Tweet
Keeping subjects separate: back to ancient Egypt.
Would you agree that whatever the reason for the switch to 3 yr intervals, the same reasoning should be applied to the reigns of both Ramesses II and Thutmosis III, who also celebrated Heb-Sed festivals beyond the 30th year, and then at 3 yr intervals?
I'm not sure there was a switch to 3 year intervals. The issue I think was that no king between Tuthmosis III and Amunhotep III lived long enough to celebrate a 30 year Jubilee and thus to let the 3 year gap kick in.
In my view, Amunhotep III, Akhenaten and maybe the son off Hapu, then commandeered the 3 year interval for politico-religious reasons.
I noted that she did not think highly of Pharoah Ramses II "the Great" whom she thought something of a blowhart and monomaniac with his monuments all over Egypt, and something of a foul up as a military commander at the battle of Kadesh.
I think Ramses only claim to fame is having lived so long - I have gazed on his face in the Cairo Museum, but I have no desire to study him. I think one-day intyerpretation of the staggeringly huge tomb of his sons will reveal much information though.
Her chapter on the Tel-al-Amarna letters in "Temple Tombs, and Hieroglyphs" was as informative as possible (given the puzzle of how the letters are to be read in chronology).
I have yet really to see a convincing (to me) analysis of the letters which makes them a source rather than using them to support a particular author's contentions. The way the Hittite archive is being used in relation to the Trojan War, is to me far more scholarly.
A major step would be to place the Amarna letters in a wider historical context, so we can accurately date the Amarna period as a whole.
As to Akhnaton, he's memorable for his effect on religion and for his "individuality" (one writer said he is easily the only Pharoah one can name seeing impressions of him against the similarity of the other rulers due to uniform art forms).
It was Breasted wasn't it who called Akhenaten "the first individual in history".
On his sculpture, part of the oddity is that the big statutes were meant to be looked at from below - hence the strange physical form when looked on face-to-face.
I think there will be a major re-interpretation one day, as there has been over the monoliths lacking genitalia - now re-interpreted (and with much common sense it seems to be) as Nefertiti.
It is possible - for me - that Akhenaten was a puppet - manipulated by his father and mother (Tiye was a dynamic woman) and uncle Ay and also perhaps by Nefertiti. Though I don't dismiss him being a forceful eccentric for a moment. He evidently came to be hated.
I look forward to seeing a really convincing DNA analysis of the mummies of the period. Some work has been done, but I think "Amunhotep III" may not be correctly identified, and we have the enigmatic older woman, younger woman and prince as well as the body that could be Akhenaten or "Smenkhare" (who was the latter, if separate from Nefertiti ruling as a man)?
But he was not a successful Pharoah - certainly not on the level of Thutmose III.
Akhenaten was FAR from a successful Pharaoh. He may have died (been killed) for that reason.
A close friend of mine regards Tuth III as a hero. (No longer, by the way, thought of as short.) I have a photo I took of the lovely statue from Luxor Museum which I'll find and post.
Regards - it's nice to be able to discuss favorite periods like this!
Phil
Would you agree that whatever the reason for the switch to 3 yr intervals, the same reasoning should be applied to the reigns of both Ramesses II and Thutmosis III, who also celebrated Heb-Sed festivals beyond the 30th year, and then at 3 yr intervals?
I'm not sure there was a switch to 3 year intervals. The issue I think was that no king between Tuthmosis III and Amunhotep III lived long enough to celebrate a 30 year Jubilee and thus to let the 3 year gap kick in.
In my view, Amunhotep III, Akhenaten and maybe the son off Hapu, then commandeered the 3 year interval for politico-religious reasons.
I noted that she did not think highly of Pharoah Ramses II "the Great" whom she thought something of a blowhart and monomaniac with his monuments all over Egypt, and something of a foul up as a military commander at the battle of Kadesh.
I think Ramses only claim to fame is having lived so long - I have gazed on his face in the Cairo Museum, but I have no desire to study him. I think one-day intyerpretation of the staggeringly huge tomb of his sons will reveal much information though.
Her chapter on the Tel-al-Amarna letters in "Temple Tombs, and Hieroglyphs" was as informative as possible (given the puzzle of how the letters are to be read in chronology).
I have yet really to see a convincing (to me) analysis of the letters which makes them a source rather than using them to support a particular author's contentions. The way the Hittite archive is being used in relation to the Trojan War, is to me far more scholarly.
A major step would be to place the Amarna letters in a wider historical context, so we can accurately date the Amarna period as a whole.
As to Akhnaton, he's memorable for his effect on religion and for his "individuality" (one writer said he is easily the only Pharoah one can name seeing impressions of him against the similarity of the other rulers due to uniform art forms).
It was Breasted wasn't it who called Akhenaten "the first individual in history".
On his sculpture, part of the oddity is that the big statutes were meant to be looked at from below - hence the strange physical form when looked on face-to-face.
I think there will be a major re-interpretation one day, as there has been over the monoliths lacking genitalia - now re-interpreted (and with much common sense it seems to be) as Nefertiti.
It is possible - for me - that Akhenaten was a puppet - manipulated by his father and mother (Tiye was a dynamic woman) and uncle Ay and also perhaps by Nefertiti. Though I don't dismiss him being a forceful eccentric for a moment. He evidently came to be hated.
I look forward to seeing a really convincing DNA analysis of the mummies of the period. Some work has been done, but I think "Amunhotep III" may not be correctly identified, and we have the enigmatic older woman, younger woman and prince as well as the body that could be Akhenaten or "Smenkhare" (who was the latter, if separate from Nefertiti ruling as a man)?
But he was not a successful Pharoah - certainly not on the level of Thutmose III.
Akhenaten was FAR from a successful Pharaoh. He may have died (been killed) for that reason.
A close friend of mine regards Tuth III as a hero. (No longer, by the way, thought of as short.) I have a photo I took of the lovely statue from Luxor Museum which I'll find and post.
Regards - it's nice to be able to discuss favorite periods like this!
Phil
Comment