| Smenkhkare is sometimes thought to be Akhenaten's brother,
his cousin and
sometimes his son. He had to be a relative in the royal bloodline in
order to be Pharaoh.
Amenhotep III fathered two sons with his Great Royal Wife Tiye, a great queen known as the progenetor of monotheism via the Crown Prince Thutmose who predeceased his father, and his second son, Akhenaten, who ultimately succeeded him to the throne. Amenhotep also may be the father of a third child—called Smenkhkare, who later would succeed Akhenaten, briefly rule Egypt as pharaoh, and who is depicted as a woman. Smenkhkare
Smenkhkare (sometimes erroneously spelled Smenkhare or Smenkare and meaning Vigorous is the Soul of Ra) is an ephemeral Pharaoh of the late Eighteenth Dynasty of whom very little is known for certain. Traditionally he is seen as Akhenaten's co-regent and immediate successor and predecessor of Tutankhamun and is assumed to be a close, male relative of those two kings (either by blood or marriage). More recent scholarly work has however cast serious doubts on this traditional view and most aspects of this individual's life and position (such as his precise relation to the Amarna royal family, the nature and importance of his reign and even his gender) are now open to question. Related to this is the ongoing debate about whether or not Akhenaten's co-regent and successor are in fact the same person. Historical contextThe scenes in the tombs of Meryre II and Huya (located in the Amarna Northern tombs necropolis) depicting the reception of foreign tribute are the last clear view we have of the Amarna period[3]. The events depicted are, in the tomb of Meryre II, dated to the second month of Akhenaten's regnal year 12 (in the tomb of Huya they are interestingly enough dated to year 12 of the Aten)[4] and show the last securely dated appearance of the royal family as a whole (that is: Akhenaten, his chief-queen Nefertiti together with their six daughters). These scenes are also the first dated occurrence of the latter name-forms of the Aten[5]. After this date the events at Amarna and their chronology become far less clear and it is only with the accession of Tutankhamun and the restoration early in this king's reign that matters become clearer again. It is precisely in this shadowy late Amarna period that Akhenaten's co-regent and probable immediate successor comes to the fore. Akhenaten is generally assumed to have died in the late autumn of his 17th regnal year (after the bottling of wine in that year). Nefertiti disappears from view somewhat earlier (around regnal year 14), the reasons for this are at present still unclear and under debate (see below), and around the same time a new co-regent is first attested. NamesMany of the questions and uncertainties surrounding Akhenaten's co-regent and successor revolve around the names attested for this individual (or individuals). There appear two closely similar yet distinct sets of names in the records available for the late Amarna period, these are:[6]
Both these sets are written in two cartouches. The epithets in the former name-set are desired of Neferkheprure/Waenre (i.e. Akhenaten). The first set of names also sometimes appears in feminine form as Ankhetkheprure Neferneferuaten and sometimes the epithet for the nomen is then replaced by beneficial to her husband. The former set of names appears to be earlier and the association of these names with Akhenaten seems more substantial than is the case for the latter set. Both names are associated with Meritaten as great royal wife[7]. Both sets of names are only poorly attested. To date, no objects other than a wine jar label, six royal seals bearing the names of Ankhkheprure Smenkhkare Djeserkheperu are known and only one named depiction of Smenkhkare along with Meritaten (in the tomb of Meryre II) are known. Some objects with the names of Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten were reused in the burial of Tutankhamun (see below) and the female variant of these names appears on faience ring bezels. Because of the presence of the feminine Ankhetkheperure Neferneferuaten the old view that there was only one, male, individual involved who first acted as Akhenaten's co-regent under the name Ankhkheperure Neferneferuaten and, after the death of Akhenaten, succeeded him under the name Ankhkheperure Smenkhkare is now generally discarded. However, several theories have been proposed to accommodate the presence of a woman: To some the shared prenomen, function and queen indicate that there is only one person associated with these different names and therefore they seek to identify this individual as a female member of the royal family[8]. Others, based on the feminine variety of the Neferneferuaten name on the one hand and the identification of the body in KV55 as that of Smenkhkare (see below), see evidence for two distinct individuals, one female and the other male[9][10][11]. It must be noted however that there is disagreement as to which names belong to each individual (see below). IdentityThose who see only evidence for one, female co-regent and successor of Akhenaten identify this individual with Nefertiti, drawing attention to the fact that Akhenaten's co-regent's name Neferneferuaten is also an epithet bestowed on Nefertiti earlier on in the Amarna period. They also point out that Nefertiti disappears from view around the same time that Akhenaten's co-regent first appears. And lastly they see further evidence for Nefertiti's elevation to kingly status in the Coregency Stela and several other, unfinished stelae, such as the Pase stela (depicting two figures wearing crowns who are nevertheless identified as a king and queen by the three uniscribed cartouches) and the Berlin 25574 stela (depicting Akhenaten and Nefertiti but with an extra, fourth, cartouche added to indicate two kings rather than a king and queen), and in a scene in Meryre II's tomb in which the figures of Akhenaten and Nefertiti are virtually superimposed over each other (which is interpreted as indicating the oneness of their co-rule). In short, a clear sequence of changing names and functions is suggested: from queen Nefertiti, who later becomes queen Neferneferuaten-Nefertiti, over co-regent Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten to successor Ankhkheprure Smenkhkare Djeserkheperu[12]. On the other hand, those who identify both a female and male co-regent/successor assume Nefertiti predeceased her husband, based on two fragmentary shabti figures inscribed for her as queen (which might however be votive offerings parralled by similar figurines of Tiye found in the tomb of Amenhotep III and ushabti figures were normally placed in a tomb prior to its owner's death[13]) . As a consequence they identify the female Ankhetkheperure as either Meritaten, who is then assumed to have succeeded her deceased husband Smenkhkare[14][15], or as Akhenaten and Nefertiti's fourth daughter Neferneferuaten Tasherit, who is then seen as Akhenaten's co-regent before the sole rule of Smenkhkare[16]. The male Smenkhkare is seen by them as an older close relative of Tutankhamun and both are usually seen as either sons or sons-in-law of Akhenaten. As was already noted above, the variously attested names are distributed differently between these two individuals: some researchers distinguish between a female Ankhetkheperure Neferneferuaten and a male Ankhkheperure Smenkhkare/Neferneferuaten[17], while others distinguish between a female Ankhetkheperure/Ankhkheperure Neferneferuaten and a male Ankhkheperure Smenkhkare[18][19]. There is also a theory that Smenkhkare was Akhenaten's male lover as well as co-regent, due to images found where a male (believed to be Smenkhkare) was depicted beside Akhenaten in a very similar manner to how Nefertiti was shown in earlier records. Some believe that the figure is meant to be Nefertiti, or one of his daughters who took the place of her mother in the religious and political hierarchy due the necessity of both roles in Atenism (after the theoretical death of Nefertiti), but the manner in which the figure is dressed is not typical of how the females in Akhenaten's family were depicted, and is in fact far more similar to Akhenaten's own garments. ReignLength of reignThe sole regnal date (year 1) attested for Smenkhkare comes from a jar label for wine from the house of Smenkhkare, this date might however refer either to the reign of Smenkhkare or that of Tutankhamun[20]. The highest known date for Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten, regnal year 3, is attested in a graffiti in the Theban tomb of Pairi (TT139)[21]. It is however unclear whether this refers to a sole rule or a co-regency. It is further noted that Manetho's kinglists includes three 18th dynasty rulers named Akenkeres (which might be identified as a Greek rendering of Ankhkheprure), one of which is identified as a king's daughter who ruled for twelve years and a month. It has been pointed out that both the repetition of names and the attested length of reign might be due to corruptions[22] . Finally it is also possible that the sole rule of Smenkhkare coincided with the beginning of Tutankhamun's reign[23]. PoliticsVirtually nothing is known about the politics of Akhenaten's co-regent/successor. It might however be noted that the TT139 graffiti mentioned above makes reference to an active Amun-priesthood, practising in the temple of Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten (possibly this individual's mortuary temple). This could indicate a first step towards an agreement between the Atenist and traditional religions which would be further consolidated during the reign of Tutankhamun[24]. Dakhamunzu
Main article:
Dakhamunzu
The Hittite annals known as The Deeds of Suppiluliuma informs us how an Egyptian queen named Dakhamunzu, the widow of her recently deceased husband Niphururiya and without sons, asks the Hittite king Suppiluliama to send her one of his own sons to be her husband and king of Egypt and how, after further negotiations, a Hittite prince (Zannanza) is send to Egypt, only to be murdered en route there[25]. The synchronisation of Hittite and Egyptian chronologies is unclear, but it is certain that the recounted episode must have happened in the late 18th Dynasty of Egypt (i.e. the late Amarna period and its immediate aftermath)[26]. The correct identification of the individuals involved in this episode could therefore possibly cast light on some of the questions surrounding Akhenaten's co-regent and successor. It is now generally assumed that Dakhamunzu is a Hittite rendering of the Egyptian title ta hemet nesu - the king's wife - rather than the name of a queen. Unfortunately the name of this queen's husband, Niphururiya, might equally be a rendering of the prenomen of either Akhenaten (Neferkheprure) or Tutankhamun (Nebkheprure)[27]. Traditionally identification with the latter is prefered and consequentially Dakhamunzu is identified with his widow Ankhesenamun (later married to her servant Ay). Studies of the chronology of the event suggest however that Akhenaten would be a more likely candidate for Nibhururiya[28][29] in which case the account in the Hittite annals can be seen as either evidence for Nefertiti's continuing importance during the late-Amarna period (in the guise of Smenkhkare) or for Meritaten's role as Akhenaten's co-regent[30]. In the former case it is assumed that Tutankhamun supplanted Nefertiti on the throne after the murder of Zannanza, in the latter case it is believed that Meritaten was afterwards forced to marry her servant Smenkhkare although the possible identification of Zannanza as Smenkhkare is also suggested[31]. BurialEvidence relating to the burial(s) of Akhenaten's co-regent(s) and possible successor(s) might be found in two different tombs, both located in the Valley of the Kings KV 55
Main article:
KV55
As pointed out above, the reason some scholars distinguish between a male and female co-regent/successor of Akhenaten rests on the identification of the KV55 mummy as that of Smenkhkare. This identification is based on anatomical evidence indicating that the KV55 body is that of a normal male, serologically tested with tutankhamun, coming to the conclusion this mummy and tutankhamun are cosely related, either father and son or brothers. both mummies share the same rare blood type. the k.v.55 mummy has an estimated age of death around twenty to twenty five years, which is seen as being far too young for Akhenaten himself[32]. However, this identification remains problematic in view of the archaeological and inscriptional evidence in this tomb, both of which suggest the body interred in KV55 was that of Akhenaten[33][34]. Because of this the correctness of the age estimates has been repeatedly called into question[35][36][37][38]. An opinion which might find support in the latest analysis of the skeletal remains, indicating an age of death around 35 years (based on dentition) or even later (based on anthropological standards and new X-rays of the long bones)[39] [40]. it must be remembered, that it is very difficult dating a mummies age, and there are many differing opinions on the legitimacy of dating techniques. recent opinion of the mummies' identity being akhenaten is called into question. the mummy shows signs of not reaching full maturity, whereas other parts are said to have become fully mature. we may never be able to prove the age of this mummy at death, but it is probable that the ancient Egyptians who buried (and later desecrated) the body in KV55 believed this to be Akhenaten's[41]. KV62
Main article:
KV62
Other than a fragmentary box bearing the names of Akhenaten, Meritaten and Ankhkheprure Neferneferuaten which was found by Howard Carter outside Tutankhamun's tomb[42], several funerary items originally made for Neferneferuaten were found in this king's tomb. The most notable of these usurpations are the mummy bands and the canopic coffins[43]. It has also been noted that the features of the canopic stoppers and the second coffin do not resemble those of Tutankhamun and it has been suggested that these too had originally been intended for Akhenaten's co-regent[44]. These objects indicate that this individual's original burial must have been substantial and impressive. More importantly however, it must be noted that all these items are purely traditional in nature. Further evidence for this might be seen in the TT139 graffiti mentioned above[45]. See alsoFurther reading
References
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In a mystery worthy of Agatha Christie, scholars seek clues to the identity of a mummy that could clarify the royal succession at the end of Egypt's 18th Dynasty. by Mark Rose On January 6, 1907, Theodore M. Davis, a wealthy American financier, and his hired archaeologist, a young Englishman, Edward R. Ayrton, opened a mos unusual tomb in Egypt's Valley of the Kings. The tomb, designated KV55, was unimpressive, with a single chamber and side niche, but its contents were extraordinary. The largest object was a wooden shrine, sheathed in gold, that had been made for the funeral of Queen Tiye, the mother of the late 18th Dynasty pharaoh Akhenaten (r. 1350-1333 B.c.). This pharaoh's name could be read on two of the four clay bricks found on the tomb's floor. In the niche were four jars, orignally inscribed for Kiya, a secondary wife of Akhenaten, mismatched with stoppers bearing exquisite portraits, probably of one or more of Akhenaten's daughters. The strangest of the tomb's contents was an elaborate coffin, also originally for Kiya as attested by reworked yet still decipherable inscriptions, but adapted for a male burial by the addition of a beard and the alteration of the inscriptions. The face on the coffin had been broken off and the royal names on it, which might have been identified its occupant, removed. In the century following its discovery, Tomb 55 has been hotly debated especially the identify of gthe remains in the coffin and how that person into the royal family and succession at the end of the 18th Dynasty. "It is probably true to say," notes Aidan Dodson of Bristol University, "that there are as many interpretations as Egyptologists who have written about the notorious Tomb 55. But it matters: the tomb provides part of the key to what was actually going on at the end of Akhenaten's reign -- and perhaps at the end of Tutankhamun's as well." Results of an examination of the skeleton by British Museum Egyptologist and physical anthropologist Joyce M. Filer, published here in detail for the first time (page 26), may help close the book on Tomb 55's mysterious occupant. Akhenaten, who came to the throne as Amenhotep IV, promoted worship of the solar sdisk, the Aten, over Amun, the god of Thebes, alienating that deity's powerful priesthood. In his fifth year he changed his name to Akhenaten ("Servant of the Aten"), and the following year founded a new capital, which he called Akhetaten ("Horizon of the Aten") and which is known today as el-Amarna. Very late (or very early -- as usual, scholars disagree) in his reign, Akhenaten had Amun's name purged from monuments, particularly in Thebes -- in was war between the pharaoh and the Theban preisthood. After Akhenaten's death, Tutankhaten reverted to the worship of Amun and changed his name to Tutankhamun. Akhenaten's own monuments were later cast down or obliterated, perhaps in the first years of the 19th Dynasty (1297-1187 B.c.), and he was called the "criminal of Akhetaten". Debate over who the mummy is or isn't has continued for nearly a century. Is it the "heretic" pharaoh Akhenaten? Could it be Smenkhkare, who some scholars think was coregent during Akhenaten's last years; husband of Meretaten, oldest of the Amarna princesses; and possibly Tutankhamun's brother? Or is there some other explanation? Davis believed that the Tomb 55 mummy was that of Queen Tiye, but this was wishful thinking. The shrine was undoubtedly hers; her name could be read on a surviving portion of the gold on it. Akhenaten apparently had it built for her burial at Amarna. When Amarna was abandoned after his death, the shrine, coffin, and other objects from the royal tombs there were moved to the Valley of the Kings, some ending up in Tomb 55. But Davis' indentification was soon discredited when examination by anatomist Grafton Elliot Smith showed the mummy was that of a man. Arthur Weigall, Chief Inspector of Antiquities at Luxor when the tomb was found, argued that it was Akhenaten's, which would explain the coffin's defacement -- priests or workers of the Valley of the Kings had entered the tomb and obliterated the name and face of the "criminal of Akhetaten". Smith, however, concluded that the man was in his early twenties at death, too young for Akhenaten, who died in his mid-thirties (we know he was in his teens when he ascended the throne and that he ruled for 17 years). The interpretation of royal names -- carved into monuments, engraved on funerary objects, and written on dockets listing commodities -- is key to sorting out the late 18th Dynasty succession and identifying the mummy. Egyptian rulers had five names, the most important being what scholars term the prenomen and nomen, written in cartouches. For example, Tutankhamun's full name was Nebkheperure (prenomen) Tutankhamun-Heqaiunushemay (nomen with an epithet). Some queens also used epithets with their single cartouches, so that Akhenaten's principal Nefertiti was, in full, Nefertiti-Nefernefruaten. Two other royal names known from the end of the 18th Dynasty are Ankhkheprure Smenkhkare and Ankhkheprure Nefernfruaten. Three basic scenarios have been proposed to account for these names and for Nefertiti's absence from the record after year 13 of Akhenaten's rule: 1. Nefertiti dies in year 13 or later of Akhanten's reign. Smenkhkare (a.k.a. Nefernefruaten, a male co-regent during akhenaten's last three years, predeceases him; Tutankhmun' succeeds Akhenaten. The Tomb 55 body in Smenkhkare. 2. Smenkhkare, a male co-regent, predeceases akhenaten, who is suceeded b Nefertiti, ruling under her name Nefernefruaten; Tutankhamun succeeds her. The Tomb 55 body is Smenkhkare. 3. Nefertiti becomes co-regent in year 12-13, as Nefernfruaten; after Akhenaten's death she rules under the Smenkhkare; Tutankhmun succeeds her. The Tomb 55 body is Akhenaten. The two basic questions are, is there evidence that a male co-regent named Smenkhkare existed, and, who is the body? Several objects found in Tutankhamun's tomb bear the name of other royal family members. These include four miniature fold coffins that held jars containing Tutankhamun's internal organs. Names, inscribed inside the coffins were reworked, apparently first from Smenkhkare to Nefernefruaten, and certainly then to Tutankhamun. From the way that this was done, it would suggest that Smenkhkare and Nefernefruaten were names borne by the same individual. In addition, the face portrayed on these and on Tutankhamun's middle coffin does not match other representations of him. On the basis of the texts of the miniature gold coffins, this must be the face of Smenkhkare. He also appears in a tomb painting at Amarna; a relief block bears his name, as do some finger-rings and stamped bricks. A battered limestone head from Amarna has also been claimed to represent him. The Tomb 55 skeleton's age may be key to its indentification. Akhenaten as in his mind-thirties at death, but examinations of the Tomb 55 bones from Smith to the 1960s yielded estimates in the early twenties. Then, at a 1988 Egyptological conference, University of Michigan orthodontics professor James E. Harris and Fawzia H. Hussein of the Anthropological Laboratory, National Centre, Cairo, claimed a middle-to-late thirties age, just right for Akhenaten. That study, however, has never been published. Joyce M. Filer, latest to examine the bones, places the age in the early twenties at most, precluding their indentification as Akhenaten's. In addition to the Tomb 55 body, there are other late 18th Dynasty royal mummies. The best-known is Tutankhamun, which has been linked by blood type and by skull shape to the Tomb 55 body. Mummies found in 1898 have been identified as Amenhotep III and tiye, Akhenaten's parents and Tutankhamun's grandparents, but both indentifications have been questioned, especially the second. An alternative, speculative proposal is that the suposed Tiye mummy may be Nefertiti, but from the context of the fnd it is pretty clear that it is of a much earlier lady and has nothing to do with Akhenaten's family. Finally, two mummified fetuses from Tutankhamun's tomb were possibly carried by his wife Ankhesenamun. DNA analysis might clarify relationships among these mummies, but just before an Egyptian-Japanese team took tissue samples from Tutankhamun's mummy last spring, the Egyptian government abruptly halted the work for what it said were national security reasons. Press reports, however, pointed to concern that some people might misinterpret the results to further claims that Akhenaten was the biblical Moses. This far-fetched link -- it assumes, among other things, that our understanding of Egyptian chronology is off by a number of centuries -- has been made in Moses; Pharaoh of Egypt, authored by Egyptian-born amateur historian named Ahmed Osman, and other books. While if is understandable that such creative interpretations might make the government skittish, the more solid evidence there is, the less room there will be for such wild claims. For now, we can say that there is artifactual evidence for a male ruler from the end of the 18th Dynasty who is not Akhenaten and is not Tutankhamun. We can also say that the body in Tomb 55 belongs to the immediate family of Akhenaten and Tutankhamun, but it is too young to be the former, and we have the mummy of the latter. Returning to he scenarios explaining the royal names, the evidence fits best the first case: Smenkhkare (a.k.a. Nefernefruaten), a male co-regent during Akhenaten's last years, predeceases him; Tutankhamun succeeds Akhenaten. The second case seems needlessly complex, and is apparently disproved by the evidence of the names in the miniature coffins. The facts fit least well with the third case: there is evidence for a royal male and body to go with it, so equating Nefertiti with Smenkhkare as Akhenaten's successor before Tutankhamun leaves the body unexplained. The most straightforward interpretation of the inscriptions, artifacts, and bones is that the body from Tomb 55 is Smenkhkare. This means that Tutankhamun, like his father, came to the throne only through the early death of an older brother. The early deaths of both Smenkhkare and Tutankhamun without heirs spelled the end of the 18th Dynasty.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Historical linguist, Ahmed Osman, has conducted an in-depth research into the identity of Moses using Egyptian records. He believes there was an influential Israelite named Yusef- Yuya (Joseph), who was chief minister to the Pharoahs Tuthmosis IV and his son Amenhotep III. When Tuthmosis died, Amenhotep married his younger sister Sitamun so he could inherit the throne.Shortly afterwards in order to have an adult wife, Sitamun was only a child at this time, Amenhotep married Tiye, the daughter of Yusef- Yuya. It was decreed however, that no son born to Tiye could inherit the throne,there was a general fear that the Israelite relatives were gaining too much power in Egypt. So when Tiye was pregnant, certain palace officials thought that her child should be killed at birth if a son. AkhenatenArrangements were made for Tiye's Israelite relatives to nurse the boy. Amenhotep (born 1394 BCE), was educated at Heliopolis by the Egyptian priests of Ra and spent his teenage years at Thebes During this time his mother had become more influential than the senior queen Sitamun-who had only borne a daughter- Nefertiti. When Amenhotep III suffered ill health, young Amenhotep was brought to the fore.He married Nefertiti in order to reign as co -regent and when his father died he succeeded as Amenhotep IV. Because of his part Israelite upbringing, Amenhotep IV couldn't accept the Egyptian dieties and developed the notion of Aten - an omnipotent god with no image, represented by a solar disk with downward rays. Amenhotep changed his name to Akhenaten (Glorious spirit of the Aten) and closed all the temples of the Egyptian Gods making himself very unpopular.There were plots against his life and threats of armed insurrection if he didn't allow traditional gods to be worshipped alongside the faceless Aten. He was eventually forced to abdicate in favour of his cousin Smenkhkare. Akhenaten was banished from Egypt and fled to the land of Midian. Here, he took another wife, an Israelite named Zipporah. Nefertiti had died a short while before. He then made arrangements to return to Egypt to retrieve his supporters who believed he was the rightful heir, the royal"mose", as they had been placed in bondage under the new, harsh laws. Moses is described in the Old Testament as being "an Egyptian" and
"slow of speech" in the language of the Israelites. Ahmed Osman believes
that Moses was in fact the Pharoah Akhenaten. Akhenaten introduced
monotheism and closed the temples making himself extremely unpopular. He
was later forced to abdicate and banished from Egypt. He returned to
lead his supporters out of Egypt to a new life. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Questions: Picture this: An
heiress is born four years before the death of her father. Her place in
the succession should've been assured. That was before the new king's
mother, Queen Mutemwiya, briefly took the helm as regent to the vast
Egyptian empire. Out of four known daughters born to the king (Tentamen,
Amunipet, and another named Uiey") this Sitamen was not her daughter. In
year 2, Mutemwiya embarked on a course that would alter egyptian history.
Her son was now of age to take full control and needed a consort. But a
babe of four years old would hardly do. Enter her niece, Tiye Nefertari.
The rest would be history. Ahmed then go's on to name Tutankhaten as another son of this union, born in year 34, eleven years later! This is with the understanding that a 10 year coregency was involved between Akhenaten & his father, and disregards his own "find" of an inscribed scarab in the temple of Osiris at Abydos. According to him, the inscription name's a "Meritre" as the mother of Tutankhamen. Since Tutankhamen always claims Amenhotep as his father and one of Tiye's daughters is named Meritre, do we find here the parents of Tut at last? If Osman is correct, then he makes an interesting connection with the boy-king's age. The date coincides with Tutankhamen's age at his accession. If he was born in year 34, he would've been 4 at his father's death, not counting the solo rule for Akhenaten (6) & Smenkhkare...(1?) He would have been ten at his coronation and between 18 - 19 at his death. But what Osman doesn't take into consideration is one important factor; it is on record: Sitamen was not recognised as the second "Great Wife" until year 30, eight years before Ammenhotep III's death. So it appears that this Sitamen couldn't be the daughter of Thutmose IV... or could she? Did Amenhotep III wait until she produced their second son before bestowing the honored title on her? And what need for a second "great royal wife" when the first was healthy and producing children? Did Tiye stop bearing heirs in year 30. Or better yet, did Akhenaten's inability to produce a male heir (after numerous attempts) have prompted Amenhotep to name two chief queens, so that either of the most direct heirs surviving would assure that dynasty's continuation? Such important questions may, to our great misfortune, never get answered. From: http://lavender.fortunecity.com/stroheim/323/sit2.html |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Smenkhkhare, the Hittite Pharaoh'Some archaeologists have argued that Smenkhare and the pharaoh-queen are one and the same person.' The person named Ankhkheperure Smenkhkhare-Djeserkheperu poses other problems. Some archaeologists have argued that Smenkhare and the pharaoh-queen are one and the same person. However, the image of Smenkhare alongside the royal wife Merytaten, in Meryre II's tomb at Amarna, and the exclusively masculine epithets referring to this individual in the same tomb and on a now-vanished block at Memphis, confirm that we are dealing with a man - as distinct from the pharaoh-queen Ankh(et)kheperure Neferneferuaten. The fact that his wife, Merytaten, bears only the title of queen on these monuments leads me to believe that his reign preceded that of Ankh(et)kheperure Neferneferuaten who was, it is highly likely, Merytaten herself. A peculiarity in the protocol relating to Smenkhkhare may resolve the issue. Contrary to Ancient Egyptian custom, Smenkhkare is not presented under a coronation name and a birth name in his two cartouches, but under two coronation names. The explanation for this curious fact seems to me clear: both his royal names were composed on the occasion of his coronation. He therefore must have had another name beforehand. 'The Hittite archives found at Boghaz Koy in Turkey provide us with a clue.' To be Merytaten's husband, moreover, Smenkhkhare must have been the equivalent in rank at least of a royal son prior to his accession to the throne. But no Egyptian prince of that name or any other existed at the time. The Hittite archives found at Boghaz Koy in Turkey provide us with a clue. They tell us that the widow of a king of Egypt wrote to the Hittite king Suppiluliuma to ask for the hand of one of his sons in marriage. After much prevarication, Suppiluliuma sent his son Zannanza to Egypt, where he was assassinated, according to the Hittites. The absence of a birth name, the lack of an Egyptian of appropriate rank and the clues in the Hittite archives allow us to conjecture that Smenkhkhare might in fact be the Hittite prince Zannanza. Indeed, diplomatic correspondence from Amarna, dating from the same period as the Hittite texts, confirms that the Egyptian queen who wrote to the Hittite king could only be the one woman of royal rank to survive Akhenaten, namely Merytaten, and that the latter was the wife of the mysterious Smenkhkhare before reigning in her own right. FROM: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/egyptians/amarna_06.shtml Editors Note: There is a problem with this article. We are told by other researchers that Smenkhkhare was either Akhenaten's brother or son, and another researcher tells us that Merytaten died in childbirth, though she died at the age of nine. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
