier were not examined in the study of Th. De Putter and blocs sont des remplois.” These reused blocks were observed Chr. Karlshausen, “Provenance et caractères distinctifs des during the dismantling of the east side of the radier. calcaires utilisés dans l’architecture du Moyen et du Nouvel 80 J. Lauffray’s sounding was cleared in the spring of Empire à Karnak,” Karnak 11 (Paris: ERC, 2003) pp. 373- 2004. 383. 81 Barguet, Karnak, p. 153. 78 This platform, which will be described further below, 82 Thresholds n°1: +74.44; n°2: +74.57; n°3: +74.61; n°4: is contiguous with the axis to the east side of Hatshepsut’s +74.59: threshold n°1 is at the level of the present pavement podium. of the 6th Pylon courtyard. This threshold was cut in two, 152 françois larché course, the four granite thresholds were embeded – to the west of the temple, this floor was at +73.37 in the three uppermost courses (Fig. 33). m as the remains of the pavement attached to Each of these four thresholds has a sliding both calcite bases embedded below the 4th Pylon’s courtyard indicates;86 channel carved perpendicular to the door reveals – to the east of the temple, this floor could be at for the placement of the door leaves. This trans- +73.50 m as the top of brick structures still in versal layout is characteristic of Middle Kingdom place87 under the storerooms surrounding the thresholds, while in New Kingdom, this channel is radier seems to show. The top of the pebble fill usually parallel to the door reveals. Nevertheless, on which the platform rests reaches +73.41 m there are several exceptions to this practice, which in some places (Figs. 34-35). limit the importance of the channels’ direction Since the four granite thresholds are built into a as a dating criteria for thresholds: radier made of reused blocks (older than the New – At Medamud,83 there are vestiges of a granite Kingdom), it is likely that these thresholds were doorway of Senwosret III’s with its threshold also reused and that they also came from an ear- resting on a limestone course. The sliding chan- lier, dismantled, construction.88 Given the posi- nel is parallel to the door reveals as in the New tion of the sliding channels for the door leaves, Kingdom. it is very likely that these thresholds date to the – At north Karnak,84 channels perpendicular to the door reveals, as in the Middle Kingdom, Middle Kingdom although the example from are still visible in Tuthmosis I’s Treasury. Medamud casts some doubt on this dating cri- Threshold n°1, which marks the radier’s top terion. It was probably during their removal from face (Figs. 24-27): the original monument to which they belonged, – is placed 11 cm above the setting course of or during their placement in the radier, that fis- the green sandstone foundations around the sures developed in thresholds n°2 and n°3. The radier; – is level with the setting course of the east wall widening of each crack was averted by fitting one of the enclosure linked to the 5th Pylon; or two wooden clamps (Fig. 33). The bed face of – is six cm lower than the granite threshold of threshold n°2 was strengthened with two hori- Akh-menu’s southern entrance. zontal clamps, while on threshold n°3, one clamp was fitted vertically to its western cross joint and In the event that these four thresholds of a Middle a second one horizontally on its top face, exactly Kingdom type are still in their original locations, under the north doorjamb.89 Since they were prob- one must admit that the Middle Kingdom floor ably removed from their original locations in the was 11 cm higher than the one at the beginning Middle Kingdom sanctuary at the beginning of of the New Kingdom85 (+74.33 m for the top face the New Kingdom, these thresholds could have of the foundation around the radier). In fact, the only been reused within a new structure dating floor of structures previous to New Kingdom to the beginning of New Kingdom, namely, the seems to have risen slightly from west to east: six limestone courses of the radier. across its length, along the transversal sliding groove, at 86 Ibid., Lauffray, p. 25. the time of the construction of Hatshepsut’s podium. See 87 Charloux, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC 2007), pp. 191- H. Chevrier, ASAE 53, p. 16, Figs. 3-5. 204. 83 M.F. Bisson de la Roque, Rapport sur les fouilles de 88 This reuse was already proposed by Th. Zimmer in Médamoud: (1925) (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français J.-M. Kruchten, Les Annales des prêtres de Karnak, p. 9: d’Archéologie Orientale, 1925), p. 24. It remains to be con- “Les récents travaux dans cet espace, menés par Azim et firmed whether or not this doorway was rebuilt after the l’auteur de ces lignes, ont conduit à contester le fait que Middle Kingdom. ces seuils soient en leur place originelle et à penser qu’ils 84 J. Jacquet, Karnak-Nord V. Le trésor de Thoutmosis ont été déplacés après le Moyen Empire, s’il s’agit bien de Ier. Étude architecturale, FIFAO 30 (Cairo: IFAO 1983), leur date de construction. See M. Azim et Th. Zimmer, “La p. 37, Fig. 5: the occasional use of sliding grooves perpen- cour du Moyen Empire: quatrième campagne de travaux dicular to the reveals seems, however, to have continued dans la zone centrale,” forthcoming); J. Lauffray, Karnak after the Middle Kingdom since two perfect examples were 6 (Paris: ERC, 1980), p. 24; Leclant, Orientalia 47, p. 288; identified in the thresholds of rooms 1 and 2 of Tuthmosis idem., Leclant, Orientalia 54, pp. 371-372. I’s treasury. 89 H. Chevrier, ASAE 49, p.13; ASAE 53, p. 16, Fig. 85 J. Lauffray, “Les travaux du Centre Franco-Egyptien 3-5 and J. Lauffray, Karnak 6 (Paris: ERC, 1980), p. 24, n. d’étude des temples de Karnak de 1972 à 1977,” Karnak 6 1: “Chevrier croyait que la fondation des seuils avait été (Paris: ERC, 1980), p. 24: “il est un fait constant dans tous enlevée partiellement en sape par des chercheurs de dépôts. les lieux de culte et sous toutes les latitudes, les abords des Nous avons constaté que le seuil le plus à l’Ouest repose au temples s’élèvent avec le temps plus rapidement, surtout Nord sur deux assises de pierre et que sa partie médiane pendant les périodes troublées, que les sanctuaires mieux est placée sur du sable jaune très homogène. Ce ne peut entretenus.” être le résultat d’un comblement hâtif.” senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 153

The slicing of the radier’s west side (Figs. 24, radier’s original projection remains intact where 28, 36, 37) the west half of threshold n°1 was removed. Here At the base of the cross joint marking the sup- the podium clearly bypassed the projection: port of the east face of the south half of Hat- shepsut’s podium against the west side of the – Just to the north of the remaining east half of limestone radier, the first course of the two con- threshold n°1, a long limestone block equiped with a channel running east-west, was cut at a tiguous structures seems to rest on a thick layer right angle in order to slide Hatshepsut’s new of yellow sand shared by both (Fig. 28). How- threshold into place (Fig. 37). This long block ever, since it is nearly impossible to distinguish continues westwards for approximately 50 cm separate layers of sand, this shared criteria does beyond the western limit of the present lime- not prove that the podium is contemporary with stone radier, that is to say 50 cm west of the the radier. On the contrary, the joint separating visible joint between the podium and the radier. The channel’s western joint could belong to the Hatshepsut’s podium from the limestone radier radier’s original face which is thus lined up with (Figs. 35-37) shows that Hatshepsut had cut a the north-west corner block of its first course slice (width: 50 cm) away from the radier’s west (Fig. 24a). face while keeping its first course intact (Fig. 24; – Just to the south of the remaining east half of see supra. 1.1). threshold n°1, the radier also extends westwards – The technical reason for this slicing for approximately 50 cm before touching Hat- shepsut’s podium. The excision of the projection Hatshepsut built the east face of her sandstone is obvious at this location (Fig. 36). suite against the west face of a now vanished ear- lier structure. The sandstone east face, which is The removal of theradier ’s projection was not still in place, seems to be counter-battered which necessary on the axis (Fig. 26) where the earlier would indicate that it leaned against an earlier narrow doorway (+74.44 m) was almost entirely structure. This tight joint is confirmed by the dismantled by Hatshepsut,90 to be replaced by a narrow channels for pouring plaster cut verti- wider one (+74.10 m). The new granite threshold cally into the abutted sandstone face. In order was inserted astride the limestone radier and the to allow two contiguous constructions to react podium, and supported new doorjambs in sand- independently to possibly differential rates of stone and granite which were embedded in the subsidence, it was essential that the east wall of earlier structure while probably leaning against the Hatshepsut suite rested only on the podium the original inner doorjambs. without overlapping the limestone radier which, like every other foundation, protruded slightly The channel embedded beneath the radier’s top beyond its original superstructure. The only pos- face (Figs. 27, 36, 37) sible way to maintain the tight joint between the Next to the north side of the threshold n°1, is a two structures was to slice off the edge of the long limestone block (length: 245 cm; depth: 66 limestone radier where it projected beyond its cm; height: 45.5 cm) belonging to the radier’s fifth now vanished superstructure. course into which a channel running east-west has – The unusual arrangement in the middle of been carved (top face +74.05 m; channel’s bottom the radier’s west side +73.89 m; width: 12 cm; depth: 14 cm), which The excision of this projection reveals an was covered by the sixth and upper course of the unusual arrangement under the granite thresh- radier. The cutting of its east joint indicates that old of the east door of Hatshepsut’s suite (Figs. the channel (Fig. 27) continued inside the radier 36-37). This large granite slab was inserted by while its westward extension was destroyed when Hatshepsut astride the radier and her podium. Hatshepsut built her podium. The west joint of the To place this slab, it was necessary to modify the block seems to have been in line with the radier’s radier by cutting the earlier threshold n°1 and west face, before this one was chopped off at a by dismantling the upper three courses of the point about 50 cm to the north and south of the radier along the entire length of Hatshepsut’s axial door along the entire length of the west face new granite threshold. The central section of the except beneath the granite threshold.

90 The west half of the original threshold n°1 and the these inner doorjambs should have been cut back in order original outer doorjambs were dismantled by necessity. to widen the passage to the same width as Hatshepsut’s However, the east half of the threshold stayed in place, as new doorway. did, probably, the inner doorjambs. However the reveals of 154 françois larché

A similar channel, but in sandstone and ori- The lower course is irregularly placed, but is ented north-south, was cut to the north of Hat- often replaced by a very thick sand layer. This shepsut’s podium91 by the foundation pit of this course seems, however, to form lines at the last one. This channel continued northwards radier’s perimeter and around the platform. If beyond Tuthmosis III’s enclosure wall which this lower course also existed underneath and in surrounds the Akh-menu and the north store- the extension of the granite thresholds n°2, 3 and rooms. It is likely that these two channels were 4, it would be tempting to reconstruct the plan once connected through a manhole that would of the missing walls plumbed with the lines fol- have been destroyed when Hatshepsut built her lowed by the blocks of the lower course. The sand podium. casings framed by the lines of this lower course Another channel still exists along with its basin, would then correspond to the spaces delimited by both in red sandstone, buried below the pave- the walls. We hope to confirm this hypothesis by ment at the east end of the corridor which borders future excavations, but it is still too early to assert the south side of Hatshepsut’s podium.92 Since that the walls rested where the radier is built of the recent excavations have not yet shown this six courses or that the spaces between the walls channel entering the south side of Hatshepsut’s correspond to the places where sand replaces the podium, it would be unwise to put forward the lower course of the radier. hypothesis that the channel could be the extremity of the one dug in the pavement of the Chapelle The reused blocks inside the radier Rouge’s sanctuary.93 – Limestone blocks: the flat limestone blocks of the radier are reused.95 Their perfectly smooth The hypothetical plan of the walls built on the faces, (Figs. 34-35) but often incised with lines, radier (see infra 4. Proposed plan of Amenho- are still visible on the west side of the radier as tep I’s monuments) well as other faces with tool marks characteristic The two lower courses of the limestoneradier of cross joints. These blocks were made by cutting are made of a very loose assembly of blocks sepa- up much larger blocks. rated by thick horizontal and vertical joints, filled – Boundary stela:96 a photography of H. Chevr- with sand (Figs. 28, 34, 35).94 The blocks are set ier illustrates the discovery, on March 13th 1949, discontinuously in order to form a very irregu- of a limestone boundary stela in the name of lar casing filled with sand. The preserved courses Senwosret I, which was reused as a block in the above the two lower ones are much better bonded, north-west part of the radier, most probably in having tight joints filled with a mortar made of its second course (Fig. 32). Although it has often plaster and limestone chips. been cited, this obvious reuse of a block inscribed

91 Charloux, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), pp. 261- Karnak (1948-1949),” ASAE 49 (1949), pp. 257-258, Fig. 3: “Le 284, pl. 4-7. lendemain, on trouvait les premières pierres en place, parmi 92 H. Chevrier: “Les fouilles furent poursuivies vers d’autres très bousculées: le 14, une autre table d’offrande, l’Ouest, jusque dans le couloir (of the “Texte de la jeunesse”) en calcaire celle-ci, de Sésostris Ier avec très peu de texte très entre le mur de la construction de la Reine. On trouvait effacé et du même type que la précédente…Le 13.[04.49], là une rigole aboutissant à un petit bassin creusé dans une vers l’Ouest, on découvrait en place dans les fondations une pierre et on apercevait des pierres remployées qui ont été pierre qui avait la silhouette d’une stèle retournée: on se laissées en place” (see ASAE 49, p. 259); Charloux, Karnak trouvait en présence d’une stèle frontière de Sésostris Ier, 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), pl. 7, Fig. 14. la seule que nous connaissions de cette époque. ” Cairo 93 Cl. Traunecker identifies these channels with the drain- Museum JE 88802 (56 x 27 x 147 cm); J. Leclant, “Compte age systems used in the courtyards of the upper/mortuary rendu des fouilles et travaux menés en Égypte durant les temples of Old Kingdom pyramid complexes. Oral com- campagnes de 1948-1950,” Orientalia 19 (1950), p. 364; munication. P. Montet, Géographie de l’Égypte ancienne, vol. 2 (Paris: 94 R. Mensan, CFEETK preliminary Report, 2005: the Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1961), pp. 38-39, Fig. 3; sounding to the south of the platform. L. Habachi, “Building activities of Sesostris I in the 95 From M. Azim’s work to developp the central part Area to the South of Thebes,”MDAIK 31 (1975), pp. 33-37, of Amun temple in 1983-1984, CFEETK Report n° 1599: Fig. 5 (he refers to figure 4 while the stela is represented in “Ce mur d’enceinte peut avoir entouré un temple de pierre figure 5); Barguet, Karnak, p. 155, n. 5; Gabolde, Le “Grand fondé sur un raft général de calcaire, dont les blocs sont château d’Amon,” p. 115, §185 et 188: “Une stèle-frontière des remplois.” M. Azim observed these reuses during the de Sésostris a été exhumée de la “cour du Moyen Empire” dismantling of the south side of the radier. où elle était remployée en assise de fondation.” 96 PM II2, p. 108; H. Chevrier, “Rapport sur les travaux de senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 155 for Senwosret I’s in the heart of the radier 97 has Offering tables:100 not led to the logical conclusion—which should – A limestone offering table101 was found by have been imperative—that the construction of H. Chevrier on March 14th 1949. the radier was accomplished by some later king Pedestals: (currently displayed on the top face of the south foundations of the storerooms sur- through the systematic reuse of limestone blocks rounding the radier) from dismantled pre-New Kingdom monuments – The granite pedestal102 n°1, discovered in 1950, (including those of Senwosret I, among others). is perhaps one of the two on display; – Four granite thresholds: on the other hand, – the granite pedestal n°2; the perpendicular position of the sliding channels – the diorite socle for a naos was found to the for the door leaves relative to the door reveals north of the granite threshold n°3 (Fig. 15). on the four granite thresholds has previously Statues:103 104 misled observers, resulting in the prevailing, but – A granite dyad representing Amenemhat I sit- still unconvincing hypothesis that Senwosret I ting next to another figure (now destroyed), that P. Barguet identifies as Amun. If this destruction dismantled his own monuments in order to reuse was the work of Akhenaten, it would cast doubt them in the radier of his new temple. However, on the reuse of this group inside the limestone it is a fallacy simply to date all thresholds with radier. This dyad is stored in one of the rooms doorleaf sliding channels perpendicular to their attached to the south enclosure wall bound to reveals to the Middle Kingdom, because two the 5th Pylon. thresholds of this type were used by Tuthmosis I – Two quartzite statues105 dating to the time of in his Treasury at North Karnak,98 while at Meda- Senoswret III. The eastern one represents an official seated as a scribe, while the western mud, the granite threshold of Senoswret III’s door one appears to be a kneeling vizier. Both fig- has a sliding channel parallel to the reveals, a ures are enveloped in long cloaks. These statues format usually found in New Kingdom thresholds are now displayed on the top face of the north (assuming this doorway was not rebuilt after the foundations of the storerooms surrounding the Middle Kingdom). radier. – A diorite dyad106 representing Hathor seated next The blocks found scattered on the radier to a standing figure of Senwosret I was found in 1897 and is stored in the Cairo Museum (CG Many stone temple furnishings of Middle King- 42008, JE 32751). dom date were discovered during the successive – A fragment of a throne107 with the name of king excavations of the courtyard:99 Wegaf, discovered by G. Legrain in 1897, is now- stored in the Cairo Museum (JE 33740). – A granite statue108 was found by A. Mariette. Its current location is unknown.

97 A second stele of the same kind stored in the scribe, enveloppés d’une longue robe, ont été laissées à Cairo Museum (Temp. Reg. 10/4/22/7) may come from l’endroit où elles furent trouvées; elles sont de l’époque de Karnak. Sésostris III (Mariette, Karnak, pl. 8s).” 98 J. Jacquet, Karnak-Nord 5, p. 37, Fig. 5: thresholds 104 PM II2, p. 107; Mariette, Karnak, p. 41, pl 8(d); of rooms 1 and 2. G. Legrain, “Notes prises à Karnak,” RecTrav 23 (1901), 99 For Cl. Traunecker, the findspot of the pieces from p. 63; Barguet, Karnak, p. 115, n. 2. Karnak brought to the Louvre by Mariette should be viewed 105 Mariette, Karnak, pl. 8s; Barguet, Karnak, p. 154, with suspicion, since these antiquities were mixed in the n. 3; Fr. Le Saout, “Deux statues en quartzite du Moyen Opet storeroom (See J.-J. Fiechter, La moisson des dieux Empire,” Karnak 8 (Paris: ERC, 1987), pp. 308-312. (Paris: Éditions Julliard, 1994). 106 PM II2, p. 108; G. Legrain, Statues et statuettes, 100 H. Chevrier, ASAE 49: “le 14, une autre table d’offrande, I, pp. 6-7, pl. III; G. Maspero, Guide du visiteur du Musée en calcaire celle-ci, de Sésostris Ier avec très peu de texte très du Caire, pp. 113-114; H. G. Evers, Staat aus dem Stein vol. 2 effacé et du même type que la précédente.” (München: Bruckmann, 1929), p. 92, Fig. 24; A. Scharff, 101 PM II2, p. 108; ibid., Chevrier, p. 258; Leclant, Ori- “Gott und König in Aegyptischen Grafftenplastiken,” Studi entalia 19 (1950), p. 36. in memoria di Ippolito Rosellini nel primo centenario della 102 PM II2, p. 110; Barguet, Karnak, p. 155, n. 5. morte (4 giugno 1843—4 giugno 1943) (Pisa: Industrie gra- 103 Barguet, Karnak, p. 154, n. 3: “Voir aussi des frag- fiche, 1949), p. 310. ments de montant de porte et d’architrave (encore visibles 107 PM II2, p. 110; G. Legrain, “Notes d’inspection: Le sur place), au nom de Sésostris Ier, dans L. D., Text, III, roi Ouga-f ,” ASAE 6 (1905), p. 130; W. V. Davies, A Royal 28 a et 29, et mentionnant l’année 20. Une statue-groupe Statue Reattributed, Occasional Paper 28 de Sésostris Ier et Hathor fut aussi retrouvée à cet endroit (London: British Museum, 1981), n° 1. (G. Legrain, Statues et Statuettes de rois et de particuliers, 108 PM II2, p. 109; Mariette, Karnak, p. 45, pl. 8 (m); I, CGC 42001-42138 [Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français H. Gauthier, Le Livre des Rois d’Égypte, vol. 2, MIFAO 18 d’Archéologie Orientale, 1906], pl. IV, pp. 6-7; CG Caire (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie 42008). “Deux statues en quartzite rouge (actuellement au Orientale, 1912), p. 19 [III]. Nord de la cour) représentant deux personnages assis en 156 françois larché

– A headless diorite statue109 of king Sobekhotep (I the limestone stele, several of these objects were or IV) shows him seated with his arms crossed reused within the radier during its construction. over his chest and his feet crushing the Nine Thisradier may have served as reliquary for these Bows. It is stored in the Louvre Museum (AF 8969). consecrated, but now obsolete, temple furnish- – A granite statuette110 of a seated king, discovered ings. This pattern of votive reuse is common at by A. Mariette, is stored in the Louvre Museum Karnak during every era. One can cite the substra- (A. 121 [E 7824]). tum of the south courtyard between the 4th and 5th Pylon, where Osirian statues and a lintel of Scattered architectural elements: Senwosret I were buried within the sand layer sup- – A sandstone block111 inscribed with the names porting the foundations of the pavement. In the of Sobekhotep IV and was dis- north courtyard, a niche containing two statues of covered by A. Mariette. Its current location is Neferhotep was also buried within the sand layer unknown. to the north of the foundation of Hatshepsut’s – Six decorated limestone fragments, one carved obelisk. Neither should one forget the so-called with a cartouche of Senwosret, were probably stored inside the Caracol in 1975, and then likely Monthu temple at North Karnak, whose base is moved to the “Cheikh Labib” in 2007. composed of reused decorated blocks.113 – A fragment of a granite doorjamb and several sandstone fragments,112 inscribed with a text in The particular case of the calcite socle with crude relief mentioning Senwosret I and Tibe- steps in Senwosret I’s name114 (Fig. 19) rius. The fragment with Tiberius’ restoration text was photographied in the “Cheikh Labib” This pattern of reuse inside theradier does not (CFEETK neg. 44343, doc. 43402). These frag- account for the presence of the calcite socle with ments that were once seen to the south of the steps115 (supra. 1.8). Although archival photo- granite threshold n°4, cannot be found today. graphs show fragments of the socle buried very * deeply to the east of the radier’s threshold n°4, The findspots of some stone furnishngs of Sen- the defacement of Amun’s name proves that this wosret I, like his limestone stela and his calcite socle was still visible under Akhenaten.116 socle with steps, are clearly identifiable in archi- If the calcite socle was really in situ on the val photographs as well as the anonymous gran- limestone radier—to the east of threshold n°4—its ite socle for a naos. It is possible that, as with large dimensions would have obliged the builders

109 PM II2, p. 109; Mariette, Karnak, p. 44-45, pl 8 (k); primitif du socle de calcite de Sésostris Ier,” Karnak 10 (Paris: Ibid., Gauthier, Livre des Rois, vol. 2, pp. 32-33, n. 3; Davies, ERC, 1995), pp. 253-256. A Royal Statue, p. 28, n° 6; J. von Beckerath, Untersuchungen 115 H. Chevrier, ASAE 49, pp. 12-13: “Continuant les zur politischen Geschichte der zweiten Zwischenzeit in Ägyp- fouilles de l’année passée, nous avons exploré la partie ori- ten (Glückstadt: J. J. Augustin, 1964), p. 248; É. Delange, entale de ce qui est maintenant une cour, avec d’autant plus Musée du Louvre—Catalogue des statues égyptiennes du d’intérêt que P. Lacau avait remarqué qu’un bloc affleurait le Moyen Empire (Paris: Éditions de la Réunion des musées sol…, nous avons tout de même mis au jour trois fragments nationaux, 1987), pp. 48-50; H. Sourouzian, “Inventaire intéressants. Le bloc d’albâtre affleurant le sol comporte ce iconographique des statues en manteau jubilaire,” Hommages qui reste d’un escalier à degré de faible hauteur, compa- à Jean Leclant, vol.1, Bibliotheque d’Étude 106/1 (Cairo: rable à celui du monument de Sésostris Ier, à sa gauche se IFAO, 1994), p. 513. trouvent deux colonnes de texte de ce roi; un autre bloc, 110 PM II2, p. 109; ibid., Mariette, p. 45, pl. 8(l); ibid., Gau- cassé presque au ras de l’escalier, porte une seule colonne. thier, Le livre des rois d’Égypte, vol. 2, p. 49 [45,I]; ibid., von Enfin un troisième bloc, d’angle celui-là, fut mis au jour à Beckerath, p. 255; ibid., Davies, n° 37; ibid., Delange, proximité. Ces trois blocs se raccordent d’une part entre eux, pp. 22-23. d’autre part avec les deux blocs qui se trouvaient sur le sol, 111 PM II2, pp. 109, 180, 293; ibid., Mariette, p. 45, pl. 8 à cet emplacement même et que j’avais dû faire repousser (n-o): he incorrectly attributes the block to Neferhotep I and sur l’arasement du mur de l’est pour effectuer les fouilles… Sobekhotep III; ibid., Gauthier, vol. 2, p. 25 [XIII] and 32 [V]; L’emplacement des fragments prouve qu’il était là, derrière W. Helck, Historisch-biographische Texte der 2. Zwischenzeit le dernier seuil en granit …” und neue Texte der 18. Dynastie (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 116 Nevertheless, it will be explained below why the monu- 1975), p. 30, n° 35; ibid., von Beckerath, p. 244. ments which occupied the location of the so-called “Middle 112 PM II2, p. 110; G. Legrain, “Notes prises à Karnak— Kingdom” courtyard could have been, in part, demolished Une restauration de Tibère au sanctuaire d’Ousertesen Ier by Amenhotep III. This king could have also begun the à Karnak,” RecTrav 22 (1900), pp. 63-64; G. Legrain, “Rap- dismantling of the limestone radier that supported them, port sur les nouveaux travaux exécutés à Louqsor à l’Ouest in order to remove the reused blocks on which Amun’s du temple d‘Amon, octobre 1916—mars 1917,” ASAE 17 names and images were later hacked out by his successor. (1917), p. 51; Barguet, Karnak, p. 155, n. 3. This would explain the defacement of the god’s name on 113 A. Varille, Karnak-Nord vol. 1 (Cairo: Imprimerie de Amenhemat I’s statue and on the calcite socle, but this l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1943). hazardous hypothesis is still impossible to confirm. 114 See 1.9 and L. Gabolde, “Le problème de l’emplacement senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 157 to place it on the radier’s top face before the con- m. Its south face is preserved to a height of 90 struction of the superstructure. Indeed, the width cm while its north one was cut by the sandstone of the four doorsways (two cubits, according to foundation of the enclosure wall. Both its loca- measurements on the four granite thresholds tion and exceptional width make it very likely that from the radier) is too narrow to bring the calcite this is an enclosure wall. To the south, another socle through any of them. This socle could only sounding118 dug below the service corridor has have been installed, therefore, after the radier’s revealed the continuation of the remains visible completion but before the construction of the on photographs of the clearance made in 1984. walls through which these doors were opened. The Here, a mud brick wall is placed symmetrically back face of the socle, flat but roughly polished, to the one observed to the north. indicates that it should have abutted a wall. – between the green sandstone foundations sur- rounding the so-called “Middle Kingdom” courtyard 3.2. The Brick Structures Predating the Outside of the north-east corner of Hatshep- Limestone Radier sut’s podium and below Tuthmosis III’s eastern chapel, (the one that is leaning against the right All of the different architectural phases pres- angle made by two of the green sandstone founda- ently visible between the so-called “Middle King- tions), G. Charloux discovered the well preserved dom” courtyard and the 3rd Pylon date to the remains of two perpendicular mud brick walls New Kingdom. They rest on the remains of more in 2004.119 Their bases rest upon another brick ancient mud brick structures which had been lev- structure described as a “pavement.”120 These walls elled beforehand.117 The preservation of these mud can now be connected with those discovered to brick structures is quite uneven, which makes it the west of the Hatshepsut podium. very difficult to reconstruct a general plan of the More soundings were dug by R. Mensan in temple prior to the New Kingdom. However, the 2007121 between the green sandstone foundations systematic drawing of these remains reveals a cer- surrounding the so-called “Middle Kingdom” tain architectural coherence. Recent soundings courtyard in order to reexamine mud brick ves- have disclosed the massive scale of their design tiges discovered by M. Azim in 1984122 during a and have allowed us to propose a date for their drainage operation. Photographs show the pres- construction. These vestiges extend out from both ence of brick everywhere inside the grid pattern sides of Hatshepsut’s podium: westward in front formed by these parallel and perpendicular foun- of the 4th, 5th and 6th Pylons; eastward into the dations. so-called “Middle Kingdom” courtyard and; to – the sand layers the north and the south, as far as Tuthmosis I’s The very thick layer of sand (~ 80 cm), on enclosure walls. which the green sandstone foundations of the storerooms surrounding the radier rest (Fig. 29), Around the radier would appear to extend, at the same level, to the – a large enclosure wall in mud brick surrounding radier’s first course, also laid on a sand layer, if the temple these two layers were not vertically separated Below the wide corridor separating the north by a thick stack of limestone chips as an archi- enclosure wall attributed to Tuthmosis I from val photograph of the radier’s north half shows the storerooms surrounding the limestone radier, (Figs. 31- 32). This common level (+72.75 m), on a large mud brick wall, oriented east-west, was which both subjacent layers of sand were poured, cleared to a length of 12.65 m and a width of 3.76 gives the impression that the whole surface of the

117 Charloux, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), p. 191-204, 120 Ibid., Charloux, pp. 191-204, pl. X. pls. II, IV; Mensan, La Chapelle Rouge vol. 2, 7.1.4. Les 121 R. Mensan, CFEETK preliminary report, 2007: to aménagements en brique crue, pp.126-127. be published by Soleb in a collective work on mud brick 118 G. Charloux, CFEETK report on operation 128, structures at Karnak predating the New Kingdom. 2005: “Deux sondages dans le second déambulatoire sud 122 M. Azim, to be published by Soleb in a collective de la Zone Centrale du Grand Temple d’Amon-Rê,” to be work on mud brick structures at Karnak predating the New published by Soleb in a collective work on the mud brick Kingdom. structures previous to the New Kingdom at Karnak. 119 G. Charloux, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), p. 198, pl. II. 158 françois larché so-called “Middle Kingdom” courtyard was uni- Further west, these brick structures extend formly leveled (infra 4.1). It is therefore impor- below the corridor bordering the north and south tant to establish whether this levelling was made sides of the Hatshepsut suite. This suite rests on everywhere at the same time. a podium built of three courses, the lowest of which cut through a mud brick wall that appears Below the radier (Figs. 28-29) to be contemporary with another one, described The radier’s first course rests on a thick yellow earlier, under the foundation of the storerooms sand layer123 (~10 cm to the south of the platform) surrounding the radier (Fig. 24). under which is a horizontal crust made of sand hardened by contact with the subjacent layer of Below the 6th Pylon’s courtyards mixed silt and clay124 (+72.75 m). On the radier’s An earlier building with mud brick foundations edges, this crust seems to rise on levelled remains was identified below the 6th Pylon’s courtyards, of mud bricks. occupying a space 39 m in length. Its walls are An archival photograph (Fig. 30) of the south- perfectly symmetrical on both sides of the east- east corner of the so-called “Middle Kingdom” west axis of the temple, under which were found, courtyard shows a few aligned limestone blocks between the 6th Pylon’s threshold and the granite forming the first course of theradier ’s south ramp to Philip Arrhideus’ chapel, the foundations side.125 This limestone course seems to have cut of a large platform in mud brick (length: 4.30 m). through mud bricks at a level close to the upper This platform forms the axis of symmetry of these face of the large mud brick wall observed to the foundations prior to the New Kingdom.128 On north of the courtyard,126 below the parallel foun- each side of this platform, a series of parallel and dations of the storerooms surrounding the radier. perpendicular walls (thickness: 2 cubits) are regu- The tiny mud brick platforms that H. Chevrier larly spaced out. Finally, the grid pattern formed called “landmarks,” probably belong to these by these thin walls is framed by two thicker ones levelled structures.127 Everywhere else below the (thickness: 4 cubits), oriented east-west. radier, the elevations of mud bricks seem to have been planed down to their lowest level, although Conclusions we must await the result of the micro-morpho- Because most of these mud brick vestiges are logical analysis of the mixed silt and clay substra- badly preserved, it is quite difficult to differenti- tum to know whether or not this results from the ate the several phases of construction. On the compression of mud bricks compacted by suc- other hand, a recurrent feature of all these walls cessive floods. is the fact that they all cut through or rest on a

123 J. Lauffray, “Les travaux du Centre Franco-égyptien de cristalline, on trouve des intrusions de tessons romains et 1972 à 1977,” Karnak 6 (Paris: ERC, 1980), p. 21: “Comme des fragments de la chapelle de granit de Philippe Arrhidée, l’a justement noté H. Chevrier, avec aussi, par place, du même dans des zones laissées intactes par H. Chevrier. Les sable gris de rivière bien distinct de celui dont le fouilleur carriers et les chercheurs de trésor ont tellement bouleversé a recouvert le fond de son sondage en fin de chantier.” les stratifications que le matériel mobilier ne peut servir à R. Mensan, CFEETK preliminary report, 2005: “La base établir une chronologie absolue des structures in situ dont de ce radier repose sur un substrat limono-argileux recouvert nous constatons la succession.” d’une fine croûte de sable cristallisé. La surface est parfaite- 125 G. Charloux’s observation on photographs (n° 100695 ment horizontale. Il s’est avéré impossible de déterminer to 100697) of H. Chevrier’s sounding. si ce sédiment est un limon apporté par la crue ou s’il est 126 Charloux, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), pp. 191- d’origine anthropique. La texture macroscopique évoque 226; R. Mensan, to be published by Soleb in a collective plutôt de la brique crue mais aucune structure de ce type work on mud brick structures at Karnak predating the New ne permet de corroborer cette hypothèse.” Kingdom. This is also the opinion of archaeological specialists in 127 H. Chevrier, ASAE 49 (1949), p. 259, pl. XIII: mud brick, like M. Millet and J. Domer. A team of British “À l’angle nord-est, on mettait au jour deux petits massifs geologists who examined a core drilled below the south- carrés de briques crues (pl. XIII), dont la face extérieure west corner of the radier identified this substratum as a correspond à l’alignement interne du mur de la XVIIIe geological formation consisting of layers of silt. South of the dynastie… Mais le travail fut repris au nord le long du mur platform, R. Mensan excavated a small area (1.5 x 1.5 m) to de la XVIIIe dynastie, pour voir si de semblables jalons a depth of 70 cm through this silt and clay layer, reaching existaient également là. On en a trouvé en effet, mais pas a level +72.05. Since this layer is perfectly homogenous and disposés de la même façon.” contains no intrusions, only a micro-morphological analysis 128 G. Charloux, “The Middle Kingdom temple of Amun will permit us to determine whether or not it consists of at Karnak,” Egyptian Archaeology 27 (2005), 20-24, offered compacted mud bricks. the hypothesis that this mud brick platform could have 124 Ibid., J. Lauffray: “Presque partout, jusqu’à la couche supported a ramp leading up to the House of Amun. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 159 layer of fill containing ceramics dating from the the temple from the beginning of the 18th Dynasty end of the 11th Dynasty to the beginning of the onward. 12th Dynasty. This fact permits us to determine that the mud brick walls are possibly contem- 3.3. The Platform Built Into the Limestone porary with or at least subsequent to the Middle Radier129 (Figs. 25-27) Kingdom. The excavations made between the so-called A kind of platform is embedded in the center of “Middle Kingdom” courtyard and the 3rd Pylon, the west side of the limestone radier. It is located have shown that this area was very likely occupied just behind the east door of the Hatshepsut suite. since the beginning of the Middle Kingdom. The Twenty cubits long from north to south and nine- first inhabitants settled here in order to establish teen cubits wide from east to west, the platform a sanctuary whose vestiges are preserved as mud is placed slightly northwards of the true central brick walls that are cut through and levelled by axis of the temple. the foundations of the stone monuments of the 18th Dynasty. The stratigraphy shows that the Its elevation (Figs. 34-35) architectural phase directly subsequent to these On its edges, the platform is built of two thin earlier occupants is still in situ. courses (height: ~30 cm) made from blocks of One can therefore point out that the lime- varied size while inside one can observe three stone radier is surrounded by two parallel deep thin courses in place. The visible face of its lower trenches which very likely once contained an course shows that it is made of sandstone blocks130 ancient foundation that was a continuation of except for a long granite block which is reused (top the five sandstone courses observed below the face +73.78 m). Its upper course has its perimeter south wall of Tuthmosis III’s south chapels. After built of long red sandstone blocks framing slabs the removal of these five courses, both trenches either in limestone or red sandstone131 (top face were half filled with a very thick layer of sand +74.05 m). on which the green sandstone foundations that The existing top face of the platform could not supported the now vanished limestone construc- have been used as the setting course for any super- tion of Tuthmosis I still rest. The discovery of a structure since it has many projections and wide sandstone channel, contemporary with these last open joints, along with construction details that foundations, reveals the existence of a building are usually hidden, like a mortice for a clamp. that required the draining of liquids. The fact that This platform was, in fact, entirely covered by this channel was cut through by the construction the fifth and sixth limestone courses, the last one of Hatshepsut’s podium suggests that this earlier serving as the pavement and the setting course building, now destroyed, should have stood in for the superstructures.132 the same location as the Chapelle Rouge. It also Thus, the platform seems to have served only reveals the continuity of the architectural plan of to recycle elements reused from dismantled

129 L. Gabolde, J.-Fr. Carlotti, E. Czerny, “Aux origines de by Soleb in a collective work on the mud brick structures Karnak: les recherches récentes du Centre Franco-Égyptien previous to the New Kingdom at Karnak. d’Étude des Temples de Karnak dans la ‘cour du Moyen 130 Ibid., Gabolde, Carlotti, Czerny, p. 38: “Qu’il s’agisse Empire’” BSEG 23 (1999), pp. 35-36: “Cette plate-forme en de remplois ou de blocs apparemment neufs, tous sont grès a été signalée en 1904 par L. Borchardt, qui semblait taillés dans un même grès de couleur gris-rose à rouge l’assigner au Moyen Empire. Elle fut ensuite fouillée une sombre. C’est le grès de la colonnette au nom d’Antef II, première fois par H. Chevrier qui, lui, ne la datait pas puis, celui utilisé au temple de Mentouhotep à Deir el-Bahari ou en 1976-1979, par J. Lauffray qui en réalisa un nouveau encore celui employé au temple primitif de Médinet Habou. dégagement et en fit alors effectuer un relevé minutieux. Il Il est totalement distinct du grès jaune ou brun employé la considérait comme postérieure au Moyen Empire, mais au Nouvel Empire.” antérieure au Nouvel Empire. L’examen de Lauffray sem- 131 J. Lauffray,Karnak 6 (Paris: ERC, 1980), p. 21: “Ces blait révéler plusieurs strates visibles de remblais. Enfin, des dalles incluent des remplois: au centre une double table à structures très anciennes de briques crues—déjà mentionnées, libations, vue par H. Chevrier; au Nord, une partie d’une du reste par H. Chevrier—paraissaient avoir été aperçues au figure royale et un fragment de texte. ” plus profond des sondages. Plus récemment, Th. Zimmer 132 Gabolde, Carlotti, Czerny, BSEG 23 (1999), p. 39, supposait que la plate-forme était l’élément le plus récent n. 17: “C’était déjà plus ou moins l’avis de H. Chevrier de la cour mais ne lui donnait pas de date précise.” (ASAE 47, p. 176) qui y voyait seulement des fondations R. Mensan, CFEETK preliminary report, 2005, pp. 3-6: et dans une certaine mesure, celui de Lauffray (Karnak “les sondages autour de la plate-forme,” to be published 6, pp.18-26) qui reconnaissait dans l’assise du haut une 160 françois larché older monuments, including some with peculiar same level and has an identical composition to the characteristics:133 one onto which the sand layer supporting the first – A soft limestone tablet134 is decorated in relief course of the limestone radier was poured. with a figure looking back and whose head is – A layer (depth: 5 to 20 cm) of grey and fine carved just below the horizontal frame that sup- alluvial sand, containing very few tiny shards, ports usually a Kheker-frieze. The nature of the rests on the former fill whose top does not appear soft limestone as well as the style of the carving— to have been levelled. This sand layer was used which is much flatter than reliefs of Senwosret to wedge the blocks of the lower course of the I— suggests that this tablet stems from an early platform, since those blocks had their bed faces New Kingdom monument (Figs. 37-38); at different levels. – A soft limestone tablet is decorated in sunk relief with the kilt of a god.135 The soft lime- The low mud brick wall encasing the pebble fill stone differs from the hard limestone used in (Figs. 34-35) Senwosret I’s monuments; A fill of small pebbles was poured inside the – Two column bases in red sandstone (Ø105 cm) perimeter delimited by a low wall in mud brick, once supported octagonal columns (Ø 57cm); which predates the radier, and whose north, east – A limestone offering table for double liba- and south sides were examined. It had already tion136 (Fig. 25). been described by H. Chevrier as a low wall.141 Its likely function was to prevent the effluence Its pebble foundations (Figs. 34-35)137 of the pebbles, since this material can only be The platform exactly covers an area of fill poured contained inside a pit or casing. into a kind of casing. On three sides of the plat- There appears to be a kind of casing here, form, (east, north and south), a regular stratig- delimited by three low walls of mud brick, (the raphy consisting of two superimposed layers has fourth wall ought to exist under Hatshepsut’s been observed to a heigth of about 70 cm, that is podium), which so closely resembles a rough to say from the bottom upwards:138 “roll” of soil that it is difficult to compare them – A fill (height: ~ 60 cm) containing few with the mud brick walls which appeared at the shards139 is composed of a mix of grey muddy sand same level (+73.84 m) below the sand layer on and irregular small pebbles (Ø 0.5 to 4 cm) which which the green sandstone foundations of the appear to come from the bed of a wadi.140 This fill storerooms surrounding the radier rest. 142 This rests on a flat, but not quite horizontal, substra- resemblance to an irregular “roll” results from tum (+72.71 m below the north-west corner of the man-made damage to the faces of the low wall, platform, +72.91 m below its south-east corner) as tool marks on the bricks show. The inner face of a mixed silt and clay. This substratum is at the was cut before the pebbles were poured while the

superstructure du fait que ses faces latérales avaient été of the channel, four limestone blocks carefully joined with soigneusement dressées.” plaster were removed. Visible at a level of +73.41, the pebble 133 Ibid., pp. 39-45. fill was sifted on a small grid (30 x 60 cm) and to a depth 134 This tablet was embedded in plaster in the upper of 70 cm until silt and clay substratum was reached at a course of the platform, along the north half of Hatshepsut’s level of +72.71. A. Masson and M. Millet examined the very podium. Numerous fragments of the tablet were reassembled few pottery shards that were found, which they tentatively by the conservator Sa’adi. The upper frame is oversimpli- date, subject to further examination, to the end of Middle fied since it shows only two lower lines, wheras there are Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period. usually four. The two reeds are also very schematic with 140 The thin plaster layer, observed by L. Gabolde and no detail. N. Grimal and M.-D. Martellière attribute the J-Fr. Carlotti, in which the pebble fill was embedded, does style of carving to the beginning of the New Kingdom, and not exist to the south of the platform. The biggest pebbles it would be useful to re-examine the other tablet (stored were deposited naturally by gravity on the bottom of the inside the “Cheikh Labib”) which is carved in sunk relief casing. The pebble fill could have served both to drain water with the belt of a god. flowing from the surface and to limit the capillary action 135 Gabolde, Carlotti, Czerny, BSEG 23 (1999), pp. 40—44: of the water table. the god is identified as Atum. 141 H. Chevrier, ASAE 47, p.177: “Sous l’assise inférieure 136 J. Lauffray,Karnak 6 (Paris: ERC, 1980), p. 22, de la plate-forme, soit que toute l’infrastructure soit en Fig. 7. briques crues, soit qu’un muret ait été établi pour éviter 137 Ibid., Lauffray, pp. 21, 22, Fig. 7; Ibid., Gabolde, que le sable ne coule.” Carlotti, Czerny, BSEG 23 (1999), pp. 35-36. 142 Charloux, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), pp. 191-204. 138 Ibid., Lauffray, p. 21; Ibid., Gabolde, Carlotti, Czemy, Mud brick remains were observed around the courtyard, pp. 45-46; R. Mensan, CFEETK preliminary report, 2005. below the sandstone foundations of the storerooms sur- 139 R. Mensan, CFEETK preliminary report, 2005. North rounding the radier. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 161 outer one was cut before the first course of the As one can see to the south and east of the radier was built (Figs. 34, 39).143 platform, the limestone blocks preserved around it were superimposed in a corbelled fashion so 3.4. The Connection between the Radier and that the third and fourth courses of the radier are the Platform (Fig. 39) contiguous with the first and second courses of the platform. This layout indicates that the plat- The first course of theradier carefully surrounds form could not have been built after the limestone the “roll” that appears to contain only the lower radier, which covers the platform. Instead, they part of the pebble fill on which the platform rests. are contemporary. In fact, the space occupied by It is difficult to determine if the roll was already the pebble fill under the platform corresponds to this low before the construction of the radier or the combined height of the first two courses of the if it had been planed down in order to place the radier and of the layer of sand inserted between second course of the radier upon it. The limestone them. blocks of this second course actually appear to be Thus the platform sealed a casing filled with embedded into the perimeter of the upper part pebbles and surrounded by a mud brick “roll” of the fill,144 although a thin sand layer separates which appears to be the only visible remains of them. It is probably when this second course of an earlier settlement (Figs. 34-35). Everywhere the radier was embedded into the fill that some of else below the radier, the elevations of the older the pebbles spilled over the low wall, into which mud brick structures seem to have been planed a few pebbles were compressed under the weight down to their lowest level.146 of the upper couses of the radier. Although the Although they are too few to be conclusive, first two courses of theradier surround the three pottery shards were found by sifting the pebble visible sides of the pebble fill, they never pass fill on which two of the limestone blocks, carefully under it.145 joined with plaster, that were lifted from plat- To the north of the platform, the roll appeared, form rested. These ceramics range in date from although very levelled, beneath the two limestone the end of the Middle Kingdom to the Second blocks of the radier’s first course, that were lifted Intermediate Period, which seems to rule out a during the excavations. The roll also appears to Middle Kingdom date for the platform. We shall continue westwards below the first sandstone see, moreover, that the whole radier, including the course of Hatshepsut’s podium where poor ves- platform, probably served as a reliquary for the tiges in mud brick appeared. However, the pos- dismantled elements of an older sanctuary. This sible turning of the roll southwards at a right same type of reuse of pre-New Kingdom archi- angle, in order to form the west side of the casing tectural elements is found beneath the courtyards containing the pebble fill, was not accessible to of the 5th Pylon, where Tuthmosis I’s columns the excavators. The tight joint between Hatshep- are founded on the architraves and column drum sut’s podium and the platform was cleaned to sections of a colonnade of Senwosret I (supra 2: examine the cut that was made by Hatshepsut Senwosret I’s sandstone colonnade). Likewise, the inside the pebble fill in order to set in the first Osirian pillar n°11 of Senwosret I was discovered sandstone course of the podium. This pebble alongside the south colonnade of Tuthmosis I at fill appears to continue further west below the the level of its foundations. Finally, in the court- podium. Three small quartzite foundation deposit yard between the 4th and 5th Pylons, pre-New stones inscribed with Hatshepsut’s prenomen Kingdom147 elements were carefully buried under Maatkare were discovered in this excision, and the 18th Dynasty foundations. were nearly plumb with Hatshepsut’s large gran- ite threshold.

143 J. Lauffray,Karnak 6 (Paris: ERC,1980), p. 21. substratum will let us know whether or not it is made of 144 The fill could have been cut to place the second course mud bricks compacted by the successive floods. of the radier. The pebbles may have been poured in two 147 Larché, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), p. 493: Osirian stages: the first one flush with the top of the “roll,” and the statues of sandstone and a limestone lintel of Senwosret I second one after the the second course was laid. There also were buried in the sand layer supporting the foundations seems to be a thin layer of yellow sand inside the vertical radier under the pavement of the south courtyard. A niche joint separating the course from the fill. with two statues of Neferhotep was also buried in the sand 145 Gabolde, Carlotti, Czerny, BSEG 23 (1999), p. 38. layer north of the foundation of the obelisk in the north 146 The micro-morphological analysis of the silt and clay courtyard. 162 françois larché

3.5. An Hypothetical Drainage System these monuments on new mastabas built to the south of the “Cheikh Labib” storeroom, where Although the water table is very close to the they have been restored, permit their classification ground today, it is hard to know if such was into eleven sets of walls characterized by the let- the case during the Antiquity. If it was high in ters A, B, C, D, E, G, M, N, P, R, and S151 (Fig. 40). antiquity, the pebble layer should have served as a Ten of these eleven sets were already described drainage system to prevent the water from rising by C. Graindorge152 while J. Fr. Carlotti has pro- too high.148 posed a sequence of three reconstructed plans.153 At Karnak, this implementation of a pebble fill However, my examination of all the faces of these is unique, since sand is used everywhere else in blocks during their transport suggests to me that foundations. The use of pebbles under the plat- they should be reconstructed according to a com- form was a deliberate choice, since it would have pletely different plan, even though it uses the same been easier to substitute the continuation of the architectural elements. Two stages of construction two first courses of the limestone radier in place of can be proposed, from east to west. the pebble fill. These pebbles seem, then, to give an exceptional importance to this tiny surface, where 4.1. First Stage: the Monuments Built o n and they could have only served to prevent the rise of around the Limestone Radier (in gold on the the water table. This underground drainage system plan, Fig. 40) suggests there was a specific need to protect the ancient ground which once existed beneath the The sanctuary platform. This drainage system could be linked Since no architectural elements in Amenhotep to the use, on the surface, of wooden furniture, I’s name have been identified, the sanctuary was, a material sensitive to humidity. As the portable perhaps, built by one of his predecessors. Its sche- bark inside its wooden naos149 would usually have matic reconstruction relies solely on the location been protected from humidity by a hard stone of the four granite thresholds and of the calcite socle, a sounding near the socle located inside the socle. bark sanctuary of Philip Arrhideus would allow us to discover if the pebble fill extends that far west- The enclosure wall C+C’ (three cubits thick at wards. According to this hypothesis, the pebbles its base) would have served to drain the water used during The thickest of Amenhotep I’s walls (Fig. 40)154 cult rituals, which could also explain why there is fits the traces incised astride threshold n°1 and a wide open joint between the bark socle and the on the red sandstone block bordering the west pavement of Hatshepsut’s Chapelle Rouge.150 edge of the top face of the radier.155 The east side of Hatshepsut’s suite abutted this enclosure wall C (Fig. 41; Égypte, Afrique et Orient 16 [2000], 4. Proposed Plan of Amenhotep I’s Monuments p. 29, plan 2, N° 6 ). Around 50 blocks belonging to the south half C’ of the enclosure are preser- Dating the radier to the beginning of the New eved, along with seven more that are attributed Kingdom opens up new prospects for the location to its north half C. of Amenhotep I’s dismantled monuments. Since A horizontal line of text in relief, topped with Amun’s names and images were not attacked a torus moulding and a cornice, runs along the on the king’s limestone blocks, his monuments upper part of its outer battered face, while its (Fig. 40) were torn down before Akhenaten’s lower face is smooth and lacks decoration. The reign. The display of the recovered blocks from battered face of four superimposed blocks of the

148 In Amenhotep III’s temple at Kom al-Hetan, H. Sour- the axis while the walls A’, B’, C’, D’, E’, R’, S’ are placed ouzian has cleared a thick layer of pebbles inserted between south of the same axis. the lower and the intermediate foundation courses of the 152 C. Graindorge, Égypte, Afrique et Orient 16 (2000), walls and of the colonnades. pp. 25-36. 149 C. Graindorge, “Les monuments d’Amenhotep Ier à 153 Ibid., pp. 27, 29 and 34. Karnak,” Égypte, Afrique et Orient 16 (2000): the decora- 154 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, tion carved on the inner faces of the walls R and R’ shows p. 329. a wooden naos sheltering the portable bark. 155 The blocks of the structure 3 (Égypte, Afrique et 150 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, 1.2.5. Orient 16 [2000], p. 29, plan 2) in fact come from wall C Le dallage du sanctuaire. (N° 6), from which they cannot be separated (see pl. 40; 151 The walls A, B, C, D, E, N, R are placed north of ibid., Burgos, Larché, p. 329). senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 163 north half C (1C + 2C + 3C + 4C)156 shows super- The wall A+A’ (81 cm thick at its base) imposed registers with small scenes identical to C. Graindorge considers wall A to be the facade the antas of Senwosret I’s portico. Since the south of an abattoir, pierced by at least three doorways, joints of these blocks are vertically aligned, they of which some elements of doorjambs and lintels could have abutted the north doorjamb, prob- were identified. One cannot say if these doors ably in granite, of the axial door (the ancestor gave access to the temple interior either for live of the present “Door of the food offerings”). This cattle coming from outside or for prepared cuts doorjamb was edged with a vertical torus mould- of meat after the animals were butchered. The ing as the vertical groove (1/4 cylinder shaped) outer battered face of the wall is decorated with incised to the right of the west face of the four a single register carved in raised relief above a superimposed blocks shows. This support is also dado, while its inner vertical face is blank except confirmed on the vertical inner face of the same for a horizontal line of text carved at mid-height four blocks whose decoration stops along the in sunk relief. Wall A is reconstructed to the usual vertical frame. This inner face shows bulls east of the limestone radier, plumbed with the walking towards an abattoir and facing the axial ancient foundation trenches reused for Tuth- door on either sides C and C’ (block 1C).157 mosis I’s storerooms (Fig. 40; Égypte, Afrique The inner face of the south half C’ is vertical et Orient 16 [2000], p. 29, plan 2, N° 11). Block and, above a blank dado, is decorated in raised 4A (271A1) should abutt the north doorjamb, relief with two registers on which the ritual lit- probably in granite, of an axial door. This door- urgies of Amun at Karnak unfold. On the lower jamb was framed with a vertical torus moulding register, Amenhotep I pays homage to Amun and as the vertical groove (1/4 cylinder shaped) that consecrates new monuments, while on the upper cut through the left edge of the battered face of one he presents offerings to the Ennead and con- block 4A indicates. Six other blocks also come secrates altars. from this north half A, while 19 blocks from the south half A’ have been identified. The wall D+D’ (two cubits thick at its base) The outer face of wall D is battered and topped 4.2. Second Stage: The Constructions Built to with a line of text. Above a blank dado, the lower the West of the Limestone Radier (in yellow on register shows Amenhotep I running the ritual the plan, Fig. 40) race around boundary stones in the presence of Amun-Kamutef, while the upper one depicts his The constructions built to the west of the lime- coronation by Amun. The wall’s inner face is stone radier were replaced, first by a monument vertical and is also decorated with two registers that has since vanished, the Netchery-menu and above a blank dado: the lower one represents an its bark chapel in hard limestone, and later by episode of the Heb-Sed, and the upper one the Hatshepsut’s podium and its superstructures. montée royale in front of Amun. The blocks from these dismantled constructions Wall D is clearly delimited (length: 4.78 m) on were buried below the Cachette courtyard or both faces by two vertical frames bordering the they may have been reused in the foundations blank reveals of two door openings. Along the left of Ptah temple, but this must be confirmed by edge of the battered face, the reveal is cut with future excavations. a vertical groove which was very likely used to embed a wooden doorpost. The bark chapel R+R’ This wall D cannot be placed as inÉgypte, This bark chapel consists of two parallel walls (R Afrique et Orient 16 (2000), Fig. 34, plan 4, N° 3. and R’) with battered outer faces158 and vertical A new location is now proposed between the axial inner ones.159 Both faces are entirely decorated sanctuary and the north wall of enclosure C. Only with two registers above a dado. Described by a few blocks from a symmetrical wall D’, to the C. Graindorge as “two screen walls surround- south, are identified (1D’ to 4D’-240A1). ing a wooden bark shrine,” R and R’ do, in fact, form the two side walls of a chapel opened at

156 Ibid., p. 329. 158 Ibid., p. 328, Fig. a. 157 Ibid., p. 329, Fig. c. 159 Ibid., p. 328, Fig. b. 164 françois larché each end. The doorframe of the eastern facade The enclosure wall around the bark shrine is decorated with two large columns of text. The B+ E and B’+E’ battered western facade has two doorjambs with – The two symetrical right corners of two per- vertical reveals (width: 90 cm). Each side of the pendicular walls (B+E and B’+E’) are decorated in doorframe is decorated with at least four small raised relief with small scenes similar to the reliefs registers (1R-5R),160 each one showing Amenho- on Senwosret I’s portico. Three blocks163 form the tep I facing the two alternate forms of Amun. corner (north-west) of the walls B and E while Three limestone blocks (175A1+249A1+ four other blocks and two fragments164 belong to 87CL56) are now joined on a mastaba161 next to the symmetrical corner (south-west). Three details three other blocks from the facade’s doorframe prevent the reconstruction of a portico with free (87CL42, 87CL183, 183A1). Perpendicular to the standing supports linked by architraves between north doorframe, the outer face of R starts with a these corners (Fig. 40; Égypte, Afrique et Orient blank surface (two cubits long) which was used to 16 [2000], p. 29, plan 2, N° 8):165 fold back the doorleaf of a side door. This blank * The small size of the blocks, as well as their surface ends near the west facade with a chis- irregular bonds, do not permit the seatting of elled rough protuberance which looks more like architraves whose soffits should be lined up a destroyed rebate than the result of the removal between both corners of the portico; of a vertical torus moulding. On the other side * The horizontal frame, carved under the upper of the opening, the doorleaf could be fixed to the line of text, seems incompatible with the decora- doorpost embbeded inside the groove cut in the tion of an architrave on which this frame might south reveal of wall B, which is same width as the possibly have been painted but never carved; blank surface (two cubits, Fig. 40). * The decoration on the face bordering the The decoration of the inner faces of both walls superimposed small scenes differs from Senwos- R and R’ starts alongside the two rebates of both ret I’s portico, which shows only the king facing axial openings. Though there are no expected Amun. The remains of tiny, superimposed female blank surfaces to fold back the doorleaf, this is not figures suggests that this was a much longer scene sufficient proof that these openings had none. whose right end is carved on a block from wall Six blocks from the upper course which sup- B, on which there appears the foot of a figure on ported the roof slabs were found: the four south- an equally small scale (13B). ern ones are decorated with a Kheker-frieze carved – Wall B (two cubits thick at its base): both inside and painted outside, while the two northern faces are decorated in raised relief. Battered, its ones show a different pattern; outside, the painted outer one has a single register showing, on its right frieze is replaced by a horizontal line of text which half, a large figure of Amenhotep I smitting his was topped by a course of cornice blocks having Asiatic enemies, and topped with a horizontal line a horizontal torus moulding. of text.166 Like the large figure of Tuthmosis III The disposition of the west facade of Amen- carved on the 6th Pylon’s west face, Amenhotep hotep I’s bark chapel between two openings was I faces away from the temple’s axis. Block 19B later copied in the Chapelle Rouge and then later (87CL384) being placed on the wall’s left half, the in Tuthmosis III’s granite bark sanctuary. The raptor’s direction indicates a king moving right- proposed location of Amenhotep I’s bark chapel wards, in the opposite direction of the smitting is on the site of the Philip Arrhideus chapel king. Vertical, its inner face is decorated with (Fig. 40; Égypte, Afrique et Orient 16 [2000], p. 27, two registers showing the king, the god’s wife plan 1, N° 4 and p. 29, plan 2, N° 4).162 Ahmes-Nefertari, and the priests entering the

160 Ibid., p. 328, Fig. c. 166 It seems impossible to assign to wall B the two small 161 Ibid., p. 328. limestone blocks which were reused inside the north wing 162 Ibid., p. 328. of the 5th Pylon, and which belonged to the frame of a 163 Ibid., p. 324, Fig. b. flagpole niche. Other niches had probably decorated the 164 Ibid., p. 325, Fig. b. eastern face of the 5th Pylon’s ancestor. 165 Ibid., pp. 324-325. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 165 temple. They are purified in basins before moving the face of one such pillar stored in the “Cheikh towards the courtyard where they sing in front Labib” storeroom has been recarved twice of the Ennead, accompanied by Thoth. Both per- (Fig. 6): on the first occasion, the new king was pendicular ends of wall B are preserved: placed much higher, in front of a wAs-sceptre held * the south end of wall B (to the right of the by a figure of Amun that was partly carved on an outer face) is dressed as a smooth reveal (87CL adjoining wall; in the second edition, a lone king 477+355+123+497). A vertical groove is cut is shown with a highly arched eyebrow character- into the angle of the reveal with the outer face, istic of Amenhotep I’s relief portraits, although probably to fix a wooden doorpost. A doorleaf the nose is shorter. Because the orientation of this allowed the passage that opened on both sides of second king is incompatible with the inner face the west facade of the bark chapel to be closed off of wall B’, this pillar (Fig. 6) was probably incor- (Fig. 40). perated into the symmetrical wall B. Given the * the north end of wall B (left of the outer face) is difficulty in reusing these pillars, it seems likely framed on both sides of the corner with superim- that they were still in place when walls B and posed registers of small scenes167 which are dupli- B’ were constructed. cates of those on Senwosret I’s portico. Wall B is – Wall E (two cubits thick at its base and 95 cm reconstructed north of the bark shrine R, aligned under the torus): both its faces are decorated in with its west facade, and separated from it by an raised relief. The inner one is vertical, and carved opening whose doorleaf must have been fixed to with two registers depicting the daily ritual of a wooden doorpost (Fig. 40; Égypte, Afrique et Amun. Battered, the outer one is smooth except Orient 16 [2000], pl. 34, plan 4, N° 2). for the line of text carved under the horizontal – Wall B’ (2 cubits thick at its base): eight torus moulding supporting the cornice (block blocks from this wall, reconstructed south of the 87CL 483). 172 Block 87CL 84 (CFEETK neg. bark shrine’s wall R’, were identified (two blocks 109364) forms a reflex right angle, whose one face are still not placed).168 In particular, an assembly has no vertical frame. This wall E (N° 9) cannot of three blocks shows: be placed symmetrically to wall C (N°6) as was * On its battered face,169 a fragmentary hori- proposed (see Égypte, Afrique et Orient 16 [2000], zontal text is carved under the horizontal torus pl. 29, plan 2, N° 9), since wall E (N° 9) is thin- moulding; ner at its base (2 cubits) than the wall C (N°6) (3 * On its vertical face,170 the remains of two cubits). Wall E is, in fact, perpendicular to wall B successive scenes separated by a vertical frame. at the level of the corner previously described, viz. In the left scene, the king moves leftwards in the one with decoration which duplicates that of the direction of the south-west corner, while in Senwosret I’s portico.173 This wall E constitutes, the very fragmentary scene on the right, only then, the north wall of the courtyard located north a brief segment of a horizontal frame where it of the bark chapel R+R’ (Fig. 40). meets the vertical frame remains. This horizontal – Wall E’: only one top block of this wall E’, frame is topped with a Kheker-frieze. Below it, a which formed the south continuation of the enclo- skyline surmounts a Nekhbet-glyph, indicating sure C’, was identified.174 the raptor’s position and that the scene was very narrow.171 The two lines N+S of 16 niches, the predecessor The north cross joints of both superimposed of the 6th Pylon blocks line up vertically and are perfectly smooth. These two series of eight niches were lined up These two anomalies prove that these cross joints on both sides of an axial door (Fig. 40; Égypte, once abutted a monolithic element that was Afrique et Orient 16 [2000], p. 29, plan 2, N° 13),175 already standing here. This may have been an each one (height: 4 cubit) likely sheltered a royal Osiran pillar of Senwosret I, whose two paral- statue.176 On both side faces of each niche, Amen- lel faces have the same depth as wall B’. Indeed, hotep I sits enthroned in front of an offering list

167 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, 172 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, pg. 324. pg. 324, Fig. b. 168 Ibid., p. 325, Fig. c. 173 Ibid., p. 324, Fig. b. 169 Ibid., p. 324, Fig. b and p. 325, Fig. b. 174 Ibid., p. 325, Fig. b. 170 Ibid., p. 325, Fig. a. 175 Ibid., pp. 326-78. 171 Observation made by Ch. Van Siclen. 176 These niches are not high enough (4 cubits) to have 166 françois larché and a table laden with offerings, while a priest with the left doorframe of the niche, while to its carries out the cult ritual. Both lines N and S seem left the face is smooth probably until the south- to come from the east face of a Pylon which is east corner of the Pylon. reconstructed as the ancestor of the 6th Pylon and – Flagpole niche: the existence of at least one its western enclosure (Fig. 40; Égypte, Afrique et flagpole niche in each wing is proved by the thin Orient 16 [2000], p. 29, plan 2, N° 5). depth (60 cm) of header 1S5-6 (345A1) which At its base, the width of the Pylon reached six belongs to the back of the fourth niche of the cubits, a figure computed through the addition southern range. Smooth and vertical, the outer of the niche depth (2.5 cubit) to the depth of the face of this block is set ~ 65 cm back from the headers (125.5 cm) which form, at their top, the west face of the Pylon. This layout is characteristic back face of the niches. The visible faces of both of a flagpole niche facing west. headers (87CL 404 and 405) show that the bat- – Decoration: a few limestone fragments in tered outer one is blank, while the vertical inner sunk relief were found in the foundation trench one is decorated. Two blocks belonging to the reused for the 6th Pylon and its west enclosure facade of the niches have vertical torus mouldings wall.177 They belonged to a line of text similar to marking the end of the decoration. This particular the one topping the walls of the open air passages feature allows them to be placed at the extreme delimiting the small chapels P. It is possible that ends of each wing: the original trench was dug under Amenhotep I to receive the foundations of a thin Pylon with – In the north wing, it is possible to place block battered faces (Fig. 40). The west face was blank 357A1 (CFEETK neg. 115996) between the axial but maybe have been topped by a line of text door and the first niche. Unlike the other vertical while its east face had 16 niches. ones, the torus moulding of block 357A1 is not – An axial door: this door separated the two carved alongside the doorframe of the niche, but rows of eight niches. It is possible that a limestone is set 15.5 cm apart. To the left of the torus, the lintel of Amenhotep I,178 with texts that men- face of the block is smooth, probably as far as the tionned construction work in Karnak temple179 doorframe of the axial door. Two superimposed and which consists of blocks reused from a hard blocks, 63A1 (CFEETK neg.115705) and 288A1, limestone lintel of Senwosret I, was placed here. are placed to the right of the last niche. To the Seven reused fragments come from the upper half left of the vertical torus, the face is decorated with of the original doorframe and from the face above the right doorframe of the niche while to its right, it which shows Senwosret I sitting enthroned the face is smooth, probably until the north-east between Horus and Seth.180 These blocks were corner of the Pylon. cut up and rotated before Amenhotep I reused – In the south wing, block 87CL 465 (CFEETK them as a lintel embedded in a battered stone neg. 104987) is placed to the left of the niche, at wall, as their perfectly flat cross joints indicate. the farthest point from the axial door. To the On the lintel, the doorframe was wider under right of the vertical torus, the face is decorated Amenhotep I (width: 3.46 m, projection: 7 cm) sheltered the sandstone Osirian statues (6 are preserved, by the feet of the divinities. Seth, here referred to as the god height: 3.15 m, CFEETK neg.1720) which were reused in of Ombos, is the Lord of Upper Egypt. He is placed to the the foundations of the south courtyard between the 5th left, on the lilly of the South, while Horus is placed to the and the 4th Pylon. right, on the papyrus of the North. This allows the lintel to 177 R. Mensan in La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, pp. 137-141: face east, and not west as one might think even though the 7.2.3. La chapelle occidentale de Thoutmosis III: opération king’s red crown faces Amun, behind Seth. Unfortunately, 161 with Fig. pg. 294. behind Horus, the crown of the symmetrical king facing 178 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, pg. 326. Amun has disappeared. The missing crown may have also It is also possible that this door comes from Amenhotep I’s been red, as one can see in the representation of Karnak’s Pylon that was replaced by the 5th Pylon. According to this 3rd Pylon, shown in a relief from the walls of the Colon- last hypothesis, Amenhotep I probably reused Senwosret nade Hall at Luxor temple (see Epigraphic Survey, Reliefs I’s lintel in its original location. and Inscriptions from Luxor Temple, Volume 1: The Fes- 179 Chr. Wallet-Lebrun, 18/2C (in press by Soleb): “[Ame] tival Procession of Opet in the Colonnade Hall [Chicago: n[ho]tep Ier doué de [vie] qui [compte parmi son oeuvre en The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1994], faveur de son père] Amon, seigneur-des-trônes-des-deux- pl. 100). Indeed, on the lintel of the axial door, (which is terres, la construction de son domaine, l’agencement de supposed to face west here), the opposing kings running son temple et l’érection de la porte Sud Seqa-hotep de vingt towards Amun both wear the red crown. This strange sym- coudées en [belle pierre blanche de calcaire]…” metry of identical crowns does not seem to be a sculptor’s 180 The direction of this lintel from an axial door is very mistake since another relief, to the south of this one on the likely defined by the position of the heraldic plants crushed same wall, the exit gateway of Luxor temple is shown with senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 167 than under Senwosret I (width: 3.10 m). The few royal statue and its ka, by priests who are dis- blocks belonging to the inner and outer door- played on two registers. A few blocks from the jambs (passage: 3 cubits) show different widths side walls still retain partial projections of the of the vertical doorframes:181 back walls of these chapels. This bonding con- * The narrowest doorframes (77.5 cm)182 have firms that the main back wall (north for G, south a slightly battered face that belonged to the inner for G’) was dismantled at the same time as the doorframe.183 They are decorated with a column chapels. Their proposed reconstruction is in the of text consisting of large hieroglyphs which per- same location as the later chapels of Tuthmosis mits the height of the passage to be reconstructed III, which border the north and south sides of as nine cubits. One reveal is smooth, in order to the Hatshepsut suite (Figs. 40-41; Égypte n°16, fold the single doorleaf, while the other one is p. 27, plan 1, n° 3). decorated with two columns of text which prob- – The short chapels P and P’ (~ 59 cm thick, ably preceded a figure of the king striding into two vertical faces): at least five short chapels have the temple (now missing).184 decoration on their side walls nearly identical to * The widest doorframes (96 cm)185 are more that of the long ones, but without the ka behind battered than the former ones and come from the royal statue. A few blocks of the side walls have the outer doorframe.186 They are decorated with kept the projection of the facade, but never of the several superimposed scenes showing the king back wall, as though the back walls had stayed in facing Amun. The door rebate seems to be pre- place when the rest was dismantled. Their pro- served on block 156A1. posed reconstruction is in the same location as * The counter-lintel: two blocks187 in hard Tuthmosis III’s chapels which border the north limestone, very likely belonged to the counter- and south courtyard of the 6th Pylon (Figs. 40-41; lintel of the earlier doorway of Senwosret I,188 Égypte n°16, p. 29, plan 2, n° 1). since one block (87CL 122) is clearly reused. Its – The chapels at the extremities surrounding top face shows an excision made at a right angle small passageways: altogether, there are six pas- with reliefs depicting stars which is typical of the sageways, three on the north and three on the decoration on the soffit of a lintel.189 From the south. On the north side, from west to east: dimensions of the lintel and of the doorjambs, it – the first passageway separates the wall with is possible to reconstruct the doorway as being the range of niches S and N from the western- ~9 cubits high with a passage three cubits wide. most chapel of P Amenhotep I wears the red crown on the left side – the second passageway separates the range of the lintel, and the white one on the right, indi- of chapels G from the range of chapels P cating that his door faced either south or west. – the third passageway separates the eastern- The chapels G and P for the royal cult most chapel of G from the two parallel walls Foundations perpendicular to the western surrounding the limestone radier. Blocks from enclosure of the 6th Pylon also supported the three walls (P1, P5, G0) have a different decora- north and south side chapels of Amenhotep I that tive scheme on one face, which is blank except Tuthmosis III and Hatshepsut later replaced. for a horizontal line of text carved at its top in – The long chapels G and G’ (~ 67 cm thick, sunk relief. These particular faces were adjacent two vertical faces): at least six long chapels have to small passageways which gave access to the scenes depicting the offering ritual made to the outside (Fig. 40).

the scene on its lintel showing the two kings run towards 87CL 439 (CFEETK neg. 105214), 87CL 3+354A1 (CFEETK Amun but wearing different crowns this time: red to the left neg. 109065), Ibid., p. 326a. South doorjamb: 274A1, 87CL (North) and white to the right (South). Epigraphic Survey, 190 (CFEETK neg. 105166), 94A1 (CFEETK neg. 115813), RILT 1, pl. 56. Ibid., p. 326b. 181 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, 186 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, pp. 326-327. p. 326. 182 Ibid., p. 327. South doorjamb: 97CL 125 (CFEETK 187 See pl. 50d. A lintel in hard limestone, reused neg. 109227), 190A1 (CFEETK neg. 115851)—b. North from an earlier lintel: 87CL 122 (CFEETK neg. 109230), doorjamb: 182A1 (CFEETK neg. 115851), 298A1+67A1. 237A1 (CFEETK neg. 11583). 183 Ibid., p. 327. 188 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, 184 Ibid., p. 327d. Reveal of the doorway: 298A1 (CFEETK p. 327. neg. 116016). 189 Larché, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), p. 417 and 185 North doorjamb: 126A1 (CFEETK neg. 115836), pl. XCII: block 87CL122. 168 françois larché

The chapel of Ahmes-Nefertari The first stage of deconstruction under At least 13 blocks of the M-series have the same Tuthmosis I thickness. The salts covering them indicates that This first destruction concerned the two parallel they lay buried under the groundwater table, enclosure walls (inner enclosure wall: 2 cubits probably below the Cachette courtyard. The thick, outer enclosure wall: 3 cubits thick) that Kheker-friezes which are found on both sides of were successively built by Amenhotep I around one block are not at the same level, indicating the limestone radier on which the main sanctuary that the roofs on each side of the wall were at rested (Fig. 40). Continued probably by Tuthmo- different levels. A corner block with a vertical sis II and certainly by his successor, the disman- torus moulding is decorated with two cartouches tling process included the north and south ranges of Ahmes-Nefertari. There is no clue as to the of short and long chapels P/P’ and G/G’ (Fig. 40) original location of this structure anywhere within which were eventually replaced by similar chapels the sanctuary. of Tuthmosis III, of which vestiges still stand. The only preserved foundations of Amenhotep The copy of Senoswret I’s White Chapel I were discovered below the westward exten- More than 30 blocks (architraves, pillars, low sion of the outer enclosure wall against which walls, dados, roof slabs) come from a chapel Tuthmosis III and Hatshepsut abutted the south whose dimensions and decoration are identical to chapels of the 6th Pylon. These foundations con- Senwosret I’s White Chapel. The low walls placed sist of five courses, in green sandstone, built in in between the pillars are slightly thinner (35 cm) the same manner as the courses of the limestone than those of the White Chapel (44 cm). radier. Elsewhere around the radier, and below On all these monuments, the facial features of the north extension of the outer enclosure, this Amenhotep I appear remarkably consistent, with foundation of five courses was removed by Tuth- a long curved nose, a falling chin and, most of the mosis I. He replaced them by one made of two or time, a highly arched eyebrow joining the tip of three thin courses, in green sandstone, set on a the eye. These portraits differ from the profiles of very thick sand layer poured into Amenhotep I’s Amun, which have a much shorter nose above a original trench. The sand thus replaced the two flatter mouth and smaller chin, and are astonish- first courses of the original foundation. A few ingly similar to the profile of Senwosret I. of Amenhotep I’s limestone blocks194 were also reused in this new foundation, at its connection 4.3. The Stages of Deconstruction joint with the old one.

All these blocks of Amenhotep I were found The second stage of deconstruction, during the in several locations at Karnak: in the so-called coregency of Hatshepsut and Tuthmosis III Montu Temple at north-Karnak,190 below the The second stage of the destruction of Amenhotep Cachette courtyard,191 in the 3rd Pylon,192 in the I’s monuments was the removal of his narrow foundations of the storerooms surrounding the Pylon with 16 niches (S+N). Its western founda- limestone radier and, very likely, in the founda- tions (Fig. 41) were reused in the construction of tions of the Ptah temple. Because of these many the 6th Pylon and its western enclosure. findspots, three successive stages of the disman- tling of Amenhotep I’s monuments can be envis- The third stage of deconstruction under aged.193 Amenhotep III The third phase of destruction removed nearly everything that Amenhotep I had built on the

190 FIFAO 19, p. 16, pl. 41-44; FIFAO 25, pp. 23-65, ASAE 39, pp. 553-570; ASAE 46, pp. 147-161; ASAE 47, 62. pp. 161-183; ASAE 49, pp. 1-15, 241-267; ASAE 50, pp. 429- 191 ASAE 4, pp. 1-40, 193-226; ASAE 5, pp. 1-43, 265- 442; ASAE 51, pp. 549-572; ASAE 52, pp. 229-242; ASAE 280. 53, pp. 7-19, 21-42. 192 ASAE 22, pp. 235-260; ASAE 23 pp. 99-138; ASAE 193 Larché, Karnak 12 (Paris: ERC, 2007), pp. 487-488: 24, pp. 53-88; ASAE 26, pp. 119-130; ASAE 28, pp. 114- 8.4. 128; ASAE 29, pp. 133-149; ASAE 31, pp. 81-97; ASAE 32, 194 F. Burgos, F. Larché, La Chapelle Rouge, vol. 2, pp. 235, pp. 97-114; ASAE 37, pp. 173-200; ASAE 38, pp. 567-608; 238, 247-251. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 169 eastern foundations, that is to say at the loca- west side of this enclosure and the reuse of its tion of the so-called “Middle Kingdom” court- blocks in the 3rd Pylon invalidates this hypothesis. yard. Amenhotep III preserved the storerooms It is difficult to imagine what Amenhotep III had of Tuthmosis I which surround the limestone planned to do in the so-called “Middle Kingdom” radier. Later restorations to these magazines courtyard, since it seems to have remained nearly prove that they remained in use until the cult empty until today.195 Like Amenhotep I, Amen- stopped. Since the east face of Hatshepsut’s suite hotep III would thus have been the instigator of has remained very rough, it would seem natural vast disruptions inside the temple of Amun by that Amenhotep III kept in place the enclosure simultaneously dismantling all the monuments wall built along the perimeter of the limestone built west of the 4th Pylon as well as part of the radier, against which this rough face abutted. sanctuary of Amun that occupied the so-called However, the reconstruction of wall C+C’ as the “Middle Kingdom” courtyard.

195 H. Chevrier, ASAE 47 (1947), p. 177: “La thèse fabrication de la chaux semble ici être en défaut, car de nom- généralement admise de l’exploitation du calcaire pour la breux blocs de ces matériaux sont restés sur le terrain.” 170 françois larché

Addendum: restitué encore plus au sud, tout semble indiquer La destruction comparée des temples du Moyen que la fondation du mur en calcaire est complète- Empire à Tôd, Médamoud et Karnak ment indépendante du radier comme le montre d’ailleurs son appareil beaucoup plus soigné. Au temple de Tôd, de nombreux détails ren- Les photographies publiées montrent que cette dent bien improbable la chronologie des étapes fondation est placée uniquement à l’aplomb du de construction du temple telle que l’a proposée mur en calcaire sans aucun lien apparent avec Bisson de la Roque1. S’il a bien remarqué le mur le radier5. La marque de l’appui d’un dallage est en calcaire de Sésostris Ier (h : 3,87 m), qui a été nettement ravalée sur le parement visible des par- partiellement conservé dans le vestibule ajouté par paings en calcaire de cette fondation. On peut y Ptolémée Évergète II, il n’a pas vu que la fonda- restituer de minces dalles en calcaire d’épaisseur tion en calcaire de ce mur était indépendante du constante et parfaitement ajustés sur un remblai, radier, celui dont le démontage a révélé un trésor identiques à celles du temple de Sésostris Ier à Élé- d’Amenhemat II, le fils2 de Sésostris Ier, ainsi que phantine où une dizaine ont été réutilisées, sous de nombreux remplois du Moyen Empire. Pour Hatshepsout et Thoutmosis III, dans la fondation faciliter la description des éléments d’architecture, du temple de Satet. l’orientation du temple sera simplifiée par rapport au Nord géographique : l’entrée ptolémaïque sera Le dallage en grès du radier dite à l’ouest, le naos supposé à l’est, le trésor au Le schéma6 de Bisson de la Roque indique qu’un nord et l’accès moderne au sud. dallage en grès recouvrait le radier. Le sol du temple le plus récent est ainsi placé 37 cm au- 1. Les quatre déconnections visibles entre le radier dessus de celui qui était associé au mur conservé et le mur de Sésostris Ier de Sésostris Ier, ce que montre la trace de l’appui du dallage contre l’assise de réglage en calcaire. La porte détruite au sud du mur en calcaire de Comme le constate très justement Bisson de la Sésostris Ier Roque, le dallage en grès est ainsi postérieur au Une ancienne porte a été partiellement détruite à mur de Sésostris Ier. Cependant, il fait l’hypothèse l’extrémité sud du mur en calcaire3 de Sésostris Ier que le dallage associé au mur de Sésostris Ier aurait afin d’y appuyer l’angle sud-ouest de l’ajout ptolé- été l’assise en calcaire qui supporte le dallage en maïque. Le jambage sud de cette porte a disparu grès alors que les photographies montrent que alors que son jambage nord est resté intact à l’ex- cette assise est construite de blocs remployés ception de la feuillure de butée du vantail, qui a (même s’ils ne sont pas décorés), plus ou moins été soigneusement arasée (l : 36 cm) de façon à bien appareillés, et dont le lit d’attente n’est pas pouvoir y appuyer les assises ptolémaïques. La assez bien ravalé pour avoir été un sol7. Ces blocs destruction partielle de ces assises en grès a fait n’ont rien en commun avec les belles dalles en apparaître l’embrasure lisse du jambage nord ainsi calcaire du temple de Sésostris Ier à Éléphantine. que l’orifice du loquet4 aménagée le long de la Rien n’assure donc que cette 3e assise du radier feuillure arasée. ait fait office de dallage au Moyen-Empire. En restituant une largeur minimale au passage disparu de cette porte, le jambage sud aurait dû L’alignement du côté ouest du radier se trouver au moins 2 coudées plus au sud, ce qui Le plan et une photographie8 montrent claire- le place bien au-delà de l’alignement du radier ment que le côté ouest du radier, en particulier démonté par Bisson de la Roque. L’angle sud- son angle nord-ouest , n’est absolument pas aligné ouest du temple de Sésostris Ier devant être alors avec la fondation du mur de Sésostris Ier, cette

1 F. Bisson de la Roque, Tôd (1934 à 1936), FIFAO 17 est visible sur un jambage de la porte de Médamoud recon- (Le Caire: IFAO, 1937). struite au musée en plein air de Karnak. Ibid., F. Bisson 2 Que le trésor soit au nom d’Amenhemat II rend aber- de la Roque, pl. III. rant l’attribution, par Bisson de la Roque, du radier à son 5 Ibid., p. 6, fig.4 et Pl. XIV. père Sésostris Ier. 6 Ibid., p. 11, fig. 7. 3 F. Bisson de la Roque, Tôd (1934 à 1936), p. 13, fig. 7 Ibid., p. 12, fig. 8 et Pl. XIV-1. 9 et Pl. I. 8 Ibid., pl. I et XIV-1. 4 Observation d’Antoine Garric. Un orifice semblable senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 171 dernière étant installée beaucoup plus à l’ouest. logiquement être couronné d’un tore surmonté Cet indice montre que, encore une fois, le mur et d’une corniche. Cependant, la frise de Khekerou, le radier sont structurellement déconnectés. gravée à ce niveau sur le parement opposé, cou- ronne une décoration en creux qui n’incite guère Le sectionnement de la fondation du mur en à y poser une couverture. Peut-on alors imaginer calcaire de Sésostris Ier une assise supplémentaire sculptée d’un tore sur- Toujours visible, l’assise de réglage de cette fonda- monté d’une corniche sur ses deux parements tion est construite d’épais parpaings traversants, opposés ? en calcaire, parfaitement joints et débordant de L’extrémité sud de l’inscription en colonnes est part et d’autre du mur épais de 2 coudées. Un bordée par le motif vertical du cobra s’enroulant sondage permettrait de mieux étudier cette fon- autour de la tige centrale d’une plante héraldique9, dation et d’en compter les assises. L’extrémité ce motif décorant ainsi le chambranle gauche de sud conservée du mur de Sésostris Ier tourne à porte démantelée qui a été décrite plus haut. Au angle droit vers l’est ce qui est confirmé égale- nord de la porte axiale, le parement en calcaire ment sur l’assise de réglage de la fondation. Ce est beaucoup moins lisible mais on observe10, au mur perpendiculaire ne conserve qu’une très niveau du dallage ptolémaïque, un alignement de petite surface de son parement nord où l’on voit ankh et de was, surmonté d’un lion couché qui la bordure segmentée du décor et la queue d’un pourrait fort bien avoir supporté le trône du roi personnage, probablement le dieu si l’on reste assis sous son dais, comme on le voit à Karnak cohérent avec la décoration du parement perpen- deux fois sur le mur du texte de la Jeunesse et diculaire. Comme l’indique les traces de coins également sur l’angle du portique de Sésostris Ier. éclateurs, la fondation du refend a été sectionnée On aurait alors ici l’habituelle scène du roi assis à moins d’un mètre de l’angle avec le mur con- devant un grand texte en colonnes. servé. La logique constructive imposant que cette fondation ait été démantelée après les assises en Le parement oriental élévation qu’elle supportait, il est certain que ce Il y avait au moins six scènes sur lesquelles le refend a été volontairement détruit à un moment roi Sésostris Ier se dirige vers le nord. Ces scènes de l’histoire du temple. Aucun sondage stratigra- sont couronnées d’une frise de Khekerou indi- phique n’ayant été réalisé entre le radier et cette quant le sommet du mur mais la décoration en fondation, il n’est alors possible d’estimer la date creux n’incite pas à y faire reposer une couverture. de cette destruction que par un raisonnement sur Seules quatre scènes sont partiellement conservées les vestiges architecturaux. dont deux de fondation : – sur la scène 1, à gauche, coupée par une petite 2. L’élévation conservée du mur en calcaire de porte ouverte à l’époque ptolémaïque, seules les Sésostris Ier jambes du roi apparaissent ; – sur les scènes 2, le roi face au dieu creuse la Le mur conservé de Sésostris Ier a été largement fosse de fondation du temple ; découpé dans sa partie médiane sous Ptolémée – sur la scène 3, le roi face au dieu jette des Évergète II qui y fit installer une nouvelle porte grains dans la fosse ; axiale. La décoration primitive de Sésostris Ier a – les scènes 4 et 5 ont été détruites par la nou- alors disparu de la partie centrale des deux pare- velle porte axiale, à l’exception de la queue du ments mais les vestiges conservés des parties laté- dieu de la scène 5 ; rales, au nord et au sud de cette nouvelle porte, – sur la scène 6, le roi consacre des offrandes permettent de la reconstituer partiellement. au dieu ; – on ne sait si d’autres scènes suivaient, le mur Le parement ouest étant détruit. Il faudrait faire un sondage vers le Une grande inscription gravée en creux, en colon- nord, dans l’alignement du mur, pour observer nes, couvrait la partie du parement actuellement les vestiges d’une éventuelle fondation ou de sa au sud de la porte axiale. Le sommet du mur con- tranchée. servé correspond au haut du texte qui aurait dû

9 Observation de Ch. Van Siclen. 10 Observation de Ch. Van Siclen. 172 françois larché

La direction du roi coudées. Il a également extrait une architrave en Au sud de la nouvelle porte axiale, le sens de la calcaire d’Amenhemat Ier, ce qui lui fait conclure marche de Sésostris Ier est à l’inverse de celle de que le radier est l’œuvre de son fils Sésostris erI . Ce Ptolémée Évergète II sur les assises en grès ajou- dernier aurait ainsi remployé les éléments déman- tées au-dessus du mur en calcaire : Sésostris Ier telés des monuments de ses prédécesseurs, dont se dirige vers la porte comme pour sortir alors son père, dans un radier de fondation sur lequel qu’il devrait aller dans le sens contraire, vers le il aurait construit son nouveau sanctuaire. sud. Curieusement, il se dirige vers le nord de Cependant de nombreuses incohérences part et d’autre de l’axe est-ouest, ce qui proscrit apparaissant dans cette hypothèse, il est indis- l’existence d’une porte axiale sous son règne. pensable d’évaluer à nouveau la date de con- Cette disposition indique que, au Moyen Empire, struction du radier qui, s’il n’est certainement Sésostris Ier arrivait du sud pour se diriger vers pas l’oeuvre de Sésostris Ier pour les évidentes le nord où devait se trouver le naos. Cependant, raisons d’architecture qui viennent d’être expli- ce dernier aurait pu aussi être à l’est car aucun quées, peut difficilement lui être antérieur pour indice d’architecture ne permet encore d’affirmer plusieurs raisons : que le naos se trouvait à l’aplomb du trésor – d’abord, le trésor découvert sous le côté nord d’Amenhemat II découvert dans le radier. du radier est au nom d’Amenhemat II, le fils de Sésostris Ier, et il semble bien en place, soigneuse- Le refend perpendiculaire aux assises en grès ment enfoui sous une dalle en calcaire ; Les assises en grès, ajoutées sur la partie sud du – ensuite, comme le radier ne peut être l’oeuvre mur en calcaire, possèdent l’accroche d’un refend de Sésostris Ier, comment expliquer le remploi perpendiculaire dont aucune trace n’existe sur dans le radier de deux blocs au nom de son père le mur de Sésostris Ier puisque la décoration des Amenhemat Ier sans ajouter un remaniement scènes de fondation 2 et 3 est continue à l’aplomb intermédiaire entre les deux règnes. En effet, il du refend disparu. Invisible sur le mur en calcaire, faut bien qu’un roi ait remployé, dans l’assise ce refend contre lequel le mur ptolémaïque en grès inférieure du radier11, l’architrave en calcaire s’est appuyé, s’il est obligatoirement postérieur à d’Amenhemat Ier (h : 40cm, L : 174cm) et posée Sésostris Ier, ne peut être qu’antérieur à Ptolémée sur l’assise inférieure la base d’une statue en gran- Évergète II. De nombreux blocs épars de la 18e ite de ce roi ; dynastie ayant été découverts, souvent remployés – enfin, rien n’empêche les éléments des 12e et dans les fondations ptolémaïques, il est probable 13e dynasties découverts sous l’église ou dans son qu’au Nouvel Empire un temple avait déjà rem- dallage de provenir du radier. Ainsi, les jambages placé celui du Moyen Empire. Ce remplacement et le linteau en granite d’une porte de Sésostris n’a pu intervenir qu’au moment de la construc- Ier (h : 4,10m L : 2,80m, l passage: 1,35 m) ont été tion du radier. remployés dans le dallage de l’église avec de nom- breux fragments en calcaire et granite au nom de 3. Nouvelle datation du radier ce roi. Deux fragments seraient peut-être même au nom d’Amenhemat II (calcaire inv. 1337 et Bisson de la Roque a publié un inventaire précis granite inv. 1647). des remplois qu’il a découvert au moment du – un fragment en calcaire est remployé en fon- démontage du radier. Ainsi, il a décompté 28 blocs dation d’un mur ptolémaïque12. aux noms de Montouhotep III et Montouhotep Il semble désormais beaucoup plus logique de V. Du premier, il a des éléments en grès (frag- dater ce radier du Nouvel Empire et, dans cette ments de colonnes octogonales Ø 45 cm, trois perspective, il serait intéressant d’examiner à nou- portes avec deux linteaux), en calcaire (parements veau l’outil en fer trouvé dans le sable de fondation en relief dans le creux et un élément de porte) (inv. 2108) avec un petit taureau en calcaire prob- et un socle de statue en granite. Du second, il ablement doré. D’autre part, le tracé du temple décrit les éléments de deux monuments en cal- observé par Bisson de la Roque, dessiné dans le caire décoré en relief, dont une dalle de plafond limon et répété sur les assises du radier, semble permettant de restituer une chapelle large de 3 bien trop ténu pour ne pas être subjectif.

11 F. Bisson de la Roque, Tôd (1934 à 1936), p. 64 et 12 Ibid., fig. 65. 104, inv. 2138. senwosret i’s portico and of some structures of amenhotep i at karnak 173

Une hypothèse plus raisonnable serait de pro- 4. Conclusion poser une clôture (en raison de la décoration en creux sur ses deux parements) en calcaire constru- Une situation similaire existe à Médamoud où ite par Sésostris Ier pour entourer un ensemble de deux radiers de fondations ont été identifiés par petites chapelles construites par ses prédécesseurs. Bisson de la Roque13. Celui du Moyen Empire a La porte en granite serait alors restituée dans l’axe conservé sa première assise posée sur un lit de du mur perpendiculaire à celui encore en place. sable et l’angle sud-est de la seconde et dernière L’accès principal au temple pourrait être la porte assise ainsi qu’une porte en granite au nom de dont le jambage nord est encore en place dans le Sésostris III, dont le seuil est encore en place. mur conservé de Sésostris Ier. Le temple de Satet Ce radier est constitué de blocs en calcaire dont construit par ce roi à Éléphantine possède une aucun ne semble être en remploi, contrairement disposition identique, sa porte d’accès n’étant au radier du Nouvel Empire dont les blocs con- pas axiale mais placée à droite de la façade, après stitutifs sont tous des blocs du Moyen Empire un grand texte en colonnes. À Tôd, la clôture remployés. Comme à Tôd, le temple du Nouvel et ses chapelles auraient alors été détruites à la Empire à Médamoud s’ouvre à l’ouest vers le 18e dynastie, à l’exception du mur toujours en Nil alors que celui de Sésostris III s’ouvre au place, et un nouveau temple avec une nouvelle nord, c’est-à dire à l’inverse de celui de Sésostris orientation vers le Nil aurait été construit comme Ier à Tôd, comme si les naos des deux temples le laisse supposer les nombreux blocs épars de tournaient le dos à Karnak. Cette inversion est cette période. Le radier aurait ainsi été construit peut-être liée à la position de Karnak entre Tôd au Nouvel Empire avec le trésor d’Amenhemat et Médamoud, sur la rive orientale du Nil, Tôd II pieusement conservé à l’aplomb probable de étant au sud et Médamoud au nord. l’ancien naos. Grâce aux exemples des radiers des trois tem- ples de Karnak, Tôd et Médamoud, on peut con- clure que les radiers et les fondations supportant les temples du Moyen Empire étaient faits de blocs en calcaire sans aucun remploi, alors que ceux du Nouvel Empire n’étaient faits que de blocs prove- nant du démontage de sanctuaires plus anciens.

13 F. Bisson de la Roque, Medamoud, FIFAO 8, (Le Caire: IFAO, 1931), pl. IV 174 françois larché the land of ramesses 175

THE LAND OF RAMESSES

Donald B. Redford Pennsylvania State University

It is with a sense of great personal loss that I dedi- word-final position with the resultant reduction cate this short piece to the memory of one who of the -a- to a shewa, “ĕ”.6 Moreover the gravi- was more than a colleague—a friend with whom tation of the stress has reduced the secondary I shared so many interests, not least the love of stress on the first syllable, and has occasionally opera. May his soul find eternal rest. introduced a euphonic–p–.7 This is the distorted The appearance of the name “Raamses” in vocalization which the Hebrew reflects, not that the Biblical account of the Sojourn and Exodus of the original Bronze Age pronunciation. In the presents us with a conundrum.1 The original Bronze Age the equivalence of Egyptian š/s with ;is standard, as one would expect ש pronunciation, Ri-a-ma-se-sa, betrays an N(1) West Semitic + N(2) syntactic pattern, viz. Re-it-is-that-has- and the entry of loanwords into the dialects of the fashioned-him.2 The active participle in N(2) posi- latter can be virtually dated by the adherence to tion bears a stressed long -a- between the first this standard.8 The rendering of Egyptian ś (sin) samekh), however, demonstrates that the) ס and second radicle, thus CVCCe.3 In the 19th by Dynasty the ayin is strong and was reinforced form of the name R-ms-sw entered Hebrew and by a pathah furtive, as well as, in one case, a pre- other West Semitic languages no earlier than the formative -alif.4 But Greek transcriptions, such end of the 8th Cent. bc,9 as no certain examples as Ραμεσσ ῆ, ΡαμέσσηϚ, ΡαμεσήϚ and ΡαμεσσήϚ5 of the equivalence ś/š with Hebrew samekh occur show that by the mid-First Millennium bc the before this time.10 accent had shifted from the participial form to

Num. 13:22); šsr) ששי < (?) Sheshy ;שישק < The commentaries are legion. Most take it for granted Su-si-in-qu 1 if the ;נחשתן < cf. From the root NS שיחור < Š-r ;שש < that the name, whether applied to a city or a “land,” derives does derive from the Egyptian root msἰ, the choice משה ultimately from Pi-Ramesses. See in particular J. Vergote, PN Joseph en Égypte (Louvain: Institut Orientaliste, 1959), of the sibilant is an interesting criterion of date of entry. pp. 183-87; C. Westermann, Genesis 37-50 (Neukirchen- 9 The interchange of Egyptianč and West Semitic s Vluyn: Neukirchner Verlag, 1982), pp. 190-92; M. Bietak, (samekh) survives into the 25th Dynasty (J. Hoch, Semitic “Comments on the ‘Exodus,’” in Egypt, Israel, Sinai, ed. Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third A.F. Rainey (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press, 1987), Intermediate Period, [Princeton: Princeton University pp. 163-71; C. Houtman, Exodus I (Kampen: Kok Publishing Press, 1994], p. 368 no. 548); but thereafter samekh is House, 1993), pp. 126-27; J.K. Hofmeier, Israel in Egypt. The used to render Egyptian ś (R. Zadok, BiOr. 48 [1991], 38): Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus tradition (Oxford: cf. C.R. Krahlmalkov, Phoenician-Punic Dictionary (Lou- ;(Osiris=אסר ;Isis =אס) Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 117-19; J.D. Currid, vain: Peeters, 2000), pp. 65, 67 Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, J.B. Segal, Aramaic Texts from North Saqqara (London: =חרסיס) ,pp. 125-29; R. Krauss, Moïse le Pharaon (Paris: Edi- Egypt Exploration Society, 1983), no. 6, 61a ,(1997 PA-dἰ-BAst); H. Ranke, Die altägyptische= פטובסת ;tions du Rocher, 2005), pp. 196-99. r-sA-’Ist n-A-bA.s; the appearance=ענחחבס H. Ranke, Die altägyptische Personennamen I (Gluck- Personennamen, 272:4 2 in the second ס stadt: Verlag J.J. Augustin, 1939), p. 218:6. of the equivalence Egyptian s = Hebrew 3 A. Loprieno, Ancient Egyptian. A Linguistic Introduction quarter of the First Millennium helps date the fixing of ,(”sy, “the Southerner PA-n) פינחס :Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), p. 87. the following forms) sy, “the Mansion of wt-pA-n Jer. 43:7-9 etc; TA-) תחפנחס E. Edel, Der Vertrag zwischen Ramses II von Ägypten 4 .Ki 1) תחפנס ,(”Ki. 17:14; SAw, “Sais 2) סוא ,(”und Hattusili III von Hatti (Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, the southerner 1997), p. 18 and n. 4. 11:19-20; TA- wt-pA nsw, “the king’s mansion,” [but perhaps ;Isa. 30:4) חנס ,([”mt-nsw, “king’s-wife See W.G. Waddell, Manetho (Cambridge: Harvard a garbling of TA 5 .Gen) סתרוס ,(”University Press, 1948), pp. 108, 112, 148, 236. wt-nn-nsw, “Mansion of the king’s child .Ezek) סין ,(”K. Sethe, “Die Vokalisation des Ägyptischen,” ZDMG 10:14, Isa. 11:11 etc.; pA tA rsy, “the Southland 6 ,Ezek. 30:17, Pr-BAst) פיבסת ,(”[p. 190. 30:15, Sin, “Syene [Pelusium ,(1923) 77 7 Cf. Ραμψής: Waddell, Manetho, pp. 150, 244; Ραμψίvιτoς “House of Bast”). The continued vacillation between the in Herod. ii.121, on which see A.B. Lloyd, Herodotus Book two sibilants in Biblical Aramaic (cf. J.D. Bing, American II, a Commentary II (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1988), p. 52. Journal of Ancient History 10 [1985], 118 n. 54) shows that .Gen. 22:24); the distinction had been lost) תחש < Tsy ;שושן < zššn ;כוש < Cf. KAš 8 .Isa. 2:16); 10 J. Hoch, Semitic Words, p. 270; cf. pp. 432-33) שכיות< skἰwt 176 donald b. redford

In Exod. 1:11 the name is applied to a city; reliefs which give prominence to royal sons on the in Gen. 47:11 to a land. While there is nothing battlefield,14 has given birth to an honorific mili- inherently impossible in a royal name occurring tary title?15 “God X of Ramesses”16 occurs with Re, in the designation of a settlement—in fact it is Amun17 Ptah, 18 and Arsaphes.19 A text of the early extremely common—the result is a name com- 4th Century BC locates temples of Re of Ramesses pounded with another element in a bound con- and Ptah of Ramesses on the eastern river, i.e. struction, e.g. nw, “residence,” pr, “house,” wt, the Pelusiac branch of the Nile.20 One inscription “mansion, plantation,” ἰnbw, “walled fort,” and so of the same period significantly links “Amun of on. In the case of Pr-R-ms-sw A-ntw, “The House Ramesses” with Pr-R-ms-sw.21 Archaeologically of Ramesses, Great of Victories,” with which the it is impossible that the reference here is to the city of Exod. 1:11 is often identified,11 one would 19th Dyn. Residence; but the god’s qualification expect pr, “house,” to survive in the pronuncia- “... of Ramesses” shows a surviving cult form, of tion, and in the vast majority of cases in which royal patronage which may well go back to the the town is cited this is indeed the case. It used city of Ramesses the Great, and the specific divine to be maintained12 in defense of the identification forms honored within it. with Pἰ-R-ms-sw that the latter dropped out of The presence of “Ramesses” in a compound usage after the Ramesside era; and that therefore indicating a place is of some importance. In the its presence in the Exodus tradition must prove Late Period Pr-R-ms-sw does indeed occur with historical authenticity. But that is not strictly true: the variant wt (nsw) R-ms-sw “the Mansion “Ramesses” does appear sporadically in the 22nd (i.e. temple) of King Ramesses.”22 It is uncer- Dynasty and later. tain whether a specific cult seat dedicated to the Occurrences fall under three heads: (a) in the memory and worship of the king existed some- expression “King’s-son of Ramesses,” (b) in the where in Egypt in the Late Period, or whether the compound Pr-R-ms-sw, “House of Ramesses,” king enjoyed a “guest cult” in several temples. and (c) in the expression “God X of Ramesses.” The fact is that TA wt R-ms-sw, “the Mansion of In the first it is not immediately apparent, nor Ramesses,” was a known form in the six centuries necessary to conclude, that the allusion is to a from the 24th Dynasty to Ptolemaic times. Now (Pr)-R-ms-sw. The dozen or so examples of this during this span of time tA wt yielded a pronun- title occur in the epithets of military officers,13 but ciation θω,23 while “land,” tA in Egyptian was pro- they are too few and isolated to permit us to see in nounced to in Sahidic, θo or θω in Old Coptic and their bearers the literal descendants of Ramesses Bohairic.24 What has happened is clear: an original the Great. Might it be that the Ramesside war TA wt R-ms-sw, “The Mansion of Ramesses,” has

11 See Hoffmeier,Israel in Egypt, pp. 116-19 and 20 E. Naville, Bubastis (London: Kegan Paul, 1891), passim. pl. 46B. 12 H.H. Rowley, From Joseph to Joshua (Oxford: Oxford 21 Chevereau, Prosopographie des cadres militaires égyp- University Press, 1950), p. 33, n. 1. tiennes de la Basse Époque, 166f, no. 239; C. Zivie-Coche, 13 P-M. Chevereau, Prosopographie des cadres mili- Tanis. Statues et autobiographies de dignitaires (Paris, 2004), taires égyptiennes de la Basse Époque (Paris: n.p., 1985), pp. 114-16 (n). pp. 258-59. 22 Cairo 22054 (= A. Kamal, Stèles ptolemaïques et 14 S.C. Heinz, Die Feldzugsdarstellungen des neuen Reiches romaines, [Cairo: IFAO, 1904-05], pl. 17). For wt R-ms-sw (Vienna: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wis- alone, see E. Brugsch, Dictionnaire géographique de l’Égypte senschaften, 2001); cf. E. Feucht, Das Kind im alten Ägypten ancienne (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1879), p. 1135; M.-L. Buhl, (Frankfurt: Campus Verlag, 1995), pp. 446-47. The Late Egyptian Anthropoid Stone Sarcophagi (Copenha- 15 See the extended discussion with references in gen: Nationalmuseet Skrifter, 1959), pl. V and Fa 16 (from P. Collombert, “Les ‘fils royaux de Rameses’: une nouvelle Abydos and Saqqara), and the “Athens” stela of Tefnakhte: hypothèse,” GM 151 (1996), pp. 23-36. J. Yoyotte, “Les principautés du Delta au temps de l’anarchie 16 Cf. A. Moret, Annales du Musée Guimet XXXII (1909), libyenne (Études d’histoire politique),” Mélanges Maspero p. 142, pl. 64. IV (Cairo: IFAO, 1961), end plate. 17 Berlin 6764 (Günther Roeder, Aegyptische Inschrif- 23 Cf. Wb. III, 1; W. Erichsen, Demotisches Glossar ten aus dem Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, [Leipzig: (Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1954), p. 284; W. Wes- J.C. Heinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1924], p. 307). tendorf, Koptisches Handwörterbuch (Heidelberg: Carl Winter 18 Ibid. Universitätsverlag , 1977), p. 352; A. Calderini, Dizionario 19 P. Tresson, “L’inscription de Chechanq Ier au Musée dei nomi geografici e topografici dell’ Egitto Greco Romano du Caire : un frappant exemple d’impôt progressif en mat- Suppl. 2 (Bonn: Habelt, 1996), p. 74: Θῷλθις (< wt-A- ière religieuse,” Mélanges Maspero I (Cairo: IFAO, 1934), dwy), Θῷσβις (< tA wt-ἰsbt): P. Wilson, Ptolemaic Lexikon, p. 820, line 28. [Louvain: Peeters, 1993], p. 627). 24 Westendorf, ibid., 219. the land of ramesses 177 given rise in the Delta to a false back-formation alleged “Land of Ramesses” in Genesis has no through Hörfehler, viz. tA R-ms-sw, “the Land of more historicity than the “Land of Oz.” Ramesses,” both pronounced T(h)o-Ramesses. The 178 donald b. redford bibliography of william j. murnane 179

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WILLIAM J. MURNANE

1969 Review of M. Vallogia. Recherches sur les “messagers” With E. Brovarski. “Inscriptions from the Time of Nebhep- (wpwtyw) dans les sources égyptiennes profanes. JNES etre II at Abisco.” Serapis 1: pp. 11-33. 38: pp. 305-306. Review of R.D. Anderson. Catalogue of the Egyptian Antiqui- 1970 ties in the British Museum. Vol. 3. Musical Instruments; “Further Light on the Conspiracy of Sejanus: Suet Tib xlviii, L. Manniche. Musical Instruments from the Tomb of 2.” Serapis 2: p. 36. Tutankhamūn; and L. Maniche. Ancient Egyptian “The Hypothetical Coregency Between Amenhotep III and Musical Instruments. JNES 38: pp. 304-305. Akhenaton: Two Observations.” Serapis 2: pp. 17- Review of W. Helck. Das Bier im alten Ägypten. JNES 38: 21. pp. 137-138.

1971 1980 “Once Again Dates for Tuthmosis III and Amenhotep II.” United with Eternity: A Concise Guide to the Monuments at The Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Medinet Habu. Cairo: American University in Cairo Columbia University, New York 3: pp. 1-7. Press. “Unpublished Fragments of Hatshepsut’s Historical In- 1972 scription from Her Sanctuary at Karnak.” Serapis 6: “The ‘King Ramasses’ of the Medinet Habu Procession of pp. 91-102. Princes.” JARCE 9: pp. 121-131. Review of E.A. Ibrahim. The Chapel of the Throne of Re of Edfu. JNES 39: p. 326. 1975 Review of R. Hanke. Amarna Reliefs aus Hermopolis. BiOr “The Earlier Reign of Ramesses II and His Coregency with 37: pp. 47-50. Sety I.” JNES 34: pp. 153-190. Review of E. Hornung. Das Buch der Anbetung des Re im “A Note on the Personnel of the Sinai Expeditions in the Westen (Sonnenlitanei) nach den Versionen des Neuen Reign of Amenemmes III.” GM 15: pp. 27-33. Reiches. JNES 39: p. 174. 1976 1981 “The Earlier Reign of Ramesses II: Two Addenda.” GM 19: pp. 41-43. With H.H. Nelson. The Great Hypostyle Hall in the Temple “A Hitherto Unpublished Funerary Cone.” GM 19: pp. 39- of Amun at Karnak, Volume I, Part 1. The Wall Reliefs. 40. OIP 106. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. “The Accession Date of Sethos I.” Serapis 3: pp. 23-33. “In Defense of Middle Kingdom Double Dates.” BES 3: pp. 73-82. 1977 “Paintings from the Tomb of Nakht at Thebes.” Field Ancient Egyptian Coregencies. SAOC 40. Chicago: University Museum of Natural History Bulletin 52, No. 10 of Chicago Press. (November 1981): pp. 13-25. “On the Accession Date of Akhenaton.” In Studies in Honor “The Sed Festival: A Problem in Historical Method.” of George R. Hughes. January 12, 1977, eds. J.H. John- MDAIK 37: pp. 369-376. son and E.F. Wente, pp. 163-167. SAOC 39. Chicago: Review of D. Wildung. Egyptian Saints: Deification in Phara- University of Chicago Press. onic Egypt. JNES 40: pp. 142-143. “Tutankhamun and the Fall of the Eighteenth Dynasty.” Review of H. Rosellini. Monumenti dell’Egitto e della Nubia. Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin 48.4 (April JNES 40: pp. 67-68. 1977): pp. 6-18. Review of Oriental Institute. The 1905-1907 Breasted Expe- Review of E. Edel and S. Wenig. Die Jahreszeitenreliefs aus ditions to Egypt and the Sudan: A Photographic Study. dem Sonnenheiligtum des Königs Ne-user-re. JNES 36: JNES 40: pp. 68-69. p. 76. Review of G.T. Martin. The Royal Tomb of El-Amarna. Vol. 1982 1. The Objects. JNES 36: pp. 306-308. With L. Bell, and B. Fishman. “The Epigraphic Survey Review of P.H. Schulze, Herrin beider Länder, Hatschepsut. (Chicago House).” NARCE 118 (Summer 1982): BiOr 34: pp. 177-178. pp. 3-23. With L. Bell and B. Fishman. “The Epigraphic Survey (Chi- 1978 cago House). Part 2: The Institute Function of Chicago Review of J.L. Foster. Love Songs of the New Kingdom. JNES House (With Special Reference to the 1980-81 Field 37: pp. 363-365. Season).” NARCE 119 (Fall 1982): pp. 6-13. Review of L. Habachi. The Second Stela of Kamose and “Opetfest.” In Lexikon der Ägyptologie 4, ed. W. Helck, His Struggle against the Hyksos Ruler and His Capital. pp. 574-579. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. JNES 37: pp. 277-278. Review of B. Van de Walle. La Chapelle funéraire de Neferirtenef; G.T. Martin. The Tomb of Hetepka and 1979 Other Reliefs and Inscriptions from the Sacred Animal “The Bark of Amun on the Third Pylon at Karnak.” JARCE Necropolis, North Saqqara, 1964-1973; and M. Bietak 16: pp. 11-27. and E. Reiser-Haslauer. Das Grab des Anch-Hor, Ober- Review of K.A. Kitchen. Ramesside Inscriptions: Historical sthofmeister der Gottesgemahlin Nitokris, Vol. 1. JNES and Biographical. JNES 38: pp. 140-141. 41: pp. 236-237. 180 bibliography of william j. murnane

Review of H. Goedicke. The Protocol of Neferyt (The Review of E. Martin-Pardey, Eingeweidengefässe; and Prophecy of Neferti). JNES 41: pp. 144-146. K. Martin. Reliefs des Alten Reiches und Verwandte Review of H.D. Schneider. Shabtis: An Introduction to Denkmäler. Vol. 3. JNES 44: p. 163. the History of Ancient Egyptian Funerary Statuettes Review of S. Amer el-Fikey. The Tomb of the Vizier Re-wer with a Catalogue of the Collection of Shabtis in the at Saqqara. JNES 44: p. 244. National Museum of Antiquities at Leiden. JNES 41: pp. 237-238. 1986 Review of J. Samson, Amarna, City of Akhenaten and “Colossal Statue of Tutankhamun from West Thebes (Ori- Nefertiti: Key Pieces from the Petrie Collection; and ental Institute 14088).” Oriental Institute Museum Fea- H.M. Stewart, Egyptian Stelae, Reliefs and Paintings tured Object 5 (Pamphlet series). Chicago: University from the Petrie Collection. JNES 41: pp. 141-146. of Chicago Press. Review of S. Ratié, La Reine Hatchepsout, sources et Égypte: Louqsor Temple du Ka Royal. Dossiers Histoire problèmes. BiOr 39: pp. 54-56. et Archeologie 101 (January 1986): “La grande fête Review of W. Decker. Annotierte Bibliographie zum Sport d’Opet,” pp. 22-25; “Pour Visiter le Temple,” pp. 12-16; im alten Ägypten. JNES 41: p. 237. “Redecouverte et degagement du temple,” pp. 16-20; “Les cartouches trompeurs du temple de Louqsor,” 1983 pp. 48-49; “Le mystere de la naissance divine du roi,” The Penguin Guide to Ancient Egypt. Harmondsworth: pp. 54-57; with L. Bell. “La presence divine à Louqsor,” Penguin. pp. 60-61. Review of A. Barucq and F. Daumas. Hymnes et prières de “James Henry Breasted.” In Dictionary of Literary Biog- l’Egypte ancienne. JNES 41: p. 78. raphy, Volume 47: American Historians, 1866-1912, Review of D. Wildung. Fünf Jahre: Neuerwerbungen der ed. C.N. Wilson, pp. 53-64. Detroit: Gale Research Staatlichen Sammlung Ägyptischer Kunst München, Company. 1976-1980; A. Niccacci and G. Kloetzli. Hyksos Scar- Review of D. Arnold. The Temple of Mentuhotep at Deir abs; and J. Bulté. Catalogue des collections égyptiennes el-Bahari; and D. Arnold. Der Tempel des Königs Men- du Musée National de Céramique à Sèvres. JNES 42: tuhotep von Deir el-Bahari. Vol. 3. Die königlichen pp. 322-323. Beigaben. JNES 45: pp. 307-308. Review of K. Martin. Reliefs des Alten Reiches, Teil 1; E. Martin-Pardey. Plastik des Alten Reiches, Teil 2; 1987 and K. Martin. Reliefs des Alten Reiches, Teil 2. JNES With B. Williams and T.J. Logan, “The Metropolitan 42: pp. 232-233. Museum Knife Handle and Aspects of Pharaonic Imag- Review of K.A. Kitchen. Ramesside Inscriptions: Historical ery Before Narmer, Appendix C: The Gebel Sheikh and Biographical. Vol. 2, 24 fascs.; Vol. 3, 28 fascs.; Soleiman Monument: Epigraphic Remarks.” JNES 46: Vol. 4, 15 fascs. JNES 42: p. 323. pp. 282-285. Review of R. David. The Mysteries of the Mummies. JNES “The ‘First Occasion of the Discovery’ of Akhet-Aten.” SAK 42: p. 78. 14: pp. 239-246. Review of R. David. The Macclesfield Collection of Egyptian Review of C. Andrews. Catalogue of the Egyptian Antiqui- Antiquities. JNES 42: pp. 156-157. ties in the British Museum. Vol. 6. Jewellery I: From Review of R. Krauss. Das Ende der Amarnazeit. Orientalia the Earliest Times to the Seventeenth Dynasty. JNES 52: pp. 274-284. 46: pp. 143-144. Review of R.A. Parker, J. Leclant, and J.-C. Goyon. The Review of H.M. Stewart. Egyptian Reliefs and Paintings from Edifice of Taharqa by the Sacred Lake of Karnak. JNES the Petrie Collection. Pt. 3. The Late Period, with a 42: p. 233. Supplement of Miscellaneous Inscribed Material. JNES 46: p. 160. 1984 Review of H. Wild. La Tombe de Nefer-hotep (I) et Neb-nefer “The El-Amarna Boundary Stelae Project: A Preliminary à Deir el Medina [No. 6] et autres documents les con- Report.” NARCE 128 (Winter 1984): pp. 40-52. cernant. Vol. 2; and A.-P. Zivie. La Tombe de Pached “The Princess Who Never Was.” Oriental Institute News à Deir el Medineh [No. 3]. JNES 46: pp. 236-237. and Notes 93: pp. 1-4. Review of A. El-Sayed Mahmud, A New Temple for Hathor 1988 at Memphis. JEA 70: pp. 168-169. Review of D.B. Redford. Akhenaten: The Heretic King. JNES Review of E.B. Pusch. Das Senet-Brettspiel in alten Ägypten, 47: pp. 47-48. Teil 1.1-2. JNES 43: p. 168. Review of H. Jaritz, H. Maehler, and K.-T. Zauzich. Ele- Review of H.M. Stewart. Egyptian Stelae, Reliefs and Paint- phantine. Vol. 3. Die Terrassen vor den Tempel des ings from the Petrie Collection. Pt. 2. Archaic Period to Chnum und der Satet: Architektur und Deutung. JNES Second Intermediate Period. JNES 43: pp. 167-168. 47: p. 48. Review of H. Ricke, L. Habachi, and G. Haeny. Untersu- 1985 chungen im Totentempel Amenophis’ III. BiOr 45: The Road to Kadesh: A Historical Interpretation of the pp. 119-120. Battle Reliefs of King Seti I at Karnak. SAOC 42. Chi- Review of J. Osing, M. Moursi, D.O. Arnold, O. Neugebauer, cago: University of Chicago Press. R.A. Parker, D. Pingree, and M.A. Nur-el-Din. Denk- “False Doors and Cult Practices Inside Luxor Temple.” mäler der Oase Dachla aus dem Nachlass von Ahmed In Mélanges Gamal Eddin Mokhtar II, ed. P. Posen- Fakhry. JNES 47: p. 51. er-Kriéger, pp. 135-148. Cairo: Institut Français Review of J. van Seters. In Search of History: Historiography d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire. in the Ancient World and the Origins of Biblical His- “Tutankhamun on the Eighth Pylon at Karnak.” VA 1: tory. JNES 47: pp. 131-133. pp. 59-68. Review of K. Sethe and W. Helck. Urkunden der 18. Dynas- Review of D. Valbelle. Satis et Anoukis. JNES 44: p. 244. tie. JARCE 25: pp. 243-244. bibliography of william j. murnane 181

Review of K.P. Kuhlmann. Materialien zur Archäologie Dictionary vol. 2, ed. D.N. Freedman, pp. 348-353. und Geschichte des Raumes von Achmim. JNES 47: New York: Doubleday. pp. 50-51. Review of L.L. Giddy. Egyptian Oases: Bahariya, Dakhla, Review of M. Bietak, E. Reiser-Haslauer. Das Grab des Farafra and Kharga during Pharaonic Times. JNES Anch-Hor. JNES 47: p. 48. 51: pp. 304-305. Review of K.P. Khulmann. Materialien zur Archäologie und Geschichte des Raumes von Achmim. JNES 47: 1993 pp. 50-51. With C.C. Van Siclen. The Boundary Stelae of Akhenaten. London: Kegan Paul International. 1989 “Dans le domaine d’Amon: l’oeuvre d’Amenophis III a “Rhetorical History? The Beginning of Thutmose III’s Karnak et à Louxor.” Amenophis III: L’Égypte à son First Campaign in Western Asia.” JARCE 26: apogée. Dossiers Histoire et Archeologie 180 (March pp. 183-189. 1993): pp. 28-39. Review of A.J. Spalinger. Aspects of the Military Documents Review of D. Jones. A Glossary of Ancient Egyptian Nautical of Ancient Egypt. JEA 75: pp. 259-261. Titles and Terms. JNES 52: pp. 234-235. Review of B.G. Trigger, B.J. Kemp, D. O’Connor, and Review of K.A. Kitchen. Ramesside Inscriptions, Historical A.B. Lloyd. Ancient Egypt: A Social History. JNES 48: and Biographical. JNES 52: p. 235. pp. 226-227. Review of L. Manniche. The Wall Decoration of Three Theban Review of M.-A. Bonhême. Les livre des rois de la troisième Tombs (TT 77, 175, and 249). JNES 52: pp. 235-236. periode intermédiaire I, XXIe Dynastie. BiOr 46: pp. 52-53. 1994 Review of W.A. Ward. Essays on Feminine Titles of the With J.P. Allen and J. van Dijk. “Further Evidence for the Middle Kingdom and Related Subjects. JNES 48: Coregency of Amenhotep III and IV. Three Views pp. 225-226. on a Graffito Found at Dahshur.”Amarna Letters 3: Review of L. Balout, C. Roubet. La momie de Ramses II. JNES pp. 26-31, 152. “Egyptian Monuments and Historical Memory.” KMT 5.3 48: p. 74. (Summer 1994): pp. 15-24, 88. 1990 “Nature of the Aten: Akhenaten and his God, Problems The Road to Kadesh: A Historical Interpretation of the Battle and Perspectives.” Amarna Letters 3 (Winter, 1994): Reliefs of King Seti I at Karnak. 2nd Edition, Revised. pp. 33-40. “Too Many High Priests? Once Again the Ptahmoses of SAOC 42. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ancient Memphis.” In For His Ka: Essays Offered in Review of Centre Franco-Égyptien d’Études des Temples Memory of Klaus Baer, ed. D.P. Silverman, pp. 187- de Karnak. Cahiers de Karnak VIII, 1982-1985. BiOr 196. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 47: pp. 89-90. Review of B. Davies. Egyptian Historical Records of the Later Eighteenth Dynasty. JARCE 31: p. 225. 1991 With M. Eaton-Krauss. “Tutankhamun, Ay, and the Avenue 1995 of Sphinxes Between Pylon X and the Mut Precinct at Texts from the Amarna Period in Egypt. Society of Biblical Karnak.” BSEG 15: pp. 31-38. Literature Writings from the Ancient World 5. Atlanta: “Amenhotep, called Huy, Son of Hapu, Servant, Seer, Saint.” Scholars Press. KMT 2.2 (Summer 1991): pp. 9-13, 56-59. “Ramesses I and The Building of the Great Hypostyle Hall Review of C. Aldred. Akhenaten, King of Egypt. JAOS 111: at Karnak Revisited.” Iubilate Conlegae: Egyptological pp. 388-390. Studies in Memory of A.A. Sadek. VA 10: pp. 163- Review C. Hobson. The World of the Pharaohs: A Complete 168. Guide to Ancient Egypt. JNES 50: pp. 159-160. “The : An Overview.” In Civiliza- Review of G.T. Martin. Corpus of Reliefs of the New Kingdom tions of the Ancient Near East vol. 2, ed. J.M. Sasson, from the Memphite Necropolis and Lower Egypt. Vol. pp. 691-717. New York: Scribners. 1. JNES 50: p. 306. “The Kingship of the Nineteenth Dynasty: A Study in the Review of H. Jacquet-Gordon, Karnak Nord IV: Le trésor de Resilience of an Institution,” In Ancient Egyptian King- er Thoutmosis I . La décoration. BiOr 48: p. 482. ship, eds. D. O’Connor and D. Silverman, pp. 185-215. Probleme der Ägyptologie 9. Leiden: E.J. Brill. 1992 Review of J. Vercoutter. L’Égypte et la vallee du Nil, Vol. 1: With F. Yurco. “Once Again the Date of the New Kingdom Des origines à la fin de L’Ancien Empire, 12000-2000 Pylon at Edfu.” In The Followers of Horus: Studies av. J.-C. JAOS 115: pp. 528-529. dedicated to Michael Allen Hoffman, 1944-1990, eds. R. Friedman and B. Adams, pp. 337-346. Oxford: 1996 Oxbow Press. The Penguin Guide to Ancient Egypt. 2nd edition revised. “Taking It With You: The Problem of Death and Afterlife Harmondsworth: Penguin. in Ancient Egypt.” In Death and Afterlife: Perspec- “Medinet Habu.” In The Dictionary of Art vol. 30, ed. tives of World Religions, ed. H. Obayashi, pp. 35-48. J. Turner, pp. 695-696. London: Grove Press. Contributions to the Study of Religion 33. New York: “Thebes.” In The Dictionary of Art vol. 30, ed. J. Turner, Greenwood Press. pp. 688-690. London: Grove Press. “Two Stelae from Nubia.” In Oriental Institute Nubian Review of M. Schade-Busch, Zur Königsideologie Amenophis’ Expedition, Vol. VI, New Kingdom Remains from III. BiOr 52: pp. 340-341. Cemeteries R, V, K, S, and W at Qustul and Adindan, ed. B.B. Williams, pp. 103-109. Chicago: University of 1997 Chicago Press. “‘Overseer of the Northern Foreign Countries’: Reflections “Egypt, History of the New Kingdom.” In Anchor Bible on the Upper Administration of Egypt’s Empire in 182 bibliography of william j. murnane

Western Asia.” In Essays on Ancient Egypt in Honour Review of P. Grandet. Le Papyrus Harris I (BM 9999). JAOS of Herman Te Velde, ed. J. Van Dijk, pp. 251-258. 119.4: pp. 679-680. Groningen: Styx Publications. “Reconstructing Scenes from the Great Hypostyle Hall in 2000 the Temple of Amun at Karnak.” In Essays in honour “Imperial Egypt and the Limits of Power.” In Amarna Diplo- of Prof. Dr. Jadwiga Lipińska, eds. A. Niwinsky and macy: The Beginnings of International Relations, eds. A. Majewska, pp. 107-117. Warsaw Egyptological Stud- R. Cohen and R. Westbrook, pp. 101-111. Baltimore: ies vol. 1. Warsaw: Polish Academy of Sciences. Johns Hopkins University Press. “Three Kingdoms and Thirty-Four Dynasties.” in Ancient “Soleb Renaissance: Reconsidering the Nebmaatre Temple in Egypt, ed. D. Silverman, pp. 20-39. London: Duncan Nubia.” Amarna Letters 4 (Fall 2000): pp. 6-19, 160. Baird. Review of S. Bickel. Untersuchungen im Totentempel des Review of C. Obsomer. Les campaignes de Sésostris dans Merenptah in Theben. III: Tore und andere wiederver- Hérodote. JNES 56: pp. 304-305. wendete Bauteile Amenophis’ III. BiOr 57: pp. 59-61. Review of J. Zandee. Der Amunhymnus des Papyrus Leiden Review of S. Ikram and A. Dodson. The Mummy in Ancient I 344, Verso. Vols. 1-3. JNES 56: p. 306. Egypt: Equipping the Dead for Eternity. JAOS 120: Review of R. Chadwick, First Civilizations: Ancient Mesopo- pp. 97-98. tamia and Egypt. Biblical Archaeologist 60.3: pp. 187- 188. 2001† “A Forest of Columns: The Karnak Great Hypostyle Hall 1998 Project.” KMT 12.3 (Fall 2001): pp. 50-59. “The Organization of Government.” In Amenhotep III: Per- “The End of the Amarna Period Once Again.” OLZ 96: spectives on His Reign, eds. D. O’Connor and E. Cline, pp. 9-22. pp. 173-221. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, ed. Donald Press. B. Redford. 3 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press: Review of C. Vandersleyen. L’Egypte et la vallee du Nil “Battle of Kadesh,” pp. 166-167; “Coregency,” pp. 307- vol. 2. De la fin de l’Ancien Empire à la fin du Nouvel 311; “Kadesh,” pp. 219-221; “Luxor,” pp. 309-312; Empire. JNES 57: pp. 294-298. “Medinet Habu,” pp. 356-358; “New Kingdom: An Overview,” pp. 519-525. 1999 Review of A.A. Amer, The Gateway of Ramesses IX in the “Luxor, Temple of.” In Encyclopedia of Egyptian Archaeol- Temple of Amun at Karnak. JNES 60: pp. 300-305. ogy, ed. K. Bard, pp. 449-453. London: Routlage. “Medinet Habu.” In Encyclopedia of Egyptian Archaeology, 2003† ed. K. Bard, pp. 481-485. London: Routlage. “Millennium Debate: Response to D.B. Redford.” In “Thebes, Royal Funerary Temples.” In Encyclopedia of Egyp- Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: tian Archaeology, ed. K. Bard, pp. 814-818. London: Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Routlage. Egyptologists Cairo 2000, Vol. 2, History and Reli- “Observations on Pre Amarna Theology During the Earliest gion, eds. Z. Hawass and L.P. Brock, pp. 15-19. Cairo: Reign of Amenhotep IV.” In Gold of Praise: Studies American University in Cairo Press. on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente, eds. Review of R. Caminos. Semna-Kumma. JNES 62: pp. 52- E. Teeter and J. Larson, pp. 303-316. Chicago: Oreintal 53. Institute. “The Return to Orthodoxy.” In Pharaohs of the Sun, eds. 2004† R. Freed, Y. Markowitz, and S. D’Auria, pp. 177-185. With P.J. Brand, J. Karkowski, and R. Jaeschke. “The Boston: Museum of Fine Arts. Karnak Hypostyle Hall Project (1992-2002).”ASAE Review of Centre Franco-Égyptien d’Études des Temples 78: pp. 79-127. de Karnak. Cahiers de Karnak IX; and idem. Cahiers de Karnak X. BiOr 56: pp. 83-84. In Preparation† Review of B.G. Davies. Egyptian Historical Records of the With P.J. Brand. The Great Hypostyle Hall in the Temple Later Eighteenth Dynasty. Fasc. 4-6; and K.A. Kitchen. of Amun at Karnak, Vol. 1, Part 2. The Wall Reliefs: Ramesside Inscriptions Translated and Annotated. Vol. Translations and Commentary. 2. Ramesses II: Royal Inscriptions. JNES 58: pp. 210- With P.J. Brand. The Great Hypostyle Hall in the Temple 212. of Amun at Karnak, Vol. 2. The Gateways. PLATES 184 william j. murnane, 1945–2000

At the wall 1: Bill Murnane collating the Opet Festival reliefs of Tutankhamun in the Colonnade Hall of Luxor Temple.

Bill Murnane reading a newspaper in the courtyard of Chicago House in Luxor.

At the wall 2: Bill Murnane collating inscrip- tions in the Colonnade Hall of Luxor Temple. marc gabolde 185

Fig. 1. An inlay fragment of the ‘sky’-sign discovered among the finds from KV 55 (Egyptian Museum in Cairo).

Fig. 2. Original inscription from the canopic jars of KV 55 with the titulary of Kiya (drawing by the author based upon the reconstruction of Krauss, MDAIK 42 (1986), p. 72, Abbildung 7).

Fig. 3. First step of the erasure of the name of Kiya. Her titulary is hacked out and the ‘sky’ sign is cut. 186 marc gabolde

Fig. 4. Second step of change: the right corner of the ‘sky’-sign is moved to the left and a calcite fragment is inserted in its place.

Fig. 5. Reconstruction of the inscribed panel of the canopic jars from KV 55 in accordance with the identity of the last owner. marc gabolde 187

Fig. 6. Last step of change, the remaining royal cartouches are erased and the ‘sky’-sign removed. Part of the calcite inlay is broken during the process. The names of the god were removed as well to prevent any confusion (the Aten could not have viscera).

Fig. 7. View of the panel after the last change. A fragment of the ‘sky’-sign was left in the tomb and recovered later by the excavators. 188 marc gabolde

Fig. 9. Nomen from pectoral Carter 261 p 1: top, from left to right: enlarged detail scanned from the photography of T.G.H. James and A. De Luca, Toutankhamon (Paris: Gründ, 2000), p. 227; traces of defaced and re-engraved car- touches; traces of re-engraved cartouche; traces of defaced cartouche; bottom, from left to right, drawing of traces of both defaced and re-engraved cartouches; traces of re-engraved cartouche; traces of defaced cartouche; reconstruction of original cartouche.

Fig. 10. Cartouche in Selkis coffinette (Carter 266g = JE 60691) line 7: top: scan from catalogueThe Treasures of Tutankhamun , Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1976, cat. no. 45, between plates 26 and 27; middle left: traces of both first and second engraved names; bottom left: traces of second engraved name; middle right: traces of first engraved name; bottom right: reconstructed first name taking advantage of the reading of Carter 261 p 1. françois larché 189 Fig. 1. 190 françois larché

Fig. 2. françois larché 191

Fig. 3. 192 françois larché

Fig. 4. françois larché 193

Fig. 5. 194 françois larché

Fig. 6. françois larché 195

Fig. 7. 196 françois larché Fig. 8. françois larché 197 Fig. 9. 198 françois larché

Fig. 10. françois larché 199

Fig. 11. 200 françois larché Fig. 12. françois larché 201 Fig. 13. 202 françois larché Fig. 14. françois larché 203 Fig. 15. 204 françois larché

Fig. 16. françois larché 205

Fig. 17. 206 françois larché Fig. 18. françois larché 207

Fig. 19. 208 françois larché Fig. 20. françois larché 209 Fig. 21. 210 françois larché Fig. 22. françois larché 211

Fig. 23. 212 françois larché

Fig. 24. françois larché 213

Fig. 25. 214 françois larché

Fig. 26. françois larché 215

Fig. 27. 216 françois larché

Fig. 28. françois larché 217 Fig. 29. 218 françois larché

Fig. 30. françois larché 219

Fig. 31. 220 françois larché

Fig. 32. françois larché 221

Fig. 33. 222 françois larché Fig. 34. françois larché 223 Fig. 35. 224 françois larché Fig. 36. françois larché 225 Fig. 37. 226 françois larché Fig. 38. françois larché 227

Fig. 39. 228 françois larché

Fig. 40. françois larché 229

Fig. 41. 230 françois larché Fig. 42. index 231

INDEX

Abu Simbel 53 n. 19, 130 Amarah West 132 Abydos 51, 176 n. 22 Amarna. See under Akhetaten (El-Amarna) Temple of Ramesses II, 54-55, 130, 143 Amarna Letters 3, 71 Temple of Seti I 53, 55, 130, 143 n. 28 Amen-(Re). See under Amun (Amun-Re) Accho 133 Amenemhab (official) 132 Aegean 133 Amenemhat. See under Amenemhet Ahmes. See under Ahmose Amenemhet I 4, 103-107, 155, 156 n. 16, 172 Ahmes-Nefertari. See under Ahmose-Nefertari Amenemhet II 170, 172-173 Ahmose 122 Amenemhet III 70 Ahmose-Nefertari (Queen) 116, 123, 164, 168 Amumherkhepeshef (Prince) 53 n. 15 Ahmosis. See under Ahmose Amenhotep I 4, 116, 144 n. 35 Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV) 1-3 deification 67, 123 accession date 3 Karnak monuments 144, 146, 147, 149-150, 163-169 age at accession 13 topographical lists 130 artistic styles & iconography 18 n. 56, 64 n. 78, 75, 78, 80, Amenhotep II 20 n. 71, 116, 122, 131 82, 89-94, 111 n. 17, 116 n. 60 Amenhotep III 3, 14, 39, 74-75, 116, 129-130, 144 n. 35, 105, Barraquer & Simon’s Syndrome 116 n. 60 111 n. 20, 112 n. 22, 116 n. 60, 121 n. 9, 122, 125-126 burial 13 & n. 26 age at death 116 chronology 65-66, 68-72, 75, 77-78, 80, 82 artistic styles & iconography 3, 51-54, 70 n. 22, 71, 80, coregency with Amenhotep III 3, 14, 65-82 89-90, 93-94 coregency with Neferneferuaten 12, 15, 19 n. 66 brothers 20 n. 74 coregency with Nefertiti 18 cartouches usurped by Akhenaten 81, 112 n. 20 coregency with Smenkhkare 9-10, 12 chronology of reign 69-72, 74, 78-79, 81-82 death 10, 12 coregency with Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten 3, 14, 65-82 epithets cult of 66-67, 76 n. 55 waenre 9, 111, 112 n. 20, 113, 117 death 68, 71, 75 n. 53, 79 “great in his lifetime” (aA m aHaw=f) 79 n. 70, 111-112 deification & deification iconography 50 n. 4, 66-67, father of his own granddaughters 14-15 iconoclasm 71-72, 74 nn. 43 & 49 69-70, 71 n. 30, 72-73, 76 n. 55, 78-81, 126 & KV 55 coffin 13 n. 26 deconstruction of older monuments 156 n. 116, 168-169 proscription of Amun 71-72, 74-76, 79, 149, 155 highest regnal year date 69, 78-79 receipt of foreign tribute (durbar) 9, 17 honorific figures of 126-127 royal tomb. See under Akhetaten (royal tomb) monuments usurped by Akhenaten 81-82 shabtis 117 n. 64 mortuary temple. See under Kom el-Heitan succession 3, 9-20 mummy 116 usurpations by 81-82 nomen changed to Nebmaatre by Akhenaten 76 See also: Akhetaten (El-Amarna); Amenhotep III; Nebmaatre, Lord of Nubia 67, 76 n. 55 Amun (Amun-Re); Ankhesenpaaten (Princess); sculpture 52, 72 n. 22 Aten; Baketaten (Princess); coregency; Karnak (Aten Sed festivals (jubilees) 54, 65, 68-74, 77-82 Temples); Kings Valley (KV 55); Kheruef (official); & Smenkhkare 20 Kiya (Wife of Akhenaten); Meketaten (Princess); topographical lists 129-134 Meritaten (Princess); Nefertiti (Queen); Smenkhkare; & Tutankhamun 14, 20, 125-126 Soleb; Tiy/Tiya/Tiye (Queen); Tutankhamun See also: Akhenaten; coregency; Karnak; Kom el-Hettan; Akenkherēs 18 Luxor; Nebmaatre; Soleb; Tiy; Tutankhamun Akhetaten (El-Amarna) 9, 10, 12, 14-15, 53, 70 n. 22, 71, 74 Amenhotep IV. See under Akhenaten n. 46, 76, 78, 82, 91, 112 n. 20, 117 Amenmesse 4, 30-34, 37-39, 45-48, 89 boundary stelae 1-2, 5 See also: Karnak; Luxor; Merenptah; Seti (Prince); Seti II earlier proclamation 13, 17, 71 Amenophis. See under Amenhotep later proclamation 9 n. 2 Amnisos 133 plaster portraits from 116 n. 60 Amon. See under Amun (Amun-Re) royal tomb 3, 12-13, 16 n. 43, 83-88, 115 Amun (Amun-Re) 4, 12, 26, 36, 45 n. 54, 55, 61, 68, 70, room alpha 84, 88 74, 80, 95 nn. 2-3, 96, 107, 114, 118, 121, 126, 133, 141, room gamma 16, 83-84, 86, 88 146-149, 163-168, 176, 180 sarcophagi 13 n. 26, 16 n. 43, 83 n. 1, 115 n. 44 barge 127-128 vandalism 84 bark 122, 126 studio of sculptor Thutmose 93 festivals 121-122 See also: Akhenaten; Aten; Ay/Aya (official); Huya Kamutef 126, 163 (official); Meryre II (official) proscription by Akhenaten 71-72, 74-76, 79, 122, 148-149, Akkadian, 3 155-156 Aksha 131-132 See also: Karnak; Khonsu; Luxor; Mut Alalakh 132 Anatolia. See under Asia Minor Alasiya 133 Ankhesenamun (Queen) 19 n. 66 Aleppo 133 See also: Ankhesenpaaten (Princess) 232 index

Ankhes enpaaten (Princess) 9, 10 n. 5, 13-20, 86 Seti (Prince) 42-45 Ankhesenpaaten Jr. (Princess) 15-18 Tutankhamun 33 Ankh(et)kheperure (Royal Prenomen) 12, 117-129 See also: usurpation See also: Akhenaten; Neferneferuaten; Smenkhkare Deir el-Bahari 121 Antef II 159 n. 130 Hatshepsut Temple 29, 52, 61, 101 n. 24, 142-144 Anubis 74, 143 Monthuhotep II Temple 159 n. 130 Apopi 105 Deir el-Medina 123 Apy (steward) 70 Djehuty. See under Thoth Aram 133 Djeme 101 n. 29 Ardukka 133 Durbar 9, 17 Armant 103-104, 106 Arsaphes 176 Elephantine 103 n. 3, 104, 170 Arzawa 133 Ennead 163, 165 Asasif 66, 76, 177 Epagomenal days 69 Asia Minor 133 Epigraphic Survey (Chicago House) 1-6, 39 n. 41, 42 n. 45, Assur 133 51, 55 n. 22, 56, 61, 68 n. 13, 77-79, 103 n. 1, 107, 125-126, Asy 133 131 Aten/Aton 10 n. 10, 12, 74, 88, 90, 93, 106 n. 20, 111 Eritrea 132 didactic name Ermant. See under Armant cartouches of 10, 71 n. 33, 72, 74 nn. 43 & 46, 110, 111, Ethiopia 132 117 Euphrates 132, 134 changes to 15, 76, 117 nn. 62-63 earlier form 15 n. 33, 73, 79 Galilee 133 later form 9, 71, 76 Geb 53 earliest appearance 71 & n. 30, 74 n. 45 God’s Wife of Amun 99 n. 17, 101 n. 24, 164 iconography 71, 73 See also: Ahmose-Nefertari; Nitocris I jubilees of 71 Gurnah 1, 61 Karnak temples of 3, 19 n. 65, 73-74, 82, 93, 116 n. 60 Great Hypostyle Hall Project. See under Karnak Great Ra-Horakhty-Aton 66, 74 Hypostyle Hall Project See also: Akhenaten; Akhetaten; Ra/Râ/Re Atum 72-74, 90, 160 n. 135 Hammath 133 See also: Ra/Râ/Re Haremhab. See under Horemheb Ay/Aya (official, later King) 14, 33, 35, 123, 126 Hathor 53 n. 15, 74, 90, 97, 142, 155 Hatshepsut 2, 14, 29, 61, 114, 121 n. 9, 141, 143, 170 Baketaten (Princess) 15 n. 33, 85, 87 coregency with Thutmose III 19, 168, 121 n. 9 Bast 175 n. 9 damnatio memoriae 33 n. 20 Barga 133 Karnak monuments 32 n. 16, 106, 143-144, 150, 153, 156, Behdetite 147 161, 167-168 Beth-Shan 133 Chapelle Rouge 2, 138, 141 n. 13, 142, 144-145, 154, Blessing of Ptah 129 159, 162, 164 Bohairic (Coptic) 176 obelisks 106, 144 n. 34, 150 n. 68, 156, 161 n. 146 Boundary Stelae of Akhenaten. See under Akhetaten podium 138-141, 144-145, 150-154, 157-161, 163 (El-Amarna) (boundary stelae) suite 138-141, 144, 145 n. 40, 151, 153, 158-159, 162, 167, 169 Canaan 133 Punt expedition 132 Carchemish 132-133 Re-burial of Thutmose I 114 Chariots 43-44, 49, 52 n. 11, 58-59, 130 See also: Deir el-Bahari; Karnak; Thutmose I; Thutmose II; Cheikh Labib. See under Karnak Thutmose III Chicago House. See under Epigraphic Survey Hatti (Hittites) 3, 19, 38, 133 Coptic 58, 176 Hazor 133 Coregency 2, 5 Hebrew 4, 175 Amenhotep III & Akhenaten 3, 14, 65-82 Heb-Sed. See under Sed Festival chronology 65, 66, 68-72, 75, 77-78, 80, 82 Herakleopolis 105 contradictions 74, 79, 82 Herihor 47 n. 61 Akhenaten & Neferneferuaten 12, 15, 19 n. 66 Hermel 134 Akhenaten & Smenkhkare 9-10, 12 Hermopolis 13-15, 87 coregency stela 10 n. 12 Hittites. See under Hatti Hatshepsut & Thutmose III 19, 168 Horemheb 3, 123 Crete 133 damnatio memoriae & usurpations of Tutankhamun & Ay Cydonia 133 29, 33, 35, 126-127 Cythera 133 topographical lists 130-133 Hor (King) 148 Daxamunzu 19 n. 66 Horus 52, 114, 117 & n. 63, 146, 166 & n. 180 Dalat-Silul (Door of the Locusts) 134 Huya (official) 15 n. 33, 71 & n. 27, 76, 112 n. 20 Damnatio Memoriae 33, 36, 38, 42-48, 115 n. 44 Hypostyle Hall Project. See under Karnak Great Hypostyle Ay 33, 35, 126 Hall Project Amun (Amun-Re) 12, 71-72, 76 nn. 54 & 60 Hatshepsut 33 n. 20 Ikhnaton. See under Akhenaten Kushite kings 95-101 Ineni (official) 114 n. 35 Merenptah 38, 42-48 Intef II. See under Antef II index 233

Irem 130-132 Pylon V 138, 139 n. 4, 142-144, 146-148, 150 & nn. 68, Isis 12 n. 18, 53 n. 15, 74, 175 n. 9 72 & 75, 152, 155-157, 161, 164 n. 166, 166 n. 178 Pylon VI 30, 32 n. 16, 106 n. 26, 129-130, 139, 142, Jezreel 133 146, 150, 157-158, 164-168 Jubilee. See under Sed festival Pylon VII 21, 129-130, 148 n. 58, 148 Pylon VIII 2, 148, 149 n. 62 Ka (kA) 87 n. 14, 88 & n. 16, 119, 126, 148, 167 Pylon IX 106, 145 Kadesh 132-134 Pylon X 106, 116 n. 60 Kamose 147 radier 138-140, 146, 149-163, 167-169, 173 Karnak 1-2, 4-5, 70, 105 Ramesses III temple 23, 55, 61 Akhmenu 32 n. 16, 106, 138-139, 142-143, 149, 152, 154 Temple A 98-101 Amenemhat I’s constructions 103-107, 155, 156 n. 116 Thutmose I monuments 4, 121-123, 138, 139 n. 4, Amenhotep I’s monuments 4, 130, 144-147, 149-150, 143-144, 150, 157, 159, 161, 168-169 163-169 Thutmose III granite barl chapel 164 Annals of Thutmose III 3, 132-133, 135, 139, 141 Thutmose IV bark chapel 142 Aten temples 3, 19 n. 65, 73-74, 82, 93, 116 n. 60 Treasury of Thutmose I 4, 121-123, 155 Hwt-bnbn 73 WADyt-hall 32 n. 16, 142 Ra-Horakhty shrine 71, 74 White Chapel of Senwoseret I 145-146, 147 n. 53, 168 talatat 13, 89-94 See also: Akhenaten; Amenhotep I; Amenmesse; Bubastite gate 129, 134 Amun-(Re); Hatshepsut; Karnak Great Hypostyle calcite bark shrine of Amenhotep I 144 n. 35 Hall Project; Ramesses II; Senwosret I (Karnak Chapelle Rouge bark shrine of Hatshepsut 2, 138, 141 n. monuments); Luxor; Thutmose I; Thutmose III; Topographical Lists; Seti II 13, 142, 144-145, 154, 159, 162, 164 Karnak Great Hypostyle Hall Project 1-2, 4-7, 25 n. 32, 29, “Cheikh Labib” storeroom 103 n. 2, 106 n. 18, 147 n. 54, 89, 139 149, 156, 160 n. 134, 162, 165 Kenset 130-131 Cour de la Cachette 23, 29-31, 33-34, 36-38, 42, 44-48, Khaemwaset (Prince) 145 n. 36, 146-147, 163, 168 Son of Merenptah 43 n. 49, 45 & nn. 53-54 Cour du Moyen Empire. See under Middle Kingdom Son of Ramesses III 53 n. 15 Court (so-called) Khepri 74 eastern temple of Ramesses II 31 n. 16 Kheruef (official) 3, 14, 65-69, 72-80, 89-92, 112, 116 n. 61 excavations 139, 150, 154-155, 158-159, 161 Theban Tomb 192: flooding 145 acrostic hymn 68, 72 gateway of Amenmesse 32 n. 16 artistic style 77-78 Le Grand Château d’Amon 138-139, 142, 144, 147, 149 collapse of roof 72 Great Hypostyle Hall 1-2, 4-7, 25 n. 32, 29, 33 n. 18, 53 n. construction 68, 76-78 19, 89, 139 decoration of 66-69, 72, 74 architraves 21-28 Sed Festival scenes 68-69, 72-74, 77-80 columns 21-25 See also: Akhenaten; Amenhotep III; coregency marginal inscriptions 47 n. 61, Khonsu 128 monuments reused in 145 See also: Karnak (Khonsu Temple) topographical lists 131, 133 Kings’ Valley (KV) 31, 56, 89, 110 war reliefs of Ramesses II 38, 44 KV 8 (Merenptah) 56 war reliefs of Seti I 3 KV 9 (Ramesses VI) 56 See also: Karnak Great Hypostyle Hall Pro ject; Rames - KV 10 (Amenmesse) 31 ses II; Ramesses IV; Ramesses VI; Seti I; Seti II KV 11 (Ramesses III) 55 Hatshepsut suite 138-140, 144, 151, 153, 158-159, 162, KV 14 (Sethnakhte) 56 167, 169 KV 15 (Seti II) 56 Hittite Peace Treaty Stela 38 KV 20 (Hatshepsut) 114 Khonsu Temple 5, 101 n. 24 KV 38 (Thutmose I) 114 Lake Edifice of Taharqa 101 KV 47 (Siptah) 56 Mansion of Nebkhepurure in Thebes 14, 33, 35 KV 55 (Amarna Cache) 3-4, 12-13 Middle Kingdom Court (so-called) 103 n. 6, 106, 138-140, age of mummy 115, 117, 119 148-150, 156 n. 116, 157-159, 169 canopic jars 109-111, 114 Mut Temple Precinct 4, 95-101, 121 n. 9 golden coffin 3, 13, 109-110, 112, 117, 119 crypt 95-99 identity of mummy 13 n. 26, 18 n. 55, 19, 114-115, 117 mammisi 100-101 magic bricks 13, 114, 117 Netchery-Menu 163 seals 114 obelisks I 29 n. 7, 106 shrine of Queen Tiy 111-112 origins of Karnak Temple 106-107, 144 n. 34, 148 n. 58, See also: Akhenaten; Kiya (Wife of Akhenaten) 150 n. 68, 156, 161 n. 147, Neferneferuaten; Smenkhkare; Tiy/Tiya (Queen) Philipp Arrhideus bark shrine 158, 162, 164 KV 62 (Tutahkhamun) 118-120 portico of Senwosret I 138-145, 147-149, 163-165 Kiya (Wife of Akhenaten) 13, 15, 16 n. 39, 17, 110-111, 113 Ptah Temple 106, 121-122, 150 n. 72, 163, 168 burial equipment reused 13, 110-111, 113 Pylons See also: Kings Valley (KV 55) Pylon I 22 Knossos 133 Pylon II 22-25, 29, 33 n. 18, 95-96, 130, 134, 142, 147 Kom el-Heitan/Kom al-Hetan (Amenhotep III Mortuary Pylon III 2, 126, 139, 145-146, 150 n. 72, 157, 159, 166 Temple) 69, 75-76, 79, 129, 131, 133, 162 n. 148 n. 180, 168-169 Kuban 121 n. 9 Pylon IV 30, 32 n. 16, 106, 138, 146, 150, 152, 157, 161, Kush 95-102, 130-132 166 n. 176, 169 See also: Nitocris I; Shabaqo; Shebitku; Taharqa 234 index

Levant 131, 133 death 1, 5-6, 29, 83, 109 Libya (Libyans) 50, 116, 130-131 education 5 See also: Tjehenu & Epigraphic Survey 1-4, 125-126 Louqsor/Louxor. See under Luxor Karnak Hypostyle Hall Project 1-2, 4, 6, 29, 139 Luxor Temple 4-6, 21 29, 31, 33, 52, 76 n. 55, 101 n. 24, 121 love of opera 1, 7, 125, 175 blockyards & magasins 103-107, 125 personal qualities 1, 5-6, 9, 21, 29, 49, 65, 89, 103 cachette of statues 52 professional service 6 Colonnade Hall 29, 39-43, 125-128 sayings 1, 5-7 colossi 33 n 23, 48 n. 62, 134 scholarship & intellect 1-3, 5-6, 29, 49, 65, 83, 89, 95, 103, Merenptah’s inscriptions in 29, 31, 33, 38-43, 45, 47-48 125, 129 Opet festival reliefs sense of humor 1, 6-7, 125 origins 105-106 teaching & mentoring 1, 5-6, 29, 49, 125 Ramesside forecourt 38-40 See also: Akhetaten (Boundary stelae); Coregency; reused blocks from 4, 103-107 Epigraphic Survey; Karnak (Great Hypostyle Hall); solar court of Amenhotep III 39, 42, 44, 69, 126 Karnak Great Hypostyle Hall Project Triple Shrine 2 Mut 61, 128 topographical lists from 133-134 See also: Karnak (Mut Precinct) See also: Amenhotep III; Amun-(Re); Epigraphic Survey Mycenae 133 (Chicago House); Karnak; Merenptah; Tutankhamun Lyktos 133 Naharin 133 Narmer Palette 63 n. 31 Ma’asara 151 Nebmaatre (Amenhotep III) 72, 76, 79-81, 112 Nebmaatre, Lord of Nubia 67, 76 n. 55 Maat 72, 89, 90, 92, 109, 112 n. 20 Neferhotep (official) 1 Malkata 69 Neferhotep I 144, 156, 161 n. 147 Mammisi 100-101 Neferneferuaten (King) 3, 9-10, 12, 14-15, 18-20, 113, Manetho 18 117-120 May (High Priest of Amun) 70 burial equipment reused 12 n. 17, 19 n. 66, 117, 118-120 Maya (official) 65 n. 1 coregency with Akhenaten 9-12, 15, 18-19 Médamoud/Medamud 152, 155, 170-173 epithets 9, 12, 19, 113, 118-120 Medinet Habu 4-5 See also: Akhenaten; King’s Valley (KV 55); Meritaten; Eastern High Gate 55, 133, 134 Neferneferure-ta-sheryt “Jr.” Eighteenth Dynasty temple 121 n. 9, 159 n. 130 Neferneferuaten (epithet of Queen Nefertiti) 15, 18 iconography of Ramesses III 49-64 Neferneferuaten (Princess) 19 n. 62 temple of Ramesses III 49-56, 58, 60-63 Neferneferuaten-ta-sheryt “Jr.” (Princess) 9, 15, 19, 86 topographical lists 130, 132, 134 See also: Akhenaten; Akhetaten (Royal Tomb); Nefernefe- war scenes 50, 52, 54, 58, 61-62 ruaten (King) & (Princess); Tiy/Tiya (Queen) Medja 130-132 Neferneferure (Princess) 86 n. 12 Megiddo 132-133 Nefertari (Queen) 1 Meketaten (Princess) 3, 16 & n. 43, 17-18, 83-88, 115 n. 44 Nefertiti (Queen) 9, 10 nn. 5 & 12, 13 nn. 24 & 26, 15-18, 73, Memphis (Egypt) 10 79 Memphis (Tennessee) 1-6, 29 artistic representations 3, 13 n. 26, 89-94 Mentouhotep III. See under Monthuhotep III coregency with Akhenaten 18 Merenptah 4, 56, 129-130 daughters 9, 15, 17, 83-87 cartouches usurped 29-48 death 19 nn. 62 & 64 damnation memoriae 33, 36, 46-48 mother of Tutankhamun 86 Merire/Meryra II (official) shawabtis of 18 n. 59 Amarna tomb 9-10, 12, 71 & n. 27, 76 See also: Akhenaten; Karnak (Aten temples) Meritaten (Princess) 9-10, 13, 15-20, 83, 85, 87, 115, 118, 120 Nekhbet 105, 165 See also: Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV); Ankh(et)khepurure; Nesptah (official) 96 n. 9 Neferneferuaten; Smenkhkare Nile 80, 83, 129-130, 132, 145 n. 36, 173, 176 Meritaten Jr. (Princess) 15, 17-18 Nitocris I 101 n. 24 Merytaten. See under Meritaten Nubia Mesopotamia 133-134 in topographical lists 129-132 Messenia 133 Nubian archers 53 n. 17 Min 74, 104 n. 11 See also: Abu Simbel; Irem; Kush; Nebmaatre, Lord of Mitanni 132-133 Nubia: Soleb; Wawat Moab 134 Nuhasse 133 Monthu/Montu 52 Nut 12 n. 17, 117 See also: Karnak (Monthu Temple) Monthuhotep III-Seankhkare 104, 172 Onnophris 12 n. 17 Monthuhotep V 172 Opet Festival 28 n. 44, 121, 125-126 Montuemhat (official) 96 & n. 9 Oriental Institute (University of Chicago) 5, 51, 65, 103, Murnane, William J. 1-7, 9, 21, 29, 31 n. 15, 33 n. 21, 37 n. 106-107 34, 38 n. 35, 95 n. 5, 107, 112 n. 20, 119, 125-126, 128, See also: Epigraphic Survey; Murnane, William J. 139, 175 Osiris 12 n.18, 74, 99 n. 20, 114, 117, 118 n. 71, 175 n. 9 academic career 1, 5-6 See also: Ptah-Sokar-Osiris Amarna studies 2-3, 83 Oupouaout. See under Wepwawet anecdotes about 1, 6-7 bibliography 179-182 Pahil 133 coregency studies 2, 65, 68, 72, 78, 81 Pairi/Pare (official) 12, 118 index 235

Parennefer (official) 78 n. 64, 93 Seti II 56, 127 n. 7 Pelusiac (Nile branch) 176 Crown Prince of Merenptah 44 Pelusium 175 n. 9 usurpations by 4, 29-34, 36-39, 42-43, 46-48 Phaistos 133 See also: Amenmesse; Karnak; Luxor; Merenptah; Seti Philipp Arrhideus 158, 162, 164 (Prince) Phoenicia 133 Seti (Prince) 42-45 Pinudjem (High Priest) 39, 123 Sety. See under Seti Pethor (134) Shabaqo 99-101 Prehotep (vizier) 133 Shebitku 99, 101 Proscription. See under Damnatio Memoriae Shebyu collar 70, 78 Ptah 70 n. 25, 74, 106, 121-122, 176 Shoshenq I 129, 134 See also: Karnak (Ptah Temple) Shu 117 n. 63 Ptah-Sokar-Osiris 69 Siptah 56 Ptolémée Évergète II 170-172 Smenkhkare 3, 9-10, 12-16, 18-20, 117-119 Punt 130-132 age at death 12 burial 13 Qadesh. See under Kadesh coregency with Akhenaten 9-10, 12 Qarmiyan 134 father of Tutankhamun 19-20 Qatana 133 length of reign 12 & Neferneferuaten 12, 19 Ra/Râ/Re 28, 39, 45 n. 54, 69 n. 19, 105, 109, 175-176 son of Amenhotep III 20 Ra-Horakhty 13 nn. 24 & 26, 71-74, 75 n. 50, 79, 89 See also: Akhenaten; Ankh(et)khepurure; coregency; Ra-Horakhty-Aton. See under Aten Meritaten (Princess); Neferneferuaten (King) See also: Amun-Re; Aten; Atum Sobekhotep I 156 Ramesses, Land of 175-177 Sobekhotep II 105, 107 Ramesses I 33 n. 18, 123 Sobekhotep III 156 n. 111 Ramesses II 31 n. 16, 40, 42, 44, 48 n. 62, 51, 53-56, 101, 123, Sobekhotep IV 156 147 Sobekhotep VII, 145 n. 36 alleged usurpation of his cartouches 30-31, 34, 37-38 Sokar Festival 50, 52 daughters 39 See also: Ptah-Sokar-Osiris Karnak war scenes 2 n. 3, 30, 44 Soleb (Amenhotep III temple) 3, 67, 79-82, 112 n. 20, sons 40, 45 130-132, topographical lists 129-135 See also: Akhenaten; Amenhotep III; Nebmaatre, Lord of usurpations by 29, 33 n. 18, 143 n. 27 Nubia See also: Karnak; Merenptah; Ramesseum Sudan 132 Ramesses III 5, 23, 31, 49-55, 61, 166 Suppiluliuma I 133 topographical lists of 130, 132, 134 Syene 175 n. 9 See also: Medinet Habu (Temple of Ramesses III) Syria (Syrians) 53 n. 17, 129-130, 132-134 Ramesses IV 33 n. 18, 39, 42, 47 n. 61 Ramesses VI 33 n. 18, 56 Taharqa 95-96, 100-101, 130 Ramesseum 33-34, 45, 53 n. 14, 61, 101 n. 24, 130 Takhsi 133 Ramses. See under Ramesses Talatat 3, 13, 90-94, 106-107, 122 Ramose (official) 78 n. 64, 89-93, 116 Tauseret (Queen) 56 Re. See under: Ra/Râ/Re Tefnakhte 176 n. 22 Red Sea 132 Texte de la Jeunesse 140-141, 154 n. 92, 171 See also: Thutmose III Saqqara 176 n. 22 Thoth 74, 123, 141, 165 Satet 170 Thutmose I 116 n. 56, 122, 134, 143 Sea Peoples 61, 134 treasury (Karnak) 4, 121-123, 152 Sed festival (jubilee) 53 n. 17, 79, 163 Karnak monuments 29 n. 7, 32 n. 16, 150, 155, 157, 159, of Amenhotep III 54, 65, 68-74, 77-82 161, 163, 169 of Aten 71 dismantles older monuments 139 n. 4, 168 Semenkhkare. See under Smenkhkare reburials of 114-115 Sennucheri (official) 145 reuse of older monuments 139 n. 4, 144, 150 Senwosret I 4, 103-104, 106, 170-173 Thutmose II 114, 144 n. 33, 145, 168 Karnak monuments 138-150, 154-156, 160-161, 165-168 Thutmose III 3, 114, 121 n. 9, 122, 139-140 See also: Amenemhet I; Karnak age at death 116 Senwosret III 70 n. 22, 103 n. 1, 105, 155 n. 103, 173 coregency with Hatshepsut 19, 168 Sesostris/Sésostris I-III. See under Senwosret I-III damnation memoriae of Hatshepsut 33 n. 20 Setau (Viceroy) 130 Karnak monuments 141-143, 145, 148 n. 56, 149-150, Setepenre (Princess) 9, 17, 86 n. 12 154, 157, 159, 164, 167-168 Séthi. See under Seti reburial of Thutmose I Seth 43 n. 48, 45 n. 55, 146, 166 Texte de la Jeunesse 140-141, 154 n. 92, 171 Sethnakht 56 topographical lists 129-135 Sethos. See under Seti See also: Amenhotep II; Hatshepsut; Karnak; Thutmose I; Seti (Prince) 42-45 Thutmose II See also: Seti II Thutmose IV 20, 52, 115-116, 130, 142 Seti I 28, 45 n. 55, 53, 55, 61, 121-123, 126, 141, 143 n. 28 Thutmose (sculptor) 91 n. 15, 93 topographical lists 129-135 Thutmosis. See under Thutmose war reliefs 3, 61 Tiberius 156 236 index

Tigris 134 Museum Objects Tiy/Tiya/Tiye (Queen) 12, 15 n. 33 & Akhenaten 72-74, 89, 91-93, 112 n. 20 Berlin Artistic representations 65-66 17813: 10 n. 12, 11 Mother of Smenkhkare 20 20716: 10 n. 12, 11 Sarcophagus 115 n. 44 21220: 91 n. 15 Statuary 101 n. 24 21263: 91 n. 15 & Tutankhamun 20 21299: 116 n. 60 See also: Akhenaten; Amenhotep III; Kheruef; Kings Valley (KV 55) Brussels Tjehenu 131 E 2157: 92 See also: Libya Tod/Tôd 103 n. 2, 104, 106-107, 170-173 Cairo Topographical Lists 129-135 Catalogue Général (CG) Tourah/Tura 103-104, 151 259: 148 n. 59 Tunip 133 22054: 176 n. 22 Tutankhamun 2-4, 14-16, 35, 109 n. 5, 114-115, 117, 23009: 105 n. 15 122-123, 125-128 34013: 121 n. 3 accession 9, 12, 19 34183: 113-114 age at accession 12 n. 20 42008: 155 age at death 12 46097: 52 n. 11 & Ay 14 damnatio memoriae 33 Journal d’Entre (JE) inscriptions usurped 29, 117, 119-120 30948: 148 n. 59 length of reign 12 n. 20 30969: 53 n. 17 parentage & ancestry 14-15, 19-20, 85-88, 114-115, 119 32169: 63 n. 31 restoration stela 113-114 32751: 155 tomb & burial equipment 9-11, 12 n. 17, 19 n. 66, 20, 72, 33740: 155 79 n. 70, 117-120 36652: 45 n. 54 See also: Ay/Aya (official, later King); Damnatio Memoriae; 36809: Larché fig. 5 Karnak (“Mansion of Nebkhepurure”); Kings Valley 42008: 155 n. 103 (KV 62); Tutankhaten 48851: 141, Larché fig. 4 Tutankhaten 13, 85-88 52344: 114 n. 39 See also: Tutankhamun 60691: 118, 119 n. 78, M. Gabolde fig. 10 Tuthmosis. See under Thutmose 61517: 119 Twoseret. See under Tauseret 61944: 118 n. 67 Tyre 133 62703: 72 n. 34 62705: 72 n. 34 Userhet (official) 91-92 64959: 10 n. 12 Usurpation of monuments 1, 3-4, 29, 33, 46 88802: 154 n. 96 by Akhenaten 81-82 by Amenmesse 30-32, 34 Special Register (SR) of Ay 126 13959*: 45 n. 54 of Hatshepsut 29 by Horemheb 29, 126-127 Temporary Register (TR) of Merenptah 29-48 16/2/25/8: 45 n. 54 by Nitocris I 101 n. 24 10/4/22/7: 155 n. 97 by Ramesses I 29, 33 n. 18 by Ramesses II 29, 33 n. 18, 34 n. 26, 143 n. 27 Luxor of Ramesses IV 29, 33 n. 18 J838: 52 n. 11 by Ramesses VI 29, 33 n. 18 of Senwosret III 105 London, Petrie Museum by Seti I 123 UC 410: 10 n. 12 by Seti II 29-48 by Tutankhamun 29, 117, 119-120 New York of Tutankhamun 126-127 20.2.11: 15 n. 33 See also: Damnatio Memoriae 26.7.1396: 93 n. 21 Ullaza 133 Uzu 133 Oxford, Ashmolean Museum Valley of the Kings. See under Kings’ Valley 1983.I-41: 53 n. 16

Wawat 130-132 Paris, Louvre Wadi Hammamat 70, 76 n. 54 A.121: 156 Wadjet 79 AF 8969: 156 Wepwawet 74, 104 E 13482: 90 Wilios 133 E 7824: 156

Yenoam 133 index 237

Tutankhamun’s Tomb Carter’s Object Numbers Theban Tombs

1k: 9, 11 TT 47 (Userhet) 91 48h: 118 n. 73, 119 TT 55 (Ramose) 93, 116 n. 60 256a-b: 118 TT 139 (Pairi) 12, 118 261p(1): 12 n. 17, 117-119, M. Gabolde fig. 9 TT 192 (Kheruef) 14, 65-78, 89-90 266g: 118, M. Gabolde fig. 10 TT 226 (Anonymous) 20 n. 71 281a: 72 n. 34, 291a: 72 n. 34, 405: 9-10 620 (41-42): 119 238 index 238 index 238 index