Kim Sargerson
Re: Ramses XII, and early Dyn 21
Thu Mar 23, 2017 13:26

Hi Jaime

You wrote "Exactly, which is why I do see Smendes coming between Ramses XI and Herihor as resolution to some problems, but may only be desirable until one comes up with something new."
This may be right - I do not think there is enough evidence to place Nesbanebdjed the king before or after Herihor the king. However, it still leaves a gap i.e. who was the king whose years 6-15 (and possibly year 1, although this may be his own as king) recorded under Painedjem A as 1PA.
If it is not Nesbanebdjed, who rules about year 1-7 while Herihor is still only 1PA, and it is not Herihor himself, whose reign, however long, has no directly attested regnal years and who appears to have functioned also as 1PA throughout, then we must fall back on the "Manetho alternative", namely the Greek language "World Chronology" fragment.
This fragment supplies 14 years, not 4, for the king who can only be regarded as Amunemnisu (name rendered as Amoses, not Nepherkheres) and to note, also supplies 48 years, not 26, for Smendes / Medes.
My thoughts on the royal daughters shown with 1PA Painedjem - if this is during the reign of Herihor, the natural conclusion would be that they are his daughters. However, the attstation of a Tentamun with Smendes, and a Tentamun as mother of Henttawy, is a strong indicator that Henttawy and her sisters were the daughters of Smendes. Otherwise almost the only indication of this king's existence is the name of the son of Menkheperre.

You wrote "Truth is, Wenamun seems to understand Nesubanebdjed as superior to Herihor, as the former is mentioned at least once before the latter"
Assuming that both men became kings at some point, and the actual Report was composed after both were safely dead, who would you place in the superior position - the one who reigned first, or the one whose descendants were still around to look over your shoulder?

"If the royal personage is King Herihor, then HPA Pinudjem should come after him, order to modify what is left of a kingly predecessor and add his own priestly ..regalia."
Yes, that is the argument in a nutshell.

"This scenario, however, asks for an intervening king between Herihor and Pinudjem, which extends the latter's pontificate long enough in order to insert his own image into a dead king's."
I do not see this as an objection. Painedjem as 1PA is only attested in unattributed regnal years, which Kitchen has arranged into a single sequence 6-15 without showing any chronological contradictions (although worth examining in detail). So there is a period of about a decade of him being 1PA before assuming royal titles, and someone else is definitely a king somewhere during this time (on balance perhaps not at Thebes, given the absence of his royal name).
We have in effect a whole generation to fill, between Paiankh and Painedjem, even assuming that Herihor was not himself related e.g. an older brother or uterine halfbrother of Painedjem. Painedjem's career seems to be c9 years as 1PA, followed by c8 years as both king and 1PA. This is not excessive, even if subsequent evidence might extend either period by a few years. This is the case whether or not Herihor's kingship precedes his with no gap. The only wat to eloongate Herihor's kingship is to assume that the anonymous years 6-15 are his, and this has no chronological impact on the lifespan of Painedjem or the length of his tenure.
For example, in your suggestion (dates are years arbitrarily after the accession of R.XI)
30-36 king Nesbanebdjed, 1PA Herihor
36-51 king Herihor, 1PA Painedjem (from 41)
51-52 king (Psusennes or Amunemnisu) Painedjem still only 1PA, usurps Herihor's monuments at Karnak
52-60 king Painedjem

in my suggestion
30-36 king NN (R.XII/XIII?) 1PA Herihor by 34, Nesbanebdjed in Tanis by 34
36-38 king Herihor
38-56 king Nesbanebdjed, Painedjem 1PA from 38
56-64 king Painedjem (south), king Psusennes I (north)
The difference is only 4 years, and that s because I have allowed extra years to Nesbanebdjed to account for Psusennes' age.

"You postulate a Ramses XIII in order to account for a Year 6 Menkheperre. I prefer to assign this one Pre-Whm Mswt Ramses XI."
The difficulty here is the date of the rewrap. Herihor (as 1PA) orders the rewrap in a year 6, and it is completed in year 7. The dates within the years are II Peret 7 and II Peret 16. Either the rewrap and reburial took a mere 9 days, and a change of royal year fell between these two dates, or the period was a year and 9 days, and we have no idea when the change in the royal year occurred.
The linen made by Menkheperre was used in this rewrap, and cannot have been 34 years old at the time of use.
This linen was also dated to a year 6. There is no possible year 6 within the likely timeframe (10 years) for use of high quality stored linen, without another king intervening. It cannot reasonably be the same year 6 as Herihor's command to osirify, because of the Wenamun Report which places Herihor already in office by year 5.
You see the problem.

You wrote "Herihor might be missing from Tanis because of a damnatio memoriae or something, but if he was sole ruler of the country one needs to ask where did 'Manetho' have him? And Pinudjem I?"
We have to concede that "Manetho" is only a guide to what one much later historian thought was the sequence, or at any rate a sequence, of reigns. The "12 kings of Diospolis" for Dyn. 20 certainly leave room for manouevre; until the discovery of Amunenisu's cartouche by Montet, the "Nepherkheres" in Manetho was thought by many to be a corruption of "Khepherkheres", that is, Kheperkare Painedjem.

You wrote "On Henuttawy: I can accept Lady of the Two Lands might be close to heir-presumptive in females, but she keeps this title even by Pinudjem I's side."
Actually she only has it by his side. One presumes that marriage and male offspring of that marriage would strengthen the dynastic position in default of a son of her royal father. The comparative male title is "Hereditary Prince at the head of the two lands" which is lately understood as signifying some executive power as well as dynastic position as heir apparent.

"This interpretation, nevertheless, would bring another interpretation to the chalice found at Psusennes I's tomb, where she appears as Lady of the Two Lands and Greatest among the Concubines of Amun while Pinudjem is a mere HP son of Payankh. It may also explain Pinudjem I carrying the title Iry-pat."
The interpretation I bring is that Henttawy is the heiress presumptive. It is her descendants that are entitled to the throne, not his. Make Painedjem a king and any son of his, by any wife, could claim the throne.
Painedjem's title of "hereditary prince" is not qualified by other epithets, and so should not be enhanced from the usual title given to high ranking civil officials.

"I'd expect to have something more substantial on coregencies during the 20th Dynasty before jumping on that wagon and postulate a Ramses XIII."
I agree it is difficult. The only evidence is that year 19 (R.IX) = year 1 (R.X), that is X started before the death of IX, but not by much. My aim was to show that the elapsed time might still be in the lifetime of one elderly Gods Wife, but if this is not a requirement then these suggested overlaps can be relaxed (although the absence of years 1-5 seems rather odd).

You wrote "there was a pharaoh in the land during the time the Wenamun's Report is written about, we can't be sure who he was."
I view it as likely that a kind of prologue, where the royal years were fully stated and Wenamun's meeting with Herihor was fully described, as well as a pre-emptive statement by Wenamun that he completed his mission, is all missing.

"I do concede that ... whoever wrote the Report omitted the one true pharaoh, and Wenamun numbered Smendes before Herihor and after Amun in conversation with the king of Byblos because the name of the "governor" of Tanis, who had ships of his own and was certainly not by coincidence was centered in the Delta, was more familiar to Byblos than anything else."
There is no evidence of Nesbanebdjed the king, at Tanis. The solitary undated royal inscription of Hedjkheperre Nesbanebdjed makes it clear that this king's royal residence was Memphis, not Tanis.

"Maybe in the mind of the author, Wenamun mentioned a king between Amun and Smendes, but the author decided to omit any mention of him, because, after all, Amun was lord ..."
I agree it does seem odd that the actual pharaoh is completely absent, even as a stop-off point on Wenamun's journey. Perhaps we overestimate the royal presence and interference all through the New Kingdom. As we know from many datelines from Deir el Medina, the royal name is more often omitted than not, even among his employees.

"Although I do like your experimental reconstruction, it still leaves holes to fill. My bet would be that after all, there was a King Ramses XII for about 6-7 years after Ramses XI."
I agree. I also have two places where Mladjov's Ramesses might fit, not just one. I am actually growing less comfortable with "perfect fit" chronologies as I study more and more; my chronology of Dyn 22 for example has absolutely no "wiggle room" back to 919 as the start of Sheshonq I. This would once have made me very pleased, but now makes me uncomfortable.

"Mladjov's case needs something more substantial, but works on interesting premises."
I would not have posted the link if I thought otherwise.

Thank you for the suggested layout. Like "Manetho" you have omitted king Siamun entirely. It is of no moment as the chronology after the death of Amunemipet is probably a different discussion. You have Herihor in post at the age of about 14, for about 35 years. I do find this exceedingly unlikely, for reasons already discussed. The genealogy you suggest does explain the two Nedjemets pretty well, but does not explain how Hrere can be a king's mother unless she is also the mother of R.XI by a previous marriage, so that R.XI would be suppressing his own stepfather...I initially liked the equation of Isetemkhebs A and B, but eventually rejected it. Isetemkheb B ought to be chief of Harim of Amun, but she is not; I am very dubious of the existence of A at all, and do not see any need for her to be the daughter of a Menkheperre (as the attestations of Isetemkheb D cannot be reassigned, even in part, to A).

I do not see how Amunemipet merits a reign of 13 years. In my view Painedjem B is in office as 1PA through 3 or 4 short reigns from the death of Nesbanebdjed B, his older brother, to his own death in a year 10, probably of Siamun. There are a number of datelines from his pontificate, none of which exceed year 10. There are no datelines at all from Nesbanebdjed B, and his early (and presumably sudden) demise left Painedjem B to settle some property on his widow and unmarried daughter (which in turn leads me to believe that Nesbanebdjed was only about 30-35 when he died, and that this was very soon after Psusennes I).
I think that Painedjem succeeded in 4 Amunemipet, and the decree for Henttawy / Isetemkheb E gives dates of years 5, 6, 8 - of the same reign to be the earliest possible, at which point Isetemkheb is still, apparently, unmarried.
Given this, and that Menkheperre's clearly attested datelines run from a year 25 to a year 48, which is a decent enough tenure, I don't see any need for weird lengthy chronologies which skew all the other data. The dissenting voices, as it were, are
(a) the low year-date in the stele of Exiles: this reads very like the chronicle of Osorkon B. It begins with a date which is not the earliest date (year 25, III Shemu 29) then jumps back to the day of the oracle year 25 I Akhet 2{+?} and says Menkheperre came south "to make the land content, to drive out his enemy..." then continues on to year X, IV Shemu, Epag. 4. X is claimed to be a low yeardate for reasons of space. I see that you also ingeniously propose a small coregency between Painedjem and Psusennes I, to make the 26 years assigned to Smendes in "Manetho" fit with a year 25 of Painedjem followed by a low date of Psusennes (but higher than year 1).
So the criticism of Ian's hypothesis, or my own, resting on a slender foundation, is irrelevant. All hypotheses concerning these data appear to rest on slender foundations.
(b) Even more slender, not even a year-date but a stray particle "n" (and how often this particle is omitted or superfluously added in these very bandages) for year 48 "of" Menkheperre (whose name is not in cartouche on this particular bandage so it is not his regnal date). We have another year 48, also of a nameless ruler, also featuring Menkheperre as 1PA, but without the "of". Even if I were to concede that the "of" here does mean that Menkheperre (like absolutely no official of any sort since the Middle Kingdom) counted his own years of tenure as "first prophet of AmunRe king of the gods" this still does not fit with your timeline (or Tory's) having him actually 1PA somewhere else for part of this period at least.
Either he means what he says i.e. it is the 48th continuous year of his tenure, or it is a slip, and it is someone else's regnal year 48 after all. I do not think that a weasel chronology is acceptable. Kitchen's chronology, for example, at least has the merit of allowing such a continuous tenure (1035-986).

"Maybe the King's Daughter Isetemkheb attested in Psusennes I's burial could have something to do with this might have something to do with this."
She is attested as a king's daughter and GM of Khonsu. It is generally assumed that she is a daughter of Psusennes I, but given that the gravegoods could span a 50 year period (from Painedjem I as mere 1PA, to his grandson Nesbanebdjed B as 1PA) and that the priestly title is borne by other members of the Theban family, she might be a daughter of Painedjem I; given also that there is at least one other king (Amunemnisu) attested at the burial she might be his daughter instead.
Isetemkheb C cannot however be made to = B, as the latter is daughter of 1PA at a time when Painedjem is already a king. B could however be made into D, as many have done, as both are associated with the Min, Horus and Isis triad. I am doubtful, as I think D was an infant when Masaharta died.



  • Re: Ramses XII = Ramses VIII?Jaime O, Wed Mar 22 09:33
    Hi Kim, forgive me for the extent of the last reply. This one might not be very different, so I apologize in advance. I wrote: "And we know from the Khonsu Temple that Herihor did act almost as king... more
    • Re: Ramses XII, and early Dyn 21 — Kim Sargerson, Thu Mar 23 13:26
      • Herihor the HPA-kingTory, Mon Mar 27 23:48
        Hi all, The oracle of Herihor (Oracular Decree of High Priest Herihor, OIP3, p. 15, Plate 132) makes it clear that he was HPA for 30 years. 10 years as HPA had already elapsed when the oracle was... more
        • Early 21st DynastyJaime O, Wed Mar 29 08:43
          Hi Kim and Tory Thank you for the replies. Kim: I do not think there is enough evidence to place Nesbanebdjed the king before or after Herihor the king. However, it still leaves a gap i.e. who was... more
          • Early 21st DynastyJaime O, Thu Mar 30 13:45
            There is an error in my previous tables, allow me to correct (and revise Menkheperre Bs tenure, presuming his Year 48 might be an error for something else): KINGS: - Ramses XI, 0-35 - Ramses XII,... more
Click here to receive daily updates