Joe Baker
Re: Dahamunza Again
Tue Jul 11, 2017 06:55
121.215.7.74

Hi Marianne

"Why shouldn't Mursili have written to Horemheb? Obviously, Horemheb was still a powerful person. Can you prove that Ay did not reign for seven years or more? I can be shaken by facts but not by appeal to consensus.

I assume from your statement that (given your position that Suppiluliuma was still ruling when Tutankhamun died), you have Ay ruling some 7 or more years and that Mursili could have corresponded with Horemheb during this time. Now the content of KUB 19.15+ KBo 50.24 shows that in year 7, Mursili wrote to Horemheb and at this time we have Ay still ruling (for Horemheb was not yet Pharaoh). But after the Dahamunzu incident (at which time you have Ay becoming Pharaoh), Suppiluliuma, followed by his son Arnuwanda, ruled for at least another 6 years and then Mursili reigned for 7 years. So some 13 years separate the Dahumunzu incident from the time Mursili corresponded with (the not yet Pharaoh) Horemheb. So in your chronology Ay would have to have reigned at least 13 years.

Problem is that many years before this time and many years after almost every single year is recorded in the Egyptian record. Ay is known by at least three dated inscriptions, year 2 (Wine jar KRI VII 65, 9), year 3 (Urk. IV 2109, 8) and year 4 (Urk. IV 2110, 13). Consensus is that Ay ruled about 4 years. Fact is that his highest year date is year 4. Are you shaken by this?

the DNA says Tutankhamun is his son. I find it unlikely that a widow of Akhenaten as Dahamunza would try to claim little Tutankhaten did not exist

The Daḫumunzu incident takes up a disproportionate part of the annals - far more than any other incident, even given that its ending is missing (the final decision to sent Zannanza). You need to read the story very carefully, the Queen (Meritaten) never says that her husband had no son. Despite the several times the Hittites asked this question, each time she avoided a direct yes/no answer by only replying that SHE had no son. It is only months later that her envoy Ḫani, when asked this question, is reported to have said that the deceased Pharaoh had no son.

What we have here is a well crafted propaganda story written many years after the event to cover the fact that the Hittites did know of a son. After all, under Akhenaten, the Egyptians made no secret of it. Hittite agents and merchants would have known and so when Ḫattuša-ziti was sent to Egypt to assess the situation, he must have become aware of Tutankhaten, even if only from court gossip. However for political purposes the Hittites eventually choose to ignore this (after all he was only a boy with a physical deformity and Meritaten’s advisors would have given strong assurances that it would be (her and) Suppiluliuma’s son who would be in control). So when Tutankhaten eventually became Pharaoh (after Zannanza=Smenḫkare and then Meritaten=Nefernefruaten) the Hittite court set about absolving their mistake. Blame had to be allocated but they could not put it entirely on Meritaten for after all, in her two letters to the Hittites (extracts of which were quoted in the account of the Daḫumunzu incident), she never mentions that the deceased Pharaoh had a son, instead the Hittites propagandists directed the blame onto Ḫani, the one who is reported to have said that the deceased Pharaoh had a son.

Regards Joe


  • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Sun Jul 9 08:06
    Joe wrote: "I was one of those who disagreed, as a perusal of this forum will show. Maybe several years ago this statement was valid but today the reverse is rapidly taking hold, particular amongst... more
    • Re: Dahamunza Again — Joe Baker, Tue Jul 11 06:55
      • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Tue Jul 11 09:37
        Hi Joe. You wrote: "I assume from your statement that (given your position that Suppiluliuma was still ruling when Tutankhamun died), you have Ay ruling some 7 or more years and that Mursili could... more
        • Re: Dahamunza AgainJoe Baker, Thu Jul 13 07:53
          Hi Marianne As for the name of the king who had died in the Dahamunza affair--it is a sure thing that the element "nb" was vocalized as "nib". First off let me point out that all the examples you... more
          • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Thu Jul 13 09:11
            Joe wrote: "First off let me point out that all the examples you give for “nb” and “nfr” were written in Akkadian (including the ones Naptera = Nefertari sent to Ḫattuša. However this is not... more
            • Re: Dahamunza AgainAnonymous, Thu Jul 13 09:59
              Look at Tory's old post: http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?id=177754;article=12412;search_term = There doesn't seem to be so much consistency in how the prenomen of Amunhotep III was written ... more
              • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Thu Jul 13 23:23
                I wrote: Look at Tory's old post: http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?id=177754;article=12412;search_term = There doesn't seem to be so much consistency in how the prenomen of Amunhotep III... more
                • Re: Dahamunza AgainJoe Baker, Sat Jul 15 07:42
                  Hi Marianne Nibḫurrereya EA 9:1 from Burna-Buriyaš of Karaduniyaš is not Amunhotep III. It is an erroneous writing for the prenomen of Akhenaten, Neferkheperure. So you agree that EA 9 was... more
                  • Re: Dahamunza AgainRobert Killian, Sun Jul 30 00:24
                    Hi Marianne & Joe Baker, I too have, exactly like Joe,---1457BCE, for 22 year Thutmose III. I have 1792BCE, minus 42 years to 1750BCE, for Hammuribi I. If this proves to be true,---"Middle... more
                    • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Sun Jul 30 10:16
                      Robert wrote: "I too have, exactly like Joe,---1457BCE, for 22 year Thutmose III. I have 1792BCE, minus 42 years to 1750BCE, for Hammuribi I. If this proves to be true,---"Middle Chronology",---just... more
                  • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Sun Jul 16 09:38
                    I wrote: "Nibḫurrereya EA 9:1 from Burna-Buriyaš of Karaduniyaš is not Amunhotep III. It is an erroneous writing for the prenomen of Akhenaten, Neferkheperure." Joe: "So you agree that EA 9 was ... more
                    • Re: Dahamunza AgainJoe Baker, Tue Jul 18 07:05
                      Hi Marianne If the addressee had been Amunhotep III, I doubt any "ancestors" would have been mentioned because all this diplomacy probably didn't go back any farther than the reign of Thutmose IV.... more
                  • Re: DahmamunzaRobert Killian, Sun Jul 16 00:56
                    Hi Joe & Marianne, I must go with Joe on his 1457BC, 'date' for Thutmose III 22/23. In that year: 2435AM, 1326CJ/BC, +131yrs = 1457BC, 'actual'. In that year, I have 'posted' several other historical ... more
        • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Tue Jul 11 10:01
          Ach--I meant not just from Tell ed-Daba--not Amarna.
          • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Tue Jul 11 10:14
            Wait a minute--how do you get six years for Arnuwanda II, who came before Mursili II? I don't recall anyone having him as ruler for more than a year.
            • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Tue Jul 11 10:24
              Forget Arnuwanda II. What makes you think Suppiluliuma I reigned for six more years after the Dahamunza affair?
              • Re: Dahamunza AgainJoe Baker, Wed Jul 12 08:48
                Hi Marianne Forget Arnuwanda II. What makes you think Suppiluliuma I reigned for six more years after the Dahamunza affair? Actually it is the combined reigns of Suppiluliuma (after the... more
                • Re: Dahamunza AgainMarianne Luban, Wed Jul 12 10:09
                  Joe wrote: "Actually it is the combined reigns of Suppiluliuma (after the Daḫumnzu episode) and Arnuwanda 2.Assuming year A was the year of the Daḫumunzu episode. Year A+1. Zannanza to... more
                  • Re: Dahamunza AgainJoe Baker, Thu Jul 13 08:40
                    Hi Marianne Surely you are aware that other sources maintain that Suppiliuliuma died of the plague quite soon after the Egyptian prisoners came to Egypt--and then Arnuwanda succumbed quickly to the... more
    • Re: Dahamunza AgainJaime O, Mon Jul 10 16:03
      Hi all, Miller has argued that Mursilis II held correspondence with Horemhab before he became Pharaoh. Miller equates Arma’a with Horemhab, thus establishing that the latter didn’t ascend to the... more
      • Re: Dahamunza AgainJoe Baker, Tue Jul 11 06:48
        Hi Jaime I am not specialized on linguistics, so I must side with those (like Marianne) who say that Nibhururyia is a better fit for Nebkheperure. This, nevertheless, does not invalidate Miller’s... more
        • Re: Dahamunza AgainJaime O, Thu Aug 3 09:24
          Hi Joe, Thank you for the reply. I apologize for not replying promptly. Real life got in the way. “There can be no letters sent to/by Tutankhamun as the Amarna archive had already been closed when... more
    • Some MathMarianne Luban, Sun Jul 9 12:43
      Here's some math regarding all this. I'm not quite sure how others have figured that the tenth year of the reign of King Mursili of Hatti could have fallen on 1312 or 1308 BCE so that he could have... more
      • Re: Some MathJoe Baker, Tue Jul 11 07:08
        Hi Marianne By the way the annals for year 10 of Mursili do not mention a solar omen of the Sun god. It is only mentioned in KUB 14.4 (CTH 70), a text which outlined the legal case for the removal of ... more
      • re: Some MathMarianne Luban, Sun Jul 9 15:37
        And, once again, keep in mind that the radiocarbon results favor the high chronology--with the New Kingdom possibly starting as early as 1570 BCE.
        • re: Some MathMarianne Luban, Thu Jul 13 08:19
          These low chronologies, based on assumed solar eclipses, do not work because, earlier in the era of Dynasty 18, there are certain texts that require a specific seasonal event. In Year 22, Thutmose... more
        • Mursili's Omen of the SunMarianne Luban, Mon Jul 10 08:38
          I have looked into this a bit more. Here's a good overview: https://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+solar+omen+of+Mursili+II.+(Brief+Communications).-a083939817
          • Mursili's Omen of the SumRobert P. Killian, Tue Jul 11 03:42
            Here's another good overview of Mursili II timeline. www.exegenesis.com Just click on 1st Vol. in the blue box at left-hand-side of Home Page and scroll-down to Page 26 to view the 24 June 1312BC,... more
            • re: Mursili's Omen of the SunMarianne Luban, Tue Jul 11 17:41
              What in the world do you mean by this? "These new chronological dates are supported by biblical scripture and also confirmed in the much better documentation of the book of Jasher."
              • re: Mursili's Omen of the SunRobert P. Killian, Wed Jul 12 02:39
                What I mean by saying: "These new chronological dates are supported by biblical scripture and also confirmed in the much better documentation of the Book of Jasher". Is,---that these newly computed... more
                • The Book of JasherMarianne Luban, Wed Jul 12 09:39
                  Robert, you wrote: "These new chronological dates are supported by biblical scripture and also confirmed in the much better documentation of the book of Jasher." But when I asked what you meant by... more
                  • The Book of JasherRobert Killian, Thu Jul 13 07:49
                    Marianne Luban, You claim:--- "That's because you do have no way of knowing how accurate anything in this book is..." etc. My response: Then you mention one of the exact sequential timeline sequence... more
                  • The Book of JasherRobert Killian, Wed Jul 12 15:57
                    Just click-on,---www.exegenesis.com and read down to verify that Moses was 18yrs old, ("when he kills the egyptian and flees"), in 148th year of Israel in Egypt. Moses was 27yrs old, (when he begins... more
                    • Re: The Book of JasherAnonymous, Thu Jul 13 08:46
                      Robert wrote: "Moses was 27yrs old, (when he begins 40yr reign in Kush)), in 157th year, at death of Kikanus, king of Kush." In the 55th year of which king of Egypt? "Exodus: Passover at 'midnight'... more
                • The Book of JasherMarianne Luban, Wed Jul 12 09:21
                  Robert, you wrote: "These new chronological dates are supported by biblical scripture and also confirmed in the much better documentation of the book of Jasher." But when I asked what you meant by... more
            • re: Mursili's Omen of the SunMarianne Luban, Tue Jul 11 11:51
              Arinniti was a sun goddess to whom, it is claimed Mursili II was particularly devoted. She is represented in this relief:... more
              • re: Mursili's Omen of the SunMarianne Luban, Tue Jul 11 12:22
                And see here about Hittites and omens and oracles. For all we know, this whole thing may be about nothing more than a cult statue being asked a question. The Egyptians did this and, evidently, so did ... more
Click here to receive daily updates