Joe Baker
RE: Papyrus Leipzig Inv. 590
Mon Sep 5, 2011 06:07
218.215.194.169

Hi Kim

This is the best I can do, if I ignore all the reign lengths and the “his son” lineage of the person I identify as Takelot 1. I use a combination of Manetho, Herodotos and modern identifications. Those I label as missing - mean they are in (Africanos) Manetho but not in Papyrus Leipzig Inv. 590. My assumed 12 contemporary rulers, as per Herodotos, seem to be constructed by varying the names of various previously listed kings.

Smende[s  x years]         Smendes
[..]mompsames: 51 years Psusennes
[........ x years] Nepherkheres
Amenophris [x] years Amenpphthis
Us[e]rthos 11 years Osorkhor [missing Psinakhes]
Psossam[m]eos [x years] Psusennes
S[..]ites 1 year Sesonkhosis 1 Hedjkheperure
Use[r]tho[s] [x years] Osorthon 1
S[..]tes II [x years Shashanq Heqakheperure
[....]os [x years] X [missing X]
[....] his son 75 years Takelot 1
Us[e]th[os] 24 years Osarkin 2
Se[s]unkheis 14 years Shashanq 3a
So[k]ophtheis 3 years Shashanq 3b
Amendesis 11 years Pamiy
Sesonkhis 41 Shashanq 5
Ousorthos 40 [+x] years Osorkin 4
Psonsames [x] years ?? an unrecorded Psusennes
The Lamb known myth, time of Bakenrenef
Sebenkhos: 23 years Shabataka
Sebenkhos II 13 years Shabaka [missing Taharqa]
Medes 48 years Assyrian control
Psonsame[s x+]1 years 1st of 12 contemporary rulers
Amoses 14 years 2nd
Amenophis 9 years 3rd
Uertho[..] 20 (years?) 4th
U[e]rtho[s .. x] years 5th
Sesunkh[eis x] years 6th
Syphois 7th
Zmendas 8th
Userthos 9th
Psonsame[s] 10th
[..]ekkhos[…] 11th
[…].kkhos[…] Psametikhos 1
[…]nkhos..[..] Nekos 1

Regards Joe


  • Papyrus Leipzig Inv. 590Kim Sargerson, Sun Aug 28 20:48
    Hi Joe Thanks for the link. I have read this article, and it is hard to make anything of the fragment. There seem to be two separate lists of the kings of the period, one from column III line 29 to... more
    • RE: Papyrus Leipzig Inv. 590 — Joe Baker, Mon Sep 5 06:07
      • Re: Papyrus Leipzig Inv. 590Kim Sargerson, Mon Sep 5 12:40
        Hi Joe, Thanks for your reconstruction. I actually view it as 2 different lists of the same period, one being much truncated. Thus we have: Col III 1. Smende[s] [xx] 2. Mompsanes 51 3. [Amo]s[es] [x] ... more
Click here to receive daily updates