Kim Sargerson
Re: Kushite Chronology
Wed Jan 25, 2017 14:33
81.151.216.235

Hi Tory

Many thanks for your responses. I don't want to rehash old arguments too much.

"When I suggested the year 6 could be Kushite, I no longer think so"
Good, thank you for that. As I have seen various dates put out by you and Jaime recently, please could you tell me what your current thinking is on the interval between year 7 of Shabaka as pharaoh and year 6 of Taharqa as pharaoh?

On Schulman: I would agree, if Pahemnetjer were stated to be the son of Shedsunefertem. He isn't. The geographical location is an irrelevance, as these titles occur only at Memphis. The chronological proximity is illusory, even on the conventional timeline used by Schulman, as a man who was, say, 40 by the end of the reign of Sheshonq I can hardly be equated with a man who was at least a similar age 35 years earlier. Closely related? - probably. Lifespans overlapped? almost certainly. One named for the other? a strong possibility. The same man? no chance. The conventional chronology simply does not work for the Memphite priests' genealogy in dynasty 21, and cannot be relied on to pull this rabbit out of the hat for dynasty 22.

The Shedsunefertem who occurs on the Berlin and Louvre genealogies has a floruit of approximately c910-c890, which is not the reign of Sheshonq I, in the conventional chronology. I don't quite know how his date works out in your own chronology, but if it does parallel your Sheshonq II I would be surprised.

Overlap of 1PAs:
Menkheperre: it was my understanding, maybe wrong, that you had Menkheperre as remaining a 1PA, just not at Thebes, between the year 6 and year 25 attestations. I am not familiar with the concept of a non-ruler laying down a priestly office in Egypt without force being applied. Do you have a clear example (excluding promotion within the ranks)?

Actually your "dance of the 1PAs" is a lot more straightforward than the picture presented by Aston, who has Sheshonq III, Takelot II, and Pedubast I all contemporaries. In that scenario there are a minimum of 5 separate tenures by Osorkon B and 4 separate tenures by Horsieset B. It could be even more, as 3 of the NLTs that would be attributed to Pedubast I and Horsieset B would fall within the period of years 22-28 Sheshonq III where Osorkon B is attested making lavish annual donations. It is time the absurdity is pointed out with emphasis. The attestations of Osorkon B, in particular, are more coherent and detailed than any other 1PA of the period. It is the "rival 1PAs" theory, and the lack of direct attestation (e.g. of Iuput A between years 11 and 21 of Sheshonq I) which enables NC constructs to have 1PAs representing different overlapping dynasties slipping in and out of Thebes at will, throughout the entire period. On the conventional timeline there are a minimum of 10 separate individuals from Iuput A to Osorkon F holding 1PA in a period of about 200 years; there might be several more, as most schemes have two Horsiesets, two Takelots, and so on. Yet scarcely any 2PAs are attested (the man to whom duties would naturally descend if the 1PA was largely an absentee), and the number of known 3Ps and 4Ps is significantly less than the 1Ps. So the rest of the hierarchy simply remained in place, passively accepting whoever happened to walk in the door as the high priest.

You wrote
"This comes just after the Gaza episode when Hananu fled to Musri so it is a king of Musri who sent an envoy to Tiglath-Pileser III and none of that king's ancestors had ever sent a message to Assyria before. The scribes of Tiglath-Pileser III must be presumed to know that a king of Musri contacted Shalmaneser III. It follows that the king of Musri who contacted Tiglath-Pileser III in 733 was not from the same dynasty as that earlier king."
Or, much more simply, it means that this ruler sending envoys was not a king of Musri. Is the name of the country not "missing"?

On Ammeris:
Actually, I don't have him as a "Nubian governor of Sais" (Kitchen). The name does not occur in Africanus. There are probably at least 4 possibilities
(a) governor: this is Kitchen's view, followed by many others, but the lists purport to be only of divinities i.e. gods and kings
(b) a king of Dynasty 25 who has somehow slipped down into the next dynasty, e.g. representing Tanutamun or Atlanersa or a combination of these names
(c) an interval marker between Dynasty 24 and Dynasty 26, representing the domination of Kushite Amun-Re and referring to a god, not a king, or simply to the dynasty as a whole
(d) as a variation on (c) that both "Ammeris" and "Stephinates" belong to dynasty 24 as predecessors of Bochchoris (in accordance with the "old chronicle" 3 kings 44 years, rather than Eusebius' 1 king 44 years)

On CG 42232.
You wrote "I’m only saying that a king Usermaatre Shoshenq and his HPA Harsiese are likely to be father and son and are likely to be the same closely related people mentioned in other documents."
But amazingly when it comes to a king Usermaatre Setepenamun Sheshonq and his 1PA Horsieset, NLT of year 6, you want to place this elsewhen. I think as you do here that the evidence for an early Usermaatre Setepenamun Sheshonq, with 1PA Horsieset, contemporary with the latter years of Nesipaqashuty A, who was the grandson or stepgrandson of another even earlier king Sheshonq, speaks for itself. This Usermaatre might well be the king referred to when only a prince, your Sheshonq "C". He might also be the same as Maatkheperre Sheshonq, as both claim descent from a king Psusennes. However there is zero evidence that this king had a third prenomen, i.e. Hedjkheperre.
Even should it be shown that a Maatkheperre, a Hedjkheperre and an Usermaatre Sheshonq were all contemporaries, without substantial data linking them, or showing that Egypt was a unified realm at the time, and that one of these certainly occupied the entire time possible to allot to all three, the default position must surely be that these are separate individuals.

You wrote "As I said, the Manethonian “3 kings for 25 years” after year 13 of Takeloth is in my view garbage but garbage that is not completely worthless. It is suggestive of overlapping reigns and multiple kings within the stated period"
Yes it is suggestive of some sort of divided rule. I once thought that it was a simple tripartite division, i.e. not 3 kings but 3 kingdoms. If they occurred in the copy Eusebius had, he certainly felt free to disregard them in his pursuit of a chronology which matched his date for the "Flood". BTW the 3 kings for 25 years comes before Takelothis, not after him, and there is another set, for 42 years, after him.
I now think it is indicative that the 3 kings, 25 years, simply had variant names on Sheshonq and/or Osorkon, Takelot was a "new" name, then the next 3 kings also were variants on preceding names in the same dynasty. As nothing was recorded of any interest to Christian or Greek chronographers, and no popular tales or well known monuments were ascribed to them, they were given an intradynastic summary and ignored.

Overlap of Osorkon II and Sheshonq III:
If from 23 Osorkon II to 28 Sheshonq III is the lifetime of one Apis, and if we accept that 25/26 years was the maximum lifespan allowed, then 1 Sheshonq III has to fall 2 or more years before 23 Osorkon II. At this period (3rd decade) of his reign Osorkon was active in Bubastis (jubilee hall), Memphis (the Apis and possibly the creation of the TIP corridor) and Thebes (the appointment of 1PAs Nimlot and Takelot) and there seems little scope for a rival dynast (if Sheshonq III was not simply the son and heir of Osorkon, which seems unlikely). It also places considerable pressure on the pedigree of the 1PPs, this time the descendants of Osorkon II, whose 4th descendants Peftjauawybast A, 1PP, and Takelot D, stm of Ptah, were active in 28 Sheshonq III and their greatgrandfather's full brother Hornakht C died aged about 10 in the reign of Osorkon II. So the maximum interval here from year 1 of Osorkon II to year 28 of Sheshonq III is about 47 years, into which have to be fitted 3 generations "plus" however much older than about 10 years (age of Hornakht) that Peftjauawybast was at his tenure of 1PP "plus" the interval betwen year 1 of Osorkon and the death of Hornakht, but "minus" whatever age difference there was between Sheshonq D, the eldest son, and Hornakht C, his full brother. The 3 generations between Sheshonq D and Peftjauawybast average at best about 19 years, and Takelot B, eldest grandson of Osorkon II, is born about 5 years before his grandfather became king. This last I do not have a problem with. I think both Takelot B and Takelot E, the eldest grandsons of Osorkon II, were born in the reign of Takelot I. I also think that Sheshonq D, the eldest son of Osorkon II, was born in the reign of a king Sheshonq, a predecessor of Takelot I and successor of Osorkon I.

Assyrian rule:
You wrote "SIPA cannot be just anyone. He was not king in 720 but clearly no one but the supreme king of Musri was more important than him. When he fled Raphia in 720 he pulled out of Lower Egypt and retreated to the south (to Thebes = Meluhha) where he died (this detail is also stated). Sargon II actually says he ruled Lower Egypt after this, and the annual tribute sent to Assyria by Osorkon IV proves it."
I do not recognise this picture of Lower Egypt in the last quarter of the 8th century. Ruled by Assyria? Annual tribute? A "supreme king of Musri" as the immediate superior of "SIPA"? Shilkhanni is the only named tributary, and his limited geographical control is not indicated. Nor is the subsequent "loss" of Lower Egypt to Kush. If "Piru of Musri" is your supreme king, and a Kushite, and a tribute payer, then your argument must fall.

Regards

Kim

  • Re: Kushite ChronologyTory, Sun Jan 15 02:45
    Hi Kim and Jaime The main date is "year 6, II Shemu day 6, of pharaoh Taharqa Sieset Meryamun LPH". The earlier date is "year 7 of pharaoh Shabaka justified". I do not see any way that either... more
    • Re: Kushite Chronology — Kim Sargerson, Wed Jan 25 14:33
      • Re: Kushite ChronologyTory, Thu Jan 26 10:33
        Hi Kim: please could you tell me what your current thinking is on the interval between year 7 of Shabaka as pharaoh and year 6 of Taharqa as pharaoh? I think year 7 and year 6 are separated by about... more
        • Re: Kushite ChronologyKim Sargerson, Sat Jan 28 12:16
          Hi Tory Thanks for replying to both Jaime and myself in such short order. I had been mulling over my response for days, cutting out superfluous verbiage and the like, and Jaime's post had not... more
Click here to receive daily updates