Joe Baker
Re: Correction (Amenhotep III Amenhotep IV co-regency)
Thu Sep 1, 2016 22:11

Hi Tory

I did not misrepresent the data provided by the Hayes paper on the Malqatta inscriptions. The data is good, I just disagree with the way Hayes arranged it. My post only concerns the data not his interpretation of it. The data is clear - no co-regency and your alignment reinforces this - only you are too blind to see it (bit like how, again and again, you create phantom reigns and reign lengths which of course are unfilled by dated documents).

If there were two pharaohs ruling in Egypt at this time. why are there no Akhenaten year dated documents at Malqatta in and around those years when Amenhotep 3 had heb-sed festivals, no gifts sent by Amarna officials (unlike the other leading Egyptian officials), not even one from Akhenaten himself (and even the Babylonians wanted in on these occasions)?

Why during these same years were there no Amenhotep 3 year dated documents at Amarna? Was there a two way trade embargo? Were traders not allowed to stop at Amarna while travelling by land? Were ships going up and down the Nile not allowed to land at the huge dockyards in Amarna? Certainly not on trade in bezel rings for these, with either names of Amenhotep 3, are quite common at Amarna.

Regards Joe

  • Hi Kim Oops, wrong papyrus. I found what I was looking for after I already sent the mail. Berlin P. 9784 is one papyrus with three consecutive transactions, not two transactions and then a summary.... more
    • Re: Correction (Amenhotep III Amenhotep IV co-regency) — Joe Baker, Thu Sep 1 22:11
Click here to receive daily updates